HomeMy WebLinkAboutMatch workbookApplication Number
1252
1251
1250
1249
1248
1247
1246
1245
1244
1243
1242
1241
1240
1239
1238
1237
1236
1235
1234
1233
1232
1231
1230
1229
1228
1227
1226
1225
1224
1223
1222
1221
1220
1219
1218
1217
1216
1215
1214
1213
1212
1211
1210
1209
1208
1207
1206
1205
1204
1203
1202
1201
1167
1166
1165
1164
1163
1162
1161
1160
1159
1158
1157
1156
1155
1154
1153
1152
1151
1150
1149
1148
1147
1146
1145
1144
1143
1142
1141
1140
1139
1138
1137
1136
1135
1134
1133
1132
1131
1130
1129
1128
1127
1126
1125
1124
1123
1122
1121
1120
1119
1118
1117
1116
1115
1114
1113
1112
1111
1110
1109
1108
1107
1106
1105
1104
1103
1102
1101
1087
1086
1085
1084
1083
1082
1081
1080
1079
1078
1077
1076
1075
1074
1073
1072
1071
1070
1069
1068
1067
1066
1065
1064
1063
1062
1061
1060
1059
1058
1057
1056
1055
1054
1053
1052
1051
1050
1049
1048
1047
1046
1045
1044
1043
1042
1041
1040
1039
1038
1037
1036
1035
1034
1033
1032
1031
1030
1029
1028
1027
1026
1025
1024
1023
1022
1021
1020
1019
1018
1017
1016
1015
1014
1013
1012
1011
1010
1009
1008
1007
1006
1005
1004
1003
1002
1001
985
984
983
982
981
980
979
978
977
976
975
974
973
972
971
970
969
968
967
966
965
964
963
962
961
960
959
958
957
956
955
954
953
952
951
950
949
948
947
946
945
944
943
942
941
940
939
938
937
936
935
934
933
932
931
930
929
928
927
926
925
924
923
922
921
920
919
918
917
916
915
914
913
912
911
910
909
908
907
906
905
904
903
902
901
898
897
896
895
894
893
892
891
890
889
888
887
886
885
884
883
882
881
880
879
878
877
876
875
874
873
872
871
870
869
868
867
866
865
864
863
862
861
860
859
858
857
856
855
854
853
852
851
850
849
848
847
846
845
844
843
842
841
840
839
838
837
836
835
834
833
832
831
830
829
828
827
826
825
824
823
822
821
820
819
818
817
816
815
814
813
812
811
810
809
808
807
806
805
804
803
802
801
800
707
706
705
704
703
702
701
700
699
698
697
696
695
694
693
692
691
690
689
688
687
686
685
684
683
682
681
680
679
678
677
676
675
674
673
672
671
670
669
668
667
666
665
664
663
662
661
660
659
658
657
656
655
654
653
652
651
650
649
648
647
646
645
644
643
642
641
640
639
638
637
636
635
634
633
632
631
630
629
628
627
626
625
624
623
622
621
620
619
618
617
616
615
614
613
612
611
610
609
608
607
606
605
604
603
602
601
600
523
522
521
520
519
518
517
516
515
514
513
512
511
510
509
508
507
506
505
504
503
502
501
500
499
498
497
496
495
494
493
492
491
490
489
488
487
486
485
484
483
482
481
480
479
478
477
476
475
474
473
472
471
470
469
468
467
466
465
464
463
462
461
460
459
458
457
456
455
454
453
452
451
450
449
448
447
446
445
444
443
442
441
440
439
438
437
436
435
434
433
432
431
430
429
428
427
426
425
424
423
422
421
420
419
418
417
416
415
414
413
412
411
410
409
408
407
406
405
404
403
402
401
400
321
320
319
318
317
316
315
314
313
312
311
310
309
308
307
306
305
304
303
302
301
300
299
298
297
296
295
294
293
292
291
290
289
288
287
286
285
284
283
282
281
280
279
278
277
276
275
274
273
272
271
270
269
268
267
266
265
264
263
262
261
260
259
258
257
256
255
254
253
252
251
250
249
248
246
245
244
243
242
241
240
239
238
237
236
235
234
233
232
231
230
229
228
227
226
225
224
223
222
221
220
219
218
217
216
215
214
213
212
211
210
209
208
207
206
205
204
202
122
121
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
101
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
86
85
84
83
82
81
79
78
77
76
75
74
73
72
71
70
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
61
60
59
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Application Round
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Applicant Project Name
Igiugig RivGen® Power System Commercial Project
100 Kilowatt Solar Array for Circle
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Permitting
Indian River Hydroelectric Project - Construction
Crater Lake Power and Water Project
Chignik Hydroelectric Dam Project
St. Paul Island 80% Renewable Energy Feasibility Study
Hydro Power Generator Adak
Gunnuk Creek Hydro Rehabilitation - IPEC Kake
Maximizing Hydropower Utilization with Controlled Electro-Thermal Systems
Heat Pump System For City Owned Buildings
Minto PV Solar Project
Solar Panels for Kake Community Buildings
Ouzinkie Hydroelectric Power Project
Koyuk Water System Heat Recovery
Sand Point High Penetration Wind System
West Creek Hydroelectric Project
Scammon Bay Hydroelectric Project
Wales Water System Heat Recovery
Grayling Water System Heat Recovery
Atqasuk Transmission Line Design and Permitting
Kaktovik Wind Diesel Design
100 Kilowatt Solar Array for Kotzebue
Knik Arm Power Plant Recycled Biomass to Power
Point McKenzie Correction Farm (PMCF) PV Solar Project
Hoonah Waste-to-Energy Project
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Project
Mountain Village-St. Mary’s Wind Intertie Project – Final Design and Construction
Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Bethel Power Plant Heat Recovery Module Construction
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project −Geotechnical Study and Final Design
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Construction Project
False Pass Hydroelectric Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design
Saxman Low-Rent Multifamily Air Source Heat Pump
Klawock School Biomass Fuel Boiler Project
Shungnak Wind-Diesel Conceptual Design
Huslia Water System and Clinic Biomass Boiler Project
Eek Water System Heat Recovery
Ambler Washeteria and City Office Biomass Heating System
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Design & Permitting
Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Heat Pump
Evaluation of a Community Solar Project
Ketchikan Schools Recreation Central Heating Plant
Ketchikan High School Biomass Boiler Construction
Yerrick Creek Hydropower Project: Construction
Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study: False Pass, Alaska
Neck Lake Hydropower Project: Phases II-III
Clearwater Creek Hydropower Project: Phase II
Craig Water Treatment Plant Micro-Hydro
Upper Hidden Basin Diversion - Geotechnical Investigation
Water Treatment Plant Inline Micro Turbines
Community Solar Project
Chignik Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Chenega Bay Hydroelectric Construction
Port Graham Community Building Biomass Heat Distribution Project
Sand Point Excess Wind Utilization
Adak Hydroelectric Feasibility Study – Phase II
Hoonah Biomass District Heating Loop
Indian River Hydroelectric Project – Construction
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Permitting
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Construction Project
Deadhorse Waste Heat to Energy Plant
Northwest Alaska Wind Resource Assessment and Intertie Study
City of Noorvik Solar-PV
Eek Water System Heat Recovery
Unalakleet Wind-Diesel Optimization
Lake and Peninsula Borough Wood Boilers
St. Paul - 80% Renewable by 2020 – Community Energy Baseline Study
Adak Community Energy Baseline Study
Southcentral Small Hydro Assessments
Scammon Bay Hydroelectric Project
Southeast Island School District wood boilers
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Project
IRHA Facility Biomass Feasibility Study
Kake senior housing solar PV
Scammon Bay Community Facilities Heat Recovery
Gateway Borough Recreation and Schools Central Heating Plant Design
Selawik Water System Heat Recovery
Ketchikan Gateway Borough – Ketchikan High School Biomass Boiler Construction
Chefornak Wind Heat System
Ouzinkie Hydroelectric Power Project
Atqasuk Transmission Line Design and Permitting Project
Kaktovik Wind Diesel Design
Lepquinum Wellness Center Ground Source Heat Pump
Kwigillingok Wind Heat System – Electric Thermal Storage
Kotzebue Paper and Wood Waste to Energy Project
Wales Water System Heat Recovery
Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler Project
Holy Cross Power Plant Heat Recovery for Water Distribution System
Nikolai Community Biomass Heating System
Igiugig RivGen® Power System Project
Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study: False Pass, Alaska
Huslia Water System and Clinic Biomass Boiler Project
Ambler Washeteria and City Office Biomass Heating System
Grayling Water System Heat Recovery
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
Koyuk Water System Heat Recovery
Biomass for Akiachak Native Community Electric Company
Yerrick Creek Hydropower Project
Shungnak Wind-Diesel Design
Bethel Power Plant Heat Recovery System Assessment and Conceptual Design
Goodnews Bay Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project ï€Geotechnical Study and Final Design
St. Mary’s-Pitka’s Point Wind Energy Construction Project
Klawock low-income housing pellet heat
Angoon low-income housing pellet district heat
100 Kilowatt Solar Array for Kotzebue
Crater Lake Power and Water Project
Wood Boiler for The Native Village of Tazlina
Craig High School Wood Heat Conversion
Neck Lake Hydropower Project
Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project
Mahoney Lake Hydropower Project
Clearwater Creek Hydropower Project
SEAPA Wind Resource Assessment
Sitka: Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Heat Pump
Upper Hidden Basin Diversion
Manokotak Renewable Energy Feasibility Project
Kake Community Energy
Chefornak High Penetration Wind Diesel System
Tuntutuliak Heat Recovery
Juniper Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project
Stetson Creek Diversion Cooper Lake Dam Facilities Project
Waste to Energy Reconnaissance Study
False Pass Wind Energy Project
Koliganek Wind Diesel and Heat Recovery
Chickaloon Solar Thermal and Biomass Project
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
NWAB School District Solar Thermal Systems
Cascade Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Tuntutuliak Wind Heat Electrical Thermal Storage
Kongiganak Wind Heat Electrical Thermal Storage
Igiugig Wind Resource Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Kwigillingok Wind Heat Electrical Thermal Storage
Sand Point Energy Storage Project
St Marys Pitkas Point Wind Energy Construction Project
Stebbins St Michael Wind Energy Final Design and Permitting
Mountain Village Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Marshall Wind Energy Final Design and Permitting Project
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project Final Design and Permitting
Chenega Bay Hydroelectric Construction
Iliamna Solar Ground Mounted Energy System
False Pass Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study
Emmonak Heat Recovery System
Holy Cross Water System Heat Recovery
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Design and Permitting
Noatak Utility Size Photovoltaic Array Construction Project
Mertarvik Renewable Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Adak Wind Data Collection Analysis and Preliminary Design
Alaska SeaLife Center Heat Recovery Project
Multiple Alternative Energy Sources for Napakiak
Yakutat Biomass District Heating Loop
Nunam Iqua Heat Recovery Project
AGSD Extension of Heating Loop
Bristol Bay Borough School District Solar PV Project
Atqasuk Transmission Line Design and Permitting Project
Kaktovik Wind Diesel Design and Permitting
Galena Community Wood Heat Project
Port Alsworth Hydropower PreConstruction Phase
Grayling Heat Recovery System
Venetie Clinic Heat Recovery
St Marys Heat Recovery System
Eek Water System Heat Recovery
Chevak Water and Vacuum Plant Heat Recovery
Brevig Mission Water System Heat Recovery
Four Villages lntertie Design
Kotzebue Paper and Wood Waste to Energy Project
Ketchikan Gateway Borough Biomass Heating Project
Packers Creek Hydroelectric Project Phase II
Feasibility Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Metlakatla to Ketchikan Intertie
Sitka Sea Water Source Heat Pump Project
Biomass Heat for Minto Community Buildings
Seldovia House Ground Source Heat Pump Project
Flywheels ESS for Kodiak Pier Electric Crane
Jack River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Carlo Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study
Chisana Mountain Wind Feasibility Project
Atka Dispatchable Heat
Gunnuk Creek Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
Walker Lake Hydro Project Feasibility
Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project
SEAPA Wind Resource Assessment Phase I and II
Haines Borough Municipal Buildings Biomass Project
Excursion Inlet Hydro Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Survey Creek Hydroelectric Project
Chignik Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Southeast Island School District Wood Boilers
Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler Project
Allison Creek Hydroelectric Project Construction
Wood Chip Boiler for The Native Village of Tazlina
Sitka Kettleson Library Air Source Heat Pump
Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Heat Pump
Sitka Centennial Hall Air Source Heat Pump
Craig High School Wood Heat Conversion
Nenana Collaborative Biomass Heating System Project
Chuathbaluk Water System Heat Recovery
Mendenhall Valley Library Geothermal HVAC System
NEA Stack Heat to Power Project
Tuntutuliak Water Treatment Plant Washeteria Heat Recovery
Karluk Tribal Council Wind Energy System
Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Phase III and IV
Poncelet Kinetics RHK100 Prototype Demonstration
Northwest Arctic Borough Solar PV Project
Electrical Power Lines -Western Alaska
Noatak Wind Resource Assessment
Wood Heat Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design for the Organized Village of Kake
Community Facilities Woody Biomass Space Heating Project
Tanana Solar Domestic Hot Water Heating Project
Bristol Bay Borough School District Energy Project
Waste-to-Energy Feasibility Study
Indian River Hydroelectric Project Construction
Carlo Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study
Knutson Creek Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Juniper Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Neck Lake Hydro Project
Elim Geothermal Resource Assessment I Feasibility
Akiak Wind Resource Assessment
Eastern Copper Basin Geothermal Assessment
Kipnuk Wind Diesel Power Generation and Heating
Nelson Lagoon Wind Energy Project
False Pass Wind Energy Project
Cold Bay Waste Heat Recovery Project
High-penetration Wind Energy Project- Kokhanok
Haines Borough Pellet Heating Project
Excursion Inlet Hydro Project- Phase II
Mount Makushin Geothermal Project
Manokotak Wind & Heat Feasibility Study
Atka Wind Power Project
TidGen? Array Project
Ticasuk Brown School Pellet Boiler Project-Phase 2
Wrangell Power Plant Upgrade
Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Goodnews Bay Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
St. Mary?s / Pilot Station Wind Energy Intertie Construction Project
St. Mary?s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design
Hotham Peak Wind Resource and lntertie Assessment
Cosmos Hills Wind Resource and Intertie Assessment
St. Michael/Stebbins Wind Energy Final Design and Permitting Project
Russian Mission Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Kotlik Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Wales Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Marshall Wind Energy Design and Permitting Project
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
St. Mary?s / Pitka?s Point Wind Energy Project
New Stuyahok Heat Recovery
OIT Inc Waste Heat Turbine Project
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant/Washeteria Building
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant and Community Store
Stebbins Heat Recovery Project
Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant and Washeteria
Heat Recovery for the Water System
Atmautluak Washeteria Heat Recovery Project
Savoonga Heat Recovery System - Power Plant to Water Plant
Biomass Feasibility Studies in Public Facilities, Interior Region
Design and Construction of Biomass Systems in Interior Villages
Nenana Collaborative Biomass Heating System Project
Allison Creek Project
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project
Bathymetric survey and marine geological study to refine submarine cable route for Kodiak-Ouzinkie Electrical Inter-tie project
Galena Community Wood Heat Project
AGSD District Heat Loop Project
Upper Tanana Biomass CHP Project
Seward Schools Biomass Heating System
Afognak Biomass Feasibility Study
Gartina Falls Hydroelectric Project
AVCP RHA Wood Biomass Heating System
Walker Lake Hydro Feasibility Project
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie
West Creek Hydroelectric Project
Blue Lake Hydroelectric Expansion Project
Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler Project
Eagle Solar Array Project
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Stetson Creek Diversion/Cooper Lake Dam Facilities Project
Egegik Wind Feasibility Study
Levelock Wind Reconnaissance Study
Igiugig Wind Turbine Design
Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Project: Phase Ill
Tazimina Hydroelectric Project Capacity Increase
Petersburg Community Heating System Retrofit Feasibility Study
Coffman Cove Hydropower Line Extension
HydroPower Surplus to Stored Hydrogen Feasibility Study
Dimond Park Library Geothermal HVAC System
Northwest Arctic Borough Solar PV
Jack River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Karluk Tribal Council ? Wind Energy System
Nome Renewable Energy Optimization Project
Port Graham Village Biomass Waste Heat Demonstration Project
MEA Power Plant Waste Heat Utilization Reconnaissance Study
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Alakanuk Waste Water Treatment Facility Wind Generation
Reconnaissance Study of Thomas Bay Public Projects
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Adak Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
Igiugig Wind, Solar, Hydrokinetic and Thermal Feasibility Study
Nikolski Renewable Energy Wind Project
Kodiak High School Ground Source Heat Pump
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
High Penetration Wind Diesel Power and Heat
Nenana?s Solar-Powered Student Living Center
Transmission Line from Fire Island Wind Project
Mentasta Woody Biomass Community Facility Space Heating Project
Tanacross Woody Biomass Community Facility Space Heating Project
Tanana Solar Thermal Public Facilities Heating Project
St. Michael / Stebbins Wind Energy Design
Emmonak/Alakanuk Phase 2 Wind Energy Construction
Upper Kalskag Solar Construction
Gambell Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Gambell Water System Heat
Chevak Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Chevak Water System Heat
Goodnews Bay Wind Energy Feasibility
Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility
Mountain Village Wind Energy Construction
Shaktoolik Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Shaktoolik Water System Heat
Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Mekoryuk Water System Heat
St. Mary\'s/Pitka\'s Point Wind Construction and Commissioning
TidGen? Array Project
Reconnaissance Study of the Geothermal Potential for the Ivanoff Bay Region
Extension of Heating Loop
Greenhouse and Processing Facility utilizing surplus heat
Net-Zero Training and Administration Center (TAC)
Community of Elim Geothermal Resource Assessment
False Pass Tidal Energy Study
Saint Michael Renewable Energy Reconnaissance Study
City of Angoon Wind to Energy Feasibility Study
Goodnews Bay Wind Generator Study
Togiak Waste Heat Recovery Project
Savoonga Heat Recovery - Power Plant to Water Plant
Shishmaref Heat Recovery Project
Old Kasigluk Wind Feasibility Study
Klawock Biomass Boiler System Feasibility Study
White Mountain Heat Recovery Feasibility Study
New Stuyahok Heat Recovery Study
Toksook Bay Heat Recovery Feasibility Study
Water Plant Biomass System Feasibility Study
Selawik Wind Feasibility Study
Sleetmute Heat Recovery - Power Plant to Water Plant
Scammon Bay Hydro Design & Engineering
Kotlik Wind Generator Study
Noorvik Heat Recovery System Feasibility Study
Russian Mission Heat Recovery System
Atmautlauk Washeteria/ Power Plant Waste Heat Recovery Project
Golovin Wind Feasibility Study
City of Kake Hydroelectric Resource Analysis
Kobuk Biomass Design & Construction Project
and 898 Nome Renewable Energy Expansion/Optimization Project
Chickaloon Solar Thermal and Biomass Project
Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Packer?s Creek Hydroelectric Project
Mahoona Hydroelectric Dam Replacement
Seward Schools Biomass Heating System
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility
Kake Pellet Boiler System
Juneau Super Critical Water Oxidation Sewage Sludge to Energy
Multi Disciplinary Combined Facility Primary Care Center Biomass Feasibility Project
Walker Lake Feasibility Study
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development GENERATION Project
Wrangell Electrical Capacitor Bank
and 827 Thayer Lake Hydropower Development Transmission/Generation Project
Anaktuvuk Pass Geothermal Feasibility Study
Tatitlek Heat Recovery Project
Wood Heating Feasibility in Public Facilities, Interior Region
Huslia Water System & Clinic Wood Boiler Project
Design & Construction of Wood Heating Projects in Interior Alaska Communities
Stetson Creek Diversion/ Cooper Lake Dam Facilities Project
Gulkana Village Biomass Fuels Project
Solomon Gulch unit 2 Efficiency Upgrade
Allison Creek Project
Wave Energy/ Sequestration Technology (WEST)
Glennallen School Campus Biomass Heating Project
Whitman Lake Project
AVTEC Hydroelectric Training Facility
Kake-Petersburg Inter-Connection Engineering
SEAPA Wind Resources Assessment & Economic Feasibility Study
SEAPA Phase I Wind Site Recon Study
Reynolds Creek Hydro Transmission Line
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Upper Tanana Area Intertie Project
Black Bear Lake Hydro Project Storage Increase
Transmission Line to Renewable Energy Resources (Mount Spurr)
Pillar Mtn High Penetration Wind Project
Petersburg Public Library Geothermal Heat Pump Construction
Jack River Hydro Project Phase II
West Creek Hydroelectric Project
Sitka Renewable Energy Feasibility for Centennial Hall & Library
Sitka Renewable Energy Feasibility for Wastewater Treatment Plant
Japonski Island Boathouse Heat Pump
Kwigillingok Wind Energy Storage
Tuntutuliak Wind Energy Storage
Packers Creek Hydroelectric Project
Palmer Ice Arena Geothermal & Heat Recovery Improvements
High Penetration Wind Diesel Power and Heat
Akiak Integrated Renewable Energy Projects
Kongiganak Flywheel Energy Storage
Napakiak Wind Design & Construction Planning
Merrill Field Landfill Gas Heating/Energy Project
Indian River Hydroelectric Project
Southern Railbelt Small Hydro Reconn. Study
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project
Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project
Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project
Port Graham Biomass Waste Heat Demo Project
Pelican Hydroelectric Upgrade Project
Hoonah Heat Recovery Project
Port Heiden Wind Turbine Project
Napaskiak Wind, Power and Heat Recovery
New Koliganek Wind & Heat Recovery Feasibility Study
Cook Inlet Tidal Hydrokinetic Power Generation
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
Lake & Peninsula Wood Boilers
Cold Bay Wind Energy Project
Nelson Lagoon Wind Energy Project
False Pass Wind Energy Project
Akiak Hydro Study
Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project
Battle Creek Diversion Project
Stetson Creek Diversion/Cooper Lake Dam Facilities
Atmautluak Wind Renewable Energy
Snettisham Transmission Line Avalanche Mitigation
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development, Transmission
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development Generation
Akiachak Wind Feasibility & Conceptual Design
Upper Kobuk River Biomass
Kotzebue Paper & Wood Waste to Energy
Kenai Winds Expansion
Upper Tanana Biomass CHP Project
Kwethluk Wind Feasibility
Ionia Renewable Energy Training Center
Gulkana Village Pellet Fuels Project
Turnagain Arm Tidal Electrical Generation Project
Cook Inlet TidGen Project
Kachemak Bay Tidal Power
Organic Rankine Cycle Field Testing
AVTEC Hydro Training Facility
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie
Triangle Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pilgrim Hot Springs Geothermal Resource Assessment
Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydroelectric Project
Mount Spurr Geothermal Project
Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project
Chefornak Wind Feasibilitly
Kenny Lake School Wood Fired Boiler
Stebbins Wind Feasibility
Selawik Hybrid Wind Diesel System Turbine Upgrade
Scammon Bay Wind Feasibility
St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point Wind Construction
Old Harbor Hydroelectric
Marshall Wind Feasibility
Koyuk Wind Phase II Feasibility
Kaltag Solar Construction
Elim Wind Feasibility
Eek Wind Feasibility
Yukon River Debris Mitigation Project
Feasibility Assessments for Wood Heating in Interior AK Communities
Thorne Bay School Wood Fired Boiler Project
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility
Nikiski Combined Cycle Conversion (NCCC)
Nushagak Community Wind Power Project
Reconnaissance Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
Schubee Lake Hydroelectric Project
Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Transmission Line
Neck Lake Hydroelectric Project
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project
Excursion Inlet Hydro Project Phases I and II
Wrangell Electric Vehicle Feasibility Study
Susitna Valley High School Wood Heat
Cordova Community Biomass Feasibility Study
Akutan Geothermal Development Project
Whitman Lake Project
Port St. Nick Fish Enhancement Hydropower
CVEA Silver Lake Feasibility
Tok School Biomass Heating Project
GVEA Eva Creek Wind Turbine Purchase
CEA Transmission Line to Renewable Energy Resources
NWAB School Alternate Energy Solar Awareness Project
Wainwright Wind Turbine Design
Point Lay Wind Generation Design
Point Hope Wind Turbine Design
Kaktovik Wind Diesel
Atqasuk Transmission Line
Renewable Energy Feasibility Study
Lime Village Photovoltaic System Retrofit
Jack River Hydro Project
Biomass Fuel Dryer Project
Bethel Renewable Energy Project
Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility Analysis
Adak Renewable Diesel Project
Waste Energy Powered Absorption Refrigeration Unit
AVCP Housing Wind Turbine Project
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development (TLHD) Generation
City of Ouzinkie Wind Generator Project
Fuel Cell Feasibility
The Angoon Commercial Demonstration Tidal Power Project
Atka Hydro Dispatched Excess Electrical Power
High Penetration Wind-Battery-Diesel Hybrid
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development (TLHD) Transmis
St. Mary?s Wind-Final Design, Permitting & Construction
New Stuyahok Wind-Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment & Conceptual Design
Scammon Bay Wind Project
Teller Wind-Final Design, Permitting & Construction
Kivalina Wind-Intertie Feasibility Analysis & Conceptual Design
Stebbins Wind-Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment and Conceptual Design
Slana Wind Farm-Wind Energy Resource Assessment
Jarvis Creek Natural Gas Project
Cook Inlet Tidal Hydrokinetic Power Generation
Adak Renewable/Diesel Project
Tatitlek High Penetration Wind-Diesel Project
West Cook Inlet Energy Cumulative Impacts
Wave Power Project Evaluation Study
St. Paul Wind Diesel Project
Cook Inlet TidGen Project
Reconnaissance Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Kachemak Bay Tidal Power-Feasibility & Conceptual Design
Biomass for Energy: Supply Side Knowledge Base
City of Napaskiak Wind Study
Tuntutuliak Flywheel Energy Storage
Kenny Lake School biomass-Fired Heating System
Hoonah City Schools Biomass Heating System
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project
Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project
Archangel Creek Hydroelectric Project
Transmission Line to Renewable Energy Resources
Tribal & Regional Energy Planning
Statewide run-of-river hydropower assessment
Port Graham Village Council Alternative Energy - Biomass Electric Generation Project
Kwigillingok Flywheel Energy Storage
Pilot Point Wind Power & Heat
Scenery Lake Hydroelectric Project
Kongiganak Flywheel Energy Storage
High Penetration Wind Diesel Power and Heat
Turnagain Arm Tidal Electric Generation Project
Tok Forestry Renewable Biomass Energy Demonstration Project
Ionia Renewable Energy Training Center
Alaska Biomass Combined Heat & Power Demonstration Project
Kodiak High School Renewable Energy Analysis
Mount Spurr Geothermal Project
City Tribe Biomass Energy Conservation
Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project
Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project
Hope Regional Hydroelectric Study
Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project
Virgin Creek Hydroelectric Project
Akutan Geothermal Development Project
Akutan Hydroelectric System Repair and Upgrade
Alaska Wind for Schools Program
Waste to Energy Feasibility Assessment for UAF and other medium sized communities in AK
Pilgrim Hot Springs Geothermal Resource Assessment
Melozi-Horner Hot Springs Geothermal Resource Estimate
AVCP Housing Wind Turbines Project
Yakutat Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration
Hoonah-IPEC Hydro Project
Thermal Engine Generator System (TEGS) for Ugashik, AK
AVTEC Hydro Training Facility Project
City of Kotzebue Biomass Tactical Garbage to Energy Refinery (TGER) Project
Kenai Winds Expansion
Hybrid Biomass and Solar Combined Heat and Power System
2MW Refinery Waste Energy Recovery
Chenega Bay Hydro Design and Permitting
Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project
Alaska SeaLife center Phase II Seawater Heat Pump Project
Silver Lake Pre-Feasibility Study
MSB Solar and Wind Potential
Triangle Lake Hydroelectric Project
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Interie
Saint Paul Fuel Economy Upgrade
Indian River Hydroelectric Project
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project
District Wood Heating in Fort Yukon
SEAPA Integrated Resource Planning Project (IRP)
Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project
Port Frederick Tidal Power Project
Schubee Lake Hydroelectic Project
Neck Lake Hydroelectric Project
Reynolds Creek Hydro Transmission Line
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Port Alsworth Hydroelectric Construction Project
Nushagak Area Hydropower Project (NAHP)
Waste Energy Powered Absorption Refrigeration Unit
Seldovia small wind generation facility
Skyline Mini Wind Farm
Tyonek Native Village Wind Project
Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project
Keep it Sustainable, Keep it Local (KISKIL) Renewable Energy Project
Cultivating Rural Alaska for Biomass Energy
Greenhouse Feasibility and Application in Rural Alaska
Heat Recovery/Power Generation in Rural Alaska
Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project
Chefornak Wind Turbine Installation
Combined/Hybrid solar-thermal collection & storage with ground-source heat-pumps
A Feasibility & Planning Project to Recapture & Utilize Waste Heat from the Healy Clean Coal Project
Renewable Support Mode for BESS
Alaska British Columbia (AK-BC) Intertie Project
Wrangell Street Light Conversion
Spur Road Distribution Line Extension
Wrangell Downtown Revitalization
Sunrise Lake Project
Clearwater Wind Farm
Wainwright Wind Diesel Generation Project
Point Hope Wind Diesel Generation Project
Point Lay Wind Diesel Generation Project
Anchorage geothermal district heating project
Biomass Fuel Dryer Project
Gastineau Elementary School Geothermal Loopfield
Cordova Community Biomass Feasibility Study
Humpback Creek Hydroelectric Project Rehabilitation
NWAB School Alternate Energy Solar Awareness Project
Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility Analysis
Galena Renewable Energy Project
Delta Junction Wood Pellet Boiler: Biofuel Pilot Program
Jack River Hydro Project
Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydroelectric Project
Wood Chip Boiler Heating System
Noatak Biomass_Native Village of Noatak
Marshall Wood Fired Boiler_Ohogamiut Traditional Council
Wood Pellet Plant_AHTNA
Chignik Lake CBM_AGE
Sand Point Wind_AWE
Tatitlek High Penetration Wind
Adak Diesel Hybrid_TDX Power
McGrath Biomass Feasibility
Nenana Biomass Feasibility
Tanacross Biomass Feasibility
Tanana Biomass Feasibility
ORPC Cook Inlet Tidal
Orutsaramiut Native Council
Plasma Gasification_Solena Group
Ambler HR_City of Ambler
Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting Wind
Connelly Lake Hydro_APT
Geothermal Resource Assessment Seward Pen_AVEC
Shaktoolik Wind_AVEC
Emmonak Wind and Transmission_AVEC
Stebbins Wind Analysis_AVEC
New Stuyahok Wind Analysis_AVEC
Scammon Bay Wind Analysis_AVEC
St. Mary\'s Wind Analysis_AVEC
Teller Wind Analysis_AVEC
Archangel Creek Hydro_AGP
Delia Creek Hydro_HPML
Sitka CHP_City and Borough
Venetie District Heat_Village Council
Chalkyitsik District Heat_Village Council
McGrath District Heat_MPL
Packers Creek Hydro_CLPU
Glacier Fork Hydro
St Paul Wind Construction_City of St. Paul
Tok Wind Construction_VWP
Slana Wind Construction_AWP
Delta Wind Construction_AWP
Kotzebue Solid Waste_City of Kotzebue
Statewide Biomass Assessment_UAF
Tidal Feasibility_City of Homer
Tanana Alternative Energy Assessment _Tanana Power
Alternative Energy Assessment_Perryville NVOP
Tanalian River Hydro_AGE
Solar Hot Water NWAB_NIHA
Angoon HR_IPEC
Integrated Resource Plan_FDPPA
Nenana Healy Hydro Phase II_GVEA
Wind Recon_NPRHA
Tuntutuliak High Penetration Wind Diesel
Akiak Wind
Unalaska Heat Recovery
UAF Photovoltaic
WCA Hydrokinetic_Tanana River
UAF Absorption Chiller
Mobile Biodiesel Processing Plant_CCTHIA
Birch Creek Solar
Kvichak River_Igiugig
Yakutat Wave Energy Conversion
Alternative Energy Feasibilty_CSD
West Creek Hydro_Muni Skagway
Alternative Energy Recon_YKSD
Biomass Hydronic Heating_YKSD
Mountain Village Wind_City and Tribe
Pilgrim Hot Springs Assessment_ACEP
Mt. Spur Resource Assessment_Ormat
Statewide Heat Pump Analysis_ACEP
Chena Hot Springs Reservoir Modeling_ACEP
Victor Creek Hydro_Kenai Hydro
Chena Power Hydrogen
Manley Village Council Geothermal
AEB Geothermal Assessment_AGDAP
Galena Hydrokinetic
Akutan Hydrosystem Repair and Upgrade
Loud Creek Hydro_Akutan
Hot Springs Bay Valley_Akutan
Barrow_Atqasuk Transmission
Point Lay Heat Recovery
Wainwright Heat Recovery
Wainwright Coal Bed Methane Phase III
Natural Gas Distribution_AGPA
Wasteoil for Heat_#2 Fuel
Biomassheat Anchorage_Earth Run Energy
Pilot Point High Penetration Wind/Diesel/CHP
Kotlik Pellet Stove_KYE
Fivemile Creek_Chitna Electric
Kotzebue HR and Ammonia Power Cycle
Knik Arm CHC_KAPP
Crooked Creek Hydro Kinetic
Bristol Bay Fish Waste_NEA
Crooked Creek Hydro_Elfin Cove
Wood Gasification_KISKIL
AVTEC Wind
Sunrise Lake Hydro_Wrangell
AK_BC Intertie_Wrangell
Carlson Creek Hydro_APT
Triangle Lake_Metlakatla Indian Community
Haines Assistant living GSHP_Apt
Neck Lake Hydro_APT
Kenai Winds_Nikiski
Kake Biomass gasifer_ccthita
Heat Recovery UMED_MLPUAA
High Penetration Wind Diesel Heat_Kipnuk
Cordova District Heat_NVE
Camp Hill Wind_NVE
Little Port Walter Hydro_Ameresco
Terror Lake Capacity_KEA
Air Source Heat Pump_BIHA
Jack River Recon_Cantwell
Akiachak Wind_ANCEC
Thorne Bay Wood Boiler_SEISD
Kiseralik_Chikuminuk Hydro_AVCP Housing
Kasaan Wood Boiler_Village of Kasaan
Coffman Cove Wood Boiler_SEISD
PetroStar HR_VFDA
Whitman Lake Hydro Construction_KPU
Banner Wind Construction_Nome
Grant Lake Phase III & IV_Nushagak
Ruth Lake Hydro Phase II _PMPL
Bethel Wind Power Project Times 4
Ambler Solar and Wind Power Construction
Napaskiak Wind Farm Feasibility Study
Delta Junction Wood Chip Heating Feasibility Study
Juneau Ground Source Heat Pump Construction (Aquatic Center)
Kongiganak Wind Farm Construction
Eva Creek Wind Farm Construction
McKinley Village Solar Thermal Construction
Kwigillingok Wind Farm Construction
Nome/ Banner Peak Wind Farm Construction
North Pole Heat Recovery Construction
Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Pillar Mountain Wind Farm Construction
Delta Junction Wind Farm Construction
Ketchikan Biomass Gasification Construction
Nikiski Wind Farm Construction
Nenana Hydrokinetic Construction
Crooked Creek Renewable Energy Reconnaissance Study
Makushin Geothermal Feasibility Study
Nikolaevsk Wind Farm Final Design
Anchorage Landfill Gas Electricity Final Design
Delia Creek Hydro Construction
Napaimute Solar PV Construction
St. George Wind Farm Construction
Nikolski Wind Integration Construction
Statewide Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study
Fishhook Hydroelectric Construction
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance
Kotzebue Wind Farm Expansion Construction
Ruby Hydrokinetic Construction
Kotzebue Wind Farm Red-Ox Flow Battery Storage Construction
Juneau Based Statewide Hydro/Ammonia Electricity Construction
Statewide Heat Recovery/Electric Demonstration Construction
Palmer Coal Bed Methane CHP Construction
Girdwood Gas CHP/Hydro/Wind Solar Construction
Shungnak Solar PV Construction
Noatak Solar PV Construction
Ambler Solar PV Construction
Upper Kobuk Region Hydroelectric Feasibility
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Final Design
Mekoryuk Wind Farm Construction
Toksook Bay Wind Farm Expansion Construction
Quinhagak Wind Farm Construction
Anchorage Landfill Gas Electricity Construction
Bethel Wind Farm Construction (BNC land)
Coal Mine Road Wind Farm Final Design
Indian River Hydroelectric Construction
Lake Pen Borough Wind Feasibility Study
Lake Pen Borough Wood Heating Final Design
Chignik Lake Area Wind-Hydro Final Design
McGrath Heat Recovery Construction
Yakutat Biomass Gasification Construction
Kobuk River Valley Woody Biomass Feasibility Study
Chuniisax Creek Hydroelectric Construction
South Fork Hydroelectric Construction
Buckland/Deering/Noorvik Wind Farm Construction
Snake Mountain Wind Farm Construction
Galena Wood Heating Construction
North Pole Biomass Electricity/Heat Construction
Nome/Newton Peak Wind Farm Construction
Mt. Alice Harbor Renewable Energy Construction
Unalakleet Wind Farm Construction
Tok Wood Heating Construction
Whittier Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance
Nome Banner Peak Wind Farm Transmission Construction
Kenny Lake Wood Heating Construction
Anchorage Wood Processing and Heating Construction
Whittier Gas CHP Construction
Palmer Gas CHP Construction
Burro Creek Hydro Feasibility Study
Haines Central Wood Heating Feasibility Study (Community Buildings)
Indian Creek Hydro Feasibility Study
Delta Junction Barley/Wood Pellet Central Heating Construction
Ruth Lake Hydro Reconnaissance
Whitman Lake Hydro Construction
Statewide Heat Recovery Demonstration Project
Hooper Bay Wind Farm Construction
Grant Lake/Falls Creek Hydro Feasibility Study
Haines Central Wood Heating System Construction (Low Income Housing Project)
Statewide Biomass Reconnaissance Study
Fort Yukon Central Wood Heating Construction
McGrath Central Wood Heating Construction
Kake-Petersburg Intertie Final Design
Hoonah - Hawk Inlet Intertie Construction
Allison Lake Hydro Feasibility Study
Cordova Wood Processing Plant Construction
Haines Ground Source Heat Pump Construction
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Coffman Cove-Naukati Intertie Construction
Cordova Heat Recovery Construction
Humpback Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie Construction
Gustavus/Angoon/Wrangell/Nikiski Tidal Feasibility Study
Pike\'s Ridge Geothermal Final Design
Jack River Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
Mt. Redoubt/Mt. Spur Geothermal Construction
Chistochina Central Wood Heating Construction
Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Final Design
Ketchikan Waste Gasification Reconnaissance Study
Juneau Waste Gasification Reconnaissance Study
Aleutians East Borough Renewable Energy Reconnaissance
Falls Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Wrangell Hydro Based Electric Boilers Construction
Anchorage Geothermal District Heating Feasibility Study
Naknek/King Salmon Fish Waste Feasibility Study
Lake Elva Hydropower Construction
Fairbanks Waste Gasification Feasibility Study
Palmer Waste Gasification Feasibility Study
Anchorage Waste Gasification Feasibility Study
Gulkana Central Wood Heating Construction
Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility
Project Name
Igiugig RivGen® Power System Commercial Project
Circle 100 Kilowatt Solar Array
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Permitting
Indian River Hydroelectric Project - Construction
Crater Lake Power and Water Project
Chignik Hydroelectric Dam Project
St. Paul Island 80% Renewable Energy Feasibility Study
Adak Hydro Power Generator
IPEC Gunnuk Creek Hydro Rehabilitation in Kake
Maximizing Cordova Hydropower Utilization with Controlled Electro-Thermal Systems
Heat Pump System for City of Seward Owned Buildings
Minto PV Solar Project
Solar Panels for Kake Community Buildings
Ouzinkie Hydroelectric Power Project
Koyuk Water System Heat Recovery
Sand Point High Penetration Wind System
West Creek Hydroelectric Project
Scammon Bay Hydroelectric Project
Wales Water System Heat Recovery
Grayling Water System Heat Recovery
Atqasuk Transmission Line Design and Permitting
Kaktovik Wind Diesel Design
Kotzebue 100 Kilowatt Solar Array
Knik Arm Power Plant Recycled Biomass to Power
Point McKenzie Correction Farm (PMCF) PV Solar Project
Hoonah Waste-to-Energy Project
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Project
Mountain Village-St. Mary’s Wind Intertie Project – Final Design and Construction
Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Bethel Power Plant Heat Recovery Module Construction
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project −Geotechnical Study and Final Design
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Construction Project
False Pass Hydroelectric Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design
Saxman Low-Rent Multifamily Air Source Heat Pump
Klawock School Biomass Fuel Boiler Project
Shungnak Wind-Diesel Conceptual Design
Huslia Water System and Clinic Biomass Boiler Project
Eek Water System Heat Recovery
Ambler Washeteria and City Office Biomass Heating System
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Design & Permitting
Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Heat Pump
Chugach Electric Association Evaluation of a Community Solar Project
Ketchikan Schools Recreation Central Heating Plant
Ketchikan High School Biomass Boiler Construction
Yerrick Creek Hydropower Project: Construction
False Pass Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study
Neck Lake Hydropower Project: Phases II-III
Clearwater Creek Hydropower Project: Phase II
Craig Water Treatment Plant Micro-Hydro
Upper Hidden Basin Diversion - Geotechnical Investigation
Unalaska Water Treatment Plant Inline Micro Turbines
Community Solar Project
Chignik Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Chenega Bay Hydroelectric Construction
Port Graham Community Building Biomass Heat Distribution Project
Sand Point Excess Wind Utilization
Adak Hydroelectric Feasibility Study Phase II
Hoonah Biomass District Heating Loop
Indian River Hydroelectric Project Construction
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Permitting
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Construction Project
Deadhorse Waste Heat to Energy Plant
Northwest Alaska Wind Resource Assessment and Intertie Study
City of Noorvik Solar-PV
Eek Water System Heat Recovery
Unalakleet Wind-Diesel Optimization
Lake and Peninsula Borough Wood Boilers
St. Paul - 80% Renewable by 2020 – Community Energy Baseline Study
Adak Community Energy Baseline Study
Southcentral Small Hydro Assessments
Scammon Bay Hydroelectric Project
Southeast Island School District Wood Boilers
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Project
IRHA Facility Biomass Feasibility Study
Kake Senior Housing Solar PV
Scammon Bay Community Facilities Heat Recovery
Gateway Borough Recreation and Schools Central Heating Plant Design
Selawik Water System Heat Recovery
Ketchikan Gateway Borough – Ketchikan High School Biomass Boiler Construction
Chefornak Wind Heat System
Ouzinkie Hydroelectric Power Project
Atqasuk Transmission Line Design and Permitting Project
Kaktovik Wind Diesel Design
Lepquinum Wellness Center Ground Source Heat Pump
Kwigillingok Wind Heat System – Electric Thermal Storage
Kotzebue Paper and Wood Waste to Energy Project
Wales Water System Heat Recovery
Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler Project
Holy Cross Power Plant Heat Recovery for Water Distribution System
Nikolai Community Biomass Heating System
Igiugig RivGen® Power System Project
Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study: False Pass, Alaska
Huslia Water System and Clinic Biomass Boiler Project
Ambler Washeteria and City Office Biomass Heating System
Grayling Water System Heat Recovery
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
Koyuk Water System Heat Recovery
Biomass for Akiachak Native Community Electric Company
Yerrick Creek Hydropower Project
Shungnak Wind-Diesel Design
Bethel Power Plant Heat Recovery System Assessment and Conceptual Design
Goodnews Bay Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project Geotechnical Study and Final Design
St. Mary’s-Pitka’s Point Wind Energy Construction Project
Klawock Low-Income Housing Pellet Heat
Angoon Low-Income Housing Pellet District Heat
100 Kilowatt Solar Array for Kotzebue
Crater Lake Power and Water Project
Wood Boiler for the Native Village of Tazlina
Craig High School Wood Heat Conversion
Neck Lake Hydropower Project
Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project
Mahoney Lake Hydropower Project
Clearwater Creek Hydropower Project
SEAPA Wind Resource Assessment
Sitka: Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Heat Pump
Upper Hidden Basin Diversion
Manokotak Renewable Energy Feasibility Project
Kake Community Energy
Chefornak High Penetration Wind Diesel System
Tuntutuliak Heat Recovery
Juniper Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project
Stetson Creek Diversion Cooper Lake Dam Facilities Project
Waste to Energy Reconnaissance Study
False Pass Wind Energy Project
Koliganek Wind Diesel and Heat Recovery
Chickaloon Solar Thermal and Biomass Project
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
NWAB School District Solar Thermal Systems
Cascade Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Tuntutuliak Wind Heat Electrical Thermal Storage
Kongiganak Wind Heat Electrical Thermal Storage
Igiugig Wind Resource Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Kwigillingok Wind Heat Electrical Thermal Storage
Sand Point Energy Storage Project
St Marys Pitkas Point Wind Energy Construction Project
Stebbins St Michael Wind Energy Final Design and Permitting
Mountain Village Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Marshall Wind Energy Final Design and Permitting Project
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project Final Design and Permitting
Chenega Bay Hydroelectric Construction
Iliamna Solar Ground Mounted Energy System
False Pass Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study
Emmonak Heat Recovery System
Holy Cross Water System Heat Recovery
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Design and Permitting
Noatak Utility Size Photovoltaic Array Construction Project
Mertarvik Renewable Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Adak Wind Data Collection Analysis and Preliminary Design
Alaska SeaLife Center Heat Recovery Project
Multiple Alternative Energy Sources for Napakiak
Yakutat Biomass District Heating Loop
Nunam Iqua Heat Recovery Project
AGSD Extension of Heating Loop
Bristol Bay Borough School District Solar PV Project
Atqasuk Transmission Line Design and Permitting Project
Kaktovik Wind Diesel Design and Permitting
Galena Community Wood Heat Project
Port Alsworth Hydropower PreConstruction Phase
Grayling Heat Recovery System
Venetie Clinic Heat Recovery
St Marys Heat Recovery System
Eek Water System Heat Recovery
Chevak Water and Vacuum Plant Heat Recovery
Brevig Mission Water System Heat Recovery
Four Villages lntertie Design
Kotzebue Paper and Wood Waste to Energy Project
Ketchikan Gateway Borough Biomass Heating Project
Packers Creek Hydroelectric Project Phase II
Feasibility Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Metlakatla to Ketchikan Intertie
Sitka Sea Water Source Heat Pump Project
Biomass Heat for Minto Community Buildings
Seldovia House Ground Source Heat Pump Project
Flywheels ESS for Kodiak Pier Electric Crane
Jack River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Carlo Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study
Chisana Mountain Wind Feasibility Project
Atka Dispatchable Heat
Gunnuk Creek Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
Walker Lake Hydro Project Feasibility
Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project
SEAPA Wind Resource Assessment Phase I and II
Haines Borough Municipal Buildings Biomass Project
Excursion Inlet Hydro Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Survey Creek Hydroelectric Project
Chignik Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Southeast Island School District Wood Boilers
Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler Project
Allison Creek Hydroelectric Project Construction
Wood Chip Boiler for The Native Village of Tazlina
Sitka Kettleson Library Air Source Heat Pump
Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Heat Pump
Sitka Centennial Hall Air Source Heat Pump
Craig High School Wood Heat Conversion
Nenana Collaborative Biomass Heating System Project
Chuathbaluk Water System Heat Recovery
Mendenhall Valley Library Geothermal HVAC System
NEA Stack Heat to Power Project
Tuntutuliak Water Treatment Plant Washeteria Heat Recovery
Karluk Tribal Council Wind Energy System
Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Phase III and IV
Poncelet Kinetics RHK100 Prototype Demonstration
Northwest Arctic Borough Solar PV Project
Electrical Power Lines -Western Alaska
Noatak Wind Resource Assessment
Wood Heat Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design for the Organized Village of Kake
Community Facilities Woody Biomass Space Heating Project
Tanana Solar Domestic Hot Water Heating Project
Bristol Bay Borough School District Energy Project
Waste-to-Energy Feasibility Study
Indian River Hydroelectric Project Construction
Carlo Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study
Knutson Creek Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Juniper Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Neck Lake Hydro Project
Elim Geothermal Resource Assessment I Feasibility
Akiak Wind Resource Assessment
Eastern Copper Basin Geothermal Assessment
Kipnuk Wind Diesel Power Generation and Heating
Nelson Lagoon Wind Energy Project
False Pass Wind Energy Project
Cold Bay Waste Heat Recovery Project
High-penetration Wind Energy Project- Kokhanok
Haines Borough Pellet Heating Project
Excursion Inlet Hydro Project- Phase II
Mount Makushin Geothermal Project
Manokotak Wind & Heat Feasibility Study
Atka Wind Power Project
TidGen? Array Project
Ticasuk Brown School Pellet Boiler Project-Phase 2
Wrangell Power Plant Upgrade
Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Goodnews Bay Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
St. Mary?s / Pilot Station Wind Energy Intertie Construction Project
St. Mary?s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design
Hotham Peak Wind Resource and lntertie Assessment
Cosmos Hills Wind Resource and Intertie Assessment
St. Michael/Stebbins Wind Energy Final Design and Permitting Project
Russian Mission Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Kotlik Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Wales Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Marshall Wind Energy Design and Permitting Project
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
St. Mary?s / Pitka?s Point Wind Energy Project
New Stuyahok Heat Recovery
OIT Inc Waste Heat Turbine Project
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant/Washeteria Building
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant and Community Store
Stebbins Heat Recovery Project
Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant and Washeteria
Heat Recovery for the Water System
Atmautluak Washeteria Heat Recovery Project
Savoonga Heat Recovery System - Power Plant to Water Plant
Biomass Feasibility Studies in Public Facilities, Interior Region
Design and Construction of Biomass Systems in Interior Villages
Nenana Collaborative Biomass Heating System Project
Allison Creek Project
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project
Bathymetric survey and marine geological study to refine submarine cable route for Kodiak-Ouzinkie Electrical Inter-tie project
Galena Community Wood Heat Project
AGSD District Heat Loop Project
Upper Tanana Biomass CHP Project
Seward Schools Biomass Heating System
Afognak Biomass Feasibility Study
Gartina Falls Hydroelectric Project
AVCP RHA Wood Biomass Heating System
Walker Lake Hydro Feasibility Project
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie
West Creek Hydroelectric Project
Blue Lake Hydroelectric Expansion Project
Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler Project
Eagle Solar Array Project
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Stetson Creek Diversion/Cooper Lake Dam Facilities Project
Egegik Wind Feasibility Study
Levelock Wind Reconnaissance Study
Igiugig Wind Turbine Design
Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Project: Phase Ill
Tazimina Hydroelectric Project Capacity Increase
Petersburg Community Heating System Retrofit Feasibility Study
Coffman Cove Hydropower Line Extension
HydroPower Surplus to Stored Hydrogen Feasibility Study
Dimond Park Library Geothermal HVAC System
Northwest Arctic Borough Solar PV
Jack River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Karluk Tribal Council ? Wind Energy System
Nome Renewable Energy Optimization Project
Port Graham Village Biomass Waste Heat Demonstration Project
MEA Power Plant Waste Heat Utilization Reconnaissance Study
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Alakanuk Waste Water Treatment Facility Wind Generation
Reconnaissance Study of Thomas Bay Public Projects
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Adak Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
Igiugig Wind, Solar, Hydrokinetic and Thermal Feasibility Study
Nikolski Renewable Energy Wind Project
Kodiak High School Ground Source Heat Pump
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
High Penetration Wind Diesel Power and Heat
Nenana?s Solar-Powered Student Living Center
Transmission Line from Fire Island Wind Project
Mentasta Woody Biomass Community Facility Space Heating Project
Tanacross Woody Biomass Community Facility Space Heating Project
Tanana Solar Thermal Public Facilities Heating Project
St. Michael / Stebbins Wind Energy Design
Emmonak/Alakanuk Phase 2 Wind Energy Construction
Upper Kalskag Solar Construction
Gambell Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Gambell Water System Heat
Chevak Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Chevak Water System Heat
Goodnews Bay Wind Energy Feasibility
Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility
Mountain Village Wind Energy Construction
Shaktoolik Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Shaktoolik Water System Heat
Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Mekoryuk Water System Heat
St. Mary\'s/Pitka\'s Point Wind Construction and Commissioning
TidGen? Array Project
Reconnaissance Study of the Geothermal Potential for the Ivanoff Bay Region
Extension of Heating Loop
Greenhouse and Processing Facility utilizing surplus heat
Net-Zero Training and Administration Center (TAC)
Community of Elim Geothermal Resource Assessment
False Pass Tidal Energy Study
Saint Michael Renewable Energy Reconnaissance Study
City of Angoon Wind to Energy Feasibility Study
Goodnews Bay Wind Generator Study
Togiak Waste Heat Recovery Project
Savoonga Heat Recovery - Power Plant to Water Plant
Shishmaref Heat Recovery Project
Old Kasigluk Wind Feasibility Study
Klawock Biomass Boiler System Feasibility Study
White Mountain Heat Recovery Feasibility Study
New Stuyahok Heat Recovery Study
Toksook Bay Heat Recovery Feasibility Study
Water Plant Biomass System Feasibility Study
Selawik Wind Feasibility Study
Sleetmute Heat Recovery - Power Plant to Water Plant
Scammon Bay Hydro Design & Engineering
Kotlik Wind Generator Study
Noorvik Heat Recovery System Feasibility Study
Russian Mission Heat Recovery System
Atmautlauk Washeteria/ Power Plant Waste Heat Recovery Project
Golovin Wind Feasibility Study
City of Kake Hydroelectric Resource Analysis
Kobuk Biomass Design & Construction Project
and 898 Nome Renewable Energy Expansion/Optimization Project
Chickaloon Solar Thermal and Biomass Project
Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Packer?s Creek Hydroelectric Project
Mahoona Hydroelectric Dam Replacement
Seward Schools Biomass Heating System
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility
Kake Pellet Boiler System
Juneau Super Critical Water Oxidation Sewage Sludge to Energy
Multi Disciplinary Combined Facility Primary Care Center Biomass Feasibility Project
Walker Lake Feasibility Study
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development GENERATION Project
Wrangell Electrical Capacitor Bank
and 827 Thayer Lake Hydropower Development Transmission/Generation Project
Anaktuvuk Pass Geothermal Feasibility Study
Tatitlek Heat Recovery Project
Wood Heating Feasibility in Public Facilities, Interior Region
Huslia Water System & Clinic Wood Boiler Project
Design & Construction of Wood Heating Projects in Interior Alaska Communities
Stetson Creek Diversion/ Cooper Lake Dam Facilities Project
Gulkana Village Biomass Fuels Project
Solomon Gulch unit 2 Efficiency Upgrade
Allison Creek Project
Wave Energy/ Sequestration Technology (WEST)
Glennallen School Campus Biomass Heating Project
Whitman Lake Project
AVTEC Hydroelectric Training Facility
Kake-Petersburg Inter-Connection Engineering
SEAPA Wind Resources Assessment & Economic Feasibility Study
SEAPA Phase I Wind Site Recon Study
Reynolds Creek Hydro Transmission Line
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Upper Tanana Area Intertie Project
Black Bear Lake Hydro Project Storage Increase
Transmission Line to Renewable Energy Resources (Mount Spurr)
Pillar Mtn High Penetration Wind Project
Petersburg Public Library Geothermal Heat Pump Construction
Jack River Hydro Project Phase II
West Creek Hydroelectric Project
Sitka Renewable Energy Feasibility for Centennial Hall & Library
Sitka Renewable Energy Feasibility for Wastewater Treatment Plant
Japonski Island Boathouse Heat Pump
Kwigillingok Wind Energy Storage
Tuntutuliak Wind Energy Storage
Packers Creek Hydroelectric Project
Palmer Ice Arena Geothermal & Heat Recovery Improvements
High Penetration Wind Diesel Power and Heat
Akiak Integrated Renewable Energy Projects
Kongiganak Flywheel Energy Storage
Napakiak Wind Design & Construction Planning
Merrill Field Landfill Gas Heating/Energy Project
Indian River Hydroelectric Project
Southern Railbelt Small Hydro Reconn. Study
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project
Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project
Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project
Port Graham Biomass Waste Heat Demo Project
Pelican Hydroelectric Upgrade Project
Hoonah Heat Recovery Project
Port Heiden Wind Turbine Project
Napaskiak Wind, Power and Heat Recovery
New Koliganek Wind & Heat Recovery Feasibility Study
Cook Inlet Tidal Hydrokinetic Power Generation
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
Lake & Peninsula Wood Boilers
Cold Bay Wind Energy Project
Nelson Lagoon Wind Energy Project
False Pass Wind Energy Project
Akiak Hydro Study
Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project
Battle Creek Diversion Project
Stetson Creek Diversion/Cooper Lake Dam Facilities
Atmautluak Wind Renewable Energy
Snettisham Transmission Line Avalanche Mitigation
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development, Transmission
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development Generation
Akiachak Wind Feasibility & Conceptual Design
Upper Kobuk River Biomass
Kotzebue Paper & Wood Waste to Energy
Kenai Winds Expansion
Upper Tanana Biomass CHP Project
Kwethluk Wind Feasibility
Ionia Renewable Energy Training Center
Gulkana Village Pellet Fuels Project
Turnagain Arm Tidal Electrical Generation Project
Cook Inlet TidGen Project
Kachemak Bay Tidal Power
Organic Rankine Cycle Field Testing
AVTEC Hydro Training Facility
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie
Triangle Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pilgrim Hot Springs Geothermal Resource Assessment
Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydroelectric Project
Mount Spurr Geothermal Project
Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project
Chefornak Wind Feasibilitly
Kenny Lake School Wood Fired Boiler
Stebbins Wind Feasibility
Selawik Hybrid Wind Diesel System Turbine Upgrade
Scammon Bay Wind Feasibility
St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point Wind Construction
Old Harbor Hydroelectric
Marshall Wind Feasibility
Koyuk Wind Phase II Feasibility
Kaltag Solar Construction
Elim Wind Feasibility
Eek Wind Feasibility
Yukon River Debris Mitigation Project
Feasibility Assessments for Wood Heating in Interior AK Communities
Thorne Bay School Wood Fired Boiler Project
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility
Nikiski Combined Cycle Conversion (NCCC)
Nushagak Community Wind Power Project
Reconnaissance Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
Schubee Lake Hydroelectric Project
Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Transmission Line
Neck Lake Hydroelectric Project
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project
Excursion Inlet Hydro Project Phases I and II
Wrangell Electric Vehicle Feasibility Study
Susitna Valley High School Wood Heat
Cordova Community Biomass Feasibility Study
Akutan Geothermal Development Project
Whitman Lake Project
Port St. Nick Fish Enhancement Hydropower
CVEA Silver Lake Feasibility
Tok School Biomass Heating Project
GVEA Eva Creek Wind Turbine Purchase
CEA Transmission Line to Renewable Energy Resources
NWAB School Alternate Energy Solar Awareness Project
Wainwright Wind Turbine Design
Point Lay Wind Generation Design
Point Hope Wind Turbine Design
Kaktovik Wind Diesel
Atqasuk Transmission Line
Renewable Energy Feasibility Study
Lime Village Photovoltaic System Retrofit
Jack River Hydro Project
Biomass Fuel Dryer Project
Bethel Renewable Energy Project
Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility Analysis
Adak Renewable Diesel Project
Waste Energy Powered Absorption Refrigeration Unit
AVCP Housing Wind Turbine Project
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development (TLHD) Generation
City of Ouzinkie Wind Generator Project
Fuel Cell Feasibility
The Angoon Commercial Demonstration Tidal Power Project
Atka Hydro Dispatched Excess Electrical Power
High Penetration Wind-Battery-Diesel Hybrid
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development (TLHD) Transmis
St. Mary?s Wind-Final Design, Permitting & Construction
New Stuyahok Wind-Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment & Conceptual Design
Scammon Bay Wind Project
Teller Wind-Final Design, Permitting & Construction
Kivalina Wind-Intertie Feasibility Analysis & Conceptual Design
Stebbins Wind-Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment and Conceptual Design
Slana Wind Farm-Wind Energy Resource Assessment
Jarvis Creek Natural Gas Project
Cook Inlet Tidal Hydrokinetic Power Generation
Adak Renewable/Diesel Project
Tatitlek High Penetration Wind-Diesel Project
West Cook Inlet Energy Cumulative Impacts
Wave Power Project Evaluation Study
St. Paul Wind Diesel Project
Cook Inlet TidGen Project
Reconnaissance Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Kachemak Bay Tidal Power-Feasibility & Conceptual Design
Biomass for Energy: Supply Side Knowledge Base
City of Napaskiak Wind Study
Tuntutuliak Flywheel Energy Storage
Kenny Lake School biomass-Fired Heating System
Hoonah City Schools Biomass Heating System
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project
Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project
Archangel Creek Hydroelectric Project
Transmission Line to Renewable Energy Resources
Tribal & Regional Energy Planning
Statewide run-of-river hydropower assessment
Port Graham Village Council Alternative Energy - Biomass Electric Generation Project
Kwigillingok Flywheel Energy Storage
Pilot Point Wind Power & Heat
Scenery Lake Hydroelectric Project
Kongiganak Flywheel Energy Storage
High Penetration Wind Diesel Power and Heat
Turnagain Arm Tidal Electric Generation Project
Tok Forestry Renewable Biomass Energy Demonstration Project
Ionia Renewable Energy Training Center
Alaska Biomass Combined Heat & Power Demonstration Project
Kodiak High School Renewable Energy Analysis
Mount Spurr Geothermal Project
City Tribe Biomass Energy Conservation
Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project
Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project
Hope Regional Hydroelectric Study
Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project
Virgin Creek Hydroelectric Project
Akutan Geothermal Development Project
Akutan Hydroelectric System Repair and Upgrade
Alaska Wind for Schools Program
Waste to Energy Feasibility Assessment for UAF and other medium sized communities in AK
Pilgrim Hot Springs Geothermal Resource Assessment
Melozi-Horner Hot Springs Geothermal Resource Estimate
AVCP Housing Wind Turbines Project
Yakutat Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration
Hoonah-IPEC Hydro Project
Thermal Engine Generator System (TEGS) for Ugashik, AK
AVTEC Hydro Training Facility Project
City of Kotzebue Biomass Tactical Garbage to Energy Refinery (TGER) Project
Kenai Winds Expansion
Hybrid Biomass and Solar Combined Heat and Power System
2MW Refinery Waste Energy Recovery
Chenega Bay Hydro Design and Permitting
Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project
Alaska SeaLife center Phase II Seawater Heat Pump Project
Silver Lake Pre-Feasibility Study
MSB Solar and Wind Potential
Triangle Lake Hydroelectric Project
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Interie
Saint Paul Fuel Economy Upgrade
Indian River Hydroelectric Project
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project
District Wood Heating in Fort Yukon
SEAPA Integrated Resource Planning Project (IRP)
Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project
Port Frederick Tidal Power Project
Schubee Lake Hydroelectic Project
Neck Lake Hydroelectric Project
Reynolds Creek Hydro Transmission Line
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Port Alsworth Hydroelectric Construction Project
Nushagak Area Hydropower Project (NAHP)
Waste Energy Powered Absorption Refrigeration Unit
Seldovia small wind generation facility
Skyline Mini Wind Farm
Tyonek Native Village Wind Project
Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project
Keep it Sustainable, Keep it Local (KISKIL) Renewable Energy Project
Cultivating Rural Alaska for Biomass Energy
Greenhouse Feasibility and Application in Rural Alaska
Heat Recovery/Power Generation in Rural Alaska
Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project
Chefornak Wind Turbine Installation
Combined/Hybrid solar-thermal collection & storage with ground-source heat-pumps
A Feasibility & Planning Project to Recapture & Utilize Waste Heat from the Healy Clean Coal Project
Renewable Support Mode for BESS
Alaska British Columbia (AK-BC) Intertie Project
Wrangell Street Light Conversion
Spur Road Distribution Line Extension
Wrangell Downtown Revitalization
Sunrise Lake Project
Clearwater Wind Farm
Wainwright Wind Diesel Generation Project
Point Hope Wind Diesel Generation Project
Point Lay Wind Diesel Generation Project
Anchorage geothermal district heating project
Biomass Fuel Dryer Project
Gastineau Elementary School Geothermal Loopfield
Cordova Community Biomass Feasibility Study
Humpback Creek Hydroelectric Project Rehabilitation
NWAB School Alternate Energy Solar Awareness Project
Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility Analysis
Galena Renewable Energy Project
Delta Junction Wood Pellet Boiler: Biofuel Pilot Program
Jack River Hydro Project
Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydroelectric Project
Wood Chip Boiler Heating System
Noatak Biomass_Native Village of Noatak
Marshall Wood Fired Boiler_Ohogamiut Traditional Council
Wood Pellet Plant_AHTNA
Chignik Lake CBM_AGE
Sand Point Wind_AWE
Tatitlek High Penetration Wind
Adak Diesel Hybrid_TDX Power
McGrath Biomass Feasibility
Nenana Biomass Feasibility
Tanacross Biomass Feasibility
Tanana Biomass Feasibility
ORPC Cook Inlet Tidal
Orutsaramiut Native Council
Plasma Gasification_Solena Group
Ambler HR_City of Ambler
Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting Wind
Connelly Lake Hydro_APT
Geothermal Resource Assessment Seward Pen_AVEC
Shaktoolik Wind_AVEC
Emmonak Wind and Transmission_AVEC
Stebbins Wind Analysis_AVEC
New Stuyahok Wind Analysis_AVEC
Scammon Bay Wind Analysis_AVEC
St. Mary\'s Wind Analysis_AVEC
Teller Wind Analysis_AVEC
Archangel Creek Hydro_AGP
Delia Creek Hydro_HPML
Sitka CHP_City and Borough
Venetie District Heat_Village Council
Chalkyitsik District Heat_Village Council
McGrath District Heat_MPL
Packers Creek Hydro_CLPU
Glacier Fork Hydro
St Paul Wind Construction_City of St. Paul
Tok Wind Construction_VWP
Slana Wind Construction_AWP
Delta Wind Construction_AWP
Kotzebue Solid Waste_City of Kotzebue
Statewide Biomass Assessment_UAF
Tidal Feasibility_City of Homer
Tanana Alternative Energy Assessment _Tanana Power
Alternative Energy Assessment_Perryville NVOP
Tanalian River Hydro_AGE
Solar Hot Water NWAB_NIHA
Angoon HR_IPEC
Integrated Resource Plan_FDPPA
Nenana Healy Hydro Phase II_GVEA
Wind Recon_NPRHA
Tuntutuliak High Penetration Wind Diesel
Akiak Wind
Unalaska Heat Recovery
UAF Photovoltaic
WCA Hydrokinetic_Tanana River
UAF Absorption Chiller
Mobile Biodiesel Processing Plant_CCTHIA
Birch Creek Solar
Kvichak River_Igiugig
Yakutat Wave Energy Conversion
Alternative Energy Feasibilty_CSD
West Creek Hydro_Muni Skagway
Alternative Energy Recon_YKSD
Biomass Hydronic Heating_YKSD
Mountain Village Wind_City and Tribe
Pilgrim Hot Springs Assessment_ACEP
Mt. Spur Resource Assessment_Ormat
Statewide Heat Pump Analysis_ACEP
Chena Hot Springs Reservoir Modeling_ACEP
Victor Creek Hydro_Kenai Hydro
Chena Power Hydrogen
Manley Village Council Geothermal
AEB Geothermal Assessment_AGDAP
Galena Hydrokinetic
Akutan Hydrosystem Repair and Upgrade
Loud Creek Hydro_Akutan
Hot Springs Bay Valley_Akutan
Barrow_Atqasuk Transmission
Point Lay Heat Recovery
Wainwright Heat Recovery
Wainwright Coal Bed Methane Phase III
Natural Gas Distribution_AGPA
Wasteoil for Heat_#2 Fuel
Biomassheat Anchorage_Earth Run Energy
Pilot Point High Penetration Wind/Diesel/CHP
Kotlik Pellet Stove_KYE
Fivemile Creek_Chitna Electric
Kotzebue HR and Ammonia Power Cycle
Knik Arm CHC_KAPP
Crooked Creek Hydro Kinetic
Bristol Bay Fish Waste_NEA
Crooked Creek Hydro_Elfin Cove
Wood Gasification_KISKIL
AVTEC Wind
Sunrise Lake Hydro_Wrangell
AK_BC Intertie_Wrangell
Carlson Creek Hydro_APT
Triangle Lake_Metlakatla Indian Community
Haines Assistant living GSHP_Apt
Neck Lake Hydro_APT
Kenai Winds_Nikiski
Kake Biomass gasifer_ccthita
Heat Recovery UMED_MLPUAA
High Penetration Wind Diesel Heat_Kipnuk
Cordova District Heat_NVE
Camp Hill Wind_NVE
Little Port Walter Hydro_Ameresco
Terror Lake Capacity_KEA
Air Source Heat Pump_BIHA
Jack River Recon_Cantwell
Akiachak Wind_ANCEC
Thorne Bay Wood Boiler_SEISD
Kiseralik_Chikuminuk Hydro_AVCP Housing
Kasaan Wood Boiler_Village of Kasaan
Coffman Cove Wood Boiler_SEISD
PetroStar HR_VFDA
Whitman Lake Hydro Construction_KPU
Banner Wind Construction_Nome
Grant Lake Phase III & IV_Nushagak
Ruth Lake Hydro Phase II _PMPL
Bethel Wind Power Project Times 4
Ambler Solar and Wind Power Construction
Napaskiak Wind Farm Feasibility Study
Delta Junction Wood Chip Heating Feasibility Study
Juneau Ground Source Heat Pump Construction (Aquatic Center)
Kongiganak Wind Farm Construction
Eva Creek Wind Farm Construction
McKinley Village Solar Thermal Construction
Kwigillingok Wind Farm Construction
Nome/ Banner Peak Wind Farm Construction
North Pole Heat Recovery Construction
Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Pillar Mountain Wind Farm Construction
Delta Junction Wind Farm Construction
Ketchikan Biomass Gasification Construction
Nikiski Wind Farm Construction
Nenana Hydrokinetic Construction
Crooked Creek Renewable Energy Reconnaissance Study
Makushin Geothermal Feasibility Study
Nikolaevsk Wind Farm Final Design
Anchorage Landfill Gas Electricity Final Design
Delia Creek Hydro Construction
Napaimute Solar PV Construction
St. George Wind Farm Construction
Nikolski Wind Integration Construction
Statewide Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study
Fishhook Hydroelectric Construction
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance
Kotzebue Wind Farm Expansion Construction
Ruby Hydrokinetic Construction
Kotzebue Wind Farm Red-Ox Flow Battery Storage Construction
Juneau Based Statewide Hydro/Ammonia Electricity Construction
Statewide Heat Recovery/Electric Demonstration Construction
Palmer Coal Bed Methane CHP Construction
Girdwood Gas CHP/Hydro/Wind Solar Construction
Shungnak Solar PV Construction
Noatak Solar PV Construction
Ambler Solar PV Construction
Upper Kobuk Region Hydroelectric Feasibility
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Final Design
Mekoryuk Wind Farm Construction
Toksook Bay Wind Farm Expansion Construction
Quinhagak Wind Farm Construction
Anchorage Landfill Gas Electricity Construction
Bethel Wind Farm Construction (BNC land)
Coal Mine Road Wind Farm Final Design
Indian River Hydroelectric Construction
Lake Pen Borough Wind Feasibility Study
Lake Pen Borough Wood Heating Final Design
Chignik Lake Area Wind-Hydro Final Design
McGrath Heat Recovery Construction
Yakutat Biomass Gasification Construction
Kobuk River Valley Woody Biomass Feasibility Study
Chuniisax Creek Hydroelectric Construction
South Fork Hydroelectric Construction
Buckland/Deering/Noorvik Wind Farm Construction
Snake Mountain Wind Farm Construction
Galena Wood Heating Construction
North Pole Biomass Electricity/Heat Construction
Nome/Newton Peak Wind Farm Construction
Mt. Alice Harbor Renewable Energy Construction
Unalakleet Wind Farm Construction
Tok Wood Heating Construction
Whittier Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance
Nome Banner Peak Wind Farm Transmission Construction
Kenny Lake Wood Heating Construction
Anchorage Wood Processing and Heating Construction
Whittier Gas CHP Construction
Palmer Gas CHP Construction
Burro Creek Hydro Feasibility Study
Haines Central Wood Heating Feasibility Study (Community Buildings)
Indian Creek Hydro Feasibility Study
Delta Junction Barley/Wood Pellet Central Heating Construction
Ruth Lake Hydro Reconnaissance
Whitman Lake Hydro Construction
Statewide Heat Recovery Demonstration Project
Hooper Bay Wind Farm Construction
Grant Lake/Falls Creek Hydro Feasibility Study
Haines Central Wood Heating System Construction (Low Income Housing Project)
Statewide Biomass Reconnaissance Study
Fort Yukon Central Wood Heating Construction
McGrath Central Wood Heating Construction
Kake-Petersburg Intertie Final Design
Hoonah - Hawk Inlet Intertie Construction
Allison Lake Hydro Feasibility Study
Cordova Wood Processing Plant Construction
Haines Ground Source Heat Pump Construction
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Coffman Cove-Naukati Intertie Construction
Cordova Heat Recovery Construction
Humpback Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie Construction
Gustavus/Angoon/Wrangell/Nikiski Tidal Feasibility Study
Pike\'s Ridge Geothermal Final Design
Jack River Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
Mt. Redoubt/Mt. Spur Geothermal Construction
Chistochina Central Wood Heating Construction
Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Final Design
Ketchikan Waste Gasification Reconnaissance Study
Juneau Waste Gasification Reconnaissance Study
Aleutians East Borough Renewable Energy Reconnaissance
Falls Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Wrangell Hydro Based Electric Boilers Construction
Anchorage Geothermal District Heating Feasibility Study
Naknek/King Salmon Fish Waste Feasibility Study
Lake Elva Hydropower Construction
Fairbanks Waste Gasification Feasibility Study
Palmer Waste Gasification Feasibility Study
Anchorage Waste Gasification Feasibility Study
Gulkana Central Wood Heating Construction
Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility
Project Type
Hydrokinetic
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro, Storage, Other
Hydro
Wind, Transmission, Solar, Storage
Hydro
Hydro
HeatHydro, HeatRecovery
HeatPump
Solar
Solar
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Transmission, Other
Wind
Solar
Other, HeatBiofuel
Solar
Transmission, HeatBiofuel
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Wind
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
HeatPump
Biomass
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery, HeatPump
Solar
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro, Storage
Hydro
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
HeatWind
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind, Transmission
Solar
HeatRecovery
Wind
Biomass
Other
Other
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Solar
HeatRecovery
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Wind
Hydro
Transmission, Other
Wind
HeatPump
HeatWind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Hydrokinetic
Hydrokinetic
Biomass
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Hydro
Wind
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Solar
Hydro, Storage, Other
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
HeatPump
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Wind
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
HeatSolar
Hydro
HeatWind
HeatWind
Wind
HeatWind
Storage
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Solar
Hydrokinetic
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Solar
Wind
Wind
HeatRecovery
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Solar
Transmission
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Transmission
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Geothermal
Transmission
HeatPump
Biomass
HeatPump
Storage
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
HeatHydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
HeatPump
HeatPump
HeatPump
Biomass
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatPump
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
Solar
Wind, Transmission
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Solar
Solar
HeatBiofuel
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Geothermal
Wind
Geothermal
Wind
Wind
Wind
HeatRecovery
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Geothermal
Wind
Wind
Other
Biomass
Other
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Solar
Wind
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Geothermal
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Transmission
Other
Geothermal
Solar
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Geothermal
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Solar
Transmission
Biomass
Biomass
Solar
Wind
Wind
Solar
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Geothermal
Biomass
Transmission
HeatRecovery
Geothermal
Hydrokinetic
Transmission
Wind
Wind
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Wind
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Geothermal
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Wind
Wind
Transmission
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Transmission
Wind
Geothermal
Hydro
Hydro
Geothermal
Geothermal
Geothermal
Other
Other
Hydro
Geothermal
Wind
Other
Other
Wind
Other
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Wind
Wind
Other
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Transmission
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Other
Wind
Biomass
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Other
Other
Other
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Geothermal
Hydro
Geothermal
Geothermal
Wind
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Solar
Wind
Wind
Other
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Geothermal
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Other
Biomass
Biomass
Geothermal
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Transmission
Solar
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Other
Biomass
Solar
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Other
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Other
Hydrokinetic
HeatRecovery
Wind
Transmission
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
NaturalGas
Hydrokinetic
Wind
Wind
Other
Hydrokinetic
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Geothermal
Hydrokinetic
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Other
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Geothermal
Geothermal
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Geothermal
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Geothermal
Geothermal
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Solar
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Geothermal
Geothermal
Hydro
Solar
Hydro
Transmission
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
Solar
HeatRecovery
Other
Transmission
Other
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Geothermal
Biomass
Geothermal
Biomass
Hydro
Solar
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
HeatBiofuel
Biomass
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Wind
Other
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydrokinetic
NaturalGas
HeatBiofuel
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Geothermal
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
HeatBiofuel
Biomass
Hydrokinetic
Other
Other
Hydro
Solar
HeatRecovery
Other
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
HeatRecovery
Solar
Hydrokinetic
HeatRecovery
HeatBiofuel
Solar
Hydrokinetic
Hydrokinetic
Other
Hydro
Other
Biomass
Wind
Geothermal
Geothermal
Geothermal
Geothermal
Hydro
Geothermal
Geothermal
Geothermal
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Geothermal
Transmission
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Other
NaturalGas
Other
Biomass
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Hydrokinetic
HeatBiofuel
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Hydro
Geothermal
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Wind
Biomass
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Other
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Other
Wind
Biomass
Geothermal
Wind
Wind
Solar
Wind
Wind
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
Wind
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Other
Geothermal
Wind
HeatBiofuel
Hydro
Solar
Wind
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Other
HeatRecovery
Other
Other
Solar
Solar
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Wind
HeatRecovery
HeatBiofuel
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Biomass
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Other
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Transmission
Biomass
Biomass
NaturalGas
NaturalGas
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Biomass
HeatBiofuel
Biomass
Biomass
Transmission
Transmission
Hydro
Biomass
Geothermal
Hydro
Transmission
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Transmission
Hydrokinetic
Geothermal
Hydro
Geothermal
Biomass
Hydro
HeatBiofuel
HeatBiofuel
Other
Hydro
Other
Geothermal
HeatBiofuel
Hydro
HeatBiofuel
HeatBiofuel
HeatBiofuel
Biomass
Hydro
Application Type
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Applicant Phases
Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Recon
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility
Construction
Recon
Recon
Recon
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Construction
Recon, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Recon, Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Recon, Feasibility
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Construction
Construction
Recon
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Recon, Design
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Recon
Design
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Recon
Feasibility
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Construction
Recon
Feasibility
Recon
Feasibility, Design
Recon
Design
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Design
Construction
Feasibility
Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility
Design
Design
Design
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Construction
Recon
Recon
Feasibility
Design
Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon
Feasibility
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Recon
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility
Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Recon
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Recon
Design
Feasibility
Recon
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Recon
Recon
Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Recon, Construction
Design
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Recon
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Recon
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Design
Recon
Design
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Construction
Recon
Construction
Recon
Design
Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Recon, Design
Design
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Recon
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Recon
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Recon, Design
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Design
Design
Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Design
Design
Design
Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Design
Recon
Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
0
Design
Recon
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Design
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Design
Design
Feasibility
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon
Design
Design
Recon
Recon
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Feasibility
0
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon
Recon
Recon
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Design
AEA Phases
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Design
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Recon
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Feasibility
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Recon, Feasibility
Design, Construction
Recon
Recon
Recon
Recon
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Recon, Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Recon, Feasibility
Design
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Construction
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Applicant Name
Igiugig Village Council d/b/a Igiugig Electric Company
Circle Utilities, Inc.
Community of Elfin Cove Non-Profit Corporation, Elfin Cove Utility Commission
City of Tenakee Springs Dba Tenakee Springs Electric Department
Cordova Electric Cooperative, Inc.
City of Chignik
TDX Power, Inc.
TDX Adak Generating, Inc. (TAG) - TDX Power, Inc.
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Cordova Electric Cooperative, Inc.
City of Seward
Minto Development Corporation
City of Kake
City of Ouzinkie
City of Koyuk
Sand Point Generating, LLC - TDX Power, Inc.
Municipality of Skagway Borough
City of Scammon Bay
City of Wales
City of Grayling
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
Kotzebue Electric Association, Inc.
Central Environmental Inc.
State of Alaska Department of Corrections
City of Hoonah
Chitina Electric Inc. (CEI)
Kenai Hydro LLC
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
City of King Cove
City of False Pass
Tlingit-Haida Regional Housing Authority (THRHA)
Klawock City School District
Native Village of Shungnak
City of Huslia
City of Eek
City of Ambler
NANA Regional Corporation
City and Borough of Sitka
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Upper Tanana Energy, LLC. UTE
City of False Pass
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
City of Craig
Kodiak Electric Association, Inc.
City of Unalaska
Homer Electric Association, Inc.
City of Chignik
Native Village of Chenega
Port Graham Village Council
TDX Power, Sand Point Generating
TDX Power, Inc.
Hoonah Indian Association
City of Tenakee Springs DBA Tenakee Springs Electric Department
Community of Elfin Cove Non-Profit Corporation, Elfin Cove Utility Commission
City of King Cove
TDX Power, North Slope Generating
Northwest Alaska Tribal Energy Organization (NATEO)
City of Noorvik
City of Eek
Unalakleet Valley Electric Cooperative/UVEC
Lake and Peninsula Borough
TDX Power, Inc.
Adak Generating, LLC., A Subsidiary of TDX power, Inc.
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
City of Scammon Bay
Southeast Island School District
Kenai Hydro LLC
Interior Regional Housing Authority
Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority
City of Scammon Bay
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
City of Selawik
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
City of Chefornak/Naterkaq Light Plant
City of Ouzinkie
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
Metlakatla Indian Community
Kwig Power Company
City of Kotzebue
City of Wales
Hydaburg City School District
City of Holy Cross
City of Nikolai
Igiugig Village Council d/b/a Igiugig Electric Company
City of False Pass
City of Huslia
City of Ambler
City of Grayling
Chitina Electric Inc. (CEI)
City of Koyuk
Akiachak Native Community Electric Company/Akiachak Native Community IRA Council
Upper Tanana Energy, LLC (UTE)
Native Village of Shungnak
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority
Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority
Kotzebue Electric Association Inc.
Cordova Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Native Village of Tazlina
Craig City School District
Alaska Power Company
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA)
City of Saxman
Alaska Power Company
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA)
City and Borough of Sitka Public Works Department
Kodiak Electric Association, Inc. (KEA)
Manokotak Natives Limited: Manokotak Power Company (MPC)
Organized Village of Kake
Naterqak Light Plant, City of Chefornak
Native Village of Tuntutuliak
Ram Valley, LLC
City of King Cove
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
City of False Pass Electric Utility
New Koliganek Village Council
Chickaloon Native Village
Native Village of Tanacross
Northwest Arctic Borough School District
Blue Hole Properties, LLC (BHP)
TCSA Electrical Services
Puvurnaq Power Company
Igiugig Village Council
Kwig Power Company
TDX Sand Point Generating, LLC
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Native Village of Chenega
Iliamna Village Council
City of False Pass
City of Emmonak
City of Holy Cross
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Northwest Arctic Borough
Ungusraq Power Company (UPC) / Newtok Traditional Council
City of Adak, Alaska
City of Seward
Napakiak lrcinraq Power Company
City and Borough of Yakutat
City of Nunam Iqua
Alaska Gateway School District
Bristol Bay Borough School District
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
City of Galena
Tanalian Electric Co-op, Inc.
City of Grayling
Village of Venetie
City of St. Mary\'s
City of Eek
City of Chevak
City of Brevig Mission
Nuvista Light and Electric Cooperative
City of Kotzebue
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Chignik Lagoon Village Council
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Metlakatla Indian Community
City and Borough of Sitka
Village of Minto
Cook Inlet Housing Authority
Kodiak Electric Association, Inc.
Native Village of Cantwell
Native Village of Cantwell
Alaska Power Company
City of Atka
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Tlingit-Haida Regional Electrical Authority
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency
Haines Borough
Haines Borough
Edna Bay Community
City of Chignik
Southeast Island School District
Hydaburg City School District
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc.
Native Village of Tazlina
City and Borough of Sitka
City and Borough of Sitka
City and Borough of Sitka
Craig City School District
Nenana School District
City of Chuathbaluk
City & Borough of Juneau
Naknek Electric Association, Inc.
Native Village of Tuntutuliak
Karluk Tribal Council
City of Saxman
Whitestone Power and Communications
Northwest Arctic Borough
Nuvista Light & Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Noatak IRA
Organized Village of Kake
Mentasta Traditional Council
City of Tanana
Bristol Bay Borough School District
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
City of Tenakee Springs DBA Tenakee Springs Electric Department
Native Village of Cantwell
Pedro Bay Village Council
Ram Valley LLC
Alaska Power Company (APC)
City of Elim
Akiak Native Community/ Akiak IRA Council
Copper Valley Development Association
Kipnuk Light Plant
Nelson Lagoon Electric Cooperative
City of False Pass Electric Utility
G&K Electric Utility
Kokhanok Electric
Haines Borough
Haines Borough
The Aleut Corporation
Manokotak Power Company
City of Atka
ORPC Alaska 2, LLC
Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB)
City & Borough of Wrangell
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Southwest Region School District
OIT Inc.
Native Village of Tuntutuliak
City of Noorvik
City of Marshall
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Native Village of Kwinhagak
City of Chuathbaluk
Atmautluak Traditional Council
City of Savoonga
Interior Regional Housing Authority
Interior Regional Housing Authority
Nenana City School District
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc. (CVEA)
City of King Cove
City of Ouzinkie
City of Galena
Alaska Gateway School District
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Kenai Peninsula Borough School District (KPBSD)
Native Village of Afognak
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
AVCP Regional Housing Authority
Tlingit-Haida Regional Electric Authority
Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC)
Municipality of Skagway Borough
City & Borough of Sitka (CBS)
Hydaburg City Schools
Alaska Power Company (APC)
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Lake and Peninsula Borough
Lake and Peninsula Borough
Lake and Peninsula Borough
City of Saxman
INN Electric Cooperative, Inc.
City of Petersburg
City of Coffman Cove
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency
City & Borough of Juneau
Northwest Arctic Borough
Native Village of Cantwell
Karluk Tribal Council
Nome Joint Utility System
Port Graham Village Council
Eklutna, Inc.
Independence Power, LLC
City of Alakanuk
City of Angoon
Igiugig Village Council dba Igiugig Electric Company
TDX Power, Inc.
Igiugig Village Council
Native Village of Nikolski
Kodiak Island Borough
City of King Cove
Chitina Electric, Inc.
Kipnuk Light Plant
City of Nenana/Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Mentasta Traditional Council
Tanacross Village Council
City of Tanana
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
ORPC Alaska, LLC
Ivanoff Bay Tribal Council
Alaska Gateway School District
Alaska Gateway School District
Alaska Gateway School District
City of Elim
City of False Pass Electric Utility
City of Saint Michael
City of Angoon
Native Village of Goodnews Bay
City of Togiak
City of Savoonga
City of Shishmaref
Native Village of Kasigluk
City of Klawock
City of White Mountain
City of New Stuyahok
City of Toksook Bay
City of Lower Kalskag
City of Selawik
Sleetmute Traditional Council
City of Scammon Bay
City of Kotlik
City of Noorvik
Russian Mission
Atmautlauk Traditional Council
City of Golovin
City of Kake
City of Kobuk
City of Nome dba Nome Joint Utility System (NJUS)
Chickaloon Village Traditional Council
Eklutna, Inc.
Chignik Lagoon Village Council
City of Ouzinkie
Kenai Peninsula Borough School District
Kenai Hydro LLC
Kake City School District
Lammergeier CleanTech (A Subsidiary of Juneau BioFuels Research Corporation)
Copper River Native Association (on behalf of native Village of Tazlina)
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Metlakatla Indian Communityi
Kootznoowoo, Inc.
City & Borough of Wrangell/Wrangell Municipal Light & Power
Kootznoowoo, Inc.
North Slope Borough
Tatitlek Village IRA Council
Interior Regional Housing Authority
Huslia Traditional Council
Interior Regional Housing Authority
Chugach Electric Association
Gulkana Village Council
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc. (CVEA)
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc. (CVEA)
Atmocean, Inc.
Copper River School District
City of ketchikan dba Ketchikan Public Utilities
Alaska Vocational Technical Center
Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA)
Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA)
Southeast Alaska Power Agency
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Chugach Electric Association
Kodiak Electric Association
City of Petersburg
Native Village of Cantwell
Borough & Municipality of Skagway
City & Borough of Sitka
City & Borough of Sitka
City and Borough of Sitka
Kwig Power Company
Tuntutuliak Community Services Assn., Inc.
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility
City of Palmer
Kipnuk Light Plant
City of Akiak
Puvurnaq Power Company
Napakiak Ircinraq Power Company
Municipality of Anchorage
City of Tenakee Springs Electric Department
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
Independence Power, LLC
Community of Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Glacier Fork Hydro, LLC
Eklutna, Inc.
Port Graham Village Council
City of Pelican
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Lake & Peninsula Borough
City of Napaskiak Electric Utility
New Koliganek Village Council
Baker Hughes, Inc.
Chitina Electric, Inc.
Lake & Peninsula Borough
G&K Electric Utility
Nelson Lagoon Electrical Cooperative
City of False Pass Electric Utility
City of Akiak
Bering Pacific Engineering
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Village of Atmautluak
Alaska Electric Light & Power Company
Kootznoowoo, Inc.
Kootznoowoo, Inc.
Akiachak Native Community/Akiachak Ltd.
Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority
City of Kotzebue
Kenai Winds LLC
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Organized Village of Kwethluk
Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority
Gulkana Village Council
Turnagain Tidal Energy Corporation
ORPC Alaska, LLC
City of Homer
University of Alaska Fairbanks ACEP
Alaska Vocational Technical Center
Metlakatla Indian Community
Metlakatla Indian Community
University of Alaska Fairbanks INE/ACEP
Kodiak Electric Association, Inc.
Ormat Nevada, Inc.
Naknek Electric Association, Inc.
City of Chefornak
Copper River School District
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Interior Regional Housing Authority
Southeast Island School District
Kenai Hydro LLC
Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative
Nushagak Electric & Telephone Cooperative (NETC)
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Haines Borough
City & Borough of Wrangell
Matanuska Susitna Borough
Native Village of Eyak
City of Akutan
City of Ketchikan dba Ketchikan Public Utilities
City of Coffman Cove
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc.
Alaska Gateway School District
Golden Valley Electric Association
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Northwest Arctic Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
Louden Tribal Council
Lime Village Traditional Council
Native Village of Cantwell
City of Craig, Alaska
TDX Power, Inc.
City & Borough of Sitka
TDX Adak Generating, LLC
Valdez Fisheries Development Assn., Inc.
AVCP Regional Housing Authority
Kootznoowoo Inc.
City of Ouzinkie Utility Operations
City of Houston
Blue Energy Canada, Inc
City of Atka
Kotzebue Electric Association
Kootznoowoo Inc.
AVEC
AVEC
AVEC
AVEC
AVEC
AVEC
Village Wind Power, LLC
Alaska Wind Power, LLC
Baker Hughes, Inc.
TDX Adak Generating, LLC
Tatitlek IRA Council/Tatitlek Electric Company
TDX Power, Inc.
TDX Power, Inc.
TDX Corporation
ORPC Alaska, LLC
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
City of Homer
UAF
City of Napaskiak-Napaskiak Electric Utility
Tuntutuliak Community Services Association Electrical Services
Copper River School District
Hoonah City School District
Independence Power, LLC
Glacier Fork Hydro, LLC
Bering Pacific Engineering
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Cheesh?na Tribal Council
UAA State Controlled Institute of Higher Learning
Port Graham Village Council
Kwig Power Co.
City of Pilot Point
City of Angoon
Puvurnaq Power Company
Kipnuk Light Plant
Little Susitna Construction Co., Inc.
State of AK DNR Division of Forestry Tok Area Offic
The State of Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority
Alaska Power Company
Kodiak Island Borough
Ormat Nevada, Inc.
City of Tanana
Eklutna Inc
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility (CLPU)
Bering Pacific Engineering
Bering Pacific Engineering
Bering Pacific Engineering
City of Akutan
City of Akutan
UAF Alaska Center for Energy & Power_Wind Diesel Application Center
UAF Institute of Northern Engineering, AK Center for Energy & Power
UAF, Institute of Northern Engineering, AK Center for Energy & Power
Ruby Tribal Council
AVCP Regional Housing Authority
City and Borough of Yakutat
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Ugashik Traditional Village
AVTEC-Alaska Institute of Technology
City of Kotzebue-Maniilaq Services LLC
Kenai Winds LLC
Chena Power, LLC
Chena Power, LLC
Chenega Corporation/Chenega IRA Council
Naknek Electric Association, Inc. (NEA)
City of Seward
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc. (CVEA)
Matanuske-Susitna Borough
Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC)
Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC)
City of Saint Paul Electric Utility
City of Tenakee Springs
Elfin Cove Utility
Gwitchyaa Zhee Utility Company
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Green Energy
Nushagak Electric & Telephone
Valdez Fisheries Development Association
City of Seldovia
April Park/IPP
Native Village of Tyonek
City of Angoon
Delta Mine Training Center
University of Alaska Fairbanks
University of Alaska Fairbanks
University of Alaska Fairbanks
Ketchikan Public Utilities Electric Division
City of Chefornak
Golden Valley Electric Association
Golden Valley Electric Association
Golden Valley Electric Association
City and Borough of Wrangell
City and Borough of Wrangell
City and Borough of Wrangell
City and Borough of Wrangell
City and Borough of Wrangell
C&L Ranch LLC
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
Iceland America Energy, INC
City of Craig
City & Borough of Juneau
Native Village of Eyak
Cordova Electric Cooperative
Northwest Arctic Borough
City & Borough of Sitka Electric Department
Louden Tribal Council
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry
Native Village of Cantwell
Kodiak Electric Association, INC
Delta/Greely School District
Native Village of Noatak
Ohogamiut Traditional Council
Ahtna, Incorporated
Alaska Green Energy, LLC (AGE)
Aleutian Wind Energy / AWE
Tatitlek IRA Council/ Tatitlek Electric Utility
TDX Adak Generating, LLC
McGrath Traditional Council
Nanana Native Council
Tanacross Tribal Council
Tanana Tribal Council
ORPC Alaska LLC ("ORPC")
Orutsaramiut Native Council Incorporated
Solena Group
City of Ambler
Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting, Inc.
Alaska Power and Telephone Co
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Alaska Village Cooperative (AVEC)
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Akaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Alaska Village Cooperative (AVEC)
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Archangel Green Power, LLC
HPML LLC
City and Borough of Sitka (CBS) Alaska
Venetie Village Council
Chalkyitsik Village Council
McGrath Power and Light
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility (CLPU)
Glacier Fork Hydropower, LLC
City of St. Paul
Village Wind Power, LLC
Village Wind Power, LLC
Alaska Wind Power, LLC
Municipal Government
University of Alaska, Fairbanks
City of Homer
Tanana Power Company
Native Village of Perryville (NVOP)
Alaska Green Energy, LLC
Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority
Inside Passage Electric Company
The Four Dam Pool Power Agency
Golden Valley Electric Association
North Pacific Rim Housing Authority
Tuntutuliak Community Services Association
Akiak Power Utilities
City of Unalaska, Department of Public Utilities
Univertity of Alaska, Fairbanks
Whitestone Community Association
University of Alaska, Fairbanks
Tlingit Haida Central Council
Birch Creek Village Council
Igiugig Village Council d/b/a Igiugig Electric Company
Yakutat Power
Chugach School District
Borough and Municipality of Skagway
Yukon-Koyukuk School District
Yukon-Koyukuk School District
Asa\'carsarmuit Tribal Council
University of Alaska Fairbanks, Institute of Northern Engineering, Alaska Center for Energy and Power
Ormat Nevada, Inc
University of Alaska Fairbanks, Center for Energy and Power
University of Alaska Fairbanks, Institute of Northern Engineering, Alaska Center for Energy and Power
Kenai Hydro, LLC
Chena Power, LLC
Manley Village Council
Aleutians East Borough
City of Galena
City of Akutan
City of Akutan
City of Akutan
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
Alaska Gasline Port Authority
Daniel A Pryse
EarthRun Energy
City of Pilot Point
Kotlik Yupik Enterprise
Chitna Electric Inc, (CEI)
Kotzebue Electric Association
KAPP,LLC
Crooked Creek Traditional Council
Naknek Electric Association
Community of Elfin Cove Non-Profit Corporation, Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Delta Mine Training Center, Inc.
Alaska Vocational Technical Center (AVTEC)
City and Borough of Wrangell
City and Borough of Wrangell
Alaska Power Company (a subsidiary of Alaska Power & Telephone Company)
Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC)
Alaska Power and Telephone, Inc. Haines Assistant Living, Inc.
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Kenai Winds, LLC
Central Council Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska
University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA) and Municipal Light & Power (ML&P)
Kipnuk Light Plant
Native Village of Eyak
Native Village of Eyak
Ameresco, Inc
Kodiak Electric Association, Inc. (KEA)
Baranof Island Housing Authority
Native Village of Cantwell
Akiachak Native Community Electric Company
Southeast Island School District for Thorne Bay School
Association of Village Council Presidents Regional Housing Authority
Organized Village of Kasaan
Southeast Island School District
Valdez Fisheries Development Association
Ketchikan Public Utilities
Banner Wind, LLC
Nushagak Electric & Telephone Company, Inc
City of Petersburg, Alaska d/b/a Petersburg Municipal Power & Light
City of Bethel
City of Ambler
Napaskiak Utility (electric) - City of Napaskiak
Delta/Greely School District
City & Borough of Juneau
Puvurnaq Power Company
Golden Valley Electric Association
Golden Valley Electric Association
Puvurnaq Power Company
Banner Wind, LLC
Golden Valley Electric Association
Haida Power, Inc.
Kodiak Electric Associaiton, Inc.
Alaska Environmental Power LLC
Diesel Brewing Company, LLC dba Diesel Brewing of Ketchikan
Kenai Winds, LLC
University of Alaska Fairbanks, Office of Sponsored Programs
Crooked Creek Traditional Council
Kiiguusi Suuluta Land Company, LLC
Alaska Wind Energy, LLC, d/b/a Wind Energy Alaska (WEA)
Alaska Wind Energy, LLC, d/b/a Wind Energy Alaska (WEA)
HPML, LLC
Native Village of Napaimute
City of St. George - St. George Municipal Electric Utility
Umnak Power / Nikolski IRA Council
Thomas Ravens, Ph.D. and Myree McDonald, Ph.D.
Fishhook Renewable Energy, LLC
Independence Power, LLC
Kotzebue Electric Association
Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council
Kotzebue Electric Association
Alaska Electric Light & Power
Ormat Nevada Inc.
Alaska Green Energy, LLC
Alaska Green Energy, LLC
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Municipality of Anchorage, Solid Waste Services Dept
Village Wind Power, LLC
Alaska Wind Power, LLC
City of Tenakee Springs
Lake and Peninsula Borough
Lake and Peninsula Borough
Lake and Peninsula Borough
McGrath Light & Power, Co.
Yakutat Power
Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority
City of Atka
South Fork Hydro, LLC
Northwest Arctic Borough
Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation
Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA)
Chena Power Utility, LLC
City of Nome d/b/a Nome Joint Utility System (NJUS)
Mt. Alice Development, Inc.
Unalakleet Valley Electric Cooperative, Inc. (UVEC)
Alaska Gateway School District
City of Whittier
City of Nome d/b/a Nome Joint Utilities System
Copper River School District
EarthRun Energy
Alpine Energy, LLC
Alpine Energy, LLC
Burro Creek Holdings, LLC
Haines Borough
City Of Chignik
State of AK, Dept. of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry
City of Petersburg d/b/a Petersburg Municipal & Light
Ketchikan Public Utilities- Electic Division
Precision Power, LLC
City of Hooper Bay
Kenai Hydro, LLC
Chilkoot Indian Association
University of Alaska, Fairbanks
Gwitchyaa Zhee Utility Company
McGrath Power and Light
Kwaan Electric Transmission Intertie Cooperative, Inc (KWETICO)
Kwaan Electric Transmission Intertie Cooperative, Inc (KWETICO)
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc (CVEA)
Native Village of Eyak
Haines Assisted Living, Inc
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Cordova Electric Cooperative
Cordova Electric Cooperative
Metlakatla Indian Community
Alaska Tidal Energy Company
Naknek Electric Association
Native Village of Cantwell
Cook Inlet Power
Cheesh\'na Tribal Council
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility (CLPU)
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC
Aleutians East Borough
Gustavus Electric Company
City and Borough of Wrangell
Iceland America Energy, Inc.
Naknek Electric Association
Nushagak Electric & Telephone Cooperative, Inc
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC
Gulkana Village Council
City & Borough of Sitka
Applicant Type
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
UtilityGovernment Entity
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
IPP
IPP
Utility
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
IPP
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
IPP
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
IPP
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Utility
IPP
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
Utility
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Utility
IPP
Utility
Local Government
IPP
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Other
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
IPP
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
IPP
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
IPP
Other
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
IPP
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
IPP
IPP
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Other
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
IPP
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Grantee PM
Vern Neitzer, AP&T
Jill Reese
Diane Moore, CLPU
Joel Groves
Bob Gross, AGE LLC
Eric Wolfe, FDPPA
Paul Taylor, Pacific Contract Co. & Stan Selmer, AP&T
Steve Gilbert & Brad Zubeck
RMA Consulting Group
RMA Consulting Group
Lee Johnson, Leland Johnson & Associates
Jane Button / Hap Leon, CECNPC
Eric Hannan, AP&T
Paul Brendible, MIC
Greg Mickelson, AP&T
Darron Scott, KEA
Bob Charles, AVCP
Ed Schofield & Jennifer Soderstrom, KPU
Michael Favors, NETC
Joe Nelson, PMPL
Todd Tew, Haida Corp. and Robert Grimm, AP&T
Daniel Hertrich
Joel Groves
Brent Petrie, AVEC
Brent Petrie, AVEC
Arthur Bloom
Earle Ausman
Bruce Sexuaer, Alaska District USACE
Darrel Maple
Brian Davis, CE2 Engineers
Joe Nelson, PMPL
Ed Schofield, KPU
Steve Gilbert
Eric Hannan, AP&T
Greg Mickelson, AP&T
John Magee
Paul Brendible, MIC
Diana Moore
Richard Levitt
Steve Henson
Michael Favors
Christopher Brewton, Utility Director
Energy Region
Bristol Bay
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River Chugach
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Aleutians
Southeast
Copper River Chugach
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
Southeast
Kodiak
Bering Straits
Aleutians
Southeast
Lower Yukon Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
North Slope
North Slope
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Copper River Chugach
Railbelt
Lower Yukon Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Aleutians
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
Aleutians
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
Southeast
Kodiak
Aleutians
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Aleutians
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Aleutians
North Slope
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Aleutians
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
North Slope
North Slope
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Bering Straits
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Copper River/Chugach
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Southeast
Kodiak
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Aleutians
Railbelt
Railbelt
Aleutians
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Copper River/Chugach
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Copper River/Chugach
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
North Slope
North Slope
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Kodiak
Railbelt
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Southeast
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Southeast
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Aleutians
Aleutians
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Aleutians
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Aleutians
Kodiak
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Kodiak
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Kodiak
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Kodiak
Aleutians
Copper River/Chugach
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bering Straits
Aleutians
Bering Straits
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Bering Straits
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Bering Straits
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Kodiak
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
North Slope
Copper River/Chugach
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Railbelt
Kodiak
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Aleutians
Aleutians
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Bering Straits
Kodiak
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Bering Straits
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Aleutians
Copper River/Chugach
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Kodiak
Railbelt
Southeast
Aleutians
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Northwest Arctic
Bering Straits
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Railbelt
Aleutians
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Statewide
Aleutians
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Statewide
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Statewide
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Kodiak
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Aleutians
Aleutians
Statewide
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Statewide
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Statewide
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Railbelt
Kodiak
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Copper River/Chugach
Aleutians
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Aleutians
Southeast
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Aleutians
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Aleutians
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Aleutians
Aleutians
Aleutians
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Kodiak
Southeast
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Bering Straits
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Southeast
Kodiak
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Aleutians
Statewide
Railbelt
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Statewide
Statewide
Railbelt
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Kodiak
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Aleutians
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Bristol Bay
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Statewide
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Statewide
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Community to Benefit
Igiugig, AK
Circle, Alaska
Elfin Cove, Alaska
Tenakee Springs, Alaska
Cordova, Alaska and Eyak Village, Alaska
Chignik, Alaska
St. Paul Island, AK 99660
Adak, Alaska
All IPEC Communities
Eyak Village, Alaska
Seward, Alaska
Minto, Alaska
Kake, Alaska
Ouzinkie, Alaska
Koyuk, Alaska
Sand Point, Alaska
Skagway, AK; Dyea, AK; Haines, AK; the Yukon Territory of Canada
Scammon Bay, Alaska
Wales, Alaska
Grayling, Alaska
The City of Atqasuk will be the beneficiary of this project
Kaktovik, Alaska
Kotzebue, Alaska
Anchorage and Alaska Railroad Corporation communities
Department of Corrections
Hoonah, Alaska
Chitina, Alaska
utility customers on the Kenai Peninsula
Mtn. Village, St. Mary’s, and Pitka’s Point
Shishmaref, Alaska
Bethel, Alaska
Old Harbor, Alaska
City of King Cove
False Pass, Alaska
Saxman and Ketchikan, Alaska
Klawock, Alaska
Shungnak, Alaska
Huslia, Alaska
Eek, Alaska
Ambler, Shungnak and Kobuk
Sitka, Alaska
Chugach's retail consumers live in the communities of Anchorage, Indian, Girdwood, Portage, Hope, Moose Pass, Cooper Landing and Tyonek.
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
interconnected communities of the Upper Tanana region, including Tok, Tanacross, Tetlin, and Dot Lake.
False Pass, Alaska
Whale Pass, Alaska
interconnected communities of the Upper Tanana region, including Tok, Tanacross, Tetlin, and Dot Lake.
Craig, Alaska
Kodiak, Alaska
City of Unalaska
The residents of the Kenai Peninsula
Chignik Bay
Chenega Bay, Alaska
Port Graham, Alaska
Sand Point, Alaska
Adak, Alaska
Hoonah, Alaska
Tenakee Springs, Alaska
Elfin Cove
The residents, small businesses, and major seafood processing plant in City of King Cove will benefit from this project.
Prudhoe Bay (Sagavanirktok) in the North Slope Borough
Kiana, Alaska, Noorvik, Alaska, Selawik, Alaska
Noorvik, Alaska
Eek, Alaska
Unalakleet, AK
Port Alsworth, Nondalton and Pedro Bay
St. Paul Island, AK
Adak, AK
Communities served by Chugach include Anchorage, Indian, Bird, Girdwood, Portage, Whittier, Hope, Moose Pass, Cooper Landing, Beluga, Tyonek and Seward.
Scammon Bay, Alaska
The communities of Thorne Bay, Whale Pass, Hollis, and Naukati
Persons benefitted would be the utility customers on the Kenai Peninsula.
Fairbanks and Nenana will have a direct benefit, Interior region villages will benefit indirectly by having IRHA reduce its overhead.
Kake Alaska
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Selawik, Alaska
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Chefornak, Alaska
Ouzinkie, Alaska
The City of Atqasuk will be the beneficiary of this project
Kaktovik, Alaska
Metlakatla Indian Community, Metlakatla, Alaska
the residents of Kwigillingok, Alaska
Kotzebue, Alaska
Wales, Alaska
Hydaburg, Alaska
Holy Cross, Alaska
Nikolai, Alaska
The Village of Igiugig
False Pass, Alaska
Huslia, Alaska
Ambler, Alaska
Grayling, Alaska
Chitina, Alaska
Koyuk, Alaska
Akiachak
Upper Tanana region
Shungnak, Alaska
Bethel
Goodnews Bay, Alaska
The residents, businesses, local government, and tribe of Old Harbor will be the beneficiaries of this project.
St. Mary’s and Pitka's Point
Klawock Alaska
Angoon Alaska
Kotzebue, Alaska
Cordova, Alaska
Native Village of Tazlina and The Association of Tazlina Residents
community of Craig
Whale Pass, Alaska
communities of Petersburg, Wrangell, and Ketchikan
City of Ketchikan, the City of Saxman, the Ketchikan Gateway Borough, Wrangell, and Petersburg by providing renewable energy via existing transmission lines.
interconnected communities of the Upper Tanana region
communities serviced by SEAPA
Sitka, AK
cooperative members of Kodiak Electric Association, Inc.
Manokotak, Alaska and immediate vicinity
Kake
Chefornak
Tuntutuliak, Alaska
railbelt energy grid
The City of King Cove
Anchorage, Girdwood, Portage, Hope, Cooper Landing, Moose Pass and Tyonek) as well as
the City of Seward.
Anchorage, Girdwood,
Portage, Hope, Moose Pass, Cooper Landing, Tyonek and Seward.
City of False Pass
Koliganek, Alaska
Sutton, AK
Tanacross, Dot Lake, Tetlin and Tok
Ambler, Buckland, Deering, Kiana, Kivalina, Kobuk, Kotzebue, Noatak, Noorvik, Selawik, and Shungnak
Communities served by Copper Valley Electric
Association, Inc. (CVEA), which includes Valdez, Glennallen, Gakona, Gulkana, Tazlina,
Copper Center, Kluti- Kaah, Copperville, Kenny Lake, Tolsona, Mendeltna, Nelchina, Eureka,
and Sheep Mountain.
Tuntutuliak, Alaska
Kongiganak, Alaska
Village of Igiugig
Kwigillingok, Alaska
Sand Point, Alaska
St. Mary?s
Stebbins
Mountain Village
Marshall
Old Harbor
Chenega Bay
Iliamna
City of False Pass
Emmonak, Alaska
Holy Cross
Ambler, Shungnak, and Kobuk
Noatak, Alaska
The Mertarvik, Alaska Community (Newtok)
Adak, AK
Seward, AK
Napakiak, Alaska
Yakutat, AK
Nunam Iqua
Tok
Bristol Bay Borough and Naknek, AK
City of Atqasuk
Kaktovik, Alaska
Galena
Port Alsworth
Grayling
Venetie
St. Mary?s, Alaska
Eek, AK
Chevak, AK
Brevig Mission, Alaska
Bethel, Akiachak, Akiak, Kwethluk,
City of Kotzebue
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Chignik Lagoon
Hoonah and Pelican
Metlakatla, Ketchikan and potentially other communities connected to the grid of the Southeast Alaska
Power Agency.
City and Borough of Sitka, AK
Village of Minto, Alaska
Seldovia, AK.
cooperative members of Kodiak Electric Association, Inc.
Cantwell, Carlo Creek, and McKinley
Village.
Cantwell, Carlo Creek, and McKinley
Village
Tok, Tetlin, Tanacross, & Dot Lake
Atka, AK
City of Kake, Alaska
Klukwan, Chilkat Valley, Haines and Skagway
Ketchikan, Wrangell, and Petersburg
Ketchikan, Wrangell, and Petersburg
Haines Borough
Excursion Inlet
Edna Bay
Chignik Bay
Thorne Bay, Whale Pass, Hollis, and Naukati
Hydaburg Alaska
Valdez, Glennallen, Gakona, Gulkana, Tazlina, Copper Center, Kluti-
Kaah, Copperville, Kenny Lake, Tolsona, Mendeltna, Nelchina, Eureka, and Sheep Mountain.
Native Village of Tazlina
Sitka
Sitka, AK
Sitka, AK
Craig, AK Klawock, Hollis, ThorneBay, Coffman Cove
Nenana, AK
Chuathbaluk, AK
Juneau
Naknek, King Salmon, South Naknek
Tuntutuliak
Karluk
Ketchikan, Saxman, Wrangell, Petersburg
Whitestone
Kotzebue
Project Location
Igiugig, AK
Circle, Alaska
on Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake
on Indian River
Crater Lake, Cordova Alaska
Chignik, Alaska
St. Paul Island, AK 99660
Adak, Alaska
Kake, Alaska
Cordova, Alaska
Seward, Alaska
Minto, Alaska
Kake, Alaska
Ouzinkie, Alaska
Koyuk, Alaska
Sand Point, Alaska
West Creek
Scammon Bay, Alaska
Wales, Alaska
Grayling, Alaska
area of the North Slope between the communities of Atqasuk and Barrow
Kaktovik, Alaska
co-located with existing wind farm, located approximately 4 miles southeast of Kotzebue
Knik Arm Power Plant 29 Whitney Road Anchorage, AK 99501
Point McKenzie Correctional Farm Wasilla, Alaska
Hoonah, Alaska
on Fivemile Creek
Grant Lake watershed located near Moose Pass, Alaska.
located along the approximately 18-mile gravel road connecting the communities of Saint (St.) Mary’s and Mountain (Mtn.) Village.
Shishmaref, Alaska
Bethel, Alaska
Old Harbor, Alaska
small creek located approximately 5 miles north of downtown King Cove
False Pass, Alaska
Ketchikan, Alaska
Klawock, Alaska
at the proposed new landfill in Shungnak, Alaska
Huslia, Alaska
Eek, Alaska
Ambler, Alaska
Kogoluktuk River
Sitka, Alaska
The project would be located on Chugach's campus at 5601 Electron Drive in Anchorage.
Ketchikan, Alaska
Ketchikan, Alaska
False Pass, Alaska
Project is near Whale Pass, Prince of Wales Island
Approximately 15 miles south of Tok, Alaska
Craig, Alaska
Kodiak, Alaska
City of Unalaska
Parcel No. 75, Northeast corner of East Road and Bear Creek Drive, Homer, Alaska
Chignik Bay
Chenega Bay, Alaska
Port Graham, Alaska
Sand Point, Alaska
Adak, Alaska
Hoonah, Alaska
Indian River, approximately one mile east of Tenakee Springs
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake
located on a small creek located approximately 5 miles north of downtown King
100 Powerplant Way, Deadhorse, AK 99734
Hotham Ridge
Noorvik, Alaska
Eek, Alaska
186 Main Street
Port Alsworth, Nondalton and Pedro Bay
St. Paul Island, AK
Adak, AK
Lowell Creek in Seward and Ship Creek in Anchorage
Scammon Bay, Alaska
Thorne Bay, Alaska
Grant Lake watershed
Fairbanks and Nenana
Kake Senior Center
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Selawik, Alaska
2610 Fourth Ave., Ketchikan, AK 99901
Chefornak, Alaska
Ouzinkie, Alaska
Atqasuk, AK
Kaktovik, Alaska
Metlakatla Indian Community, Metlakatla, Alaska
community of Kwigillingok
258 Third Avenue Kotzebue, Alaska
Wales, Alaska
Hydaburg School, located in Hydaburg Alaska, Prince of Wales Island in SE Alaska
Holy Cross, Alaska
Nikolai, Alaska
Kvichak River
False Pass, Alaska
Huslia, Alaska
Ambler, Alaska
Grayling, Alaska
Akiachak, Alaska
within 2.5 miles of Shungnak, Alaska
Bethel
Old Harbor (pop. 193) is located on the southeast coast of Kodiak Island, 70 miles southwest of the City of Kodiak and 322 miles southwest of Anchorage.
near Pitka’s Point
Klawock Senior Center
Xootz Road, Buildings 1 – 9.
approximately 4 miles southeast of Kotzebue
Crater Lake, Cordova, Alaska
Mile 110.5 Richardson Highway
Craig, Alaska
remote area of Revillagigedo Island at the northern end of Carroll Inlet, approximately 22 air miles northeast of Ketchikan, Alaska.
approximately 5 miles northeast of Ketchikan, Alaska
Approximately 15 miles south of Tok, Alaska
Kake, Alaska
Chefornak
Tuntutuliak
Juniper Creek
King Cove
Stetson Creek, Cooper Lake
Anchorage
False Pass
Koliganek
Sutton
Yerrick Creek
Ambler School ? Latitude 67.084985, Longitude -157.8632
Buckland School ? Latitude 65.899971, Longitude -161.57341
Deering School ? Latitude 65.894924, Longitude -162.552567
Kiana School ? Latitude 66.971982, Longitude -160.436275
Kivalina School ? Latitude 67.654166, Longitude -164.06456
Kobuk School ? Latitude 66.90489, Longitude -157.029362
Kotzebue School ? Latitude 66.8983, Longitude -162.5959
Noatak School ? Latitude 67.624386, Longitude -163.001633
Noorvik School ? Latitude 66.833224, Longitude -161.042926
Selawik School ? Latitude 66.599159, Longitude -160.014675
Shungnak School ? Latitude 66.893844, Longitude -157.159138
Cascade Creek
Tuntutuliak
Kongiganak
Igiugig
Kwigillingok
Sand Point
Pitka?s Point
Stebbins
Mountain Village
Marshall
Old Harbor
Chenega Bay
Iliamna
False Pass
Emmonak
Holy Cross
Kogoluktuk River
Noatak
Vicinity of the new Mertarvik Community Site
Adak
Seward
Napakiak
Yakutat
Nunam Iqua
Tok
Naknek
Atqasuk and Barrow
Kaktovik
Galena
Tanalian water falls and in-river along the Tanalian River
Grayling
Venetie
St. Mary?s
Eek
Chevak
Brevig Mission
Bethel, Alaska 60.7922 N 161 .7558 w
Akiachak, Alaska 60.9094 N 161.4314 w
Akiak, Alaska 60.9122 N 161.2139W
Kwethluk, Alaska 60.8122 N 161.4358 w
Kotzebue
Ketchikan
Packers Creek
at the head of Tenakee Inlet on Chichagof Island in Southeast Alaska
on Annette Island
between Metlakatla and Walden Point and a submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel
between Walden Point on Annette Island and Mountain Point on Revillagigedo Island.
Sitka
Minto
Seldovia
Kodiak
Jack River approximately 3 miles southeast of Cantwell
Carlo Creek
Chisana Mountain
Atka
Kake
27 miles northeast of Haines, Alaska
Revillagigedo Island at the northern end of Carroll Inlet,
approximately 22 air miles northeast of Ketchikan, Alaska
westem coast of Revillagegedo Island
Haines
Excursion Inlet
Survey Creek on Kosiusko Island near the community of Edna Bay
Chignik Bay
Thorne Bay School
1010 Sandy Beach Road, Thorne Bay, AK 99919
Naukati School
100 Heather Street, Naukati, AK 99950
Whale Pass School
126 Bayview Road, Whale Pass, AK 99950
Hollis School
6488 Klawock Hwy. Hollis, AK 99928
Hydaburg
Valdez
mile 110.5 on the Richardson Highway
Sitka
Sitka
Sitka
Craig
Nenana
Chuathbaluk
Juneau
Naknek
Tuntutuliak
Karluk
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Community of Whitestone
Kotzebue, AK
Akiachak, Alaska 60.9094 N 161.4314 w
Akiak, Alaska 60.9122 N 161 .2139 w
Alakanuk, Alaska 62.6889 N 164.6153 w
Bill Moore\'s Slough, Alaska 62.9706 N 163.8041 w
Chevak, Alaska 61 .5278 N 165.5864 w
Emmonak, Alaska 62.7756 N 164.5545 w
Hamilton, Alaska 62.8961 N 163.8942 w
Hooper Bay, Alaska 61.5311 N 166.0967W
Kipnuk, Alaska 59.9375 N 164.0439 w
Kongiganak, Alaska 59.9539 N 162.8953 w
Kotlik, Alaska 63.0342 N 163.5533 w
Kwethluk, Alaska 60.8122 N 161.4358 w
Kwigillingok, Alaska 59.8723 N 163.1658 w
Napaskiak, Alaska 60.7081 N 161 .7661 w
Nunam lqua, Alaska 62.5203 N 164.8478 w
Oscarville, Alaska 60.7220 N 161.7893 w
Paimiut, Alaska 61 .9667 N 160.2333 w
Scammon Bay, Alaska 61.8428 N 165.5817 w
Tuntutuliak, Alaska 60.3431 N 162.6631 w
Noatak is located on the west bank of the Noatak River, 55 miles north of Kotzebue and 70 miles north of
the Arctic Circle. This is the only settlement on the 396 mile-long Noatak River, just west of the 66-
million acre Noatak National Preserve.
Kake, AK
Mentasta Village, AK
Tanana, AK
Naknek, AK
Anchorage: specific location to be determined. If a Waste-to-Energy (WtE) plant was
constructed it could be by Chugach\'s Headquarters (5601 Electron Drive} or centrally located
elsewhere in Anchorage, preferably near the solid waste transfer station (1111 E. 561
h Avenue)
to minimize handling and transportation logistics.
The project is located on Indian River, approximately one mile east of Tenakee Springs in
Township 47 South, Range 63 East of the Copper River Meridian.
The project is located on Carlo Creek approximately 10 miles north of Cantwell
The project is located on Knutson Creek near the Village of Pedro Bay
The project is located on Juniper Creek, a tributary of Eagle River near Anchorage.
This project is located 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales
Island, Alaska. The Project would supply power to the community of Whale Pass.
Elim (pop. 337) is located on the northwest shore ofNorton Sound on the Seward Peninsula, 96
miles east of Nome.
The actual met tower site will need to be determined upon initial evaluation of the site. The Akiak IRA is
interested in a met tower east of the community approximately 4 miles at 60?54\'25.80"N and 161?
6\'19.02"W.
The project is located in the Eastern Copper Basin of Central Alaska. Primarily in the
Tazlina and Copper Center area on the east side of the Copper River. See attached
maps. The Tazlina anomaly is located on the old Copper Valley School Road near
Tazlina Village.
Kipnuk, AK
Nelson Lagoon is situated on the north coast of the Alaska Peninsula on a slender strand of sand between
the Bering Sea and a lagoon of the same name, approximately 580 miles southwest of Anchorage.
False Pass is located on the eastern shore ofUnimak Island on a strait connecting the Pacific
Gulf of Alaska to the Bering Sea. It is 646 air miles southwest of Anchorage.
Cold Bay is located on the Alaska Peninsula, approximately 634 miles southwest of Anchorage and 180
miles northeast ofUnalaska.
Kokhanok, Alaska is located on the southern shore of Iliamna Lake. Kokhanok is 88 miles
northeast of King Salmon, Alaska
PO Box 1209, Haines, AK
99827
The Excursion Inlet Hydro Project is located on Excursion Inlet in the community of the same
name in southeastern Alaska (See Figure 1). Excursion Inlet is strategically located in Icy
Straits, the water body at the extreme southwest of the Haines Borough. The community is
composed of 95 land owners including Wards Cove Packing Company, dba Ocean Beauty
Seafoods, and several commercial sport fishing lodges. The industry and most residences are
seasonal. The valuation of the community in FY12 was $16,200,000.
Mount Makushin is an ice-covered stratovolcano located on Unalaska Island in the Aleutian
Islands approximately 800 miles southwest of Anchorage. With an elevation of (6,680 ft), its
summit is the highest point on the island (See Figure 1).
The City of Unalaska, which includes Dutch Harbor, is the main community on the Island. The
Port of Dutch Harbor is the only deep draft, ice-free port from Unimak Pass west to Adak and
north to the headwaters of the Bering Straits. Unalaska?s economy is based primarily on
commercial fishing, seafood processing, fleet services and marine transportation. Unalaska
relies on diesel fueled generators to supply most of its power.
The City of Unalaska and its customers will benefit most from this project. This project will play
a major role in providing clean, reliable, and affordable base-load renewable power.
The local community will also benefit from increased local hire and local services for the
development and eventually construction work contemplated in this project as well as on-going
maintenance and operations.
Manokotak is located on the lgushik River 25 miles southwest of Dillingham and 347 miles southwest of
Anchorage.
Atka, Alaska located about 1,100 miles from Anchorage, 350 miles west of Unalaska, and 90
miles east of Adak in the Aleutian Islands.
The TidGen? Array Project, part of a larger commercial project at East Foreland, near Nikiski, Alaska, is
a pilot project to test the effectiveness of Ocean Renewable Power Company?s TidGen? Power System
in Cook Inlet. The energy produced will be delivered to the Railbelt Grid via interconnect to the Homer
Electric Association (HEA) distribution system in the early stages of the project, and ultimately via a
dedicated transmission line to the Bernice Lake Substation. From there, it can be delivered to any of the
Railbelt utilities and associated communities
Ticasuk Brown Elementary School
785 Lakloey Drive
North Pole, AK 99705
City & Borough of Wrangell
Shishmaref (population563) is located on Sarichef Island, in the Chukchi Sea, just north of the Bering Strait. Shishmaref is 5 miles from the mainland, 126 miles north of Nome, and 100
miles southwest of Kotzebue.
Goodnews Bay (population 243) is located on the north shore of Goodnews Bay at the mouth of Goodnews River. It is 116 air miles south of Bethel, 110 miles northwest of Dillingham, and
400 miles west of Anchorage.
This electric intertie to wind energy will be constructed between St. Mary?s and Pilot Station.
Both Western Alaskan communities are approximately 450 air miles west-northwest of
Anchorage.
This electric intertie to wind energy will be constructed between St. Mary?s and Mountain
Village. Both Western Alaskan communities are approximately 450 air miles west-northwest of
Anchorage. Pitka?s Point will also benefit because it is already intertied to the St. Mary?s
electrical system.
The communities impacted by this project are Noorvik, Kiana, and Selawik. They are all located
in Northwest Alaska.
The communities impacted by this project are Ambler, Shungnak, and Kobuk. These villages are
located in Northwest Alaska on the Kobuk River.
St. Michael (2010 U.S. Census population 401) is located on the east coast of St. Michael Island in Norton Sound. It lies 125 miles southeast of Nome and 48 miles southwest of Unalakleet.
Russian Mission (population 303) is located on the west bank of the Yukon River in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, 25 miles southeast of Marshall. It lies 70 air miles northeast of Bethel
and 376 miles west of Anchorage
Kotlik (population 601) is located on the east bank of the Kotlik Slough, 35 miles northeast of Emmonak in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. It lies 165 air miles northwest of Bethel and 460
miles from Anchorage.
Wales (population 154) is located on Cape Prince of Wales, at the western tip of the Seward Peninsula, 111 miles northwest of Nome.
This project will be located near the community of Marshall (population 407) which is located on the north bank of Polte Slough, north of Arbor Island, on the east bank of the Yukon
River in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. It lies on the northeastern boundary of the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge.
This project will be constructed in Shungnak, Alaska (population: 261) and will benefit Shungnak
and its neighbor, Kobuk (population: 148).
This project will be constructed near Pitka?s Point and will service that community and its
neighbor St. Mary?s, five miles away. Both communities are approximately 450 air miles westnorthwest
of Anchorage.
The school is located near the old airstrip 2000 feet northwest of the Nushagak river
The OIT Inc Waste Heat Turbine Project is located in Moose Creek, Alaska 20 miles from
Fairbanks, AK. The project will create electrical power through use of a steam turbine driven by
waste heat generated during operations at OIT?s remediation facility. The turbine project will
create 335KWH providing enough electrical power to operate OIT?s facility while adding
157KWH to the GVEA grid in cogenerated surplus electrical power. The 157KWH in
supplementary power would benefit the general Moose Creek, AK population consisting mainly
of small business, churches and homes.
Tuntutuliak, AK. The existing power plant, water treatment plant and existing washeteria.
Noorvik, AK. The existing power plant and water treatment plant.
Marshall, AK. The existing power plant community store and the water treatment plant.
This project will be located in Stebbins, AK and connect the existing power plant, water
treatment plant, school, Head Start building, clinic, and washeteria.
The project is located at the head of Tenakee Inlet, Chichagof Island in Southeast Alaska. The location is
a rugged stream valley accessible via helicopter. The area of interest is approximately 4 to 5 acres in
size and occurs on both sides of the stream we have called Tenakee Creek.
Quinhagak, AK. The power house, washeteria, and combined utility building
Chuathbaluk, AK. The existing power plant and water system.
Atmautluak, AK. The power plant and washeteria buildings
Savoonga is located on the northern coast of St. Lawrence Island in the Bering Sea, 164 miles
west of Nome. The water treatment plant (WTP) is located approximately 200 feet from the
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant.
This project will fund feasibility assessments and forest inventories in the communities of Alatna,
Allakaket, Northway, Grayling, Shageluk, Beaver and Stevens Village. All communities are
located in the Interior/Doyen region of Alaska.
IRHA recently completed biomass feasibility studies and forest inventories in the Interior
communities of Hughes, Ruby, Koyukuk, Nulato, Kaltag, Nikolai, Anvik and Holy Cross. Using
Renewable Energy Fund Round 5 funds, design and construction will commence for biomass
projects in Nikolai, Koyukuk and Anvik. The Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 proposal will
fund the design and construction of three more biomass systems in three more Interior villages.
The communities and biomass projects will be selected based on existing feasibility studies for
Hughes, Ruby, Nulato, Kaltag, Holy Cross and new feasibility studies to be conducted for
Alatna, Allakaket, Shageluk, Grayling, Northway, Beaver and Stevens Village. Project selection
will be based on sustainable forest inventories, effective project champions in the communities,
cost savings and simple payback.
The project is located in Nenana, Alaska. The collaborative partners in the application for this grant funding are the Nenana City School District, the City of Nenana, and the Nenana
Native Council. All three entities expect to derive benefit from this project.
The Allison Creek Hydroelectric Project is located adjacent to the Prince William Sound,
immediately south of Port Valdez, Alaska.
CVEA is a member-owned electric cooperative providing central station electric service to a
relatively large geographic area of Eastern Interior and Prince William Sound. CVEA is a
stand-alone (not interconnected to another power system) electric utility.
The service territory is divided into two districts, the Valdez District and the Copper River Basin
District. The Valdez District is comprised of the organized area of the City of Valdez. The
Copper River Basin District incorporates many outstretched communities
Delta Creek Valley- King Cove, Alaska
T he Project will be located on a small creek located approxima tely 5 miles north of the City of King
Cove. T his creek is adjacent to and west of an existing hydroelectric project on Delta Creek that
was constructed in 1995. T he creek has a noticeable waterfall that is visible form the Delta Creek
hydroelectric powerhouse.
The project is located between the City of Kodiak on Kodiak Island and the City of Ouzinkie on Spruce Island. This specific grant request is to assess the underwater structures in the
marine channel between the two islands. The project will benefit the communities of Ouzinkie and Kodiak.
The project will be located in Galena, AK at the Galena Base Steam Plant, adjacent to the former Galena Air Force Base.
Tok, Alaska with six (6) other small communities.
The Upper Tanana Biomass CHP (Combined Heat & Power) Project will be located in the Alaska Interior community of Tok (pop. 1270), at the junction of the Alaska Highway and the Tok Cutoff
to the Glenn Highway, 200 miles southeast of Fairbanks, 93 miles from the Canadian border. This project will serve an isolated power grid that connects the communities of Tok, Tanacross,
Tetlin and Dot Lake (combined population estimate 1580)
Location ? latitude and longitude or street address or community / communities served:
The proposed project will serve the community of Seward, AK, located on the Kenai Peninsula. The three locations for the project are:
1. Seward Middle School, 304 Sea Lion Avenue, Seward, AK 99664
2. William H. Seward Elementary School, 606 Sea Lion Avenue, Seward, AK 99664
3. Seward High School, P.O. Box 1049, Seward, AK 99664
Kodiak Island ? City of Kodiak and road system communities
Hoonah, Alaska
Project will be located at AVCP Housing campus in Bethel, AK. The beneficiaries will include
AVCP Housing and its 60-plus staff, new AVCP Housing regional headquarters, the 30-bed
AVCP Aviation Dormitory, 32-unit Bethel Low Rent Apartment Complex, 16-unit Lulu Heron
Assisted Living Facility, 20-bed Construction Worker Bunkhouse, AVCP RHA\'s Maintenance
Facility, Warehouse and Satellite Office Buildings.
Walker Lake is located approximately 30 miles inland on the Chilkat side of the peninsula that
separates the Chilkoot and Chilkat Rivers at the head of Lynn Canal. The service area includes
the Chilkat Valley from 10 Mile Haines Highway to the US-Canada border and Klukwan. These
two areas currently receive electric service from Inside Passage Electric Cooperative (IPEC).
The Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie will include an overhead transmission line on Annette Island
between Metlakatla and Walden Point and a submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel
between Walden Point on Annette Island and Mountain Point on Revillagigedo Island. The
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie will provide benefits to both Ketchikan and Metlakatla, allowing
for significantly improved utilization of Metlakatla?s existing hydroelectric generating resources
while reducing diesel generation in Ketchikan.
Skagway, Alaska; Haines, Alaska; potentially other electric utilities in the area and region
The project is located on Sawmill Creek, formerly the Medvetche River, in the Borough of Sitka, Alaska. The project currently occupies a total of 1,676 acres of federal lands administered
by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (U.S. Forest Service), and under the City of Sitka?s proposal, it would occupy 1,798 acres of federal lands.
Hydaburg, Alaska on Prince of Wales Island
The communities of Eagle and Eagle Village will benefit from this project
Haines, Lutak, and Skagway
The project is located at the northern extent of the existing Cooper Lake project, approximately
4.5 miles south of Cooper Landing, Alaska. A map of the area is attached.
City of Egegik located on the King Salmon River approximately 330 miles SW of Anchorage
The village of Levelock located on the Kvichak River approximately 230 miles SW of Anchorage
The village of Igiugig located at the head of the Kvichak River approximately 210 miles SW of
Anchorage
The Mahoney Lake hydroelectric project is located in the Ketchikan Gateway Borough, approximately 5
miles northeast of Ketchikan, Alaska.
Petersburg, AK- Numerous locations in the city. School Buildings, Parks and Recreation
Facilities, Municipal buildings, etc.
Coffman Cove, Prince of Wales Island, Alaska
SEAPA hydro generation is
located at Tyee Lake and Swan Lake
Dimond Park Library is located at Dimond Park in the Mendenhall Valley, Juneau AK 99801.
The community of Juneau will benefit from this project.
Kotzebue Alaska
The project is located on Jack River approximately 3 miles southeast of Cantwell (MP
209.5 Parks Hwy).
Karluk, Alaska 99608
Nome, Alaska
Port Graham, AK
Eklutna, AK
Seward, AK
Alakanuk, AK
Three SE communities: Petersburg, Kake, Angoon
Igiugig, AK
Adak, AK
Igiugig, AK
Nikolski, AK
Kodiak, AK
King Cove, AK near Delta Creek Valley
Chitina, Alaska at Fivemile Creek
Kipnuk, AK
Nenana, AK
Fire Island to International Substation
Mentasta, AK
Tanacross, AK
Tanana, AK
St. Michael and Stebbins, AK
Emmonak and Alakanuk, AK
Upper Kalskag, AK
Gambell, AK
Chevak, AK
Goodnews Bay, AK
Shishmaref, AK
Mountain Village, AK
Shaktoolik, AK
Mekoryuk, AK
St. Mary?s, AK
East Foreland near Nikiski, AK
between Perryville and Port Moller, AK
Upper Tananacross Valley
Upper Tanacross Valley
Upper Tanacross Valley
Elim, AK
False Pass, AK
St. Michael, AK
Angoon, AK
Goodnews Bay, AK
Togiak, AK
Savoonga, AK
Shishmaref, AK
Old Kasigluk, AK
Klawock, AK
White Mountain
New Stuyahok, AK
Toksook Bay
Lower Kalskag, AK
Selawik, AK
Sleetmute, AK
Scammon Bay
Kotlik, AK
Noorvik, AK
Russian Mission, AK
Atmautlauk, AK
Golovin, AK
Kake, AK
Kobuk, AK
Nome, AK
Sutton, AK
Hunter Creek tributary to Knik River
Chignik Lagoon at Packer?s Creek
Ouzinkie, AK
Seward, AK
Moose Pass, AK
Kake, AK
Juneau, AK
Tazlina, AK
Chilkat Lake Road near Klukwan
Annette Island, AK
Angoon, AK
Wrangell, AK
Angoon, AK
Anaktuvuk Pass, AK
Tatitlek, AK
8 Interior AK Villages
Huslia, AK
Interior Alaska 8 communities
Cooper Landing, AK
Community of Gulkana, AK
Across from the city of Valdez, AK on Dayville Road
Prince Williams Sound south of Valdez, AK
Cannon Beach in Yakutat, AK
Copper River School District Glennallen Campus
Whitman Creek/Achilles Creek Watersheds
Seward, AK
Petersburg, AK
Ketchikan, AK
Ketchikan
Prince of Wales Island, AK
Haines, AK
Tok, AK
BBL Prince of Wales Island, AK
Mount Spurr
Pillar Mtn near Kodiak
Petersburg, AK
Jack River in Cantwell
West Creek near Dyea
Sitka, AK
Sitka, AK
Sitka, AK
Kwigillingok, AK
Tuntutuliak, AK
Chignik Lagoon, AK
Palmer, AK
Kipnuk, AK
Akiak, AK
Kongiganak, AK
Napakiak, AK
Anchorage, AK
Tenakee Springs, AK
Railbelt
Seward, AK
Elfin Cove
Glacier Fork, Knik River
Hunter Creek, AK
Port Graham, AK
Pelican, AK
Hoonah, AK
Port Heiden, AK
Napaskiak, AK
Koliganek, AK
Cook Inlet, AK
Chitina, AK
Igiugig, Iliamna, Kokhanok, Port Alsworth
Cold Bay, AK
Nelson Lagoon, AK
False Pass, AK
Akiak, AK
Sutton, AK
Homer, AK
Cooper Landing, AK
Atmautluak, AK
Juneau, AK
Angoon, AK
Angoon, AK
Akiachak, AK
Kobuk Valley, AK
Kotzebue, AK
Nikiski, AK
Tok, AK
Kwethluk, AK
Kasilof, AK
Gulkana, AK
Turnagain Arm, AK
Cook Inlet, AK
Homer, AK
Rural Alaska Communities
Seward, AK
Annette Island, AK
Annette Island, AK
Pilgrim Hot Springs, Alaska
Kodiak Island, AK
Mount Spurr, Alaska
Naknek, AK
Chefornak, AK
Kenny Lake, AK
Stebbins, AK
Selawik, AK
Scammon Bay, AK
St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point, AK
Old Harbor, AK
Marshall, AK
Koyuk, AK
Kaltag, AK
Elim, AK
Eek, AK
Eagle, AK
Alaska Communities
Thorne Bay, AK
Moose Pass, AK
Nikiski, AK
Dillingham, AK
Tenakee Inlet, AK
Tok, AK
Haines, AK
Prince of Wales Island, AK
Whale Pass, POW Island, AK
Haines, AK
Slana, AK
Haines, AK
Wrangell, AK
SVHS Mile 98 Parks Highway
Cordova, AK
Akutan, AK
Ketchikan, AK
Craig, AK
Silver Lake, AK
Tok, AK
Ferry, AK
Railbelt
NWAB communities
Wainwright, AK
Point Lay, AK
Point Hope, AK
Kaktovik, AK
Atqasuk, AK
Galena, AK
Lime Village, AK
Cantwell, AK
Craig, Alaska
Bethel, AK
Sitka, AK
Adak, AK
Valdez, AK
Bethel, AK
Angoon, AK
Ouzinkie, AK
Houstan, AK
Angoon, AK
Atka Island, AK
Kotzebue, AK
Angoon, AK
St. Marys, AK
New Stuyahok, AK
Scammon Bay, AK
Teller, AK
Kivalina, AK
Stebbins, Ak
Chistochena, AK
Delta Junction, AK
Cook Inlet
Adak, AK
Tatitlek, AK
Cook Inlet
Gulf Alaska Communities
St. Paul Island
Upper Cook Inlet
Tenakee Inlet
Kachekmak Bay, AK
Fairbanks, AK
Napaskiak, AK
Tuntutuliak, AK
Glennallen, AK
Hoonah, AK
Seward, AK
Glacier Fork
Sutton, AK
Cook Inlet
Chistochina, AK
Anchorage, AK
Port Graham, AK
Kwigillingok, AK
Pilot Point, AK
Thomas Bay, AK
Kongiganak, AK
Kipnuk, AK
Turnagain Arm
Upper Tanana Communities
Kenai Pennisula Communities
Upper Tanana Communities
Kodiak, AK
Anchorage, AK
Tanana, AK
Hunter Creek
Chignik Lagoon, AK
Hope, AK
Sutton, AK
Girdwood, AK
Akutan Island, AK
Akutan Island, AK
Fairbanks, AK
Fairbanks, AK
Pilgrim Hot Springs, AK
Ruby, AK
Bethel, AK
Yakutat, AK
Hoonah, AK
Ugashik, AK
Seward, AK
Kotzebue, AK
Nikiski, AK
Chena Hot Springs, AK
North Pole, AK
Chenega Bay, AK
Bristol Bay, AK
Seward, AK
Valdez, AK
Matanuska-Susitna Borough
Annette Island, AK
Metlakatla, AK
Saint Paul, AK
Tenakee Springs, AK
Elfin Cove, AK
Fort Yukon, AK
Melakatla, AK
Slana, AK
Hoonah, AK
Haines, AK
Prince of Wales Island, AK
Prince of Wales Island, AK
Tok, AK
Skagway, AK
Port Alsworth, AK
Dillingham, AK
Valdez, AK
Seldovia
Eagle River
Village of Tyonek
Thomas Bay, AK
Delta Junction, AK
Bethel, Eyak, Nenana, Nome & Fairbanks
Galena, AK
Ruby, AK & Galena, AK
Ketchikan, AK
City of Chefornak
Fairbanks, AK
Healy, AK
Fairbanks, AK
British Columbia Border
Wrangell, AK
Wrangell, AK
Wrangell, AK
Wrangell, AK
Delta Junction, AK
Wainwright, AK
Point Hope, AK
Point Lay, AK
Anchorage, AK
Craig, AK
Juneau, AK
Cordova, AK
Cordova, AK
Northwest Arctic Borough Schools
Sitka, AK
Galena, AK
Delta Junction
Cantwell
Kodiak Island
Delta Junction, AK
Native Village of Noatak
Village of Marshall
Statewide
Chignik Lake
Sand Point
Tatitlek
Adak
McGrath
Nenana
Tanacross
Tanana
Anchorage
Bethel
Statewide
Ambler
Sand Point
Skagway
Seward Peninsula
Shaktoolik
Emmonak-Alakanuk
Stebbins
New Stuyahok
Scammon Bay
St. Mary\'s
Teller
Hatcher Pass
Delia Creek
Sitka
Venetie
Chalkyitsik
McGrath
Chignik Lagoon
Eklutna
St. Paul
Tok
Slana
Delta
Kotzebue
Statewide
Homer, Seldovia, Port Graham
Tanana
Perryville
Port Alsworth
NWAB
Angoon
Ketchikan, Wrangell, Petersburg
Healy
Chenega Bay, Tatitick
Tuntutuliak
Akiak
Unalaska
Fairbanks
Whitestone
Fairbanks
Southeast, Southcentral,Statewide
Birch Creek
Igiugig
Yakutat
CSD Whittier, Chenega, Tatilek
YKSDAlakaket ,Hughes,Huslia,Kaltag,Kayukuk, Manley, Minta, Nulato,Ruby
Kaltag
Kaltag
Mountain Village
Pilgrim Hot Springs
Anchoragae
Statewide
Statewide
Moose Pass
Chena Hot Springs
Manley
Aleutians East Borough
Galena
Akutan
Akutan
Akutan
Atqasuk
Point Lay
Wainwright
Wainwright
North Pole/Salcha
Statewide
Anchorage
Pilot Point
Kotlik
Chitna
Kotzebue
Anchorage
Crooked Creek
Statewide
Elfin Cove
Delta Region
Seward
Wrangell
AK-BC SE AK to BC
Slana
Metlakatla
Haines
Whale Pass
Nikiski
Kake
Anchorage
Kipnuk
Cordova
Cordova
Baranof Island Little Port Walter
Kodiak
Sitka
Cantwell
Akiachak
Thorne Bay
Calista Region
Kasaan
Coffman Cove
Valdez
Ketchikan
Nome
Grant Lake
Northeast of City of Petersburg
Bethel, AK
Ambler, AK
Napaskiak, AK
Delta Junction
Juneau\'s Mendenhall Valley
Kongiganak, AK
Eva Creek near Ferry, AK
Denali Education Center
Kongiganak
Nome, AK
North Pole Expansion Plant
Prince of Whales Island, AK
Kodiak, AK
Delta Junction, AK
Ketchikan, AK
Nikiski on the Kenai Penisula
Tanana River by Nenana
Crooked Creek, AK
Unalaska
Village of Nikolaevsk, Southern Kenai Peninsula
Alaska Regional Landfill / Eagle River
Little Susitna River
Village of Napaimute
St George
Umnak Island
Statewide
Fishhook Creek in Hatcher Pass
Seward
Kotzebue
Yukon River
Kotzebue
Juneau, AK
To Be Determined
Palmer, AK
Girdwood, AK
Shungnak, AK
Noatak, AK
Ambler, AK
Upper Kobuk Valley, Alaska - Ambler, Shungnak, Kobuk, Kiana
Old Harbor, AK
Mekoryuk, AK
Toksook Bay, AK
Quinhagak, AK
Anchorage Regional Landfill
Bethel, Ak
Coal Mine Rd , south of Delta Junction
Tenakee
Pedro Bay, Newhalen/Ilimna, Nondalton, Port Alsworth, Egegik, port Heiden and Pilot Point
Pedro Bay, Newhalen/Ilimna, Nondalton, Kokhanok and Port Alsworth
Chignik bay, Chignik Lagoon and Chignik lake
Mcgrath, Ak
Yakutat, AK
Upper Kobuk River Valley
Atka
Eagle River, AK
Buckland, Deering and Noorvik
Snake Mountain
Galena
North Pole
Nome. AK
Mt. Alice Harbor
Unalakleet, AK
Tok
Whittier
Nome
Kenny Lake
Anchorage
Whittier
Palmer
Skagway
Haines Borough
Chignik
Delta Junction
City of Petersburg
Revillagigedo Island near Ketchikan
Statewide
Hooper Bay, AK
Moose Pass, AK
Haines
Statewide
Fort Yukon, AK
McGrath, AK
Kake - Petersburg
City of Hoonah
Near Valdez, AK
Cordova
Haines
Yerrick Creek
North Prince of Wales Island
Orca Plant/ Cordova
Humpback Creek
Between Metlakatla and Ketchikan
Icy Passage/Icy Straits near Gustavus,Angoon,Wrangell Narrows, central Cook Inlet
Pike\'s Ridge site in King Salmon
Jack River
Redoubt or Spur
Chistochina, AK
Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon, AK
Ketchikan, AK
Juneau, AK
Cold Bay, False Pass, Nelson Lagoon, AK
Gustavus, AK
Wrangell, AK
Anchorage, AK
Bristol Bay
Lake Elva
Fairbanks
Matanuska-Susitna Borough
Anchorage
Gulkana Village
Takatz Lake
Project Latitude
59.328889
65.741918
58.1989
57.785776
60.572401
56.29528
57.122962
51.843106
56.9708
60.544699
60.1244
65.152812
-133.947222
57.925879
64.933871
55.340103
59.525833
61.843879
65.610613
62.90554
70.48122
70.132607
66.838394
61.224703
61.59
58.10028
61.582261
60.461317
62.08556
66.25667
60.7922
57.197222
55.069129
54.85394
55.319642
55.553311
66.880226
65.701462
60.2187
67.086437
66.964444
57.047394
-149.910688
55.347579
55.352793
63.379197
54.85394
56.097806
63.1513
55.457222
57.608333
53.846484
58.99567
60.0657
59.348592
55.340669
51.879532
58.110181
57.788
58.19
55.069129
70.198287
66.8
66.83201
60.219142
63.876925
60.202524
57.196697
51.879702
60.101173
61.843879
55.687638
60.460926
64.8378
56.977
55.34517
66.604053
55.352793
60.15907
57.925879
70.48122
70.132607
55.125514
59.868038
66.897263
65.610613
55.204971
62.198619
63.01347
59.328601
54.85394
65.701462
67.086437
62.90554
61.588635
64.933871
63.379197
66.886238
60.7922
59.12
62.03278
55.555
57.496
66.838394
60.572401
62.030702
55.488697
56.097806
55.416653
63.1513
56.18906
57.049259
57.3537
58.99567
56.97724
60.15907
60.371787
61.257
55.069129
60.44611
61.17417
54.52443
59.72861
61.42697
63.223078
67.084985
61.19673
60.343042
59.95993
59.32688
59.872222
55.2043
62.03278
63.51722
62.0856
61.87778
57.165
60.0657
59.75459
54.85394
62.779254
62.198707
66.5752
67.572031
60.826028
51.8439
60.099943
60.695536
59.559038
62.515487
63.327019
58.732329
70.4812
70.132607
64.741678
60.19806
62.90554
67.016009
62.051472
60.371787
61.527769
65.330894
60.7922
66.897212
55.35588
56.1827
57.5924
55.127
57.11252
65.14712
59.438063
57.782
63.21
63.57
63.186
52.1157
56.58
59.395144
55.35662
56.18906
59.141224
58.25
55.5641
56.174
55.68784
55.20719
61.055388
62.030702
57.025062
57.025062
57.049543
55.291931
64.564075
61.528424
58.377756
58.72833
60.371787
57.556361
55.416653
64.156278
66.895127
67.589961
56.965256
62.93155
65.173056
58.732329
61.169528
57.788
63.57
59.79833
61.433333
56.0981271
64.7
60.907167
62.05079
59.93889
55.999489
54.85394
55.204694
59.4416
59.2338
58.416667
53.907574
58.98139
52.207002
60.722092
64.82569
56.461753
66.25667
59.11889
61.93889
62.08556
66.8086111
67.0063889
63.52222
61.785
63.03417
65.60917
61.87778
66.88806
62.03278
59.45278
64.713889
60.371787
66.839487
61.878974
63.52222
57.99
59.75148
61.574708
60.86694
63.69417
66.56692
66.04889
64.564075
61.055388
55.069129
57.92361
64.741678
63.175433
63.334806
60.127554
57.7934954
58.084479
60.804019
59.39529
55.12959
59.525833
57.065378
55.2080556
64.783544
59.4235727
60.427
58.21556
59.11417
59.32778
55.4211134
59.904488
56.815274
56.0037
56.18906
58.376946
66.895127
63.3441449
57.556361
60.78
67.08
60.7
64.03
58.3
59.87
63.85
63.655489
59.85
64.5
64.75
55.2
57.788611
64.03
55.33
60.73
64.57
61.87
53.886389
59.83
61.32
61.53
56.6
52.93
61.22
61.6
60.12
66.9
64.75
66.9
58.3
61.6
60.93
66.87
67.57
67.08
66.92
57.2
60.38
60.52
59.75
61.22
60.78
64.03
57.77
59.78
59.78
56.23
62.95
59.55
66.92
52.191111
61.32
65.98
58.97
64.73
64.75
64.5
60.12
63.87
63.33
60.77
64.5
61.72
61.22
60.77
61.6
59.45
59.23
56.3
64.03
56.991389
55.333333
61.6
61.52
60.488889
59.23
64.83
66.57
62.95
56.97
58.1
61.12
60.55
59.23
63.395278
56.02
60.55
60.6125
55.12
58.4
58.72
63.38
61.3
62.57
56.33
55.33
58.3
55.2
58.4
56.47
61.22
58.72
59.611389
64.83
61.6
61.22
62.27
57.136833
Project Longitude
155.885278
-144.225858
-136.3553
-135.193628
-145.699744
-158.40222
-170.279317
-176.670155
-133.9339
-145.757525
-149.4333
-149.337219
56.975833
-152.502766
-161.156731
-160.489627
-135.4125
-165.581303
-168.087044
-160.066681
-157.42
-143.623838
-162.555569
-149.879283
-149.4525
-135.397327
-144.436483
-149.337272
-163.72944
-166.07194
-161.7558
-153.307778
-162.313385
-163.40883
-131.595161
-133.099242
-157.168627
-156.389489
-162.0259
-157.856047
-156.73
-135.355222
61.168823
-131.641339
-131.67743
-143.602086
-163.40883
-133.138525
-143.198217
-133.030833
-153.002778
-166.56318
-159.002809
-148.0104
-151.829739
-160.49567
-176.65675
-135.442792
-135.193
-136.35
-162.313385
-148.460364
-160.8
-161.047705
-162.024822
-160.791306
-154.314218
-170.258443
-176.658398
-149.449241
-165.581303
-132.526403
-149.336959
-147.7164
-133.947
-131.637603
-160.012811
-131.67743
-164.269437
-152.502766
-157.42
-143.623838
-131.577267
-163.159663
-162.592764
-168.087044
-132.822037
-159.770336
-154.375076
-155.903146
-163.40883
-156.389489
-157.856047
-160.066681
-144.434915
-161.156731
-143.602086
-157.137787
-161.7558
-161.59
-163.28778
-133.095
-133.947
-162.5555561
-145.699744
-145.253895
-133.128597
-133.138525
-131.529814
-143.198217
-131.48126
-135.356066
-153.059
-159.002809
-133.945663
-164.269437
-162.658081
-149.73
-162.313385
-149.84944
-149.99611
-163.24646
-157.28444
-148.54249
-143.361815
-157.8632
-145.552136
-162.663078
-162.893479
-155.892706
-163.166111
-160.2921
-163.28778
-162.28444
-163.7294
-162.08111
-153.33
-148.0104
-154.87231
-163.40883
-164.550176
-159.770908
-156.4348
-162.975085
-164.487494
-176.677548
-149.441035
-161.982822
-139.749895
-164.877377
-142.994328
-157.004415
-157.42
-143.623838
-156.956306
-154.34194
-160.066681
-146.421061
-163.175812
-162.658081
-165.586624
-166.487846
-161.7558
-162.592725
-131.713607
-158.3136
-135.562
-131.576
-135.39277
-149.36631
-151.710884
-152.436
-148.49
-148.81
-142.553
-174.9248
-133.56
-136.144681
-131.6733
-131.48126
-135.264226
-135.2634
-133.4316
-158.2414
-132.53246
-132.82783
-146.348126
-145.253895
-135.20554
-135.211882
-135.334893
-133.74295
-149.091442
-165.586452
-134.588592
-157.01389
-162.658081
-154.447639
-131.529814
-145.861078
-162.599894
-163.133906
-133.925683
-143.79273
-152.1
-157.004415
-149.91124
-135.193
-148.81
-154.1575
-149.45
-133.1398627
-162.467
-161.105283
-145.43588
-164.04139
-161.207267
-163.40883
-162.718386
-154.75514
-135.447009
-135.442778
-166.930389
-159.05833
-174.201729
-151.413974
-147.532489
-132.379074
-166.07194
-161.5875
-162.875
-163.72944
-160.6894444
-157.0566667
-162.28806
-161.32028
-163.55333
-168.0875
-162.08111
-157.13639
-163.28778
-157.31194
-147.138056
-162.658081
-161.032963
-162.081642
-162.28806
-135.938889
-161.90188
-159.24408
-162.26306
-170.47889
-152.66639
-154.25556
-149.091442
-146.348126
-162.313385
-152.50222
-156.956306
-143.258972
-142.964639
-149.443803
-152.393707
-135.381367
-161.790939
-136.14536
-131.57496
-135.4125
-135.198442
-132.8266667
-141.204028
-135.664053
-149.865
-157.37583
-156.85889
-155.89472
-131.5237029
-154.692138
-132.953314
-132.4836
-131.48126
-134.589901
-162.599894
-148.7814559
-154.447639
-161.75
-157.87
-161.9
-145.73
-134.4
-163.03
-148.97
-148.834642
-163.13
-165.42
-147.35
-132.82
-152.435556
-145.73
-131.63
-151.32
-149.08
-158.1
-166.931111
-151.58
-149.57
-158.68
-169.53
-168.85
-149.88
-149.1
-149.43
-162.58
-155.5
-162.58
-134.4
-149.1
-149.17
-157.15
-162.97
-157.87
-156.87
-153.3
-166.18
-165.1
-161.9
-149.88
-161.75
-145.73
-135.22
-154.1
-154.1
-158.78
-155.58
-139.73
-156.87
174.193611
-149.57
-161.13
-159.05
-156.93
-147.35
-165.42
-149.43
-160.78
-142.98
-148.68
-165.42
-144.93
-149.88
-148.68
-149.1
-135.3
-135.43
-158.4
-145.73
-132.731389
-131.53
-149.1
-166.08
-149.306389
-135.43
-147.72
-145.27
-155.58
-133.93
-135.43
-146.27
-145.75
-135.43
-143.55
-132.83
-145.75
-145.682222
-131.57
-135.73
-157
-148.93
-152.25
-144.67
-158.48
-131.63
-134.4
-162.7
-135.73
-132.37
-149.88
-157
-159.135556
-147.72
-149.1
-149.88
-145.38
-134.867833
Election District
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
O-29 North Kenai
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
Q-33 Downtown Juneau/Douglas/Haines/Skagway
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
L-23 Taku
D-7 Greater Wasilla
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
P-31 Homer/South Kenai
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
T-40 Arctic
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
M-25 Abbot
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
P-31 Homer/South Kenai
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
L-23 Taku
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
P-31 Homer/South Kenai
A-1 Downtown Fairbanks
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
T-40 Arctic
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
T-40 Arctic
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
T-40 Arctic
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
T-40 Arctic
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
T-40 Arctic
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
Q-34 Southeast Island
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
M-26 Eagle River Valley
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
N-28 North Kenai
K-22 Taku
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
C-06 Richardson Highway
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
T-40 Arctic
C-06 Richardson Highway
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
R-35 Kodiak/Cordova
R-35 Kodiak/Cordova
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamn
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamn
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
N-28 North Kenai
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
R-35 Kodiak/Cordova
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamn
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
S-37 Bethel/Aleutian
T-40 Arctic
Q-34 Southeast Island
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-34 Southeast Island
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
O-30 Homer/South Kenai
R-35 Kodiak/Cordova
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
S-37 Bethel/Aleutian
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-33 Ketchikan/Wrangell
Q-33 Ketchikan/Wrangell
Q-34 Southeast Island
P-32 Downtown Juneau
Q-33 Ketchikan/Wrangell
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
Q-33 Ketchikan/Wrangell
Q-34 Southeast Island
C-06 Richardson Highway
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-34 Southeast Islands
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
P-31 Mendenhall Valley
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
R-35 Kodiak/Cordova
Q-33 Ketchikan/Wrangell
C-06 Richardson Highway
T-40 Arctic
T ? Arctic
Q ? Southeast Islands
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
K ? Taku
P ? Downtown Juneau/ Skagway/Petersburg
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
M ? Eagle River Valley
Q ? Ketchikan/Wrangell
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
P ? Downtown Juneau/ Skagway/Petersburg
P ? Downtown Juneau/ Skagway/Petersburg
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
N ? North Kenai
A - North Pole/ Eielson
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
T ? Arctic
T ? Arctic
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
T ? Arctic
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
A - North Pole/Eielson
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
T ? Arctic
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
Q ? Southeast Islands
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
C ? Richardson Highway
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
R - Kodiak/Cordova
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
N ? North Kenai
R - Kodiak/Cordova
Q ? Southeast Islands
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
Q ? Southeast Islands
Q ? Ketchikan/Wrangell
P ? Downtown Juneau/ Skagway/Petersburg
Q ? Southeast Islands
Q ? Southeast Islands
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
P ? Downtown Juneau/
Skagway/Petersburg
N ? North Kenai
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
Q ? Ketchikan/ Wrangell
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
P ? Downtown Juneau/ Skagway/ Petersburg
Q ? Ketchikan/ Wrangell
Q ? Ketchikan/ Wrangell
P ? Mendenhall Valley
T ? Arctic
S - Wade Hampton/McKinley
R- Kodiak/Cordova
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
13, Greater Palmer
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
15, Rural Mat-Su
35, Homer-Seward
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
16, Chugiak-South Mat-Su
16, Chugiak-South Mat-Su
35, Homer-Seward
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
38, Bethel
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
35, Homer-Seward
6, Interior Villages
36, Kodiak
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
37, Bristol Bay - Aleutians
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
38, Bethel
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
35, Homer-Seward
35, Homer-Seward
38, Bethel
3, Juneau-Downtown-Douglas
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
38, Bethel
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
34, Rural Kenai
6, Interior Villages
38, Bethel
34, Rural Kenai
6, Interior Villages
34, Rural Kenai
35, Homer-Seward
35, Homer-Seward
6, Interior Villages
35, Homer-Seward
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
39, Bering Straits
36, Kodiak
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
38, Bethel
6, Interior Villages
39, Bering Straits
40, Arctic
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
36, Kodiak
6, Interior Villages
39, Bering Straits
6, Interior Villages
39, Bering Straits
38, Bethel
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
1, Ketchikan
35, Homer-Seward
34, Rurak Kenai
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
6, Interior Villages
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
6, Interior Villages
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
15, Rural Mat-Su
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
1, Ketchikan
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
34, Rural Kenai
6, Interior Villages
8, Denali-University
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
8, Denali-University
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
38, Bethel
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
38, Bethel
40, Arctic
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
38, Bethel
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
40, Arctic
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
35, Homer-Seward
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
15, Rural Mat-Su
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
16, Chugiak-South Mat-Su
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
40, Arctic
9, City of Fairbanks
35, Homer-Seward
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
36, Kodiak
40, Arctic
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
1, Ketchikan
8, Denali-University
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
9, City of Fairbanks
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
9, City of Fairbanks
3, Juneau-Downtown-Douglas
6, Interior Villages
36, Kodiak
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
32, Chugach State Park
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
9, City of Fairbanks
7, Farmers Loop-Steese Highway
35, Homer-Seward
7, Farmers Loop-Steese Highway
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
11, North Pole
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
39, Bering Straits
6, Interior Villages
40, Arctic
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
35, Homer-Seward
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
6, Interior Villages
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
34, Rural Kenai
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
38, Bethel
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
36, Kodiak
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
8, Denali-University
38, Bethel
1, Ketchikan
38, Bethel
1, Ketchikan
1, Ketchikan
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
1, Ketchikan
39, Bering Straits
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
38, Bethel
40, Arctic
38, Bethel
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
3, Juneau-Downtown-Douglas
38, Bethel
8, Denali-University
8, Denali-University
38, Bethel
39, Bering Straits
11, North Pole
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
36, Kodiak
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
1, Ketchikan
34, Rural Kenai
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
34, Rural Kenai
17, Eagle River
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
13, Greater Palmer
35, Homer-Seward
40, Arctic
6, Interior Villages
40, Arctic
3, Juneau-Downtown-Douglas
32, Chugach State Park
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
36, Kodiak
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
38, Bethel
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
36, Kodiak
36, Kodiak
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
6, Interior Villages
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
40, Arctic
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
17, Eagle River
40, Arctic
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
6, Interior Villages
11, North Pole
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
6, Interior Villages
32, Chugach State Park
39, Bering Straits
6, Interior Villages
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
1, Ketchikan
13, Greater Palmer
39, Bering Straits
35, Homer-Seward
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
6, Interior Villages
1, Ketchikan
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
1, Ketchikan
3, Juneau-Downtown-Douglas
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
9, City of Fairbanks
13, Greater Palmer
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
6, Interior Villages
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
Project Description
Igiugig Village Council (IVC) requests Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) funding through the Renewable Energy Fund Round IX program (RFA 16012) in the amount of $1,490,077 for the Igiugig
RivGen Power System Commercial Project (Project), which includes Phase III Final Design and Permitting and Phase IV Construction of a 20-kilowatt RivGen Power System by ORPC Alaska,
LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company (collectively ORPC). As a remote village that has extremely high energy costs and relies on diesel fuel to meet electricity
and heating needs, IVC seeks to lower energy costs by utilizing the Kvichak River as a local, clean, renewable energy source. This Project will be the first commercial installation
of a hydrokinetic power system of any type in the state of Alaska. The Project follows IVCs successful completion of previous project phases funded by AEA, i.e., Phase I Reconnaissance
and Phase II Feasibility and Conceptual Design. The Project also follows ORPCs successful demonstration of the RivGen Power System, which generated electricity from the Kvichak River
in August 2014, and of the optimized system, which provided over 2 MWh of clean power to Igiugigs local grid during the 2015 demonstration, also funded in part by AEA. On April 1, 2015,
IVC submitted a draft Federal Energy Regulatory Commission pilot license application. The proposed REF project works synergistically with a proposal submitted to the US Department of
Energy in July 2015 (EE1310-1517), which will provide matching construction funds.
Solar power feasibility for the community of Circle including resource assessment, integration and interconnection studies, and cost and preliminary design for a 100 kW solar array.
The proposed project is a 35 kW run-of-river upper project with a 105 kW storage lower project for a total installed capacity of 140 kW, based on updated hydrology and utility loan data
reported in a January 2014 sizing analysis.
The project will include a run-of-river hydroelectric plant between Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake (upper project) and a storage hydroelectric project between Jim's Lake and tidewater
(lower project). The recommended project is estimated to displace 89% of the annual diesel fuel consumed by the electric utility generators.
The proposed project is construction of a 180 kW new run of river hydro on Indian River serving the community of Tenakee Springs utilizing 50 cfs and 65 ft of head to generate approximately
680 MWhs of energy and displace 350 MWhs of diesel energy (34,000 gallons of fuel, 95% of current diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $5.5 million with
a projected start date of 2017. Proposed project features include a diversion structure with integrated fish ladder, 1,700 feet of 36 inch diameter penstock, a single crossflow turbine,
and 4,300 ft transmission line.
At least an additional 6,500 gallons of fuel oil can be displaced by heating public buildings (community building and school) with excess energy from the hydro project.
Design of a new 500 kW storage hydro at Crater Lake serving the community of Cordova utilizing 5 cfs and 1440 ft of head and 790 acre ft of storage to generate approximately 2,260 MWhs
of energy and displace 2,000 MWhs of diesel energy (145,000 gallons of fuel, 25% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $17.3 million with a projected
start date of 2020. Proposed project features include a low height high dam, 3,500 feet of 16 inch diameter penstock, and a single pelton turbine.
Crater Lake is a perched lake located directly above existing City of Cordova chlorinator building and water supply line, and a CEC transmission line from the Humpback Creek Hydroelectric
Project to Cordova. In addition to providing improved generation, in part from storage capability (Cordova’s first water storage project), the project is expected to improve water
supply to the City of Cordova.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough applied on behalf of the City of Chignik for the design and permitting of a reconfigured and new 385 kW storage hydro on Indian Creek serving the community
of Chignik Bay utilizing 18 cfs and 380 ft of head and 200 acre ft of storage to generate approximately 2,140 MWh of energy and displacing 900 MWh of diesel energy (64,000 gallons of
fuel, 95% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $8 million with a projected start date of 2020. Proposed project features include a 25 foot high
dam, 7280 feet of 24 inch diameter penstock, a single pelton or turgo turbine, 9170 ft of access road, and 1,600 ft of transmission line.
The City, Tribal Council, Borough, CE2 Engineers, and the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium are in a collaborative venture to manage the project successfully with ANTHC taking the
lead on project management. Through this project the City will see enhancements in the areas of water supply delivery, elimination of the diversion of 2 cfs from the anadramous habitat
due to the existing project which would be decommissioned, reduced dependence on fossil fuels, and reduced maintenance of electric generation infrastructure. The City of Chignik is
already a FERC license holder for the hydroelectric project which can significantly reduce the permitting timeline.
St. Paul has a goal of 80% local renewable energy generation for electric, heat and transportation. TDX owns and operates three 225 kW wind turbines that provide wholesale power the
City of St. Paul Utility as well as the TDX owned and operated St. Paul Airport. However, most of the electric power on the island is still generated with diesel. TDX is committed to
establishing a sustainable source of energy that makes the island essentially independent of imported energy. In order to achieve this, TDX proposes to install additional renewable
energy sources such as wind and solar to increase renewable generation. On the demand side TDX proposes to promote, facilitate and install energy savings efficiency measures and technology
that takes advantage of excess renewable energy to heat space and water. To initiate the project, TDX proposes a detailed feasibility study to assess the current situation and identify
the most cost effective path to achieve the declared goal.
Feasibility, design, and construction of a 75-90 kW power recovery turbine on a water supply line serving the community of Adak utilizing 3-3.5 cfs and 440 ft of head to generate approximately
330-760 MWh of energy and displace 330-760 MWh of diesel energy (25-54k gallons of fuel, 17-38 % of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $1.75
million with a projected start date of 2020. Proposed project features include an unspecified turbine type in place of a pressure reducing valve.
Adak has high mountains with good snow cover that provide a water resource for hydropower. Currently the pipe line infrastructure is owned by the City of Adak. TDX Adak Generating (TAG)
will work with the City on the design, final configuration approvals, construction and operation. A Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study by HATCH (dated 2/16/2013, AEA REF grant 2195450)
provided the basis for assessing the hydro power potential. An existing 10" ductile iron pipe from Lake Bonnie Rose to a pressure reducing station, originally used to provide potable
water to the now closed military base, will be used as a penstock to keep the construction cost low. The turbine house location will be at the existing PRV station. The estimated power
production is 89 kW.
Construction of a 500 kW hydro addition to a water supply dam on Gunnuk Creek serving the community of Kake utilizing 130 cfs and 69 ft of head to displace 1,620 MWh of diesel energy
(115,000 gallons of fuel, 55% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $5.7 million with a projected start date of 2018. Proposed project features
include 2,100 feet of 54 inch diameter penstock and a single crossflow or francis turbine.
IPEC proposes to expand and rehabilitate the existing 7kW hydro project that makes use of the existing water supply dam and hatchery facilities at Gunnuk Creek in Kake, Alaska. Costs
and construction risks are minimized because the dam and intake facility have already been constructed, and no new transmission lines or access roads are required.
Cordova Electric Cooperative’s hydroelectric power plants are both run of the river and have no capacity to store energy. When 100% of the load is met with hydro, excess water is spilled
and used for spinning reserve. This situation occurs for substantial amounts of time for over half the year. Backup diesel power plant must also be kept warm to keep the generators
on standby; diesel-fired heaters are used for this purpose. The proposed REF project will: 1) Assess in detail the frequency, amplitude and duration of availability of excess hydropower,
2) Develop economic assessments, and RFP-quality specifications for controlled electrothermal system, implementation at the diesel power plant and the local pool to supplement and displace
diesel fuel-based heating systems, 3) Develop economic assessments, and RFP-quality specifications for efficiency upgrades of the cooling systems at the Orca Power Plant, and 4) Provide
an assessment of total potential for demand managed electro-thermal systems to maximize hydropower utilization economically.A preliminary study concluded in 2015 that 4,500-10,500 gallons
of diesel could potentially be saved annually by managing the loads via electrical heating of the CEC diesel power plant, electrical heating of the pool, and adding heat storage to
the system.
Design and construction of a ground source heat pump system to displace approximately 96% of the heating oil usage of four existing City buildings and one future building. A field of
sixteen vertical boreholes, 6†diameter x 300 ft depth, will be drilled on City land adjacent to the existing waterfront bike path. Vertical double u-bend 1†HDPE loops will be
installed in each of these boreholes. A single u-bend loop will be installed in the existing 300 ft deep test hole. The vertical loops will be charged with a 20% methanol and 80% water
heat transfer fluid. The loops will serve as 50 year design life underground heat exchanger, warmed by the ocean tides of Resurrection Bay. The vertical loops will connect via a reverse
return manifold to buried insulated supply and return trunk mains that will deliver ground heat to the four City buildings via loop pumps. A pair of blank tees will be provided on the
trunk mains to allow connection of the new year round Adams Street Shower House to be built in the fall of 2016. Four high efficiency water to water heat pumps, one buffer tank, and
loop pumps will be installed in the existing mechanical rooms of the Library and City Hall. One buffer tank will be installed in the Annex and the Fire Hall. One existing heating oil
boiler will remain in each building to serve as a standby and lag boiler. On the load (hot) side of the heat pumps, buffer tanks will be heated from 125F to 145F, these will in turn
supply heat to existing hydronic space heating and domestic hot water systems in the buildings. The total quantity of #1 heating oil anticipated to be displaced annually is 20,020 gallons,
which equates to 2,146 MMBTU.
Minto Development Corporation submitted an application for $22,748.80 to partially fund the feasibility study, conceptual and final design, and construction of a $56,872, 10.8kW solar
photovoltaic system in Minto. The original application requested $140,000 to assist in the purchase and installation of a 100.4 kW photovoltaic solar energy system. After the grant
application deadline, the applicant approached AVEC (the local utility) regarding interconnection standards. AVEC agreed to allow a 10kW solar PV system to be intertied, so the applicant
reduced the scope to a 10kW system.
Feasibility, design, and construction of solar panels on Kake community building and liquor store to reduce electricity costs.
Design and construction of 150 kW replacement storage hydro on Spruce Island serving the community of Ouzinkie utilizing 9 cfs and 230 ft of head and 183 acre ft of storage to approximately
generate 475 MWh of energy and displacing 475 MWh of diesel energy (36,000 gallons of fuel, 55% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $4.6 million
with a projected start date of 2018 for the reconstructed project. Reconstructed project features include a 17 foot high dam (recently completed), 5,100 feet of 24 inch diameter penstock,
and a single turgo or crossflow turbine.
Ouzinkie currently operates a makeshift hydroelectric operation that has served the village for many years. However, the dam failed in the fall of 2013 even while a new project was being
planned to replace the dam. The proposed project in Ouzinkie will work to install new hydroelectric capacity in conjunction with the recent new dam construction. A new Ossberger 150
KW hydroelectric turbine will be installed to maximize electrical generation in the community. The turbine is to operate efficiently at flow rates from 2 cfs to 10 cfs.
The proposed project will take recovered heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant and use it to offset the heating oil consumption in City of Koyuk’s
Water Treatment Plant and Washeteria. The estimated fuel savings from this heat recovery system is projected to be 11,971 gallons of heating oil per year.
Sand Point Generating LLC (SPG) proposes a high penetration wind diesel operation for the City of Sand Point. The proposed system will utilize a high speed low load generator. This unit
can run at 10% of its 600KW rating continuously. The power converter, which is integral to the Innovus IP MVS 600 variable speed generator proposed, can operate even when its diesel
engine is turned off. Ultra-capacitors on the DC Bus provide short term electrical storage to facilitate load pick up and diesel starting sequence. The IP MVS 600 power converter and
ultracapacitor energy storage can and will be used to maintain the frequency and voltage of the wind turbines, allowing (during steady wind) the Utility to power City loads with only
wind power (diesels off).
The Municipality of Skagway (MOS) proposes to construct the West Creek Hydroelectric Project located approximately 7 miles west of Skagway and adjacent to the small community of Dyea.
The primary purpose of the Project would be offsetting diesel generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway during the months of May through September each year. A secondary purpose
of the Project is to provide winter energy to the local utility when they have a shortfall of hydro energy from their hydroelectric projects (Dewey Lakes Hydro, Lutak Hydro, Goat Lake
Hydro, Kasidaya Creek Hydro) as well as to sell winter energy to other utilities in the area.
Feasibility and design of a 190 kW new run of river hydro on Hillside Creek serving the community of Scammon Bay utilizing 6 cfs and 480 ft of head to generate approximately 756 MWh
of energy and displacing 646 MWh of diesel energy (48,000 gallons of fuel, 38% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $4.3 million with a projected
start date of 2021. Proposed project features include a 6 foot high diversion structure, 4300 feet of 16 inch diameter penstock, a single pelton turbine, and 4300 feet of access road.
In 2013, AEA provided funding to the City of Scammon Bay through the Renewable Energy Fund for initial planning and feasibility analysis of hydroelectric potential. This initial study
was completed in 2014 and identified the best locations for hydroelectricity development in Scammon Bay, which had a variety of creeks available for development. The most promising
site, located 12 miles to the west of town, located on Ekashluak creek was found to have a significant salmon population, and the community of Scammon Bay was not interested in developing
the location. The small creek running through town, Hillside Creek, was found to be an economic and low impact run-of-river hydro alternative opportunity. The project will also would
improve and stabilize access to clean water for the water treatment plant.
In order to secure permitting and allow for a design that maximizes the potential of the resource, three years of stream gauging is recommended. This phase will fund survey and 35% design.
The proposed project will take recovered heat from the existing Wales power plant and use it to heat the City of Wales’ water system via a buried heating connection to the washeteria
and water treatment plant. The estimated fuel savings to save the washeteria and water treatment plant is 9,726 gallons of heating oil per year.
The proposed project will take recovered heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant and use it to heat the City of Grayling’s water system, via a
connection into the water treatment plant glycol loop prior to the boilers. The estimated fuel savings from this heat recovery system is projected to save the water treatment plant
6,518 gallons of heating oil per year.
This phase of the Barrow to Atqasuk Transmission Line Project is for final design and permitting required for the construction of the transmission line and conversion of homes and buildings
in Atqasuk to electric space heating.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions an area-wide energy production and management system consisting of integrated wind-diesel generation, end-use energy efficiency, automated building
controls, and conservation. The proposed project is the design and permitting phase of a three-phase project which will include construction and commissioning of three wind turbines
to supplement the existing power generation and distribution system for the community of Kaktovik.
Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA) has applied for a $384,730 grant to fund a $449,178 100kW solar photovoltaic project at the electric utility's wind energy site. Solar PV panels provide
little energy in the arctic during the winter but there is a solar resource during the shoulder seasons and Kotzebue experiences 35 days of constant daylight during the summer. The
applicant states that recent declines in prices for PV panels mean that there is sufficient power produced during the spring, summer and early fall months to justify the cost of installing
a solar array in Kotzebue. Using NREL’s September 2014 release of PV Watts’s photovoltaic modeling software, an optimized estimate of the useful power that would be produced by
a solar array was prepared. KEA has successfully worked with piling systems on its wind site since 1996 using both standard and freeze-back pilings to install wind turbines. KEA’s
significant experience with foundations on the site will allow the use of a piling system to be used for a solar installation which will reduce design costs. The site has had three
extensive geophysical surveys that will be relied upon to assist in the foundation design and help minimize costs. Inverters can be installed in the existing wind farm structures.
Knik Arm Power Plant (KAPP) provided heat and power from 1952 until it was decommissioned in 1985. Over the last decade, there have been numerous attempts to reopen energy operations
at KAPP. The proposed project intends to demonstrate 400 kWe from recycled construction and demolition cellulose biomass waste at a levelized cost of $0.05 per kWh. Power would be sold
to the Alaska Railroad Corporation, Anchorage Municipal Light & Power or Chugach Electric Association. Additional benefits are an increase in recycling of construction and demolition
cellulose from 75% to 90%. Other benefits stated in the application include distributed generation benefits to utilities and diversion of 1,000 tons from Alaska landfills.
This grant application requests $140,000 to assist in the purchase and installation of a 100.4 kW Photovoltaic Solar Energy System to supply a portion of the energy needs at the Point
Mackenzie Correctional Farm (PMCF). It is estimated that this size PV system may produce 92,973 kWh annually. The stated goal of the project is to install a 100.4 kW Solar Energy System
that will produce an estimated $64,153 in electricity annually to contribute a portion of PMCF's electrical supply needs.
The proposed project involves the development of a waste-to-energy facility that will use the process of anaerobic digestion (AD) to generate methane from waste water biosolids and other
biomass feedstocks and then burn the methane to generate electricity. The project includes the design and construction of the AD facility, a transmission line to convey electricity
to the City of Hoonah and ancillary facilities to dispose of digestate by-products. The project is being developed by the City of Hoonah, in close collaboration with the Hoonah Indian
Association.
Construction of a 300 kW new run of river hydro on Fivemile Creek serving the community of Chitina utilizing 5 cfs and 900 ft of head to generate approximately 2,000 MWh of energy and
displacing 500 MWh of diesel energy (40 k gallons of fuel, 100% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 6.6 million with a projected online date
of 2019. Proposed project features include a 10 foot high diversion structure, 10,000 feet of 12-16 inch diameter penstock, a single pelton turbine, and 2,900 feet of access road.
This project will serve the native community of Chitina which currently is an isolated micro grid and entirely diesel dependent. The diesel plant will function primarily as a backup
system after the hydro is constructed. An electric boiler will be installed in the existing diesel module and connected to the existing hydronic heat recovery system currently utilized
to heat the clinic building and the aboveground storage tank used to store diesel fuel for the diesel plant. The boiler will provide a dual purpose; provide frequency control during
operation of the hydro turbine, and allow for continued utilization of the existing heat recovery system infrastructure. During most times of the year, excess water will be available
beyond the communitys demand. During these times, the excess energy will be available for space heating during winter months via electric boilers installed in various community buildings,
residential living facilities, and commercial facilities. In the summer, when flow in Fivemile Creek is higher, there will be considerable excess energy available for commercial and
industrial uses such as ice making, sawmill operation, etc.
Design of a 5000 kW new storage hydro on Grant Lake, located near the community of Moose Pass, serving the railbelt utilizing 385 cfs and 185 ft of head and 18,790 acre ft of storage
to generate approximately 19,500 MWh of energy and displacing 19,500 MWh of natural gas energy annually at an estimated total project cost of $59 million with a projected start date
of 2020. Proposed project features include an intake structure, 3300 feet of 10 foot diameter tunnel and surge tank, two Francis turbines, 2 miles of access road and a bridge across
Trail Lakes, and 3.5 miles of transmission line.The layout has been recently revised to minimize the project footprint. The current design omits the construction of a diversion structure
(dam) at the outlet of Grant Lake. All 13-feet of storage that will be utilized for power generation will be drawn from below the natural lake outlet.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is seeking $3,196,000 from this Grant Program for the construction of an electrical intertie to connect Mtn. Village to the St. Mary’s/Pitka’s
Point Wind Energy Project. The intertie will include 16.1 miles of new 3-phase overhead power line along the existing gravel road between the St. Mary’s Airport and the Mtn. Village
Airport. The project will also include upgrading 4.0 miles of existing electrical distribution system near both communities from single-phase to threephase. The existing power plant
in Mtn. Village will be put into standby mode, with installation of an electric boiler to keep the existing generators warm. This intertie project will enable the community of Mtn.
Village to benefit from the new wind energy system in St. Mary’s /Pitka’s Point.
This proposal requests $152,000 and provides a match of $8,000 to conduct a wind power feasibility and conceptual design project for the community of Shishmaref. The Alaska Village Electric
Cooperative (AVEC), with the cooperation of the community, proposes to assess the feasibility of wind resources to provide power to Shishmaref and to prepare a conceptual design of
a wind generation system.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is requesting $2,555,489 to construct a new heat recovery module at the Bethel Power Plant. The new module will isolate the generator
cooling loop from the existing recovered heat distribution loop to enable expansion of the recovered heat system. The new approximately 800-square foot module and associated piping
located immediately adjacent to the Bethel Power Plant will enable expansion of the existing system including future connection of exhaust heat recovery at the power plant, creating
a significant increase in recovered heat available for the community. The heat recovery module will also allow expansion of the existing loop and an additional future second loop that
could supply heat to the Aquatic Center and the new alcohol treatment facility currently under construction.
Design of a 525 kW new diversion hydro on Mountain Creek (discharging to Lagoon Creek) serving the community of Old Harbor utilizing 12 cfs and 790 ft of head to approximately generate
3520 MWh of energy and displacing 850 MWh of diesel energy (96 k gallons of fuel, 100% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 9.3 million with
a projected online date of 2019. Proposed project features include a 6 foot high diversion structure, 10,000 feet of 16-20 inch diameter penstock, one of two pelton turbines, 3 miles
of access road, and 1 mile of transmission line.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), the electrical utility provider in Old Harbor, is proposing to complete geotechnical field work and final design for a hydroelectric project
in Old Harbor, Alaska. The 262 kilowatt (kW) (initial, 525 kW future) basin diversion project will be located on East Fork Mountain Creek and Lagoon Creek Tributary. The project will
be capable initially of generating an average of about 2,300,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) annually and will run year-round and meet all the existing electricity demands of the community.
Power from the facility would also be used to heat the school, saving up about 8,370 gallons of diesel heating fuel annually.
Construction of a 350 kW new run of river hydro on Waterfall Creek serving the community of King Cove utilizing 12 cfs and 470 ft of head to approximately generate 1167 MWh of energy
and displacing 720 MWh of diesel energy (49 k gallons of fuel, 31% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 6.9 million with a projected online
date of 2017. Proposed project features include a 20 foot high diversion structure, 4630 feet of 20 inch diameter penstock, a single pelton turbine, and 5000 feet of access road.This
facility will be a working partner to the Citys existing and highly successful Delta Creek hydroelectric project, which has been operating for the last eighteen years.
Feasibility study for a 125 kW new run of river hydro on Unga Man Creek serving the community of False Pass utilizing 12 cfs and 200 ft of head to approximately generate 936 MWh of energy
and displacing 540 MWh of diesel energy (43 k gallons of fuel, 85% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 4.4 million with a projected online
date of 2021. Proposed project features include a low height diversion structure, 4300 feet of 20 inch diameter penstock, a single turbine, 4300 feet of access road, and associated
transmission line.
The City of False Pass requests funding from the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) in the amount of $187,000 through the Renewable Energy Grant Program for a Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
and Conceptual Design of Unga Man Creek. Reconnaissance work funded by the City and performed in August 2015 suggests that Unga Man Creek may hold adequate hydro potential. This proposal
will build upon recent efforts in order to confirm the viability of hydro power to reduce the communitys dependence on diesel and provide a stable and renewable source of electricity.
This project is consistent the Aleutian and Pribilof Islands Regional Energy Plan. The City of False pass believes that this project will provide significant benefits to the public
and represents a relatively low risk and high value hydroelectric project.
The Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority (THRHA) plans to renovate, modernize, and expand the existing Saxman Multifamily Low Rent building. THRHA requested funding for the inclusion
of an air-to-water heat pump system in the renovation. This system would include a new low temperature hydronic heating system and domestic hot water tank to allow the heat pump to
provide the building space heating and domestic hot water demands. If funded, this would replace the existing oil boilers and high temperature hydronic heating system. The THRHA recently
completed a weatherization and interior insulation project for this building, and will be incorporating additional efficiency measures into the upcoming renovation. If the heat pump
project is funded, the THRHA will install a new mechanical room in the existing walk-in crawlspace and the existing mechanical room would be converted to an ADA accessible bathroom.
The heat pump project would offset the use of 100% of the oil use at the facility. The heat pump is estimated to cover 95% of the overall heating and domestic hot water demand with
a seasonal efficiency of 233%. The remaining 5% (peak and during pump maintenance) of demand would be provided with electric resistance heaters. It is anticipated that the overall energy
use index for the facility will drop by over 46%, from 94,000 Btu/sqft/yr to 51,000 Btu/sqft/yr through the implementation of the heat pump and low temperature hydronic system. The
project will provide an estimated $5,200 in annual energy savings for the facility at current low oil prices.
This project will install a wood fired (proposed dried chips) boiler to heat the two school buildings. The wood boiler will connect to the existing heating system and dramatically reduce
diesel fuel consumption. The gymnasium boiler will be decommissioned and the existing main building boilers will be used only during peak heating needs and as a backup system.
Using the conclusions from a completed Wind Resource Data Collection Report, the Native Village of Shungnak will, with assistance from Alaska Energy Authority (AEA), initiate and complete
the conceptual design process and establish an environmental baseline to successfully install a winddiesel system in the community. This includes automated controls and the equipment
necessary to regulate, control and deliver reliable wind energy to the residents of the community. The project will also establish an environmental baseline and a list of permits for
the projected wind turbine, in addition to associated equipment installations needed to upgrade the existing power generation and distribution system to a wind turbine-diesel engine
configuration. The Native Village of Shungnak will hire and contract with WHPacific to complete the design project as well as provide management oversight of subcontracted engineering/design
firms. Assuming the project progresses to construction, the consultant will also complete the Final Design and needed construction solicitation packages by collaborating with the NANA
Regional Corporation, Shungnak Power Plant operator, and the Native Village of Shungnak.
In 2013, AEA provided REF for initial planning and conceptual design of a biomass heating system to serve community buildings in Huslia. Huslia partnered with ANTHC to engineer a conceptual
design and to develop a draft biomass operations plan. In addition, ANTHC contracted with Tanana Chiefs Conference to complete an Assessment of Woody Biomass Resources for Huslia, which
provides local wood resource harvesting guidance. The proposed project will build on this initial work to complete the design and construction of a biomass heating system to serve the
Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plant in Huslia. The proposed project will install a prefabricated, containerized cordwood boiler and cordwood storage area adjacent to
the Clinic and Washeteria. Biomass heating will be integrated using circulating glycol heat transfer loops from the containerized biomass boiler. The estimated heating oil reduction
resulting from this biomass project is 8,474 gallons per year.
The proposed project is for final design of a recovered heat system from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant to heat the City of Eek’s water system
via a circulating distribution water loop. The estimated heating fuel savings from this heat recovery system is 4,000 gallons per year.
In 2013-2014, the Northwest Arctic Borough, through funding provided by the AEA Renewable Energy Fund, contracted with Tetra Tech, Inc. and Dowl HKM to complete a biomass feasibility
study and initial engineering design for the Upper Kobuk villages of Ambler, Shungnak and Kobuk. The study focused on identifying woody biomass feedstock availability, availability
of local woodcutters, site surveys of viable project locations, heating demand, conceptual design for each proposed project, and a review of permitting requirements. This study concluded
that Ambler’s City Office/Washeteria building offered the best opportunity in the region to integrate biomass heating into an existing community facility. The proposed project will
build from this initial work to complete the design and construction of a biomass heating system to serve the City Office/Washeteria in Ambler. Specifically, this project will install
a prefabricated, containerized cordwood boiler and wood storage area adjacent to the City Office/Washeteria. Biomass heating will be integrated into the end user building using circulating
glycol heat transfer loops from the containerized biomass boiler. The estimated heating oil reduction resulting from this biomass project is 3,516 gallons per year.
Design and permitting of a 700 kW run of river hydro on the Kogoluktuk River serving the communities of Ambler, Shungnak, and Kobuk utilizing 170 cfs and 64 ft of head to generate approximately
5,410 MWh of energy and displace 2,900 MWh of diesel energy (212,000 gallons of fuel, 95% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $51 million with
a projected start date of 2021. Proposed project features include a 10 foot high diversion structure, 4300 feet of 72 inch diameter insulated above grade penstock, a single kaplan turbine,
7 miles of access road, and 6 miles of transmission line to Kobuk and 25 mile of transmission intertie connecting Shungnak to Ambler.
After evaluation of the potential hydropower sources in the Cosmos Hills, as documented in the Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design Report, project stakeholders have chosen to move
forward with design and permitting for a hydroelectric project on the Kogoluktuk River to provide renewable electric generation year round. The Kogoluktuk River has an upstream basin
catchment area of approximately 424 square miles. In addition to the displaced diesel electric energy the project has significant excess energy that could be used to offset heating
fuels.
The proposed project would design and construct a heat pump system to replace the existing fuel oil boilers at the Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The system would utilize treated
effluent as the heat source, and the heat pump would be powered by renewable energy from Sitka’s hydroelectric power generation. One fuel-oil boiler would be retained to generate
heat on the coldest winter days and to provide redundancy. The system would displace approximately 95 percent of the heating oil usage at the WWTP.
The proposed project is to for a feasibility study, conceptual design and cost estimate to evaluate the potential for a small scale solar energy project in Anchorage. If feasible, Chugach
has land available for an array of solar panels; the location proximate to Chugach's system will allow for easy interconnection.
The proposed project is a feasibility study and design of a central biomass boiler plant to serve the Schools/Recreation complex consisting of Schoenbar Middle School, Valley Park School,
the Gateway Recreation Center/Aquatic Center, and the Ketchikan Gateway Borough School District Maintenance Facility. The total project area is roughly 207,000 square feet of building
space.
Ketchikan Gateway Borough seeks to modify install a containerized, 2,460-MBH biomass-fired boiler at the Ketchikan High School. The woody biomass fired boiler will be installed to replace
heating oil boilers, which will become more costly to maintain. The project will include construction of the biomass system, including storage bin, collection bin, motors, fans, controls,
circulation pumps, accumulator tanks and valves.
The proposed project includes construction of a 1500 kW new run of river hydro on Yerrick Creek serving the communities of Tok, Tanacross, Tetlin, and Dot Creek utilizing 60 cfs and
460 ft of head to generate approximately 3,450 MWh of energy and displace 3450 MWh of diesel energy (240 k gallons of fuel, 37% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated
total project cost of $21 million with a projected start date of 2019. Proposed project features include a 10 foot high diversion structure, 15,000 feet of 36-42 inch diameter penstock,
turbines, 3 miles of access road, and 5 miles of transmission line.
The applicant estimates that the project will provide 4.9 GWH of energy. Tok and surrounding communities in the upper Tanana region (Tok, Tanacross, Tetlin, Dot Creek) are currently
dependent upon 100% diesel-fired generation of electricity. Construction of project features (transmission) has already begun through the support of USDA funds. Applicants are requesting
$4 million through the AEA REF IX program. It is estimated that this level of funding support by the State of Alaska, in conjunction with $500,000 in new USDA Renewable Energy for America
Program (REAP) funds awarded to the project in September of 2015, will result in a project which produces clean energy at less than the cost of diesel fuel, which will allow for project
approvals by the regulatory commission of Alaska (RCA).
Tanacross Inc., the Native Village of Tanacross, and Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T) signed a Memorandum of Understanding expressing willingness to work cooperatively on the Yerrick
Creek project in August of 2014. The three entities established a new venture named Upper Tanana Energy (UTE) to develop, own, and operate the project as an independent power producer
(IPP). As a project partner, AP&T has drafted and will finalize and execute PPA terms and other commercial agreements after project financing is secured. Yerrick Creek is located on
private and State lands and has received a non-jurisdictional determination from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), making it possible to develop this low-impact hydropower
project in a timely fashion without undergoing lengthy federal permitting processes through FERC. In 2015, UTE installed several stilling wells on Yerrick Creek at the request of ADF&G
to record subsurface flow and for stream gaging. In addition, 5.3 miles of new transmission line was installed from Tok toward the project. An additional 5 miles of upgraded transmission
line will still need to be funded.
The City of False Pass requests Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) funding in the amount of $440,319 through the Renewable Energy Fund Round IX program (RFA 16012) to complete Phase II Feasibility
Analysis and Conceptual Design for the False Pass Tidal Energy Project proposed for the Isanotski Strait. The City of False Pass, like most communities of the Aleutian Islands, has
very high energy costs and depends completely on diesel fuel to meet their electricity and heating needs. While diesel fuel is currently the most practical option for such communities,
it also creates economic, energy security and environmental problems it has a disproportionately high carbon dioxide (CO2) output compared to other power generation systems at both
local and global levels. The City of False Pass, fortunately, is situated near a significant hydrokinetic (tidal) resource at the Isanotski Strait that offers a potential to significantly
reduce, or eliminate the use of diesel fuel. Circulation modeling conducted by University of Alaska Anchorage shows False Pass as a premier tidal energy resource, having the strongest
tidal energy resource measured in Alaska. The City seeks to lower its very high cost of energy by utilizing this resource and proposes the False Pass Tidal Energy Project. The completed
Project will be the first commercial installation of a tidal hydrokinetic power system in the state of Alaska and is a key part of our quest for sustainability. In addition, the Project
will benefit local industry by selling excess energy to the expanded Bering Pacific Seafood plant. This Phase II proposal follows the successful completion of the AEA-funded Phase I
Reconnaissance research, which proved a significant tidal energy resource in the Isanotski Strait. This Project proposes to build on this work, thereby accelerating development of the
False Pass Tidal Energy Project. The Project Team has previously worked together and is comprised of the City of False Pass; Aleutian Pribilof Islands Community Development Association
(APICDA); University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA); Benthic GeoScience, Inc.; and ORPC Alaska, LLC (ORPC).
Feasibility and design of a 124 kW new run of river hydro on Neck Lake serving the community of Whale Pass utilizing 34 cfs and 60 ft of head to approximately generate 1086 MWh of energy
and displacing 300 MWh of diesel energy (24k gallons of fuel, 98% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 3.0 million with a projected online date
of 2022. Proposed project features include a low height foot high diversion structure, 400 feet of 30 inch diameter penstock, multiple pumps or other type of low head turbines, 400
ft of access road, and 4 miles of transmission line upgrades.
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T), requests $395,200 in funding for feasibility, design, and permitting activities for the Neck Lake hydropower
project. APC will provide $98,800 cash match to AEA funding. The 124 kW Neck Lake Hydroelectric Project will be located below the outlet of Neck Lake, approximately 1.5 miles southwest
of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island, Alaska. The Project will supply as much as 450,000 kilowatt hours of energy per year to the community of Whale Pass, offsetting
diesel generation, which is currently the sole source of electricity for residents. The relatively high and modulated flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end
of the outlet stream provide an attractive opportunity for a small run-of river hydroelectric project. The hydroelectric facilities will be designed to avoid interference with the existing
salmon rearing and collection facilities operated at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA). A letter of support from the SSRAA is enclosed. APC
conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2009 and determined that there is sufficient potential to almost always provide enough generation meeting 100% of current and future
Whale Pass loads. This Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for APCs Whale Pass customers. In 2014 and 2015, AP&T conducted
financial and economic analysis which confirmed the economic and financial viability of this project.
Feasibility for a 1000 kW new run of river hydro on Clearwater Creek serving the community of Tok, Tanacross, Tetlin, utilizing 35 cfs and 500 ft of head to approximately generate 3400
MWh of energy and displacing 1700 MWh of diesel energy (118 k gallons of fuel, 18% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 15.4 million with a
projected online date of 2021. Proposed project features include a low height diversion structure, 20,000 feet of penstock, a single turgo turbine, 2 miles of access road, and 9 miles
of transmission line.
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T), requests $386,000 in AEA Renewable Energy Fund Round IX grant funding support for Phase II Feasibility /
Conceptual Design activities for the Clearwater Creek hydropower project. APC proposes a match of $100,000 in private funds supplied by AP&T / APC. The proposed project is located approximately
15 miles southwest of the community of Tok on the Tok-Cutoff Highway (Glenn Highway).
Feasibility and design of a 45 kW power recovery hydro serving the City of Craigs water treatment plant utilizing an estimated 1.8 cfs and 500 ft of head to approximately generate 287
MWh of energy and displacing 5 k gallons of diesel heating fuel annually at an estimated total project cost of 0.4 million with a projected online date of 2019. Proposed project features
include a power recovery turbine in the existing 6.4 mile long 12 inch diameter City water supply transmission main.
Provide design, engineering and permitting to install and operate a micro-hydro power generator in line of the raw water supply line from the Craig municipal water source (North Fork
Lake) to the Craig water treatment plant and Prince of Wales Hatchery Association Chinook Salmon hatchery to provide electrical power for the water treatment plant and hatchery.
Feasibility (geotech investigation) for a 0 kW addition to the existing Terror Lake storage hydro consisting of two diversions on Hidden Basin drainage serving the community of Kodiak
utilizing 950 cfs and rated 1436 ft of head and 118 k acre feet of storage to approximately generate 33,000 MWh of energy and displacing 0 MWh of diesel energy (based on 2015 demand,
fully utilized in 2025) annually at an estimated total project cost of $80 million with a projected online date of 2021. Proposed project features include a two low height diversion
structures, 0.6 miles of open channel or 60 inch diameter piped conveyance, 1.2 miles of 12 ft diameter horseshoe tunnel, and 4 miles of access road.
The Upper Hidden Basin Diversion (UHBD) will supplement the available hydro resource supply of KEAs existing Terror Lake Hydroelectric Facility (FERC Project No. 2743) by an additional
30,000 acre-feet of water. The UHBD will increase hydropower generation by an additional 33 million kilowatt-hours (kWh) annually. Diversion components would be a basic, non-mechanical
design intended for un-manned water conveyance. Structural components of the UHBD consist of two concrete-face rockfill dams, a buried conveyance pipe, tunnel and access road. Surface
water from the diversion dam on the eastern tributary of the West Fork of Hidden Basin Creek (D-East) will flow to the diversion dam on the western tributary of the West Fork of Hidden
Basin Creek (D-West). The combined flow of water from both diversions will then flow by gravity through a tunnel through a mountain ridge to the Terror Lake reservoir. Assuming no spill
at the Terror Lake reservoir, the inflow of water from the diversions generate additional hydropower from the existing Terror Lake powerhouse and will feed directly into KEAs existing
electrical grid without any operational or capacity-related changes. The UHBD is the most technically-viable, cost-effective, and minimally invasive option for adding renewable energy
to Kodiaks electrical grid for the benefit of the Kodiak community.
Feasibility, design, and construction of a 64 kW power recovery hydro serving the community of Unalaska utilizing 6.4 cfs and 184 ft of head to approximately generate 280 MWh of energy
and displacing 280 MWh of diesel energy (18 k gallons of fuel, <1% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 1.3 million with a projected online
date of 2019. Proposed project features include a power recovery turbine in the existing 4000 foot long 24 inch diameter City water supply transmission main.
This project will install inline micro-turbines in the new Pyramid Water Treatment Plant to generate power for its use as well as provide power to the Electric Utility's grid. The new
Water Treatment Plant was designed and constructed with a configuration that would allow for micro-turbines to be installed at a future date. This project is estimated to provide at
least 64 KW of in-house power using the water that passes through the Water Treatment Plant for treatment or system flushing; 30 KW may be needed for the Water Treatment Plant's electrical
usage. An annual average of 280,000 kWh of power production is anticipated. A 1997 DOE report indicated that up to 260 KW could be available from the source (Icy Creek Reservoir) with
additional water diversions, so there may be potential for future low-cost power development.
In response to strong member-consumer interest, Homer Electric Association (HEA) is pursuing $342,600 in grant funds to construct a 100 kW solar phovoltaic (PV) community-oriented project.
The general concept would be to develop an economy-of-scale project, and allow members to participate in that project through matching grant funds.The size of the project would be nominally
100 kW of photovoltaic panels, with the actual quantity adjusted to reflect internal system losses. The project would be sited on lands owned by HEA east of the town of Homer, Alaska.
This land is currently leased for use as a sod farm and has an optimal south-facing slope. HEA distribution lines are adjacent to the site, with a 3 phase 12.5 kV line on the south
side and a single phase 7.2 kV line on the west side.The following assumptions were made, based on a review of products from several manufacturers:1. Output per panel: Average of 300
Watts (Vendor Range: 250 to 410 watts)2. Power delivered to grid: 3 phase, transformed to 12.5 kV at interconnection point3. Number of Panels required: 360 (will vary depending on vendor)4.
General Panel Layout anticipated: (9 double rows of 20 panels each)5. 6 ft. X 7 ft. land surface area required for each panel: (7 ft. is largest case, and reflects ten Solar panels
w/reflectors)6. 12 ft. wide vehicle access between panel rows for maintenance & snow removal7. Estimated Total Land Surface Area (including inverter): 0.7 Acres
Complete final design and permitting for a 420-340kW storage hydroelectric project on Indian Lake in Chignik Bay. The project would consist of an approximately 25 foot high by 125 foot
long concrete faced, rock filled dam impounding up to 204 acre feet of water, 7,280 feet of 22 inch underground penstock, 9,170 feet of new access road and trail, Turgo impulse hydro
turbine and generator in a 26 x 26 foot powerhouse, tail race that returns water into Indian Creek above the anadromous reach of the creek, above ground insulated City water supply
line, 1,600 feet of electrical tie line. This project would replace the existing, 1947 era, 60kW, nonfunctioning hydro. The new proposed project will continue to supply raw water to
the City. The existing 60kW project was re-licensed by FERC in 2006. The application is based upon the findings of a the feasibility study funded by REF round 1 for $207,500 As required
by the grant the City received control and ownership of the hydro resource from NorQuest Seafoods owned by Trident Sea Foods in the fall of 2012.
The Native Village of Chenega (aka. Chenega Bay) proposes to construct a run-of-the-river hydroelectric project on Anderson Creek. The planned 64 kW capacity project will offset power
currently generated by burning diesel. The non-jurisdictional hydro will offset up to 10,400 gallons of diesel annually which translates into $56,600 in annual savings.
This project proposes the construction of a cordwood system in Port Graham to heat 4 community buildings: village council offices, clinic, public safety/fire station, and the Corporation
offices. The Corporation will be invoiced for the heat for its building. This project will displace approximately 5,365 gallons per year of heating fuel. Design was funded through round
4 for $75,000.
TDX AWE is requesting phase III and IV funding for installation of electric boilers at public facilities to utilize non-firm excess wind power for heating. This work was originally proposed
in 2008 as part of the Sand Point wind turbine installation, but not implemented due to wind turbine project cost and schedule difficulties. Presently, lacking means to deliver excess
wind, considerable excess wind energy is dissipated into a resistive dump load, and the Island’s two 500KW wind turbines are curtailed to 300KW each. This project proposes to install
thermal nodes at 2 community facilities – the Sand Point School and Health Clinic - with total installed nameplate electric boiler capacity of 600 kW. Preliminary energy auditing
(incorporating previous reports) will be performed on the facilities to determine the “energy baseline†from which project impact can be measured going forward. The project also
includes integration of building energy use data into the existing power plant SCADA system such that ongoing operational performance can be measured and optimized.
TDX previously completed an REF funded reconnaissance level analysis for a hydroelectric power plant in Adak. The reconnaissance study showed that a series of alpine lakes in the immediate
vicinity of the city have the potential to displace the diesel power plant as the primary energy source for Adak. Resource availability, engineering considerations, land ownership and
permitting issues were all considered. The proposed project is a continuation from the previous study that recommended two development options for further consideration and additional
data collection and analysis before making a recommendation for future development. The first configuration consists of an intake at Lake Bonnie Rose and a powerhouse at Mitt Lake,
with a preliminary capacity 440 kW and capable of generating 3,200 MWh’s at an estimated cost of $8 million. The alternative project utilizes the existing raw water transmission pipeline
from Lake Bonnie Rose to the water treatment plant having a capacity of 75 kW to 90 depending on the domestic water needs and capable of producing approximately 760 MWh’s at an estimated
cost of $2.75 million. An area of concern that required additional investigation are the instream flow requirements that significantly affect the economics of all of the diversion projects
using water from the lake system.
Hoonah Indian Association (HIA) proposes a feasibility study and conceptual design for a district heating loop for Hoonah School/pool, autoshop/carving shed, Boys and Girls Club, HIA
Cookhouse, Headstart, city hall, and a large privately owned commercial building (apartments, laundry, and store). This heating loop could potentially be operated as a heat utility
by HIA. HIA is also pursuing a community greenhouse, but this is not included in the feasibility study.
The City of Tenakee Springs is constructing a hydroelectric project on Indian River. This will be a 180 kW low head, run-of-river plant displacing the use of 30,000 gallons of diesel
fuel annually, or 90% of annual electric utility diesel consumption. At least 6,500 additional gallons of fuel oil can be displaced by heating public buildings with excess energy from
the hydro project. The city successfully completed construction of Phase 1 of this project in June 2014, which consisted of extending access roads and trails to the powerhouse and intake
sites. Phase 2 will commence this fall, which will construct the balance of the project. The final engineer’s cost estimate exceeds the funds the city has available for this project,
so the city is requesting additional grant funds to ensure Phase 2 can be completed without disruption.
The community of Elfin Cove proposes a hydroelectric project that would be located on Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake, located approximately one mile south of Elfin Cove at 58.19N, 136.35W.
The project will include a run-of-river hydroelectric plant between Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake (upper project) and a storage hydroelectric project between Jim's Lake and tidewater
(lowerproject). A January 20, 2014 updated sizing analysis from Polarconsult recommended a configuration with a 35 kW run-of-river upper project with a 105 kW storage lower project
for a total installed capacity of 140 kW, based on updated hydrology and utility load data.
The recommended project is estimated to displace 89% of the annual diesel fuel consumed by the electric utility generators.
This funding request supplements the community’s existing funding for project permitting. FERC declared that the project was not eligible for license exemption in August 2014, so the
project will require a FERC license. Based on recent FERC licensing processes in Southeast Alaska, the community anticipates more extensive resource studies than expected when the permitting
budget
was developed in 2010. The community is requesting this supplemental grant so the FERC licensing process can be completed without delay arising from funding constraints.
The Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project will result in a modest, run-of-the-river hydroelectric facility using Waterfall Creek and consisting of a concrete diversion/intake structure,
4,500 feet of HDPE penstock pipeline, 16 feet by 40 feet metal powerhouse on a concrete slab, Pelton Impulse Turbine and induction generator, remote-automatic control system, and 5,000
feet access road. This facility will be a working partner to the City’s existing Delta Creek hydroelectric project, which has been operating for the last eighteen years. It will produce
1 megawatt (MW) of electricity.
TDX proposes to install (3) 800 kWe Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) power generation units to generate electric power from waste heat in the flue gas of two Solar Turbine Taurus 70 gas turbines.
Furthermore TDX intends to utilize low grade waste heat downstream of the ORC topre-heat turbine inlet air to significantly improve the emissions profile at low temperatures. This new
facility will require an extended 40x64’ structure to the west of the new gas turbine plant building. Approximately 10.5 MWth waste heat would be drawn from the gas turbine stacks
and used to produce 2.1 MWe (net) electricity year round through the ORC system. Downstream the flue gas is exhausted through a separate stack. Systems are built on a pile foundation
with an air gap. The extended facility will remain on the footprint of the existing gravel pad. Glycol fluid coolers are placed on the roof of the extension from lower level switchgear
and shop rooms. Heat is intercepted downstream of the ORC and upstream of the fluid coolers and used in a coil to preheat inlet combustion air from each side of the main turbine room.
NATEO proposes to assess the wind energy resource potential on Hotham Peak, between Noorvik and Selawik, along with an intertie between Noorvik, Kiana, and Selawik. According to modeling
completed in the 2012 Noorvik Wind-Diesel Conceptual Draft Report, the most ideal location for a larger turbine would be on the southwest slope of Hotham Ridge between Noorvik and Selawik.
The work will involve obtaining a letter of non-objection for placement of a met tower and geotechnical fieldwork on Hotham Peak; permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing
a met tower; studying the wind resource for one year; and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design
will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
The Intertie between Noorvik, Kiana, and Selawik will be evaluated by looking at land use, permitting, and cost. AC and DC power transmission systems will be considered for cost estimating
and O&M purposes.
With Round VIII AEA Renewable Energy funding, the City of Noorvik would install a 10kW solar photovoltaic array on the City building as well as install another 10kW solar photovoltaic
array on the Noorvik IRA Council building. The anticipated annual generation, according to the new version of the PVWatts Calculator, will be approximately 8,982 kWh/building for a
total of 17,964 kWh for both the City and IRA buildings, for an annual average of 2.85 kWh/m2/day per building. That translates into a total of $11,742 electrical savings per year for
the City and IRA combined at an electrical rate of $.65/kWh.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to take waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant in Eek and use it to heat the city’s
water system via heating connection into the adjacent water distribution loop main. The heat recovery system is projected to save the water system 4,000 gallons of the estimated 5,900
gallons of heating oil used per year. The existing water distribution loop is located 100 feet from the powerhouse; heat recovered from the power plant and injected into the circulating
distribution loop can also be conveyed into to the more distant community water storage tank. The proposed connecting heat recovery pipe to the will be buried 1.5-in twin PEX carrier
pipe insulated with a minimum of 1.25-in polyurethane insulation. The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by ANTHC.
The hybrid wind-diesel system in Unalakleet is operational, but not performing to its full potential. UVEC will work with Marsh Creek to deploy a data collection system that will provide
reliable synchronized information at a 1 Hz data rate from the wind farm, the feeder from the wind farm to the power plant, and all equipment in the diesel plant. Along with voltages
and currents it will acquire waveforms of voltages under certain conditions. Marsh Creek will coordinate with NorthernPower to ensure useful data is obtained from the wind farm. The
data will be reviewed by Marsh Creek, Northern Power and the Alaska Center for Energy and Power/ACEP. Informed hypotheses to address and mitigate problems with the system will be developed
and modeled. From this work a conceptual design for modification to the system will be developed.
The Lake and Pen Borough proposes the construction of cordwood wood boilers for the communities of Port Alsworth (Improvement Center and Fire Hall), Nondalton (single structure or multiple
units), and Pedro Bay (Smokehouse Bay Annex). This project will displace approximately 9,104 gallons of heating fuel.
TDX believes that there is sufficient wind energy at St. Paul that eventually 80% of the total energy consumption for electricity, heating, and ground transportation on the island could
be sourced from renewable energy resources. Given the fifteen years of continuous wind power experience and recent improvements in controls, electrical storage and heat utilization,
TDX is committing to reaching our goal of 80% Renewable by 2020. Although the first steps have been taken there are a number of important steps that need to be completed to fully develop
and implement this vision. Under this grant proposal TDX is asking for support to conduct and implement a Community Energy Baseline study. This study would define the energy sources
and energy resources, energy use on the island for electricity, heat and transportation, and provide a solid baseline of current needs. This information would also be used to create
a roadmap to define specific approaches to both the reduction of energy consumption as well as the design of the renewable energy delivery system and required auxiliary components.
TDX believes that there is sufficient hydro, wind, or hydrokinetic renewable energy at Adak that eventually 70% of the total energy consumption for electricity, heating, and ground transportationon
the island could be sourced from renewable energy resources. TDX is committing to reaching a goal of 70% Renewable by 2023. Although the first steps have been taken there are a number
of important steps that need to be completed to fully develop and implement this vision. Under this grant proposal TDX is asking for support to conduct and implement a Community Energy
Baseline study. This study would define the energy sources and energy resources, energy use in Adak for electricity, heat and transportation, and provide a solid baseline of current
needs. This information would also be used to create a roadmap to define specific approaches to both the reduction of energy consumption as well as the design of the renewable energy
delivery system and required auxiliary components.
The project is to assess the hydroelectric energy potential of Lowell Creek and Ship Creek. The proposed work includes review of the public record, the installation of stream gauging
equipment at each location to measure annual water flow of each of the creeks, site reconnaissance,identification of permit requirements, and concept development.
Scammon Bay requests funding for feasibility and conceptual design for a 188 kW R-O-R hydro project on Hillside Creek. Proposed activities include surveying, 3 years of stream gauging
and a 35% project design. Capital cost is estimated at $4.3M. Services to be provided by ANTHC DEHE. The basin resource size is limited at 0.7 sq mile, which reduces in flow during
winter months. Existing electrical generation and distribution system in Scammon Bay is operated by AVEC. Project features would include an intake structure with coanda screen, 4300
lf of 16†dia penstock, and a powerhouse with a single 188 kW dual nozzle pelton turbine, controls, etc.
Expect FERC will have jurisdiction as Scammon Bay is located within the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge.
Scammon Bay has requested Rnd 8 REF grant for heat recovery. AVEC has applied to REF for wind turbines to be installed in Scammon Bay.
This application includes a feasibility study performed by Hatch for a hydroelectric project entitled Hillside Creek Hydroelectric Project. Completed in September 2014, the report was
funded through a Round 5 REF grant (#847). However, there are a number of items within the report that raise questions, such as how a hydro project on Hillside Creek would interact
with current community water supply for Scammon Bay (on the same creek) water is diverted for community use and/or needs to be re-pumped; over-estimation of hydro generation in 5 months
of winter; under-estimation of capital cost from leaving out steep access road (13.5% grade) needed for intake/penstock construction; under estimation of licensing costs due to lands
within the Wildlife Refuge, etc.)
The project proposes the design and construction of cordwood boiler systems for Hollis, Naukati, and Whale Pass Schools (including teacher housing and greenhouses), and the replacement
of the Thorne Bay school GarnPacs. The GarnPacs currently operated by the Thorne Bay School will be relocated Hollis and Whale Pass. The project will use wood biomass to replace diesel
as the heat energy source by installing wood fired boilers in four school communities. The applicant has purchased a greenhouse for Naukati that will also use the heat from the boiler
and will provide healthy, nutritious food for students and the community, in addition to giving students opportunities to learn life-long skills. Thorne Bay School received an AEA grant
in 2009 to install two GARN wood fired boiler units, and while the system has been operating, it has proven too small for the job. The units currently in use, (proto-types), can easily
be moved with a forklift, so part of the proposal is to install them at two other school sites, Whale Pass and Hollis Schools. In order to heat the facility in Thorne Bay, which includes
a teacher housing unit and a hydroponic greenhouse, the current system would be replaced with 2 GARN 3200’s, and a structure built to house the boilers. Very little reconstruction
would be necessary in Thorne Bay due to the portability of the current Garn Pacs. In Whale Pass and Hollis, structures would be built to house the boilers. A wood storage area will
also be constructed at Hollis, now the only one of the four communities where there is no wood storage shed. At Naukati School a wood fired boiler (2 2200 Garns) would be installed.
The Naukati School is the same size as Howard Valentine School, in Coffman Cove, which has a currently operating Garn system. Naukati will be modeled after the Coffman Cove set-up.
Wood storage facilities have already been built in Naukati and Whale Pass, with 30 cords in Naukati and less than 10 in Whale Pass. Southeast Island School District is committed to
moving in a direction of local energy independence, breathing life into small business enterprises such as wood cutting, and involving students in growing food, stoking the boilers,
and acquiring both work and meaningful life skills.
The Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility is a proposed 5 MW storage hydro project undergoing licensing (FERC P-13212) located near Moose Pass on the Kenai Peninsula in Southcentral Alaska
and serving the railbelt. The project features include an existing lake to provide approximately 15,900 acre-ft of storage, a conveyance tunnel, annual energy of 19,500 MWh at an estimated
cost of $60 million.
The proposed project is comprised of an intake structure in Grant Lake, a tunnel, a surge tank, a penstock, a powerhouse, a tailrace detention pond, a switchyard with disconnect switch
and step-up transformer, and an overhead or underground transmission line. The intake would be in Grant Lake near its outlet. Water would be conveyed from the intake through a 3200’
tunnel and a 150 foot penstock to a powerhouse containing two Francis-type turbines. The powerhouse would be located near the bank of Grant Creek and would discharge through a tailrace
into Grant Creek. A transmission line would connect the facility to the Railbelt grid near Moose Pass. Supplemental water will be routed from the intake tunnel to provide instream flows
for fish in the bypass reach.
IRHA is proposing a biomass feasibility study in order to examine the costs and possibilities of various appliances and woody biomass sources for three IRHA facilities - the IRHA office
building in Fairbanks, the IRHA warehouse in Fairbanks and the Meda Lord Center which is a 15 unit senior housing complex in Nenana. All three facilities currently are using heating
oil, and have been weatherized.
THRHA proposes to install a ground-mounted PV solar array at the Kake Senior Center. The Senior Center is currently undergoing expansion and modernization to include new community and
residential space, which will almost double the current electrical usage. The PV system will be designed to produce a minimum of 10,000 Watts and will displace approximately 25% -30%
of the projected increase in electrical load at the Senior Center. The intent is to keep electrical operating costs sustainable. It will not reduce the current utility usage, and therefore
will not have a negative impact on the local utility (IPEC). The PV system is intended only to avoid additional utility costs on a percentage of the new added usage expected when the
modernization improvements are completed. The system will be parallel to the utility grid system, isolated with a non-grid tie inverter, and will not feed back into the utility grid
system. The system will have battery storage to allow for night-time operation of specific house loads. The Project will include final design and installation of the PV system.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to take waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant in Scammon Bay and use it to heat three
community buildings and the city’s water system via heating connection into the adjacent water distribution loop main. The heat recovery system is projected to save 10,933 of the
estimated 11,578 gallons of heating oil used per year.
The City Office and Old Clinic are both hydronically heated and had been served by a heat recovery system that is no longer in use. The planned Community Hall will also be hydronically
heated; all buildings would be served by a heat recovery loop approximately 400 feet in length. The existing water distribution loop is located 300 feet from the powerhouse; heat recovered
from the power plant and injected into the circulating distribution loop can also be conveyed to the more distant community water storage tank. The proposed connecting heat recovery
pipe will be buried 2-in PEX carrier pipe insulated with 3-in polyurethane insulation.
The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by ANTHC.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough proposes the feasibility and final design and permitting for biomass-fueled boilers for five buildings: Schoenbar Middle School, Valley Park School, the
Gateway Recreation/Aquatic Centers (two buildings) and the School District Maintenance Facility. This project could displace 209,900 gallons per year of heating fuel.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) proposes to insulate above ground existing waste heat lines from the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant to the
city’s water plant. ANTHC estimates that insulating the heat recovery lines between the power plant and the WTP will save an additional 1,935 gallons annually of fuel. The existing
20+ year old insulated piping system dates back to the original heat recovery system construction. The round trip length of arctic pipe to be insulated in 1,600 ft. The existing pipe
and degraded insulation would be enclosed in closed cell Engineered Polymer Foam Insulation (EPFI) formed into clamshell sections for installation over the existing pipe, then wrapped
with a self healing multi-ply embossed UV-resistant aluminum foil / polymer laminate with a layer of rubberized asphalt (Alumaguard). A wear barrier of 24 gauge galvanized steel will
be installed over the exterior of the weather barrier and secured with stainless steel straps. The existing pipe supports would be re-used with new mounting hardware and two piece saddles
to allow pipe movement.The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by ANTHC.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough plans to replace two of three oil-fired boilers in the Ketchikan High School with pellet boilers, displacing approximately 108,715 gallons of fuel oil annually.
This project received design funding through the US Forest Service and School Bond CIP Fund and has contracted Wise Wood to complete the work.
This project consists of the installation and integration of five Windmatic 17S turbines 95 kW wind turbines (475 kW) into the Naterkaq Light Plant’s generation system. The integration
of this wind energy includes the installation of a load balancing boiler, 40 residential electric thermal storage (ETS) units, wind-diesel supervisory control and data acquisition system
(WDSC), and improvements to the electrical distribution system which include sectionalizing, the replacement of3 power poles and one distribution transformer, as well as the extension
of the distribution line by 3 power poles to the wind turbines. The proposed system is similar to those installed in theneighboring villages of Kongiganak, Kwigillingok and Tuntutuliak.
ANTHC on behalf of the City of Ouzinkie proposes to complete the final design, permitting and construction of a replacement penstock and replacement hydro turbine for the City of Ouzinkie.
The new project will provide increased hydroelectric capacity. A new 5,100 foot, 20 inch penstock will replace the one installed in 1987. A new 150kW Ossberger type turbine will replace
the existing 125kW turbine. The penstock is also used for the City water supply. The old wood dam at Mahoona Lake has recently been replaced by ANTHC with a rock and concrete dam. The
new dam will utilize the existing penstock and the existing hydro turbine. It is scheduled to be back online generating electricity mid Nov 2014. The dams replacement cost was estimated
at $2,087,000, of which the majority, $1,800,000, came from a 2013 Alaska Legislature appropriation.
This phase of the Barrow to Atqasuk Transmission Line Project is for final design and permitting required for the construction of the transmission line and home and building conversions
to electric space heating.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a wind energy and area-wide energy management system, consisting of wind diesel integration, end-use energy efficiency, automated building controls,
and conservation. This phase of the project is the design and permitting phase of a three phase project which will include a phase for construction and commissioning for three anticipated
wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution system for the community of Kaktovik. The contractor will provide overall project management and system engineering
during this phase of the project. During the construction phase, NSB will recruit an engineering and construction contractor for design and installation of all civil works, erection
of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to design and construct a ground source heat pump system to provide heat for the Lepquinum Wellness Center in Metlakatla. The heat
pump system would capture heat from the ground via a vertical bore loopfield and water-to-water heat pumps and tie into the facility’s existing hydronic heating system, which would
retain the oil-fired boilers for supplemental and backup heating. The heat pump system is projected to save the center 47,200 of the estimated 49,500 gallons of heating oil used per
year.
The loopfield would be located under the existing parking area; each of the approximately 80 6-in boreholes would be drilled to over 300-ft deep and use a 1-in HDPE pipe loop and thermal
conductive grout. The proposed system would be sized to satisfy 92% of the building’s overall heat demand. The existing heating system would be modified to use the lower temperature
water heated by the heat pump system.
The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by Alaska Energy Engineering.
This project would expand the heat storage capacity of Kwigillingok Wind Heat Smart Grid System by increasing the number of electric thermal storage (ETS) devices from 27 to 50 units.
The community of Kwigillingok (Kwig) has an operational, utility scale wind project that is designed to produce excess wind energy, and this excess energy is captured in residential
ETS devices to displace home heating fuel. Additional ETS storage capacity is needed to make use of the full capacity of the wind system.
The City of Kotzebue is proposing final design and construction for a waste to energy/biomass project to heat the Kotzebure Public Works buildings – water treatment facility and maintenance
shop. Feedstock for this system would consist of sorted and separated cardboard, newspaper, mixed paper, and wood materials from the city of Kotzebue's waste stream. The city's waste
management equipment will be used to collect materials, either as source-separated material from the producers or mixed with the city's MSW waste stream. RDF fuel will be separated
from the waste stream in the Bailer building, in conjunction with an aluminum and tin recycling program.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to take waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant in Wales and use it to heat the city’s
water system via a heating connection to the planned water treatment plant’s hydronic heating system. The heat recovery system is projected to save the washeteria/water treatment
plant 9,619 gallons of the estimated 12,475 gallons of heating oil used per year. The new water treatment plant will be located 200 feet from the powerhouse will also serve as the community
washeteria and will provide heat to circulating water lines and the community water storage tank. The proposed connecting pipe will be buried 2-in PEX carrier pipe with 1.5-in foam
polyurethane foam insulation and an HDPE outer jacket. The most frequently used generator (DDS60k4, 1200 rpm) will be equipped with a marine manifold to increase the amount of recoverable
heat.The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by ANTHC.
The Hydaburg City Schools in Hydaburg, AK on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska proposed the design and construction of a cordwood fired boiler system to heat the school buildings.
The project involves placing four Garn type wood fired boilers adjacent to the school site and running underground pipes from the wood fired boiler to plumb into the school’s heating
system, four teachers housing units, and a greenhouse. The system is anticipated to displace approximately 25,500 gallons of heating fuel annually.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to take waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant in Holy Cross and use it to heat the city’s
water system via heating connections into the water treatment plant’s hydronic heating system and the lift station. The heat recovery system is projected to save the water system
4,159 gallons of the estimated 4,826 gallons of heating oil used per year. The existing water treatment plant is located 750 feet from the powerhouse and also provides heat to the circulating
water lines and heat to the community water storage tank. The lift station is located 200 feet from the powerhouse and is heated with electric resistance heaters. The proposed connecting
pipe will be buried 2-in PEX carrier pipe insulated with 5-in foam insulation and an HDPE outer jacket. The powerhouse’s DDS60 1200 RPM generator would be equipped with a marine
manifold as a part of the project increase the amount of recoverable heat. The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by ANTHC.
The proposed project will install a manually-fed cordwood boiler into a prefabricated building to heat the City of Nikolai’s community building, city lodge, school, and city shop using
circulating glycol heat transfer loops. Modifications to end user building heating systems will be carried out as needed to ensure effective utilization of biomass heat. The estimated
heating oil reduction resulting from this biomass project is projected to save the City and school district approximately 9,630 gallons of heating oil per year.
The Igiugig Village Council requests REF in the amount of $2,016,509 for Phase III Final Design and Permitting and Phase IV Construction of a RivGen® Power System on the Kvichak River
by Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC (ORPC). This Project will be the first commercial installation of a river hydrokinetic power system in the state of Alaska and follows the Igiugig
Village Council’s successful completion of previous project phases – Phase I Reconnaissance and Phase II Feasibility and Conceptual Design, as well as ORPC’s successful demonstration
of the RivGen® Power System, which generated electricity from the Kvichak River in August 2014.
The City of False Pass proposes to follow up a study of the tidal resource in Isanotski Strait with a feasibility study and conceptual design of a tidal power project. The proposed phase
would include current profile surveys at 3-5 sites, submission of draft study plans to regulatory agencies, detailed economic analyses, conceptual design, cost estimates and operations
plan, and completion of a sub bottom survey.
The project envisions installation of a seafloor-mounted 200kW TidGen device made by Ocean Renewable Power Company. Power would be delivered first to the False Pass community grid with
excess power sold to the recently expanded Bering Pacific Seafood fish processing plant. The city estimates that the project can generate 730,000 kWh and offset 58,400 gallons of diesel
annually.
In 2013, AEA provided funding to the community of Huslia through the Renewable Energy Fund for initial planning and conceptual design of a biomass heating system to serve community buildings.
Under this previous grant, Huslia partnered with ANTHC to engineer a conceptual design and to develop an initial woody biomass resource assessment and a draft operations plan. The proposed
project will build from this initial work to complete the design and construction of a biomass heating system to serve the Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plant in Huslia,
Alaska. Specifically, this project will install a manually-fed cordwood boiler to be housed in a prefabricated building and integrated into the existing buildings using circulating
glycol heat transfer loops. Modifications to end user building heating systems will be carried out as needed to ensure effective utilization of biomass heat. The estimated heating oil
reduction resulting from this biomass project is projected to save the Clinic and Water Treatment Plant 8,474 gallons of heating oil per year.
In 2013-2014, the Northwest Arctic Borough, through funding provided by the AEA Renewable Energy Fund, contracted with Tetra Tech, Inc. and Dowl HKM to complete a biomass feasibility
study and initial engineering design for the Upper Kobuk villages of Amlber, Shungnak and Kobuk. This study concluded that Ambler’s City Hall / Washeteria building offered the best
opportunity in the region to integrate biomass heating into an existing community facility. The proposed project will build from this initial work to complete the design and construction
of a biomass heating system to serve the City Hall / Washeteria in Ambler. Specifically, the project will install a manually-fed cordwood boiler to be housed in a prefabricated building
and integrated into the existing building via a circulating glycol heat transfer loop. Modifications to the existing building heating system will be carried out as needed to ensure
effective utilization of biomass heat as part of a separate Ambler Washeteria Upgrades project funded by the Indian Health Service (match to this project). The estimated heating oil
reduction resulting from this biomass project is projected to save the Washeteria and City Office 3,516 gallons of heating oil per year.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to take waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant in Grayling and use it to heat the city’s
water system via a heating connection into the water treatment plant’s hydronic heating system. The heat recovery system is projected to save the water treatment plant 6,669 gallons
of the estimated 8,004 gallons of heating oil used per year. The water treatment plant is located 250 feet from the powerhouse and will also provide heat to the circulating water lines
the community water storage tank. The proposed connecting pipe will be buried 2.5-in PEX pipe insulated with 3.5-in foam insulation and an HDPE outer jacket. The powerhouse’s DDS60
1200 RPM generator would be equipped with a marine manifold as a part of the project increase the amount of recoverable heat. The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed
by ANTHC.
Chitina's application is for design and construction of a new 300 kW run of river (no storage) hydro on Fivemile Creek serving the community of Chitina producing approximately 2,000
MWh's of energy
The proposed Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project consists of the following major components: 1. Creek diversion/intake structure- The proposed diversion/intake structure would divert
a portion of the flow from Fivemile Creek into a pipeline (penstock and would also create a small impoundment that would provide freeze protection. 2. Penstock – The proposed penstock
would transport water from the intake structure to the turbine powerhouse. The penstock will be buried, and will consist of insulated HDPE pipe (low pressure reach) and schedule 20
welded steel pipe (high pressure reach). The pipe will range from 12-20 inches in diameter and will be roughly 10,400 feet long. 3. Diversion Access Road – An access road will be
constructed between the existing jeep trail and the proposed diversion/intake structure location. This road will be approximately 2,850 feet long and will provide access for construction
and maintenance of the diversion/intake structure. 4. Turbine Building – the turbine building will house a 300 kW pelton wheel turbine/generator and controls. The building foundation
will include a tailrace that will return water from the penstock to the creek. 5. Electrical Intertie - A 4-mile long overhead transmission line will connect the turbine power plant
step up transformer to the community grid. The transmission line was constructed utilizing federal grant funds in 2008. 6. Diesel Integration - The proposed hydro switchgear will be
linked to the community’s existing diesel powerhouse controls. The diesel plant will function primarily as a backup system after the hydro is constructed. 7. Heat Recovery – An
electric boiler will be installed in the existing diesel module and connected to the existing hydronic heat recovery system currently utilized to heat the clinic building and the AST
used to store diesel fuel for the diesel plant. The boiler will provide frequency control and allow for continued utilization of the existing heat recovery system infrastructure. 8.
Excess energy utilization – During most times of the year, excess water flow will be available to produce electricity above and beyond the community’s electric demand. During these
times the excess energy will be delivered to dispatchable loads throughout town. The dispatchable loads will include electric heaters installed at community buildings, residential living
facilities and commercial facilities.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to take waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant in Koyuk and use it to heat the city’s
water system via a heating connection into the water treatment plant’s hydronic heating system. The heat recovery system is projected to save the water treatment plant 11,971 gallons
of the estimated 12,300 gallons of heating oil used per year.
The existing water treatment plant/washeteria is located 850 feet from the powerhouse and also provides heat to the circulating water lines and heat to the community water storage tank.
The proposed connecting pipe will be buried 3-in polypropylene and fiberglass composite carrier pipe insulated with 3.5-in foam insulation and an HDPE outer jacket. The powerhouse’s
DDS60 1800 RPM generator would be equipped with a marine manifold as a part of the project increase the amount of recoverable heat.
The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by ANTHC.
Akiachak Native Community Electric Company (“the Utilityâ€) proposes a biomass project to save fuel and reduce costs for the generators and community buildings. The project includes
all phases of development including reconnaissance, feasibility, design and construction. The project would be located on Akiachak, Alaska about 18 air miles east of Bethel.
Upper Tanana Energy's application is for construction of a new 1,500 kW run of river hydro on Yerrick Creek serving the communities of Tok and surrounding area capable of producing approximately
7,000 MWh's of energy annually at an estimated cost of $19 million.
The communities in the upper Tanana region (Tok, Tanacross, Tetlin, Dot Creek) are currently dependent upon diesel-fired generation of electricity and pay energy costs of $0.50/kWh (before
PCE). Upper Tanana Energy, LLC is requesting $8,000,000 through the AEA REF Round VIII program for Phase IV – Construction which is the estimated level of funding support required
by the State of Alaska that will result in a project which produces clean energy for half of the cost of diesel-fired generation of electricity. The Yerrick Creek hydropower project
will displace approximately 40%, or 4,900 MWh’s, of the region’s diesel-fired generation. Tanacross Inc., the Native Village of Tanacross, and AP&T signed a Memorandum of Understanding
expressing willingness to work cooperatively on the Yerrick Creek project in August of 2014. The three entities established a new partnership named Upper Tanana Energy to develop, own,
and operate the project as an independent power producer (IPP).
Yerrick Creek is located on private and State lands and has received a non-jurisdictional determination from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) making it possible to develop
this hydropower project in a timely fashion without undergoing federal permitting processes through FERC. Construction is anticipated to be complete by 2017. Project partners anticipate
that all remaining permitting, power sales agreement, and other pre-construction activities will be complete by the 2015 construction season. Unlike other communities in Alaska, Tok
and surrounding communities of the upper Tanana region have not yet had the opportunity to transition from 100% diesel-fired generation to an energy mix including renewables. If the
Slana-Chistochina-Mentasta grid becomes connected to Tok in the future, these communities will also benefit. Similarly, if Northway, Northway Junction, and Northway Village also become
connected to Tok, they will benefit from this project.
Based on the conclusions of a completed wind resource data collection report, the Native Village of Shungnak will, with Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) assistance, complete the design
process to successfully install a wind-diesel system in the community. This includes automated controls and the equipment necessary to regulate, control and deliver reliable wind energy
to the residents of the community. The project will produce the final designs and plans and complete the necessary permitting for one projected wind turbine and the associated equipment
installations to upgrade the existing power generation and distribution system to produce power from a wind turbine-diesel engine configuration. The Native Village of Shungnak will
hire and contract with an engineering consultant to complete this design project and provide management oversight of any subcontracted engineering/design firms. The consultant will
also complete the construction solicitation package by working closely with NANA Regional Corporation, Shungnak Power Plant operator, and the Native Village of Shungnak.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative proposes to complete a detailed assessment of the existing 40 year old heat recovery system and prepare a conceptual design report of essential
upgrades to the existing system and potential new recovered heat connections. The project would also consider additional heat capture using exhaust gas heat exchangers. Assessment of
the existing system would include installation of BTU meters and inline ultrasonic inspection of the 10†pipeline mains. Heat is recovered from the powerhouse’s six 2.2 MW EMD 16-645
E4D generators.
The application is based on a reconnaissance study completed by Coffman Engineers in 2014. Recommendations in the report include ultrasonic inspection, consideration of a list of potential
future users of recovered heat, and evaluation of the installation of exhaust gas heat exchangers for system evaluation.
AVEC proposes to use wind data to be collected by AEA and to complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Goodnews Bay. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the geotechnical fieldwork and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering
at the site. A conceptual design will be created based upon the wind data and geotechnical investigation.
AVEC requests funds to complete geotechnical and final design for a 262kW (initial) 525kW (future) run of the river hydroelectric project with water diverted from East Fork Mountain
Creek in Old Harbor on Kodiak Island. Hatch was contracted by AVEC for the feasibility report. The 4-6 foot high by 100 foot long intake structure is proposed to be concrete. The 16
to 20 inch, 10,350 long buried penstock will consist of HDPE and steel. The 11,700 foot long intake access trail will be 12 foot wide. The hydro powerhouse is expected to be 25 x 35
x 12 foot metal building. The new 6,200 foot long road to the turbine will be 24 foot wide. A new 7,700 foot long 7.2kV 3 phase distribution tie lie will follow the new road alignment.
The project will divert 5.9 to 11.8 cfs of water from East Fork Mountain Creek to the Lagoon Creek. The FERC license application was submitted in October 2013. FERC license anticipated
to be issued in December 2015.
AVEC proposes to complete construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of four wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation system for currently intertied communities
of St. Mary’s and Pitka’s Point. As a part of this project, AVEC will upgrade the electrical distribution line between St. Mary’s and Pitka’s Point to a 3-phase line and upgrade
the joint power plant to accommodate wind turbine energy generators.
Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority proposes a biomass pellet heat system that will be installed at the (18) unit senior housing center in Klawock, Alaska. The building is currently
heated with oil. The project will entail the installation of a single biomass heating system and will reduce the cost of heat by offsetting 4,750 gallons of fuel oil with 42 tons of
pellets per year. The biomass heat system will be located within the existing building.
A biomass district heat system will be installed to serve eight multiplex residential buildings and one community center in Angoon, Alaska. The buildings are currently heated with one
oil boiler per residence and also one boiler for the community center. The objective of this project is to reduce fossil fuel consumption and operating costs by installing a wood-fired
pellet heating plant to serve all nine buildings in the complex. This project is expected to displace 11,400 gallons of heating fuel annually.
Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA) has applied for final design, permitting, and construction funding of $384,730 for a $449,178 solar project. The project as proposed is a 100kW, dual-axis
tracking solar photovoltaic system to be installed at KEA’s wind farm approximately four miles from Kotzebue. There are no prior REF grants directly associated with this project,
although it would be constructed at KEA’s wind site which did receive REF funding for two 900kW EWT wind turbines and associated equipment.
Cordova Electric's application is for design and permitting for a storage hydro using Crater Lake creating an estimated 400 acre-ft of storage for a 500 kW capacity project capable of
generating 2,000 MWh's of electricity at an estimated cost of $10 million.
Crater Lake is a perched lake located directly above existing City of Cordova chlorinator building and water supply line to Cordova, and a CEC transmission line from the Humpback Creek
Hydroelectric Project to Cordova. The reconnaissance study (Appendix B) indicates the project can deliver 2,000,000 kWh of direct energy, and up to 2,000,000 of additional energy by
eliminating the need for Power Creek Hydroelectric Plant and Orca Diesel Generation Plants to provide spinning reserve – the most significant waste of hydro and diesel fuel resources
on the CEC system. The Crater Lake Hydroelectric Project represents a relatively low risk, low cost, high value hydroelectric project with multiple extended public benefits.
The Native Village of Tazlina is proposing a small wood boiler to heat four community buildings: Community Hall, Clinic/Police Station, Office, and Shop. A centrally located boiler will
supply heat through underground insulated pex pipe running to all four buildings. The existing oil boilers will remain as backup.
The project will consist of engineering and layout; acquiring machinery and equipment; installation of fuel delivery systems; and acquiring and installing biomass boilers to be integrated
into the existing heating system of the Craig High School. The system will use dried fuel from the AEA funded dryer at Viking Lumber and benefit Viking Lumber by expanding the market
base for dry wood fuel. The installed boilers would heat the 53,319 square foot high school using wood chips generated by operations at a local lumber mill. Feedstock for the mill and
the resulting wood chips comes from timber logged from the nearby Tongass National Forest, Southeast Alaska State Forest, Alaska Native Corporation lands and other private lands. The
project is similar in scope to the Craig wood-fired boiler and will share an existing contract to provide wood chips for the boiler. A preliminary feasibility study for conversion from
fossil fuel to wood heating for the Craig High School was prepared for the Craig City School District by Robert Deering, Biomass Program Manager, USDA Forest Service, Tongass National
Forest. An energy audit has also been completed for the facility.
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T), requests $391,200 for Phase II and Phase III activities for the Neck Lake hydropower project. The 124 kW
Neck Lake Hydroelectric Project will be located below the outlet of Neck Lake, approximately 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island, Alaska. The
Project will displace as much as 450,000 kilowatt hours of diesel electric energy per year to the community of Whale Pass which is currently the sole source of electricity for residents.
The relatively high and modulated flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end of the outlet stream provide an attractive opportunity for a small run-of-river hydroelectric
project. Project features would include an access road, intake structure, 400 feet of penstock, a containerized power plant, a tailrace channel, and 4 miles of distribution line upgrades.
The hydroelectric facilities will be designed to avoid interference with the existing salmon rearing and collection facilities operated at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional
Aquaculture Association (SSRAA). APC conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2009 and determined that there is sufficient potential to almost always provide enough generation
meeting 100% of current and future Whale Pass loads. This Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for APC’s Whale Pass customers.
Southeast Alaska Power Agency's application if for construction of a project that will raise the normal reservoir height 15' (5% head increase) at the existing Swan Lake hydro project,
FERC No. P-2911, creating an additional 21,600 acre-ft of storage resulting in an average annual energy generation of 7,500 MWh's at a total cost of $13 million. The Swan Lake Hydroelectric
Project is currently comprised of a concrete arch dam 174' high and 430' long at its crest, an intake structure near the dam, a rock tunnel and penstock water conveyance system, and
a power house located near tidewater. It is located 22 air miles northeast of Ketchikan, Alaska and generates renewable energy for the communities of Ketchikan, Petersburg, and Wrangell.
SEAPA proposes to raise the existing dam by 6' and install a gate system (fuse type and vertical gate) in the fixed spillway slot, which will result in an overall reservoir height increase
of 15'. This will provide additional 25% increase in active reservoir storage. Modifications to the concrete intake structure will also be required, including raising the height and
moving internal equipment to a higher elevation.
City of Saxman's application is for design of the FERC licensed (P-11393) project that will create 9.6 MW of new hydroelectric capacity on Mahoney Lake with a storage capacity of 4,000
acre-ft and 41,700 MWh of energy at a cost of $45 million to serve Ketchikan and surrounding communities.
Approximately 17,900,000 average annual KWH (17.9 aGWH) of power is available between November and April as winter storage, allowing the project to meet the key SEIRP (Southeast Integrated
Resource Plan) objective of increasing winter storage. A detailed cost estimate was performed by Mead & Hunt, a third party engineering firm, in August of 2014, which estimated the
project’s total cost at $45,320,707, making the Mahoney Lake hydroelectric project one of southeast Alaska’s most affordable options for new hydropower energy and capacity. This
alpine lake tap project does not require construction of a dam, and the project’s FERC license has already been issued. Project proponents are requesting $800,000 AEA REF Round VIII
funds, and are proposing $100,000 match (cash and in-kind) to follow through on $200,000 of work funded to date by a SFY14 Capital Appropriation from the State of Alaska.
Alaska Power Company's application is for a feasibility study for a new 1 MW run of river (no storage) hydro project on Clearwater Creek to serve Tok and surrounding area producing 3,400
MWh's of energy at an estimated cost of $16 million.
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T), requests $413,600 in AEA Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII grant funding support for Phase II Feasibility
/ Conceptual Design activities for the Clearwater Creek hydropower project. The proposed project is a 1 MW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Clearwater Creek, which is located approximately
15 miles southwest of the community of Tok on the Tok-Cutoff Highway (Glenn Highway). The project would supply approximately 3.4 GWh annually to Tok and surrounding interconnected communities.
Clearwater Creek’s project features would consist of a small diversion structure, a 1 MW generating system (Turgo turbine), approximately 20,000 feet of penstock, an open tailrace
channel, substation, approximately 5 miles of access road, and a distribution line. The project would interconnect with the Tok region grid via a 14-mile transmission connection made
utilizing existing highway right-of-way.
Applicant accepted delivery of a 34-meter Met Tower from the Alaska Energy Authority in July 2013 and seeks to conduct a reconnaissance and feasibility analysis to determine if it is
feasible to use wind power to supplement the energy needs and displace diesel for the communities serviced by SEAPA. After the site assessment has determined the most suitable site
for collection of raw wind data, the Met Tower will be installed to gather two (2) years of wind data for a thorough analysis. An analysis of the wind data and a final report will be
performed by a qualified consultant specializing in the field.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes to design and construct an effluent source heat pump system to provide space heat to the Wastewater Treatment Plant on Japonski Island. The heat
pump system would capture heat from screen effluent through a stainless steel heat exchanger and water-to-water heat pumps for use in the buildings hydronic heating system.
Effluent currently passes by the boiler at an average temperature of ~50 F; the 72-ton heat pump system is expected to perform with a higher efficiency as a result of the warm source
fluid, with a coefficient of performance of approximately 4.0. Backup heat would be supplied by a new 955 MBH fuel oil boiler.
The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by Alaska Energy Engineering and a 2014 HVAC assessment complete by CH2MHill.
Kodiak Electric's (KEA) application is for final design and permitting for basin diversion project to augment existing Terror Lake (P-2743) hydroelectric generation serving Kodiak. No
additional storage or capacity would be added by the project. The diversion is expected to produce 30,000 MWh of energy through the existing Terror Lake hydro at an estimated project
cost of $50 million.
Hydropower generated by the Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project is KEA’s primary energy source. Enhancing water availability to Terror Lake with a new diversion would allow KEA’s future
electrical load growth to be continually powered with renewable energy. The Upper Hidden Basin Diversion would supplement the available water supply for the Terror Lake Hydroelectric
Facility by capturing additional snow melt and rain in the upper reaches of the Hidden Basin watershed and conveying it to the existing Terror Lake reservoir. Structural components
for the proposed project would consist of two dam embankments connected by an approximately 0.4 mile long channel, an intake structure connected to subterranean tunnel that would run
through a mountain ridge for approximately 1.2 miles, and a gravel road for construction and future maintenance access. These diversion components would be a simple, nonâ€mechanical
design intended for unâ€manned water conveyance. Once the water from the Upper Hidden Basin diversion flows into the Terror Lake reservoir, the additional hydropower would be generated
from the existing Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project and fed directly into the KEA grid.
Manokotak Power Company (MPC) is proposing to install up to 4 small meteorological towers to determine a location with the following criteria: (1) a location with class 5 or better wind
resource, (2) a location nearest to the road system and (3) location suitable for the installation of a wind turbine. The project would complete a conceptual design to establish and
further the development of the project at a suitable wind turbine site and offer viable design configurations from available wind resource turbines and equipment. The conceptual design
will offer a determination of the optimal capacity of any wind turbine system to be incorporated into the community’s existing power plant (260 kW diesel powered generators). Based
on similar configured systems, a system with two (2) 100 KW wind generators would be optimal in a class 5 wind environment.
Kake Community Energy (KCE), a project of the Organized Village of Kake (OVK), is a community-scale thermal energy services company providing affordable biomass heat to critical public
institutions and (later) businesses in Kake, AK while creating local employment and enhancing forest restoration on Tribal and National Forest lands. It is designed to achieve the economies
of scale, customer convenience and price stability of traditional district energy systems, while allowing the adaptability and flexibility needed to serve a community with a spatially
extensive development pattern, typical of Southeast Alaska.
This project consists of the installation and integration of 5 each Windmatic 175 turbines 95 kWe wind turbines (490 kW) into the Naterqak Light Plant diesel power grid. The integration
of this wind energy includes the installation of load balancing boiler, 40 residential electric thermal storage (ETS) units, wind diesel supervisory control and data acquisition system
(WDSC), and improvements to the electrical distribution system which include sectionalizing, the replacement of 3 power poles and one distribution transformer, as well as the extension
of the distribution by 3 power poles to the wind site. The proposed system is similar to those installed in the neighboring villages of Kongiganak, Kwigillingok and Tuntutuliak.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant/washeteria. The estimated fuel oil savings to the community water plant and
washeteria is projected to be 6,600 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached updated Tuntutuliak, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
The proposed project is a run-of-river hydroelectric project located on private property along Juniper Creek, a tributary of Eagle River about 10 miles upstream from the Glenn Highway.
The proposed project would include an intake/diversion structure at approximately the 1900-foot elevation and powerhouse at the 1500-foot elevation. The design flow is estimated at
10 to 20 cfs, for an estimated installed capacity of 250 to 500 kW.
Participation of adjacent downstream property owners would increase the available head from 400 feet to either 900 feet or 1,100 feet if one or two adjacent land owners were to participate.
This would increase installed capacity to as much as 1,300 kW. The adjacent landowner is open to discussion, but questions the resource and impacts. Results of the feasibility study
are expected to encourage local support and participation.
This project will be a modest, run-of-the-river hydroelectric facility using Waterfall Creek and consisting of a concrete diversion/intake structure, 4,500? HDPE penstock pipeline, 16?X40?
metal powerhouse on a concrete slab, Pelton Impulse Turbine and induction generator, remote-automatic control system, and 5,000? access road. This facility will be a working partner
to the City?s existing and highly successful Delta Creek hydroelectric project, which has been operating for the last eighteen years.
As a condition of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing of the Cooper Lake plant in 2007, Chugach agreed to construct a project to divert water from Stetson Creek
into the Cooper Lake reservoir and a related structure to release water into Cooper Creek. The project will enhance fish habitat and add water to Cooper Lake which will result in additional
hydroelectric energy generation. Most importantly, constructing this project allows the license for the Cooper Lake hydro facility to be renewed for 50 years.
The project is the performance of a reconnaissance study to provide a preliminary assessment of the viability of a WtE plant in Anchorage. Other than some recyclables that are recovered
prior to disposal, municipal solid waste (MSW) in Anchorage is largely disposed of in the municipal landfill. The quantity of refuse currently being disposed of in this manner is approximately
330,000 tons per year. There may also be an opportunity to incorporate other fuel, such as wood being disposed of in local woodlots.
WtE plants, while somewhat rare in the U.S., are very popular, efficient and environmentally effective in many European and Asian countries. If feasible, a WtE plant would be expected
to provide energy, environmental, reliability, economic and community benefits
False Pass currently produces all their electricity from diesel generators and heating from burning fossil fuels. Analysis by Marsh Creek LLC confirms that, despite the ample Class 4
wind resource, a Class 3 S designation is most appropriate. Turbulence from complex terrain precludes a typical rural Alaskan wind project. This project proposes feasibility completion
funding to 1) fully assess commercially available wind turbines for deployment in high turbulent locations and 2) expanding available wind resource data at the 10 meter height on proposed
sites and 3) revised Conceptual Design Report (CDR) recommending the best turbine to proceed to design in Round 8. Vertical axis wind turbines (VAWTs) are potentially a mechanically
and economically sound upgrade to False Pass?s current diesel generator system. This project will consider ten (10) 5 kW Kelso VAWTs in comparison to the use of either the Xzeres Skystream
and Bergie options.
The CDR recommendations will closely examine three potential turbines and research other potential options. The Vertical axis wind turbines (VAWTs) are potentially a mechanically and
economically sound upgrade to False Pass?s current diesel generator system. This project will consider ten (10) 5 kW Kelso VAWTs in comparison to the use of either the Xzeres Skystream
and Bergie options. This project seeks feasibility funding for the False Pass wind project. The feasibility funding would allow for further site testing of wind resources at the proposed
system height of 10M and heat recovery analysis. Conceptual Design Report Updates will include additional HOMER analysis with wind resource data at the 10M height, Down East Heat Recovery
modeling, WASP modeling, wind turbine profiles, revised economic analysis and recommendations.
This project proposes to install two remanufactured Vestas V20 wind turbines in the community of Koliganek. Koliganek was awarded a grant from the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) in Renewable
Energy Fund Round IV to complete a conceptual design for installation of wind turbines, with possible construction beginning in 2015. New Koliganek Village Council owns and operates
the electric utility for the community of Koliganek. The moderate wind resource at this site could support a medium penetration wind-diesel system.
The Draft Conceptual Design Report for the RPSU project does not currently include the prospect of integrating wind energy. Koliganek has received $300,000 for conceptual design and
design completion for the Rural Power System Upgrade (RPSU) project. The 2009 Conceptual Design Report (CDR) will be updated starting in January 2014.
This project proposes that the conceptual designs of both the wind-diesel and RPSU project proceed in coordination. If the projects are designed together, potential retrofitting expenses
will be avoided and savings realized through the elimination of redundancies.
The proposed project is to build and install a Combined Solar Thermal and Wood Pellet Boiler System that would provide heat for both a 3,200 sq ft shop/office and a 1,160 sq ft ? administrative
building. Included in the project is construction of a building addition to house the boiler system, purchase and installation of solar thermal panels and pellet boiler, ?and focused
monitoring and evaluation. The project will also be used as a demonstration projectfor the community to learn about solar thermal and wood pellet boiler systems and to encourage the
use of renewable resources for heating.
Project location: 21117 Myers Avenue Sutton, Alaska 99674
The communities in the Upper Tanana Subregion to be served by this renewable energy project are economically distressed in part caused by the very high cost of electricity at $0.51 per
kWh. These communities currently rely on diesel generation to meet their electric needs.
Renewable energy is a must for this area to remain economically viable during these difficult times. The Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project, first pioneered by Alaska Power and Telephone
(AP&T), would be the first renewable electric energy project for the Upper Tanana Subregion and is now a collaborative effort of the Native Village of Tanacross, Tanacross, Inc. and
AP&T.
The project site can be accessed at MP 1339 of the Alaska Highway
This project focuses on installing a solar hot water thermal system in each of the eleven Northwest Arctic Borough schools to provide a year around economical source of hot water. Currently,
each school?s hot water heater is part of the heating plant, which is separate from each building. For example, the Kotzebue school?s hot water is heated indirectly with hot glycol
from a boiler module, which also provides space heating. The boiler water heats the school?s two huge plate and frame heat exchangers where the schools glycol/water-heating medium is
heated. Hot glycol is then circulated through a plate type heat exchanger (for 115 degree water) and an Amtrol hot water maker for 140-degree hot water.
During the warmest months of the school year, the school must run a boiler to make hot water. One boiler contains 385 gallons of water, the piping that connects it with the plate and
frame heat exchangers contain approximately 200 gallons. Thus there are times when the school does not need space heating, but does have need for hot water; just as all the other school?s
do.
The proposed project is an approximately 200 kW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Cascade Creek at MP 35 of the Richardson Highway. The project would provide power to CVEA via a
proposed 14-mile line extension or tie into the 138 kV transmission line that runs within ? mile of the project site.
This project expands the Tuntutuliak Wind Heat Smart Grid System by from 30 to 50 electric thermal storage devices (ETS). ETS units are used to capture and store surplus wind energy
and use it to displace home heating fuel. The increase in the number of residential ETS units is needed to absorb wind generated energy during modest to high wind periods, which occur
in throughout the fall and winter, when heating requirements are the greatest. The addition of 20 ETS units increases the productivity and efficiency of the existing wind system.
This project expands existing Kongiganak Wind Heat Smart Grid System by adding additional electric thermal storage (ETS) devices. The units themselves have been in production since the
mid-1980?s as electric heat sources, but have only recently been advanced to include Grid Interactive Controls for renewable energy sources. Currently, the units and their controls
are considered ?off the shelf? technology and are readily available. The ETS units proposed for installation in this project are already in use in 20 homes in Kongiganak (Kong) and
have realized those homes 30-50% fuel decreases (in home heating fuel) in the 10 months they have been in use. Kong has operational, utility scale, wind turbine project that produces
excess wind capacity. This capacity needs to be used or the turbine production must be governed in a way that energy is wasted. Additional ETS units will provide an outlet to maximize
the use of wind power to displace diesel fuel for both power generation and heating.
The Village of Igiugig seeks funding to complete the final feasibility of our wind resource and conceptual design to verify the economic viability of a wind-diesel electric generation
facility. A Rural Power Systems Upgrade was completed in 2011, and a preliminary wind feasibility study was completed by Knight-Piesold Consulting in 2012. Igiugig has a class 3-4 wind
resource, and with the higher cost of diesel and the increasing electrical demand, it was determined that a high-penetration wind turbine system is economically viable. A final feasibility
study and conceptual design with a construction cost estimate remains to be completed. The total cost of the project is $110,000 and the Lake and Peninsula Borough has committed a $20,000
match. Igiugig Village is providing a $10,000 in-kind match, and requesting the additional $80,000 needed.
This project expands existing Kwigillingok Wind Heat Smart Grid System by expanding electric thermal storage (ETS) devices from 20 to 50 units.
The ETS units proposed for installation in this project are in use in 27 homes in Kwigillingok (Kwig). Kwig has an operational, utility scale wind turbine project that produces excess
wind capacity. Additional ETS units will maximize the use of wind power to displace diesel fuel for both power generation and heating.
TDX Power intends to build on a successful wind?diesel power system at Sand Point, Alaska, by adding an energy storage component to its Sand Point Generating power plant. The additional
hardware ? inverter and battery bank ? will allow the utility to purchase more wind power from the existing turbines and shut off the diesel engines for approximately 30% of the year.
The project includes the final design, procurement, installation and commissioning of an inverter and battery bank and integration with the existing wind?diesel power system in Sand
Point, Alaska.
AVEC proposes to complete construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of four wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation system for currently intertied communities
of St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point. As a part of this project, AVEC will upgrade the electrical distribution line between St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point to a 3- phase line and upgrade the
joint power plant to accommodate wind turbine energy generators. This project has been in planning for over 10 years, and with funding from this grant AVEC will complete the St. Mary?s
wind farm.
The proposed project is located near the village of Stebbins on St. Michael Island. Stebbins is located approximately 430 miles northwest of Anchorage, on the south side of Norton Sound.
Stebbins is 8 air miles from the village of St. Michael. This project will benefit both the communities of Stebbins and St. Michael as an intertie to connect the two communities and
a new joint power plant will be constructed
by 2015.
AVEC proposes to complete a conceptual design report (CDR) for a wind energy project in Mountain Village. This project will move the project towards the goal of reducing fuel usage by
establishing a renewable energy resource in the community. A met tower collected data east of Mountain Village from November 2009 to August 2011. A wind resource report was completed
and revealed a low Class 5 (excellent) wind resource with an average wind speed of 7.62 m/s. Work under this grant will include updating the wind resource report, conducting a geotechnical
investigation at a proposed wind site, completing the CDR with the preliminary design of a wind farm.
Building on the results of the completed Conceptual Design Report (attached in Tab G), Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is proposing to complete the final design and
permitting to install three Northern Power Systems NPS 100-24 turbines, each with a 95 kilowatt (kW) installed wind capacity (aggregate generating capacity of 285 kW), to the existing
diesel power generation system in Marshall. Once work done under this grant is completed, AVEC will seek funding to construct the turbines. A met tower in the proposed turbine site
has collected 21 months of data. A wind resource report has been completed based on data from the met tower and has revealed a Class 4 (good) wind resource at the site with an average
wind speed of 6.30 m/s.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), the electrical utility provider in Old Harbor, is proposing to complete final design and permitting of a hydroelectric project in Old
Harbor, Alaska. The 262 kW (initial; nominal) basin diversion project will be located on East Fork Mountain Creek and Lagoon Creek Tributary. The project will be capable initially of
generating an average of about 2,018,924 kWh annually and could grow to an annual generation of 2,725,646 kWh when demand warrants and an additional turbine is installed. The project
will run year-round and meet all the existing and future electricity demands of the community.
The Native Village of Chenega (aka. Chenega Bay) proposes to construct a run-of-the-river hydroelectric project on Anderson Creek. The planned 64 kW capacity project will offset power
currently generated by burning diesel. The non-jurisdictional hydro will offset up to 10,406 gallons of diesel annually which translates into $56,600 in annual savings. Engineering
design is 95% complete and permit applications to the appropriate agencies have been submitted.
This project entails the construction of a ground-mounted, stand-alone solar energy system to manage the energy capacities of the Iliamna Village Council and adjacent maintenance buildings,
eventually adding houses and/or additional community facilities to this solar energy powered system as funds permit. Further study will take place during Phase I of this project to
assess the measure of insolation in our location, to determine how much sunlight will be available for solar panels to convert into electricity and how many hours of peak sunlight the
location receives per day, making adjustments for Net Metering with the local power company, or for a battery-storage system. We will assess the number of devices that will be electrically
powered in total for both buildings, and the total kWh and wattage consumption of these devices. An assessment must also be performed to determine an accurate cost for both buildings?
heating fuel requirements. Once a thorough energy cost assessment has been completed, Phase I will meld into Phase II as further assessments are implemented to develop cost evaluations
for installing a solar electric system to successfully power total electric energy consumption requirements, as well as solar energy systems to manage both buildings? heating needs,
taking into account plausible separate and hybrid systems. Phase II will also entail developing a detailed evaluation intended to further assess the technical, economic, financial,
and operational viability of the project. Phase II will be completed by narrowing the focus of our final ground mounted solar panel design and construction plans, to prepare for future
final design and implementation of the Project, and establish pre-construction equipment, shipment costs, time-frames etc.
The City of False Pass requests Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) funding through the Renewable Energy Grant Program (RFA 2014-006) to complete Phase II Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual
Design Requirements (Project) for a proposed tidal energy project at False Pass in the Isanotski Straight. The City of False Pass, like most communities of the Aleutian Islands, depends
on diesel fuel to meet their electricity and heating needs. While diesel fuel is currently the most practical option for such communities, it also creates economic, energy security
and environmental problems?it has a disproportionately high carbon dioxide (CO2) output compared to other power generation systems?at both local and global levels. The City of False
Pass, fortunately, is situated near a significant hydrokinetic (tidal) resource at the Isanotski Straight that offers a potential to significantly reduce, or eliminate, the use of diesel
fuel. The viability of this resource was confirmed through a reconnaissance study funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Tribal Energy Program that included measurement of the
current velocities in the vicinity of False Pass through a full lunar cycle. This Project proposes to build on the completed reconnaissance study to accelerate efforts to develop this
tidal energy resource. The following goals will be achieved in this Project: (1) measure current velocities and collect turbulence data at 3-5 sites selected for potential deployment
of tidal turbines based on University of Alaska (UAA) circulation modeling, (2) analyze the data from the field effort including extending UAA modeling efforts to select the optimal
site(s) for tidal turbine placement, (3) collect existing environmental data and develop draft environmental study plans in consultation with regulatory agencies, (4) initiate stakeholder
outreach efforts, (5) collect additional geophysical data required to inform engineering of the project, and (6) complete a conceptual design and economic analysis for a tidal energy
project at False Pass. The Project Team is comprised of the City of False Pass; Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Inc. (APIA); Aleutian Pribilof Islands Community Development Association
(APICDA); University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA); Benthic GeoScience, Inc.; National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and ORPC Alaska, LLC (ORPC).
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant, the City Office, and the Boys and Girls Club. The estimated fuel oil savings
to these facilities is projected to be 18,879 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached updated Emmonak, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility
Study. (Note that the potential savings noted above are contingent on the completion of proposed renovations to the power plant.)
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant/washeteria. The estimated fuel oil savings to the community water plant and
washeteria is projected to be 3794 gallons of heating oil per year.
For more detailed information, see the attached updated Holy Cross, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
After careful consideration of the potential hydropower sources in the Cosmos Hills, as documented in the Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design Report, AVEC has chosen to move forward
with design and permitting for a hydroelectric project on the Kogoluktuk River. The Kogoluktuk River project would be a run-of-river project with a small diversion dam and intake, a
long above-ground penstock pipeline, a
small Kaplan turbine and powerhouse, and a tailrace back to the river. The project would also include an access road, a transformer, and a high-voltage transmission line. At this location,
the upstream basin catchment area is approximately 424 square miles.
Northwest Artie Borough is seeking $447,800.00 from this Grant Program on behalf of Noatak and Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC), to add a solar energy component to the
existing diesel power generation system that serves the community. Northwest arctic Borough will construct a new 52.5 kW array of 210 pc. 250W, Photovoltaic (PV) modules in Noatak,
Alaska. The array will be inclined at 34 degrees from May through September, and 90 degrees the remainder of the year to take advantage of the solar angle at this northerly location.
The annual power production of the array is estimated to be approximately 49,500 kWh (with shading). The solar array will be located on a lot of land under discussion near the powerplant.
A Feasibility study was performed for a system of similar size in 2008, see attached. A request for funding was turned in at that time for round 1, Renewable Energy Fund. Since that
time fuel prices have increased and equipment( Solar Arrays) have come down in price. This have made the project more economically feasible. Considering that no other renewable energy
option is available for Noatak as Wind and Hydro is below development stage, Solar-PV is a good match for this community. Additionally Solar-PV is being successfully installed and integrated
for the regions Water-plants to help offset the use of Diesel fuel and lower the cost of living.
The Newtok community must move due to the erosion of the existing community site and based on the Mertarvik Relocation Plan, the time has arrived to begin the study and development of
an efficient energy project for the new site. Ungusraq Power Company (UPC) is the independent power producer for the community of Newtok, Alaska. This proposed UPC project will begin
the conceptual and preliminary design and feasibility study work necessary to utilize the least diesel fuel and to maximize the renewable energy resources for: electrical and heat generation
production systems at the new Mertarvik community site.
The proposed project is for wind field data collection, analysis and preliminary engineering design. Wind field data collection will require a one year collection period as recommended
by AEA for location of wind generators. The wind data will be analyzed and used for the design of the wind generators and related facilities. The City of Adak has completed a hydroelectric
power feasibility analysis and preliminary engineering prepared by McMillen LLC. The report recommends hydro ? wind generation with pump storage development project that includes hydroelectric
power generation, raising the Lake Bonnie Rose and Lake DeMarie dams, construction of the penstock, powerhouse (2 MW hydro), transmission lines, wind generation (4.5 MW), wind pump
from L. DeMarie to L. Bonnie Rose storage, and associated facilities. Both lakes are in the same watershed. The hydro - wind generation with pump storage project will supply hydro and
wind generated power to the community as well as pump water to the higher elevation Lake Bonnie Rose to store potential energy for conversion into hydropower
generation to the community to meet demand (a buffering effect). The next step in the development process is wind field data collection and analysis to design the wind generation system.
The hydropower feasibility component and preliminary engineering design is complete in the McMillen report.
The City of Seward is the owner of the Alaska SeaLife Center (ASLC), which is leased and operated by the Seward Association of Marine Science (SMMS), doing business as the Alaska SeaLife
Center. In conjunction with SMMS, the City proposes installation of an innovative heat recovery system that captures waste heat from exhaust fans EF-4 & EF-5, minus 80 tissue freezers,
IT .server room, electrical and mechanical room, fan coils and animal and necropsy refrigeration. Heat recovered will be directed to the front end of the seawater heat pump system and
this will increase the coefficient of performance (COP) of this system.
The applicant will work with Energy Unlimited, LLC on final design of an alternative energy system that includes a wind tower, solar panels, and an energy storage system. The products
we intend to use for each of these technologies are tested, warrantied, and commercially available. However, the combination of these technologies to achieve maximum local benefits
is innovative.
Primary heat sources in three municipal publicly accessible buildings will be replaced with two Garn WHS2000 boilers, which will use locally sourced cordwood biomass to provide heat
through a supply loop linking all buildings. Existing antiquated hydronic heating systems in each building will be replaced and upgraded to improve efficiency an estimated 25%. Concurrent
to this project, VEEP projects (Yakutat is a 2013 VEEP recipient) will be conducted to increase envelope efficiency per AEA statewide goal of 15%. AEA-required performance metering
is addressed through ACEP subcontract. With significant local match and good project partners, we are seeking the funding for Phases III and IV: final design, purchase and installation
of 2 Garn WHS2000 boilers, pipe installation and associated link up plumbing to all three buildings in the district heating loop. The project also includes construction of a separate
boiler building and a cordwood storage/drying building. Per standard practice, existing oil furnaces will remain as supplemental and emergency back-up heat systems. The City and Borough
of Yakutat, along with Yak-tat-Kwaan, want to ensure that we install the most effective technologically and economically appropriate equipment for our biomass district heating loop.
We are pleased to have the interest of Garn Boiler Company in participating in this application based on the estimate for the equipment they suggested as most appropriate for the buildings
involved. Garn has a proven track record of installing and operating their equipment in several locations in Alaska, including at least two that we know of in the coastal SE Alaska
environment. It is our plan to also closely monitor developments in the biomass energy world, and we recognize that this technology sector is evolving. During the 9th month period of
AEA review, legislative approval and appropriation, CBY and Yak-tat-Kwaan will continue to monitor technological development. One of our goals for the project is to link Yak-tat Kwaan?s
forest management program and the biomass products produced with the installed boiler technology and have the best opportunity for expansion and integration of future biomass projects.
CBY is prepared to operate and maintain this project, and has demonstrated ability to operate energy infrastructure through the electric utility, Yakutat Power.
Project Locations in Yakutat, AK:
City Hall Building: 309 Max Italio Drive, Court House Building: 120 Max Italio Drive,, Yakutat Community Center: 100 Ridge Road.
This project will provide recovered heat from the new Nunam Iqua power plant to the washeteria/water treatment plant for building heat; the water treatment plant for process heat; and
to the Clinic, Community Hall and Corporation Store for building heat. The delivery system will include supply and return lines; BTU meters, heat exchangers and unit heaters. The estimated
combined fuel reduction is 18,000 gallons per year with an expected annual savings of roughly $79,000.
The project will include extending a new hot water heating I return loop from the recently completed Biomass Heating Plant to two (2) additional buildings on the Tok School Campus and
will include the required integration work within the two buildings.
The first building is the multipurpose building which houses an ice hockey rink and shooting range. The intent is to use the biomass plant to heat the shooting range and toilet group
portion of the multipurpose building, approximately 10,000 square feet.
The second building is the Zamboni garage which would approximately 1 ,400 square feet. The heating loop will connect to the Tok School Biomass Plant that was completed in the fall of
2010. (The Tok School Biomass Plant was developed using AEA Round I Grant Funding.
The project consisted of a Biomass heating facility that contained an automated biomass heating system that now provides heat to the existing K-12 School.) Since the completion of the
Tok School Biomass Plant a steam turbine and electrical generation system have been added to create a combined heat and power (CHP) system. The original biomass boiler was sized to
allow for the CHP expansion and the additional load of the multipurpose building and Zamboni garage. The CHP project was completed the fall of 2012. When the CHP system is in operation
it generates a substantial amount of heat as a byproduct. The heat created currently surpasses the required heat demand of the existing K-12 School. The intent is to recover the surplus
heat and supply it to meet the heating demand of the additional buildings mentioned above. The cost for maintenance and operation as well as for biomass fuel will be negated for this
project due to the current operation of the CHP system.
Project Location: 249 Jon Summar Road
This project will consist of a 50 kW (d.c. rating) ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV) system, to be installed next to the school building. The PV system will generate clean, renewable
power for decades to come, reducing the amount of electricity the school buys from the local utility and reducing pollution associated with burning fossil fuels. The system will also
provide an opportunity for the school?s students and the wider community to learn about PV. The system will be composed of (200) 250-watt photovoltaic (PV) collector panels (e.g. Solarworld
250W monocrystalline or equivalent), 50 kW DC to AC power inverter capacity (multiple smaller inverters, e.g. SMA Sunnyboy 6000TL) and a data acquisition system with a graphical display
inside the building and accessible through the Internet. The panels will be wired in multiple DC series circuits called strings. The strings will be wired to a combiner box, then connect
to the power inverter(s) which transforms the DC power into AC power suitable for use by the building?s existing electrical system. The inverter assures that the PV generated power
is compatible with the power supplied by the utility grid and will disconnect from the electrical system in the event of a utility power outage to prevent ?back feed? to the utility
grid. The proposed system is sized to supplement current electric usage and peak demand only, as it will not store power. The proposed system will be interconnected with the electrical
system and controlled to ?follow? the existing systems? electrical characteristics.
A dedicated data acquisition system tied directly to the inverter will display the performance of the PV system and describe how it works through a dedicated live display setup in the
lobby. A revenue grade utility meter will also be installed on the PV system to accurately measure the power generated. The existing electric systems supply 208-volt, three phase power
for larger loads and 120-volt, single-phase for most of the distributed loads from a three phase service provided by NEA. The average monthly electric demand for the school is approximately
137 kW.
This phase of the Barrow to Atqasuk Transmission Line Project is for final design and permitting required for the construction of the transmission line as wells as home and building
conversions to electric space heating.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a wind energy and area-wide energy management system, consisting of wind diesel integration, end-use energy efficiency, automated building controls,
and conservation. This phase of the project is the design and permitting phase of a three phase project which will include a phase for construction and commissioning for three anticipated
wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution system for the community of Kaktovik. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough(NSB), a contracted
engineering/design firm, and Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont (wind turbine experts and supplier). The contractor will provide overall project management and system engineering
during this phase of the project. During the construction phase, NSB will recruit an engineering and construction contractor for design and installation of all civil works, erection
of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100B model wind turbines plus startup & commissioning services.
The City of Galena is requesting AEA Round VII funding to provide a sustainable and predictable energy resource for its school district. The Galena Community Wood Heat Project will substantially
reduce high costs for heat for the Galena Interior Learning Academy School (GILA) by utilizing woody biomass harvested and processed from local forests. The project will implement Phase
IV Construction over an eighteen (18) month period to construct and install a biomass boiler system for the GILA campus. Local coordination among the stakeholders group is strong, infrastructure
and administrative resources are in place to support the project, and the Galena City School District has committed to purchasing the resulting heat. Existing Feasibility Studies and
strategic community planning documents align with the project.
The proposed project will assess hydroelectric and hydrokinetic resource potential and economics of the Tanalian River for providing electric energy to the Community of Port Alsworth.
Reconnaissance of hydroelectric at Tanalian Falls has already been complete and this project will include the feasibility and conceptual design of hydroelectric at the waterfalls. Due
to land use designations at the proposed hydroelectric power plant we would also like to include a reconnaissance of in-river hydrokinetic along the Tanalian River. This portion of
the proposed project has documented National Park Service support and may be a viable option for an alternate location of hydropower.
This project will provide waste heat from the AVEC electrical power plant to water treatment plant (WTP). The expected annual savings is 5,261 gallons, or approximately half of the total
heat demand. For more detailed information, see the attached Grayling, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the newly constructed clinic. The fuel oil savings to the clinic is projected to be 2,300 gallons of
heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached updated Venetie, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the AVEC electrical power plant to the city shop, water circulation loops, cold storage/hotel, and city office buildings. The expected annual
fuel savings is 15,726 gallons, which is approximately equivalent to the total heat demand of three buildings plus the water system. For more detailed information, see the attached
St. Mary\'s, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water system via a heating connection into the circulating water distribution loop. The fuel oil
savings to the community water system is projected to be 4,000 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached updated Eek, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery
Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the Water Treatment Plant and Vacuum Sewer Plant. The estimated fuel oil savings to the water treatment
plant and vacuum sewer plant is projected to be 12,500 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached updated Chevak, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility
Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant and washeteria. The project will install marine manifolds on the existing diesel
generators and provide the recovered heat to the water system. The current estimate of fuel savings is 14,726. However, an intertie of the power system is planned with the neighboring
village of Teller. If that project proceeds, available heat may be increased to up to 33,000 gallons of equivalent heat. For more detailed information, see the attached, updated Brevig
Mission, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will perform initial design, right-of-way planning, and environmental work for transmission lines between the communities shown in Table 2.2.1 in the region. This project
will connect closest and largest population center villages shown in table 2.2.1. This initial village group connection is a critical foundation block for the region intertie system,
and enables access to alternative energy options. All communities currently have diesel power plants. Subsequent phases to complete design and perform construction are contingent upon
the technical findings and community acceptance under this phase.
The objective of the Kotzebue Paper and Wood Waste to Energy Project is to replace fuel oil fired boilers with refuse derived fuel (RDF) and wood fired boilers in two city owned buildings.
Feedstock for this system will consist of sorted and separated cardboard, newspaper, mixed paper, and wood materials from the city of Kotzebue waste stream. The city\'s waste management
equipment will be used to collect materials, either as source-separated material from the producers or mixed with the city\'s MSW waste stream. RDF fuel will be separated from the waste
stream in the Bailer building, in conjunction with an aluminum and tin recycling program.
Project Location: 258 Third Avenue Kotzebue, Alaska
Ketchikan Gateway Borough seeks to secure its future energy independence through the construction of two biomass-fired building heating systems. The woody biomass fired boilers will
replace outdated heating oil boilers, which are costly to maintain and run on heating oil number 2, which is more expensive than locally sourced woody biomass. These systems will, in
turn help to stabilize and secure the forest products industry of Southeast Alaska through the sourcing of locally-produced wood pellets.
The project is a high head run-of-river hydroelectric power plant on Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon with an installed capacity of 167kW. The first phase of this project, currently under
construction, includes a 480 square foot powerhouse, a 1,500 foot long access road with a bridge across Packers Creek to the powerhouse, a 3,260 foot long access trail to the intake,
as well as supply of the turbine, generator, and switchgear. This grant funds the second phase of this project which includes a 9-foot tall concrete dam, a 3,260 foot long 18-inch and
16-inch diameter penstock, a 1,750 foot long overhead power line extension to the existing distribution system and 3,000 foot long control connection to the existing diesel power plant,
interconnection to the existing diesel plant controls, addition of dispatchable electric heat to the existing diesel plant waste heat system feeding the school, environmental upgrades
to Packers Creek at the Powerhouse location required by ADF&G, and start-up and commissioning of the new hydroelectric power plant.
The Reconnaissance Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource funded by Alaska Energy Authority Renewable Energy Grant #7040073 was completed in July 2013. The reconnaissance study was
the first time this geothermal resource had been significantly studied. The surface expression of the resource is four hot springs that occur together near the base of a hill approximately
200 feet high in a rugged, isolated, stream valley on Chichagof Island in southeast Alaska. During the field effort in September 2011, the hot springs had surface water temperatures
of between 1610F to 1760F. Geochemical sampling of water and soil, a shallow temperature survey, and geological mapping occurred in this first field effort. Later fieldwork in the spring
and summer of 2012 included infrared imaging of the area, additional shallow temperature survey, and CO2 gas survey.
The purpose of this phase of the project is to further evaluate the viability of the geothermal resource by 1) obtaining Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data to locate faults and
obtain topographical information for design; 2) drill two slim holes to about 2,500 feet each and conduct well testing; 3) conduct an environmental assessment to address agency and
environmental issues; 4) prepare a conceptual design to develop the resource; and 5) refine the economic analysis based on the conceptual design and more detailed economic parameters.
The primary goal of the site work during this phase would be to collect the information needed to verify resource viability and evaluate whether this project should be considered for
Phase 3 investigation and development. The drill holes will be approximately 10 inches in diameter necking down to approximately 2.5 inch core hole. Each well will have a temperature/pressure
survey conducted and rock chip samples will be analyzed for fluid inclusions and alterations. If the wells penetrate the reservoir we will conduct flow tests on the wells and collect
water samples for chemical analysis. The location, depth, size and flow characteristics are important parameters that determine the viability of the geothermal resource. Evaluating
those parameters was beyond the scope of the Phase 1 reconnaissance study. If found viable, the results of this Phase 2 investigation would provide information necessary to support
the development phase of the project.
<Project description edited for reporting purposes. See original application for full scope of work.>
The proposed Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie is a 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan Public Utilities
(KPU). The Intertie will include 14 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line on Annette Island between Metlakatla and Walden Point and an approximate three mile submarine cable
crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Walden Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation. The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for the integrated operation
of the interconnected systems? generating plants.
Final design of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie is underway.
Construction of the line began in June 2010 and the overhead line to the new ferry terminal at Walden Point was completed in August 2013.
The line to the ferry terminal is scheduled to be energized at 12.47-kV in the fall of 2013.
The control system upgrades were completed in July 2011.
The City and Borough of Sitka is applying for design and construction of a sea water source heat pump system to displace 100% of the heating oil usage of the existing 11,000 sq ft historic
Sage Memorial Building that has been home to the Sitka Sound Science Center (SSSC) since 2010.
The Science Center has already conducted significant feasibility and reconnaissance work on this project. With the help of the Rasmuson Foundation and Foraker Group, they have conducted
an energy audit, a heat pump evaluation, and a master plan for the facility. A significant amount of funds have been raised to improve the energy efficiency of the structure through
renovations of roof, windows and exterior. These renovations will compliment the project proposed here. Raw sea water flow of up to 85 gallons per minute will serve as the heat source.
The sea water is drawn from a depth of 65 ft via an existing 8? intake line and shoreside pump station. A buried manifold pipe delivers sea water in to the basement of the building
where the heat pump system will be located. The sea water will transfer heat thru a titanium plate heat exchanger to a glycol loop that in turn will serve as the source side of the
new heat pumps. Three 84,000 BTU/hour high efficiency water to water heat pumps will be installed in the existing mechanical room. The existing heating oil boiler and electric boiler
will be replaced by the three new heat pumps. On the load (hot) side of the heat pumps, two buffer tanks will be heated from 115F to 145F, these will in turn supply hydronic heat to
new low temperature baseboards also included in the project. A heat pump controller will modulate the temperature of the hydronic heat based on outdoor air temperature. This project
will be the first sea water source heat pump system in Sitka, and the first water source heat pump system in Sitka to displace 100% of its existing annual heating oil and electric resistance
heat. The proposed heat pump system is anticipated to perform with a seasonal COP of 3 or greater, due in great part to the reliably warm sea water from Sitka Sound.
Project Location: 834 Lincoln Street, Sitka AK 99835
The project is the installation of a single biomass heating system serving the Minto Multi-Purpose Building/ Lodge and the Health Clinic. The project will reduce the cost of heat by
offseting 11,400 gallons of fuel oil with 99 cords of firewood per year. The biomass heat system will be located in a stand-alone building (new construction) located adjacent to the
project buildings. The project site and all project buildings are controlled by the Village of Minto. The wood fuel will be sourced from nearby forests owned by Seth-De-Ya-Ah Corporation,
which has provided a letter of commitment for the project. Fuel harvests will be completed by Minto?s trained wildfire crew, and the crew boss has provided a letter of support for the
project. A harvest plan will be completed by Tanana Chiefs Conference, and is included as part of the project budget. The project emerges from significant community energy planning
efforts and project prioritization, including the US DOE Strategic Technical Assistance Response Team (START) program and wood energy assessment supported by the Alaska Wood Energy
Development Task Group.
Funding is being requested to help support the costs of final design, permitting and construction of a ground source heat pump system to displace approximately 75% of the heating oil
usage of the 17,191 sq. ft. Seldovia House Senior Housing Complex. Seldovia House is an 18-unit housing complex serving low income senior citizens living in Seldovia. The total annual
cost for heating oil for 2012 heating season (Jan 2012-Dec 2012) was $56,461. A field of ten vertical wells, 6? diameter x 300 ft. depth, will be located under the existing parking
area and will serve as the heat source. A manifold loop of buried HDPE piping with methanol/water mixture will connect the wells to two high efficiency water to water heat pumps installed
in the existing mechanical room. One of the existing heating oil boilers will be replaced by the two new heat pumps. On the load (hot) side of the heat pumps, buffer tanks will be heated
from 130F to 145F, these will in turn supply heat to both hydronic space heating and domestic hot water. A heat pump/boiler controller will integrate the heating oil boiler such that
supplemental heat will be provided when the heat pump capacity is exceeded on cold winter days. The goal of the ground source heat pump project is to displace approximately 75% of the
heating oil currently used annually in the building for space heating and domestic hot water heating.
The Flywheel Energy Storage Systems (FESS) for Kodiak Pier Electric Crane is the installation and integration of two (2) ABB modular PowerStore flywheel energy storage units at the City
of Kodiak?s Pier III. Modernizing Kodiak?s shipping infrastructure with an electric crane instead of a diesel-powered crane requires KEA to install the two new ABB flywheel energy storage
systems, each with one (1) megawatt (MW) of generating capacity, in order to safely integrate the crane?s electrical load demand onto KEA?s isolated grid. This project allows KEA to
be the energy solution for the communities of Kodiak Island by making it possible to power a critical component of the City with locally generated, clean renewable energy. The versatile
grid?stabilizing flywheel generator would mitigate the sudden increase in electric load caused by the operation of a high?powered electric cargo crane, and would also supplement KEA?s
existing Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) for systemwide electric grid support and conserve water utilized at the hydro facility. By being first?in?line to respond to rapid micro?second
grid frequency fluctuations, the FESS optimizes the range of frequency and voltage support provided by KEA?s other renewable generation, thereby making KEA?s entire grid system more
robust. This project is the next step in advancing KEA?s renewable energy vision for the benefit of all Alaskans by bringing renewable energy to more sectors of Kodiak Island and by
demonstrating a new energy storage technology in Alaska.
The proposed project is a feasibility study of a 3 MW storage hydroelectric project on Jack River near Cantwell. The hydro project?s output would be sold to the local electric utility,
Golden Valley Electric Association, Inc. (GVEA) to reduce GVEA?s reliance on diesel and naptha for generation. Other project configurations with installed capacity ranging from 1.6
to 7.3 MW were identified in the 2013 Reconnaissance Study and may be considered in the feasibility study.
The proposed project is a reconnaissance study of a 1 to 2 MW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Carlo Creek near the Parks Highway approximately 10 miles north of Cantwell. The hydro
project?s output would be sold to the local electric utility, Golden Valley Electric Association, Inc. (GVEA) to reduce GVEA?s reliance on diesel and naptha for generation.
The Chisana Mountain Wind Feasibility Project would consist of installing a single 50 meter meteorological tower (met tower) to record wind velocities, temperature, and humidity to determine
if this site is feasible for a wind turbine installation to generate electricity for the Tok power grid.
This project consists of the installation of a dispatchable electric energy system to supply electric space heat to designated buildings regularly used by the general public of Atka.
The energy to power the system will come from excess electricity available from the recently completed Chuniixsax Creek hydroelectric plant. The existing hydro-electric controls will
be reprogrammed to support the dispatchable system. Each installation will include replacement of the existing electric meter with a duplex meter base to meter dispatched energy separate
from building power; a new dispatchable energy panel and controller; an electric boiler; unit heaters or baseboards; wiring; and hydronic heating connections.
IPEC proposes to conduct a Feasibility Study for the Gunnuk Watershed. In 1977, the Alaska Power Authority identified two potential hydroelectric projects near Kake. The focus was
on the Gunnuk Creek water shed. However, the projects were never pursued due to the relatively low cost of diesel fuel which was less than $1.00 per gallon at that time. Since then
diesel has risen sharply to over $4.00 per gallon making the potential for this hydro project more attractive as a more economical power source for the community.
THREA proposes to conduct a Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design in an effort to further prove the Walker Lake Hydro Project and apply for a FERC license. The Project is expected
to have a 1 megawatt power output, generating 3,615 MWH of energy, using an estimated 780 feet of head and 18 cfs of flow year-round using Walker Lake as a reservoir. Two small earthen
dams will raise the lake elevation from 1,180 ft to 1,195 ft, increasing the reservoir storage capacity to allow for year-round power production. A penstock will run from two small
dam locations and join together to supply an 11,000 ft long buried penstock that terminates at the powerhouse next to Little Salmon River. THREA proposes to work with IPEC to provide
the lowest cost power from the project to benefit of IPEC\'s members in the Chilkat Valley and Klukwan service areas and the Upper Lynn Canal (ULC) grid.
Swan Lake is currently comprised of a concrete arch dam, 174\' high and 430\' long at its crest, which is located approximately 3/4 mile downstream from the mouth of the original Swan
Lake. SEAPA proposes a 15-foot lake raise, and a new reservoir level of 345 feet, raising the crest of the dam to 350 feet. SEAPA would install a 15-foot high Obermeyer gate system
as shown below in the existing spillway to achieve the new maximum normal operating pool level of 345 feet. The intake structure would need to be raised to contain the maximum operating
pool of 345 feet. This would require raising the concrete intake structure, relocating the gate hoist equipment, and increasing the gate lift shaft.
Applicant accepted delivery of a 34-meter meteorological tower (\'Met Tower\') from the Alaska Energy Authority in July 2013 and seeks to conduct a reconnaissance and feasibility analysis
to determine if it is feasible to use wind power to supplement the energy needs and displace diesel for the communities serviced by SEAPA. After the site assessment has determined the
most suitable site for collection of raw wind data, the MET Tower will be installed to gather two (2) years of wind data for a thorough analysis. An analysis of the wind data and a
final report will be performed by a qualified consultant specializing in the field.
This project will install biomass pellet boilers in ten borough buildings; The Haines School and Pool, The Chilkat Center, The Sewer Treatment Plant, The Water Treatment Plant, The Vocational
Education Building, The Library, The old City Shop, The new City Shop, The Public Safety Building and The Sheldon Museum.
A Phase II Feasibility Study would be carried out, including the following tasks
? Project scoping
? Detailed energy resource analysis
? Identification of land and regulatory issues
? Permitting and environmental analysis
? Detail analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets
? Assessment of alternatives
? Conceptual design analysis and cost estimate
? Conceptual business and operations plan
? Final report and recommendations
Currently, all electric power in Edna Bay is provided by private gas or diesel generators. Significant gains in efficiency and reliability would be realized with the installation of
a diesel power plant integrated with a hydroelectric Archimedes type screw driven generator distribution system. The proposed project is a reconnaissance study for the potential of
Survey Creek to provide Hydroelectric power to the community of Edna Bay. In addition, the feasibility of constructing a power plant and distribution system also needs to be evaluated.
Besides private homes, the electric service would also serve businesses (including saw mills, the General Store, and the Post Office), the school, the church, and AP&T?s communication
site.
This project will complete the necessary design and permitting for the recommended hydroelectric project in Chignik Bay, AK. The existing hydro project currently only serves as the community\'s
raw source and transmission and does not produce power for the City. The existing
project is in imminent danger of failing and a replacement dam and pipeline will be required in the near future. This work will fulfill the design and permitting needs of the replacement
project.
Our project will serve four school communities and we intend to use wood biomass and replacing diesel as the energy source by installing wood fired boilers. We anticipate the result
of greatly reduced heating costs for the schools and associated buildings. Thorne Bay School received a grant in 2009 to install two Garn wood fired boiler units, and while the system
has been operating, it has proven too small for the job. The units currently in use, (proto-types), can easily be moved with a forklift, so part of the proposal is to install them at
two other school sites, Whale Pass and Hollis Schools. In order to heat the facility in Thorne Bay which includes a teacher housing unit and a hydroponic greenhouse, the current system
would be replaced with 2 Garn 3200\'s, and a structure built to house the boilers. Very little reconstruction would be necessary in Thorne Bay due to the portability of the current
Garn Pacs. In Whale Pass and Hollis, structures would be built to house the boilers. Wood storage buildings will also be constructed. At Naukati School we would install a wood fired
boiler and build the housing for it as well as for wood storage. The Naukati School is the same size as Howard Valentine School, Coffman Cove, in our district, where we have an operating
Garn system. Naukati will be modeled after the Coffman Cove set-up. Money saved on the fuel costs will be re-invested in the school, resulting in more direct service to our students.
This project involves placing cord wood fired boilers in the schools. The supplemental heating system would be located at the Hydaburg City Schools in Hydaburg, AK on Prince of Wales
Island in Southeast Alaska.
We intend to use wood biomass to heat the school buildings replacing diesel as the energy source. The project involves placing four Garn wood fired boilers adjacent to the school site
and running underground pipes from the wood fired boiler to plumb into the school\'s heating system, four teacher hosing units and a greenhouse.
The Allison Creek Project is a run of the river (ROR) alternative involving construction of a diversion structure on Allison Creek at elevation 1,300 feet. Water will be diverted from
the creek into a 42/36 inch surface / buried penstock to a 6.5 megawatt powerhouse near tidewater.
The wood chip boiler will be centrally located between the four buildings with underground insulated pex pipe running to all four buildings. The pipes will connect to existing boiler
and furnaces through heat exchangers to supply required heat.
Design and construction of an air source heat pump system to displace approximately 95% of the heating oil usage of the expansion and renovation of the 7,752 sq ft Kettleson Memorial
Library at a seasonal efficiency of 220%. The expansion and renovation, which will increase the building to 12,400 sq. ft., will require the replacement of the current constant volume
ventilation system. While the HVAC must be replaced, the base case assumptions include the retaining of the current fuel oil boilers, the use of natural cooling, a conventional variable
air volume ventilation system, and thermal upgrades that would decrease energy consumption by 20% relative to the current structure.
The two air-to-water heat pump units would be situated outdoors and a variable refrigerant flow (VRF) system would pipe refrigerant to the ten indoor fan coils to provide heating or
cooling to the building. Ventilation air would be supplied by energy recovery ventilators that transfer heat from the exhaust or relief air to the fresh air being supplied to each fan
coil unit. The outdoor heat pump assembly would be housed within a louvered enclosure to protect the equipment and lessen noise issues.
Backup heat will be supplied by 360 MBH electric heating coils.
This proposal is a direct result of the attached Renewable Energy Feasibility Analysis, which was completed in July 2012 under a RE Fund Round 3 grant. See Attachment 1.
Design and construction of an effluent heat pump system to displace approximately 95% of the heating oil usage at the Wastewater Treatment Plant on Japonski Island in the City and Borough
of Sitka at a seasonal efficiency of 400%. The existing oil fired boilers have reached the end of their useful life and need to be replaced. The effluent, with an average temperature
nearing 50?F, passes by the boiler room, easing the integration of the heat resource. The effluent from the wastewater treatment plant would pass through an in-line screen prior to
going through a stainless steel plate-and-frame heat exchanger; an antifreeze solution would be heated by the effluent on the other side of the heat exchanger. The refrigerant from
the 868 MBH water-to-water heat pump unit would be heated by the antifreeze solution in the evaporator. Using the vapor compression cycle, the heat pump would then "lift" this heat
to 115?F during the compression cycle, and then transfer that heat to the condenser loop to supply heating appliances. 220 gallons per minute of effluent will be required to provide
sufficient heat to the evaporator under design load conditions. A variable frequency drive on the existing recycled effluent pump will provide the correct flow of effluent to the heat
exchanger under varied heat load conditions. As the Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently designed for 180?F in its heating system, the air handlers, unit heaters, cabinet unit heaters,
and baseboard heaters would need to be replaced to increase the amount of surface area of heating coils to compensate for the 115F temperature hydronic water supplied by the heat pump
system. Backup heat would be supplied by a new 955 MBH fuel oil boiler in conjunction with a storage tank. This proposal is a direct result of the attached Renewable Energy Feasibility
Analysis completed by Alaska Energy Engineering, LLC in July 2012 under a RE Fund Round 3 grant. See Attachment 1.
Design and construction of an air source heat pump system to displace approximately 95% of the heating oil usage of the expansion and renovation of the 19,000 sq ft Harrigan Centennial
Hall at a seasonal efficiency of 220%. The expansion and renovation, which will increase floor space approximately 5,000 sq. ft, will require the replacement of the current ventilation
system. While the HVAC must be replaced, the base case assumptions include the retaining of the current fuel oil boilers, the use of natural cooling supplemented with air-cooled compressor
unit, separate conventional variable air volume ventilation systems for the museum, auditorium, and office units, and thermal upgrades that would decrease energy consumption by 20%
relative to the current structure.
The six air-to-water heat pump units would be situated outdoors and a variable refrigerant flow (VRF) system would pipe refrigerant to the 16 indoor fan coils to provide heating or cooling
to the building. Ventilation air would be supplied by energy recovery ventilators that transfer heat from the exhaust or relief air to the fresh air being supplied to each fan coil
unit. The outdoor heat pump assembly would be housed within a louvered enclosure to protect the equipment and lessen noise issues.
Backup heat would be supplied by electric heating coils with a total capacity of 930 MBH.
This proposal is a direct result of the attached Renewable Energy Feasibility Analysis, which was completed July 2012 under a RE Fund Round 3 grant. See Attachment 1.
This project will consist of engineering and layout, acquiring the machinery and installation of fuel delivery systems and biomass boilers to be integrated into the existing heat system
of the Craig High School and thus eliminate the use of oil for fuel. The system will use dried wood fuel from the AEA funded dryer at Viking Lumber and benefit Viking by expanding the
market base for dry wood fuel. The installed boilers would heat the 52,219 square foot high school using wood chips generated by operations at a local lumber mill. Feedstock for the
mill and the resulting wood chips comes from timber logged from the nearby Tongass National Forest, Southeast Alaska State Forest, Alaska Native Corporation lands and other private
lands. The project is similar in scope for the Craig Wood Fired Boiler and will share an existing contract to provide wood chips for the boiler. A Preliminary Feasibility Assessment
for Conversion from Fossil Fuel Oil to Wood Heating for the Craig High School, Craig, Alaska was prepared for the Craig city School District by Robert Deering, Biomass Program Manager,
USDA Forest Service, Tongass National Forest. A Copy of the study is attached to this application. An Energy Audit has been completed for the facility and is attached to this application.
The ?Pre-Feasibility Assessment for Integration of Wood-Fired Heating Systems Final Report? dated July 24, 2012 states that, ?Connecting the school with several nearby buildings with
a wood fired district heating system appears to be an economically viable project.? (p. 2 of 13) The buildings for the City of Nenana include the Water Plant and the Fire Department.
The building included for the Nenana Native Council is the Youth Educational Resource Center (YERC), which houses the Early Learning, Head Start, and Youth Center programs. The school
district buildings included in the project are the Nenana City Public School, the Administration Building, the Warehouse/Vocational Education Building, and the Nenana Student Living
Center. Though the Nenana Student Living Center is located approximately six blocks from the Nenana City Public School, the ?Pre-Feasibility Assessment? states, ?The additional energy
saved by connecting several buildings together offsets the significant additional cost of underground piping and pumping costs. . . . Even with the significant piping costs, the extra
pumping energy, and the extra wood fuel needed to offset the heat loss of the long pipe runs, this option remains the strongest relative to other options.? (p. 2 & 3 of 13)
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water system. The fuel oil savings to the community water plant is projected to be 1 ,900 gallons
of heating oil per year.
For more detailed information, see the attached Chuathbaluk, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
The City & Borough of Juneau is proposing the design and construction of a geothermal HVAC system to serve the heating and cooling needs at the new Mendenhall Valley Library (formerly
called the Dimond Park Library in prior AEA grant request). The community of Juneau recently received a $7 million grant from Alaska Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
to construct the new library in Juneau?s Mendenhall Valley. The City & Borough of Juneau Assembly is interested in reducing the carbon footprint of Juneau and reducing the operating
costs of their facilities. The use of a geothermal HVAC system rather than traditional oil-fired boilers and chillers provides an opportunity to achieve both goals of the City & Borough
of Juneau and to expand the use of renewable energy in city facilities.
The Cooperative faces an urgent need to stabilize and lower the cost of electricity to consumers. Improving fuel efficiency in its diesel generation facility NEA will install two highly
efficient waste heat to power (WH2P) systems onto existing diesel-fueled reciprocating engines to increase efficiency and reduce costs. The selected WH2P systems utilize supercritical
carbon dioxide (sCO2) as the working fluid for converting stack heat to electrical power without additional fuel consumption or emissions. The stack heat to power project is scheduled
for completion fifteen (15) months from the authorization to proceed date, and the proposed budget supports all design, fabrication, installation, commissioning, training, management,
and reporting tasks for a $1.94 million investment.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant/washeteria. The estimated fuel oil savings to the community water plant and
washeteria is projected to be 6,600 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached, updated Tuntutuliak, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility
Study.
Karluk is located on the west cost of Kodiak Island in Alaska. The village is cut-off from any road system. Fuel oil has to be shipped by barge to Karluk. Therefore, it is a high energy
cost village with fuel oil at 4.92 $/gal. This project will perform a feasibility study and complete the design & permitting for a wind energy system and a heat recovery system to serve
the existing power plant in Karluk, Alaska. For the wind energy system, wind data from a meteorological monitoring tower already installed at the proposed wind turbine location will
be available for the analysis and design. The wind energy systems would consist of wind turbines installed on the mountain 0. 7 miles south of the existing power plant, the transmission
line to the power plant, and the electric boiler for excess energy utilization. The heat recovery system would consist of upgrading the existing power plant generators with waste heat
recovery units and installing a total length of up to 100011 hydronic heating loop to connect the power plant with the community buildings.
The 9.6MW Mahoney Lake hydroelectric project (FERC License P-11393) will provide Ketchikan and SEAPA-region residents and businesses with 41,743,000 KWH (41.7 GWH) of renewable hydropower
per annum, allowing for continued economic and community growth while displacing use of diesel fuel. Approximately 17,900,000 KWH (17.9 GWH) of power is available between November and
April as winter storage. The most recent (June, 2012) cost estimate for the project is $46,000,000 +/- 20%, making the Mahoney Lake hydroelectric project one of southeast Alaska?s most
affordable options for new hydropower. This alpine lake tap project does not require construction of a dam. This application proposes State participation in the project through grant-funded
cost-sharing in remaining Phase III Final Design and Permitting tasks, and initial IV construction tasks, which will help assure the Mahoney Lake can be constructed in a manner which
benefits the Alaskan public, and provides the additional benefits of supporting new economic growth and job creation.
The proposed project would demonstrate a prototype hydrokinetic turbine through installation of a 100 kW Poncelet Kinetics? turbine. The project will prove the design concepts employed
for debris management, environmental impact, shallow water power generation, and electrical efficiency of the proposed design. The technology proposed to be used was developed by Whitestone
Power and Communications under the trademark Poncelet Kinetics. The project is shovel-ready with all permits and design documents in hand.
This project expands on a previous Feasibility study that has been ongoing for 3 years. In 2010 a Single 175W Solar Array was installed at the proposed location to see if Solar PV would
be feasible for the Northwest Arctic. The panel has been facing south-east and is connected to a single En phase inverter that is Cogenerating with the Kotzebue Electric Association
(KEA) grid. It was found that it produced 165 Kwh during 1 year average @ $ 0.54/Kwh this equals a savings of $ 89.10/year. A build-out of the array to 10 Kw would save the Northwest
Arctic Borough approximately $5,091.66/year in electric bills. This would also be a good match as the Borough operate mainly day time, when the sun is available. The project aims to
match the load of the building and offset just enough energy to try to get to stop the electric meter, this is important as we do not want to be paid for any generated electricity by
the KEA Coop. The project would consist of 42 pc. 240 watt panel, for a total of 10 KWatts configured on the roof of the building in a configuration to match the load of the building.
It would be a "fixed" array, non tracking. It would also be configured in 2 directions, southeast and south, to match the electric needs of the building, so not to overproduce with
one large peak power during the day. Each individual panel will have it\'s own Aurora micro-inverter. The entire array will be displayed and monitored on a website that can be accessed
for educational purposes.
This project will involve exploration and research regarding installation of transmission lines between the communities shown in Table 2.2.1 in the Nuvista region. Some of the communities
have wind turbines and all communities have diesel power plants. The final report will present a plan for connecting communities into small power grids to increase efficiency and reliability.
This project is a feasibility study to evaluate the potential wind resource in Noatak
This proposal will focus on a feasibility assessment and conceptual design for a wood heating system and district heating loop for an office building and lodge owned by the Organized
Village of Kake (OVK), a federally recognized tribe. The overall goal of the feasibility study is to determine what kind of wood heating system will best meet the objective of the tribe?s
energy planning targets which are to: reduce the cost of energy, reduce the environmental impacts of energy consumption, explore locally sourced sustainable energy supplies and to provide
energy related job opportunities. The assessment will expand on previous reconnaissance work performed by Dan Parrent in 2008 (Preliminary Feasibility Assessments for High Efficiency
Low Emission Wood Heating in Kake, Alaska) for the Kake School and Community building and provide an analysis of the economic and social benefits of high efficiency low emission cordwood/multifuel
systems (e.g. Garn and Wood Master) versus pellet systems for the two tribal buildings. The scope of the feasibility study will include assessing the suitability and economics of various
wood boiler systems including storage and delivery infrastructure, comparing the costs of locally sourced cord-wood and imported bulk fuel, conducting a thorough resource inventory
for local cord-wood production and evaluating and comparing the potential of locally sourced wood and imported pellets to create jobs. This feasibility study will also include collaboration
with efforts of the Renewable Energy Alaska Project to determine how, if at all, efficiency measures may decrease the OVK campus energy loads and influence the final system design,
as well as to what degree switching to biomass heating may help to recirculate money back into the community that would otherwise be spent on imported fuel oil. The outcome of the feasibility
study will be a conceptual design and final system recommendation based on the economic, logistical, environmental and social objectives of the community. The state recently released
a regional energy plan (Southeast Integrated Resource Plan) that recommends significant conversions from fuel oil to wood based heat. The tribe also recognizes the potential of wood
based heat to support a sustainable community energy portfolio by offsetting imported fuel oil with renewables, reducing costs, creating local job opportunities and aiding in forest
health. The tribe has identified wood heating as one of four energy priorities in its Community Economic Development Strategy Plan (CEDS updated 2012) and during its ongoing energy
planning process as part of DOE?s START (Strategic Technical Assistance Response Team) program. In addition, the tribe has taken a significant leadership role in the community on energy
issues and biomass specifically, and in June 2012 invited a number of technical experts to educate the community on the types of technologies available and lessons learned from projects
throughout the state. The information resulting from this feasibility study will be a significant contribution in the community?s energy planning and project efforts.
Mentasta?s predicament, as is the case for most of rural Alaska, is its dependence on imported expensive petroleum for space heating of community facilities. Mentasta?s community facilities
are centrally located and can be serviced by one woody biomass heating plant strategically located adjacent to Mentasta?s clustered public facilities (see Map - Attachment II). The
project is estimated to cost $460,000 of Round VI funds and donated building space with estimated value of $50,000 and will serve the school, teen center, clinic and tribal offices/post
office building and are expected to displace approximately 22,000 gallons of heating oil.
The Tanana Solar Public Facilities Heating Project seeks to implement the market transformative benefits of combining biomass space heating technologies currently being installed at
Tanana?s public facilities with solar thermal collectors. This Round 6 Renewable Energy Fund application has been revised since its original submission during Round 5 and limit solar
thermal application to best ?low hanging fruit at Tanana which is the large domestic hot water demand at the Tanana Tribal Elders Residential complex and the City?s Senior housing four-plex.
The synergistic benefits of the village existing biomass thermal storage capacity with solar thermal collectors will serve to result in reduced imported petroleum consumption and also
serve to optimize operation of the biomass boilers currently being installed at Tanana.
Heat energy is, by far, the greatest financial burden facing Alaskans, and particularly those in rural Alaska. It is also the most critical as heat during Alaska?s extreme winters is
a matter of survival. Many rural communities in Alaska are moving in the direction of biomass as an alternative to fuel oil for heat energy generation. Tanana has become a model in
Alaska for demonstrating the effective use of renewable energy to reducing heat energy operational costs. Tanana was one of the first villages in Alaska to incorporate the use of GARN
biomass boilers for offsetting the high expense of fuel oil for generating hot water in the community washeteria. In 2011, as a part of a major biomass expansion project, systems are
being installed in numerous commercial and residential scale buildings.
Solar thermal is an excellent complement to the biomass boilers. During the winter months the heat energy generated by the biomass boilers offsets a substantial amount of the fuel oil
normally required. The cordwood fuel source also allows many of the operating costs to remain in the community since the supply of the cordwood and manpower required to feed and boilers
is local. During the summer the biomass boilers are a less desirable alternative. The focus and energies of the community are diverted to essential traditional cultural activities.
The solar thermal, which is a passive heat energy source that can operate largely unattended, allows those activities to continue uninterrupted. Thus it is an excellent companion to
the biomass and can contribute substantially to the heat energy requirement for at least nine months of the year. The combination of the two heat energy sources virtually eliminates
the dependency on fuel oil as the heat energy source.
While used extensively throughout other parts of the U.S. and the world for years, the use of solar thermal technology as an alternative to fuel oil is relatively new. Equally new to
Alaska is the concept of solar thermal in conjunction with the biomass systems. The City believes that the integration of solar thermal is essential to the continued development and
expansion of the biomass program in Alaska. The resulting combination system is more compatible with the life styles and cultural activities of people in rural Alaska, further reduces
the ongoing operational costs of the heat energy system, and reduces the long term impact on the area biomass resource due to the system operation.
For this project, the City of Tanana has selected two buildings in Tanana that have biomass systems ? the tribal elders complex and City?s senior residential four-plex housing unit.
This mix represents a good cross section of multi-residentially oriented systems where domestic hot water usage is very high. Due to the highly variable temperatures found in the biomass
systems, the City has selected indirect, glycol based fltaplate collectors with variable speed circulation pumps and supplemental heat storage tanks for the solar thermal systems. In
the City?s senior housing 4 -plex, the integral storage of the GARN boiler will be utilized. In the tribal elder housing complex, that is utilizing Econoburn gasification boilers with
limited internal storage capacity, supplemental storage tanks will be installed in conjunction with the solar thermal.
1. Solar PV Installation This project will consist of a 50 kW (DC) ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV) system, to be installed next to the school building. The PV system will generate clean,
renewable power for decades to come, reducing the amount of electricity the school buys from the local utility and reducing pollution associated with burning fossil fuels. The system
will also provide an opportunity for the school\'s students and the wider community to learn about PV. The system will be composed of (185) 270-watt photovoltaic (PV) collector panels,
(1) 50 kW DC to AC power inverter and a data acquisition system with a graphical display inside the building and accessible through the Internet. The panels will be wired in multiple
DC series circuits called strings. The strings will be wired to a combiner box, then connect to the power inverter which transforms the DC power into AC power suitable for use by the
building\'s existing electrical system. The inverter assures that the PV generated power is compatible with the power supplied by the utility grid and will disconnect from the electrical
system in the event of a utility power outage to prevent "back feed" to the utility grid. The proposed system is sized to supplement current electric usage and peak demand only, as
it will not store power. The proposed system will be interconnected with the electrical system and controlled to "follow" the existing systems\' electrical characteristics. A dedicated
data acquisition system tied directly to the inverter will display the performance of the PV system and describe how it works through a dedicated live display setup in the lobby. A
revenue grade utility meter will also be installed on the PV system to accurately measure the power generated. The existing electric systems supply 208-volt, three phase power for larger
loads and 120-volt, single-phase for most of the distributed loads from a three phase service provided by NEA. The average monthly electric demand for the school is approximately 137
kW.
2. Heat Recovery from Exhaust Air Sensible heat-recovery systems that transfer sensible (dry-bulb) heat from the exhaust air to the supply air entering the building are proposed to be
installed for the fresh air supply air handling units using cross flow heat exchangers. This system transfers energy through a crossover grid or through plate heat exchangers made of
metal or plastic. Warm air passing between the plates transfers its energy by conduction through the material to another grid or plate where the air is warmed. The plates form alternating
exhaust and ventilation air pathways. Efficiencies (also referred to as effectiveness) of these systems vary from around 60% to 70%. It is proposed to install flat plate heat recovery
units for (7) fresh-air units, to pre-heat roughly 12,000 cfm of fresh air with the exhaust air from the space. The HR units would be tied to existing building management system to
ensure proper functioning and provide visibility to building operator.
This project is to perform a feasibility study, including a conceptual design, to assess the viability of a WtE plant. Other than some recyclable materials, municipal solid waste (MSW)
in Anchorage is largely disposed of in the municipal landfilL The quantity of refuse currently being disposed of in this manner is approximately 375,000 tons per year. There may also
be an opportunity to incorporate other fuel, such as wood being disposed of in local woodlots. WtE plants, while somewhat rare in the U.S., are very popular, efficient and environmentally
effective in many European and Asian countries. If feasible, a WtE plant would be expected to provide energy, environmental, reliability, economic and community benefits.
Replace diesel generation of electricity for the community of Tenakee Springs with renewable hydroelectric power. The City of Tenakee Springs proposes to construct a hydroelectric project
on Indian River. This will be a 180 kW low head, run-of-river plant displacing the use of 31,400 gallons of diesel fuel annually, or 90% of annual electric utility diesel consumption.
At least 6,500 additional gallons of fuel oil can be displaced by heating public buildings with excess energy from the hydro project.
Cantwell is currently served by GVEA via the power transmission line between MEA and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and
lower the cost of the community of Cantwell?s power system. To accomplish this we propose to study a run-of-river hydroelectric project on Carlo Creek, approximately 10 miles north
of Cantwell along the Parks Highway.
The proposed project is an approximately 150 kW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Knutson Creek near Pedro Bay. The hydro project will provide most of the electricity needs of the
village, as well as providing a significant amount of interruptible energy to heat the tribal council building, church, school, and potentially other buildings.
The proposed project is a run-of-river hydroelectric project located on private property along Juniper Creek in the Eagle River Valley, approximately 10 miles from Eagle River, Alaska.
The proposed project would include an intake / diversion structure at approximately the 1900-foot elevation and powerhouse at the 1500-foot elevation. The design flow is estimated at
10 to 20 cfs, for an estimated installed capacity of 250 to 500 kW. Participation of adjacent downstream property owners would increase the head available for the project from 400 feet
to either 900 feet or 1,100 feet if one or two adjacent land owners were to participate. This would increase installed capacity to as much as 1,300 kW. Ram Valley expects to determine
the participation status of these land owners prior to the start of the feasibility study.
APC proposes to construct a small run-of-river hydroelectric project at Neck Lake, a 1,000 acre lake located 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island.
The Project would supply power to the community of Whale Pass, and would offset diesel generation, which is currently the sole source of electricity. The relatively high and modulated
flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end of the outlet stream provide a good opportunity for a small run-of-river hydroelectric development. Facilities would
include an access road, intake structure, 400 feet of penstock, a containerized power plant, a tailrace channel, and upgrade of 4 miles of transmission line. The hydroelectric facilities
will be designed to avoid interference with the existing salmon rearing and collection facilities operated at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA).
APC conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2008, and determined that there is sufficient potential to almost always provide enough generation for Whale Pass loads (see Section
11 for a copy of the reconnaissance report). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for APC?s Whale Pass customers.
The AEA Energy Pathway 2010 indicates hot springs located on Elim Native Corporation land surrounding Elim are potential energy sources, but only comprehensive analysis can determine
how, and under what conditions, geothermal energy might be viable. The City of Elim, the Native Village of Elim, Elim Native Corporation, and the University of Alaska Fairbanks propose
a Resource Assessment (Reconnaissance} I Feasibility Analysis of Elim geothermal sites. It will use low cost airborne and ground-based reconnaissance and mapping techniques to develop
a conceptual model. Feasibility, cost analysis, and design of viable solutions will follow.
This project is a feasibility study to evaluate the potential wind resource in Akiak.
This project will conduct the much delayed follow up on the Wescott report. In 1985 Wescott and Turner study published the results of their geothermal investigations in the Copper Basin
during the 1982 field season. They recommended that additional detailed gravity and self-potential data be taken at the confluence of the Tazlina where a high helium anomaly was located.
In addition they also recommended self-potential surveys in two other anomaly areas and one area was recommended as a prime drilling target.1 We are requesting funds to do further reconnaissance
by completing the recommended studies using modern tools and efficiencies as well as compiling other research and exploration that has been done since 1985 in the Eastern Copper Basin
Kipnuk Light Plant is proposing to complete the final design, permitting and construction of a community wind diesel system for the community of Kipnuk, Alaska. The project will be owned
and operated by the Kipnuk Light Plant and the community of Kipnuk. Construction of the wind plant will be conducted in conjunction with the construction of a new school, powerplant
and bulk fuel facility in the community. The new school is currently under construction and is anticipated to completed in late 2013, early 2014. Funding has been received for a new
diesel powerplant and bulk fuel storage facility. The new powerplant construction will take place in the winter of 2014. The wind project would be completed at the same time. The design
of the wind system has been completed and is straightforward, in that is similar to the systems which have been installed in Kongiganak, Kwigillingok and Tuntutuliak. The only design
elements remaining to be completed, are: the installation and wiring diagrams for the specific installation of the load balancing boiler, system master control, communications gateways
and static var compensation in the new powerplant. These design elements will be conducted concurrently with the design and construction of the new diesel powerhouse.
Nelson Lagoon requests funding for this wind study as the first step towards supplementing the high cost of diesel generators currently in use. The wind study will result in a feasibility
report on the technical, economic, financial, and operational viability and guidance of implementing the next three phases of a wind energy system. The grant would be managed by the
Aleutian East Borough and calls for the solicitation off a contractor to perform the analysis and a community meeting with the contractor for presentation, review and discussion of
the results Participants in the project will include:
1. Nelson Lagoon Electrical Cooperative (owned by the Native Village of Nelson Lagoon)
2. Aleutians East Borough who will provide overall project management
3. A contractor firm who will provide civil and electrical system engineering.
False Pass currently produces all their electricity from diesel generators and heating from burning fossil fuels. Data from a met tower set up several years ago was compromised and has
data gaps when bears damaged the equipment, but the data still may be useful if analyzed using appropriate assumptions and software. The wind resource may prove to be good, but we won\'t
know until the data is analyzed and a wind resource report is completed. In addition, an avian study will determine if birds will be of concern and/or if mitigation measures are necessary.
This project seeks design and permitting for the False Pass wind project. The design and permitting phase will include project scoping and community solicitation for planning and design,
permit applications and acceptance, final environmental assessments and mitigation plans, resolution of land rights and right of way, final system design, engineers cot estimate, updated
economic and financial analysis, and final business plan and operational plans.
Cold Bay requests funding for this waste heat recovery study as a step towards supplementing the high cost of diesel generators currently in use. The waste heat recovery study and will
satisfy Phases I, Reconnaissance and Phase II, Feasibility, and the study will result in a feasibility report on the technical, economic, financial and operational viability and guidelines
of implementing the next three phases of a waste heat recovery system. The grant would be managed by the Aleutians East Borough and calls for the solicitation of a contractor to perform
the analysis and a community meeting with the contractor for presentation, review and discussion of the results. Participants in the project will include:
1. G&K Electric Utility
2. Aleutians East Borough who will provide overall project management.
3. A contracted firm who will provide civil and electrical system engineering.
By the end of 2011, the high development costs of the Kokhanok wind-diesel project drove Sustainable Automation out of business. Sustainable Power Systems LLC was subsequently formed
to pursue new business opportunities in the field of renewable energy systems integration. Given adequate funding, Sustainable Power Systems is ready and willing to take on the task
of completing the remaining system development and commissioning work that will be required to make the Kokhanok project a success. What remains to be done at this point is to complete
the development, testing, and commissioning of the software for the Hybrid System Supervisory Controller, the component that monitors and orchestrates the operation of all other system
components. Specifically, the following functions remain to be fully implemented:
? Automatic diesel dispatch
? Automatic inverter dispatch
? Automatic feeder control
? Data logging to a local database
? Fault logs for each component
? Data log exporting
? Automatic report generation
? Fault notification
? Public portal
Much of the remaining work can be accomplished in the Sustainable Power Systems offices and power lab in Boulder, Colorado. However, because they represent major changes to the system
operation, the automatic dispatch algorithms in particular will require on-site installation and testing as part of a final commissioning process. To be able to undertake this work
and continue to pay its staff, Sustainable Power Systems requires an immediate source of funds. The company is therefore requesting that 50% of the grant amount be paid up front, with
the remaining 50% of each task invoiced increments as each task is completed.
Project funds will be used to design, purchase and install six wood pellet boilers and storage silos at the following Borough-owned buildings: sewage treatment plant, human resources
I preschool building, Haines Borough School District vocational education building (also referred to in this application as voc-tec building), swimming pool, Borough administrative
offices, and visitor center.
A Phase II Feasibility Study would be carried out, including the following tasks:
>Project scoping
>Detailed energy resource analysis
>Identification of land and regulatory issues
>Permitting and environmental analysis
>Detail analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets
>Assessment of alternatives
>Conceptual design analysis and cost estimate.
>Conceptual business and operations plan
>Final report and recommendations.
Mount Makushin geothermal energy potential has been discussed and evaluated by the State of Alaska and others for the last twenty or so years. An exploratory drilling program, funded
by the Department of Energy in the early 1980s made the determination that the Makushin geothermal resource is the only proven high temperature geothermal system in Alaska that could
be used for power generation. While the data has been encouraging there has not been a sustained effort to develop the resource beyond its current status since 1995 when the design
and permitting reports were completed for a 12MW power plant for which the financing was approved by the Alaska State legislature. This grant will help the Aleut Corporation re-characterize
the Makushin resource and develop the preliminary design of a production facility with the intention of building and operating a geothermal plant on Unalaska for the benefit of the
Island. The cost elements in this grant are based on a 30MW plant ? which we expect to be the maximum size project (likely project size range 10-30 MW). During this phase we will evaluate
all options and determine the optimum size of the project as well as the optimal location of the steam field and other facilities.
The Manokotak Wind & Heat Feasibility Project proposes a further look at the viability of wind to produce electricity for residential and non-residential uses. A 2009 wind resource report
written by V3 Energy, LLC indicates a mid-Class 2 (marginal) resource, but given the position of the community in relation to nearby elevation (for a higher wind class) and an old landing
strip (for a solid foundation) a further look is warranted. The project proposes using the Wind Atlas Analysis and Application Program (WAsP), a software application from Denmark, to
further analyze the current met tower data and investigate options for the installation of 3-4 small met towers for additional resource data collection and analysis. The end result
would be a conceptual design report in compliance with the Alaska Wind Program Guidelines for Conceptual Design Reports that includes in broad categories a wind resource analysis, electrical
system overview, and heat load overview.
This project seeks funding for completion of a reconnaissance and feasibility study for wind generated energy in Atka. The study will analyze whether wind power used in combination with
the recently completed Chunixsax Creek Hydro-Electric project and diesel generated power can provide additional power needed to support electric heat to the entire Atka community and
a planned expansion of Atka Pride Seafoods (APS) to a year-round processing operation with increased energy needs. Atka Pride Seafoods is a subsidiary of the Aleutian/Pribilof Community
Development Association(APICDA) and is partially owned by the community of Atka. The ultimate goal is to meet 90% or more of Atka energy needs using renewable energy sources.
ORPC Alaska 2, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC, (collectively, ORPC), is a global leader in the development of hydrokinetic power systems and ecoconscious
projects that harness the power of ocean and river currents to create clean, predictable renewable energy. ORPC works in partnership with coastal and river communities to create and
sustain local jobs while promoting energy independence and protecting the environment. Its technology includes the proprietary TidGen? Power System, which includes one or more TidGen?
devices connected to an on-shore station with power and data cables. In ORPC?s TidGen? Array Project, ORPC will install a four-device TidGen? Power System in Cook Inlet with a rated
generating capacity of 600 kW in a 6- knot current. ORPC?s REF Round 4 grant (award document signed) will help fund the first device of what eventually will be a four device TidGen?
Power System. REF Round 6 funding will help fund the TidGen? Array Project to expand to a four-device system by adding an array of three TidGen? devices.
The Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) proposes the installation of a wood pellet boiler at the Ticasuk Brown Elementary School. Phase 1 of this project is currently underway through
an AEA managed grant agreement with the FNSB. The $550,000, funding for Phase 1 of this project was provided by the 2012 Legislature through a DCCED grant to AEA. This proposed project,
or Phase 2 of this project, will be comprised of: 1) Modular pellet boiler unit anchored to concrete sleepers, 2) heat loop to existing school boiler room. The boiler room is to be
equipped with new heat exchanger for heat transfer to school system, including heat exchanger, manifolding, controls and re-circulating pump, 3) connection of electrical service from
a panel in the existing boiler room, assuming required electrical capacity is available and 4) install pellet silo and auger system for pellet fuel storage and fuel supply stream. To
ensure project continuity, the FNSB proposes this final phase of the project also be an AEA Managed Project.
Wrangell has recently experienced an unprecedented increase in our electrical distribution load. The increase is a result of customers removing their expensive diesel fuel burning heating
systems and replacing them with lower cost (hydro) electric units. During the 2011/2012 winter season Wrangell bad a record peak load demand of 9.5 MW. Currently the Wrangell Power
Plant is capable of producing 8 MV A. If there were a catastrophic event that disrupted Wrangell\'s hydroelectric power supply from Tyee, such as the landslide that affected the Juneau
area in January of 2009, our standby generators could not supply electricity to all of our customers. Preliminary indications are that Wrangell must install an additional standby generator.
This project will evaluate, recommend, design and install the upgrades needed at the Wrangell Power Plant that will insure our ability to continue to support all of our customers and
their renewable energy choices.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Shishmaref. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower, geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a reconnaissance-level geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual
design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. This project will also consider other turbines that can be relocated, if the
village decides to move to another location.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Goodnews Bay. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be
created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control will be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is seeking $5,581,800 from this Grant Program to construct an electrical intertie between the communities of St. Mary?s and Pilot Station,
the total cost of which is $6,202,000. AVEC will contribute $625,000 cash as its match. The intertie will be designed with 14 miles of new connection through undeveloped terrain. The
completed design work-to-date indicates the three-phase electrical intertie will require two river crossings and six slough/lake crossings, must be constructed in winter months, and
will need pole spacing of 185 feet. Completed design work on the intertie is included in Tab F. At present, St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point are connected by a distribution power line,
but Pilot Station is a stand-alone, diesel-powered community. This project would connect the electric system of Pilot Station to the St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point system. Standby generation
capability will be provided with a new standby generation module in Pilot Station, but primary generation will be delivered by the existing St. Mary?s power plant and an EWT wind turbine.
Another Round 6 Renewable Energy Grant Program application requests funding to build a wind energy system for the intertied communities of St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point. This project
will add Pilot Station, about eleven miles from St. Mary?s, to that proposed wind system.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is seeking $332,500 from this Grant Program to (final) design and permit an electrical intertie between the communities of St. Mary?s
and Mountain Village. AVEC will contribute $17,500 as a cash match. The intertie will be designed with fourteen (14) miles of new connection along the existing gravel road that connects
the two communities and will require an upgrade from single-phase to three-phase of an existing eight (8) miles. The conceptual design work indicates the intertie will not require any
water crossings; it can be constructed in summer months and will need pole spacing of 125 feet. At present, St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point are connected by a distribution power line,
but Mountain Village is a stand-alone diesel powered community. This project would electrically intertie Mountain Village to the St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point system. Standby generation
capability will be maintained in Mountain Village but primary generation will be delivered by the existing St. Mary?s power plant. AVEC has submitted another Round 6 Renewable Energy
Grant Program application to build a wind energy system for the intertied communities of St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point. This project will add Mountain Village, about 20 miles from St.
Mary?s, to that wind system.
The Northwest Arctic Borough is very large and the communities are small and isolated. Typically larger transmission systems have not been possible due to challenging construction and
steep economics. Constructing an intertie is a large capital investment. The intertie between Noorvik, Kiana, and Selawik would intertie three AVEC utilities and would be over 50 miles
in length. The construction of an intertie could reduce the cost of energy in the community by equalizing the cost of diesel to that of the community with the cheapest fuel: in this
case, Noorvik. Additionally, an intertie would provide generation support and increased reliabi lity for the overall electrical system. The construction of an intertie would also allow
for installation of distributed generation at the most ideal location, in this case Hotham Peak which, through observations and modeling, has a superb wind resource. A greater wind
resource provides the opportunity for installation of larger scale wind turbines. According to modeling completed in the 2012 Noorvik Wind-Diesel Conceptual Draft Report, the most ideal
location for a larger turbine would be on the southwest slope of Hotham Ridge, between Noorvik and Selawik.
The Northwest Arctic Borough is very large and the communities are small and isolated. Typically larger transmission systems have not been possible due to challenging construction and
steep economics. Constructing an intertie is a large capital investment but can reap significant benefits in the form of reduced energy costs. This proposed project will include the
completion of a Wind Resource Assessment in Cosmos Hills near Wesley Creek. The placement of the met tower will be north of Shungnak approximately five miles. In order to fully reap
the benefits of wind energy in the Upper Kobuk region, and to reduce the cost of electricity for those communities, an intertie between Ambler and Shungnak will also be evaluated. All
three communities are members of Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) who has completed other similar studies for greater community benefit. AVEC has installed numerous interties
between communities, some with wind turbine generators, and has been able to successfully reduce the cost of power.
Building on the results of the already completed wind resource (V3 Energy LLC), economic modeling (Northern Economics, Inc.) and conceptual design reports (HDL Engineering Consultants),
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is proposing to complete the final design and permitting to install one EWT 900 wind turbine to supplement the existing diesel-fired
power generation systems in St. Michael and Stebbins. Work under this grant would also be expended to design necessary wind integration controls for the power generation system at the
new power plant in Stebbins. AVEC has completed the final design and obtained permits for the intertie between St. Michael and Stebbins. Once work done under this grant is completed,
AVEC could seek funding to construct the turbines and an intertie to serve both communities.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Russian Mission. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be
created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control will be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Kotlik. The work will involve obtaining
a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location, studying
the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created
based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control will be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
AVEC proposes to install two wind meteorological (met) towers and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Wales in order to get a better
understanding of the good wind regime in Wales. The work will involve obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met towers and geotechnical fieldwork,
permitting, transporting and installing met towers at two locations, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions
and needed engineering at the sites. A conceptual design at one site will be created based on the outcome of the met towers? recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site
control will be obtained for the project.
Building on the results of the already completed Concept Design Report (attached in Tab F), Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is proposing to complete the final design
and permitting to install two Northern Power Systems Northern Power 100 ARCTIC turbines for a 200 kilowatt (kW) installed wind capacity, to the existing diesel power generation system
in Marshall. Once work done under this grant is completed, AVEC would seek funding to construct the turbines.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is seeking $585,000 from this Grant Program to add a solar energy component to the existing diesel power generation system that serves
two communities. It will construct a new 50kW array of 288 Photovoltaic (PV) modules in Shungnak, Alaska. The array will be inclined at 34 degrees from May through September, and 90
degrees the remainder of the year to take advantage of the solar angle at this northerly location, and would serve Shungnak and Kobuk via an existing electrical intertie. The annual
power production of the array is estimated to be approximately 44,623 kWh (with shading). The solar array will be located on a lot just northwest of the existing Shungnak power plant
which has been committed to AVEC for this use. Total project cost is $650,000 and AVEC is prepared to match grant funds with $65,000.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is seeking $5,538,592 from this Grant Program to add a wind energy component to the existing diesel power generation system that presently
serves St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point. The project will construct one 900 kW EWT turbine at a location 2.5 miles from St. Mary?s and 1 miles east of Pitka?s Point, and will connect it
to the existing power generation system. The EWT is expected to produce 2,717,000 kWh annually at 80% turbine availability. This project would also involve upgrading the existing power
line between St. Mary?s and the new wind turbine site from 2-phase to 3-phase. The total estimated project cost is $6,153,991 with AVEC contributing $615,399 as its match. This project,
using previously awarded REF funds, is currently under design. Geotechnical work has been completed and permit applications have been submitted. The FAA approval has been obtained.
Permits are expected to be in hand by December 2012. Final design will be completed by the end of 2012.
This project includes upgrades to the AVEC power plant cooling system, installation of heat exchangers at the AVEC plant and school boiler module with appropriate pumps and controls
at both sites and 700 feet of underground piping between the plant and school boiler module.
Organic Incineration Technology (OIT) incinerates non-hazardous petroleum contaminated soils, absorbent pads and sludges generated by Alaskan industries in a regulated, environmentally
safe facility in Moose Creek, AK. The waste treatment process generates a substantial amount of energy which is currently exhausted and therefore wasted. Through the installation of
a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG), a steam turbine generator system and condenser, OIT intends to capture the waste heat from the existing incineration process and turn that energy
into electricity to be used on-site and placed onto the grid for use by the surrounding community. Through the implementation of this system, OIT would be utilizing an existing energy
resource to reduce the community?s dependence on traditional utility power sources fueled by the burning of fuel oil.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant/washeteria. The estimated fuel oil savings to the community water plant and
washeteria is projected to be 6,000 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached Tuntutuliak, Alaska 2012 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant. The estimated fuel oil savings to the community water plant is projected to
be 18,600 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached Noorvik, Alaska 2012 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant and village store. The estimated fuel oil savings to these two facilities is
projected to be 7,700 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached Marshall, Alaska 2012 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide recovered heat from the new AVEC power plant to the new water treatment plant {WTP}, existing WTP, washeteria, clinic, Head Start Building, and school. The
estimated fuel reduction for the six buildings combined is estimated to be 57,000 gallons a year with an expected savings of $240,000 annually.
The purpose of this project is to further investigate the known geothermal resource at Tenakee Inlet and evaluate its potential to produce power and to evaluate alternative uses of the
source. Hot springs encountered during our reconnaissance study have the highest recorded surface temperature (176? F) of any of the numerous geothermal springs tested on Chichagof
Island. The reconnaissance study has indicated a viable resource with fluids having encountered subsurface temperatures of 260? F, and that the resource is larger in size than originally
anticipated. We request funding for a feasibility study and conceptual design project with a timeline of approximately 28 months. We are currently completing a reconnaissance study
that included mapping, remote sensing, and geochemical sampling of water and soils. A paper presented at the Geothermal Resource Council in October 2012 is attached. We also submitted
a draft interim report to AEA in December 2011 with all of the data collected at that point. We propose for this feasibility study to continue our investigations by advancing one to
two slim drill holes, conducting a feasibility analysis and developing a conceptual design of how best to develop the resource. Future work would include production level drilling,
permitting, and power plant and infrastructure construction.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the washeteria and combined utility building. The estimated fuel oil savings to the combined utility
building and washeteria is projected to be 14,200 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached Quinhagak, Alaska 2012 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water system. The estimated fuel oil savings to the community water plant is projected to be 1 ,400
gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached Chuathbaluk, Alaska 2012 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the washeteria. Waste heat infrastructure will include waste heat transmission lines and upgrades necessary
in the power house and washeteria. For more detailed information, see the attached feasibility study by Alaska Energy and Engineering.
Currently, AVEC is not utilizing either the jacket heat from its diesel engines or the heat generated by the electric boiler installed to dispose excess wind energy. This project would
recover heat from both sources at the AVEC plant and send that heat to the water treatment plant to heat the building, the circulated water loops, and the water storage tank. The AVEC
power plant and the Savoonga water treatment plant are located next to each other in Savoonga. A feasibility study has been done for this project, the design has been completed and
a construction cost estimate has been prepared. These are attached. Funds are being requested
for construction only.
The seven communities named in this proposal- Alatna, Allakaket, Northway, Grayling, Shageluk, Beaver and Stevens Village- have all participated in energy planning meetings with IRHA
and other organizations and have identified wood heating in public facilities as a key opportunity to displace fuel oil, reduce energy costs, utilize locally available renewable resources
and create local employment. This proposal calls for feasibility assessments that include the study of public facilities where wood heating may be applicable, pre-engineering analysis
of the size and type of boilers that would be required (including "boiler in a box" option), estimated fuel displacement and cost savings, capital cost and payback period, and forest
inventory and wood harvest plan. Of the seven communities selected for this project, Stevens Village, Beaver and Northway had Preliminary Feasibility Assessments conducted in 2008.
The 2008 studies suggested that biomass was a viable option for the communities, but that further analysis was necessary. For these three communities, the 2008 studies will be updated
and expanded upon. Forest inventories will be completed as well. For the communities of Shageluk, Allakaket, Alatna and Grayling, IRHA proposes a two-pronged approach: (1) subcontract
with a qualified biomass energy specialist to conduct a 1-2 day site visits in each community and prepare a feasibility assessment for each community, (2) subcontract with Will Putman,
head forester for Tanana Chiefs Conference to conduct forest inventory and wood harvest planning. Following completion of these reports, project staff Kim Carlo and Nadine Winters of
IRHA will continue to communicate with residents of the communities and facilitate their internal planning processes to determine whether each community wants to move forward with final
design and construction phases of the respective wood-heating projects, pending available funding . It bears mentioning that this proposal is identical in scope to one submitted by
IRHA under Round 4 of the Renewable Energy Fund. It was funded and eight biomass feasibility studies are completed as a result. This represents a deliberate approach whereby the applicant
is proceeding in stages with conducting feasibility work prior to conceptual design, final design and construction. It is anticipated that the phased approach will allow IRHA to conduct
full assessments for most communities in the region.
Alatna 66.566920 N 152.666390 W, Allakaket 66.562610 N 152.647560 W, Shageluk 62.682220 N 159.561940 W, Grayling 62.903610 N 160.064720 W, Northway 62.982220 N 141 .951670 W, Beaver
66.359440 N 147.396390 W, Stevens Village 66.006390 N 149.090830 W
The project will design and construct wood heating systems in three Interior Alaska rural communities. IRHA has conducted eight feasibility assessments including forest inventories and
wood harvest assessments in eight Interior communities. Based on the feasibility studies, design and construction of biomass systems and wood storage facilities will begin design and
construction in spring 2013 in Nikolai, Koyukuk, and Anvik. Round 6 funding is being requested for three more biomass systems in three more communities in the region. Projects will
be selected based the likelihood of successful project implementation which includes identification of a project champion in the community, projected simple payback and adequate, sustainable
forest inventory. IRHA will partner with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the individual tribes. Renewable Energy Fund Round 4 IRHA received funding for biomass feasibility
studies for: Koyukuk Nikolai Anvik Holy Cross Nulato Hughes Ruby Kaltag Renewable Energy Fund Round 5 IRHA received funding for design and construction for three biomass projects to
be determined by Round 4 feasibility studies( completed in August 2012) Nikolai, Anvik and Koyukuk are selected for design and construction based on the highest annual savings, lowest
simple payback and biomass stocking figures that indicate sustainable harvest plans. Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 IRHA submitting a Round 6 application for construction of three more
biomass projects to be determined suing feasibility studies and forest inventories. IRHA submitting a Round 6 application for feasibility studies for seven more communities in the
Interior- Alatna, Allakaket, Beaver, Stevens Village, Grayling, Shageluk and Northway.
The location of the three biomass systems to be designed and constructed will be in three of the following communities:
Hughes (66.048890 N, 154.255560W), Ruby (64.739440 N 155.486940W), Nulato (64.719440 N 158.103060 W), Kaltag (64.327220 N 158.721940 W), Holy Cross(62.199440 N 159.771390 W), Alatna
(66 .566920 N 152.666390 W), Allakaket (66.562610 N 152.647560 W), Shageluk (62.682220 N 159.561940 W), Grayling (62.903610 N 160.064720 W), Northway (62.982220 N 141.951670 W), Beaver
(66.359440 N 147.396390 W) or Stevens Village (66.006390 N 149.090830 W).
The ?Pre-Feasibility Assessment for Integration of Wood-Fired Heating Systems Final Report? dated July 24, 2012 states that, ?Connecting the school with several nearby buildings with
a wood fired district heating system appears to be an economically viable project.? (p. 2 of 13) The buildings for the City of Nenana include the Water Plant and the Fire Department.
The building included for the Nenana Native Council is the Youth Educational Resource Center (YERC), which houses the Early Learning, Head Start, and Youth Center programs. The school
district buildings included in the project are the Nenana City Public School, the Administration Building, the Warehouse/Vocational Education Building, and the Nenana Student Living
Center. Though the Nenana Student Living Center is located approximately six blocks from the Nenana City Public School, the ?Pre-Feasibility Assessment? states, ?The additional energy
saved by connecting several buildings together offsets the significant additional cost of underground piping and pumping costs. . . . Even with the significant piping costs, the extra
pumping energy, and the extra wood fuel needed to offset the heat loss of the long pipe runs, this option remains the strongest relative to other options.? (p. 2 & 3 of 13)
The Allison Creek Project is a run of the river (ROR) alternative involving construction of a diversion structure on Allison Creek at elevation 1,300 feet. Water will be diverted from
the creek into a 42 inch surface / buried penstock to a 6.5 megawatt powerhouse near tidewater. Attachment A is the Final Feasibility Study which provides details on this project as
presented and approved by the CVEA Board of Directors.
This project will be a modest, run-of-the-river hydroelectric facility using Waterfall Creek and consisting of a concrete diversion/intake structure, 4,500\' HOPE penstock pipeline,
16\'X40\' metal powerhouse on concrete slab, Pelton Impulse Turbine and induction generator, remote automatic control system, and 5,000\' access road. This facility will be a working
partner to the City\'s existing and highly successful Delta Creek hydroelectric project, which has been operating for the last seventeen years.
This phase of the overall project is recommended in the completed feasibility report regarding extending Kodiak Electric Association?s Monashaka feeder line to the City of Ouzinkie,
dated April 2011. (attached) The line extension will tie KEA?s current electrical grid, including hydro and wind power generation, to the City of Ouzinkie. Necessarily, the inter-tie
will include a submarine electrical cable of approximately 1 to 1.4 miles (depending on route) in length between the Island of Kodiak and Spruce Island. The report reads, ?as the project
moves forward, the recommendation is to perform bathymetric surveys and marine geophysical studies to refine and verify the submarine feasibility.? The City of Ouzinkie currently has
both electrical and hydro power generation but of limited capacity and reliability. Connecting Ouzinkie to the KEA power grid will provide virtually unlimited, primarily renewable,
reliable power to the community and thereby facility community growth and economic development. The feasibility report, attached, was jointly funded by the Ouzinkie Native Corporation
and Kodiak Electrical Association.
The City of Galena is requesting AEA Round 6 funding to provide a sustainable and predictable energy resource for its school district. The Galena Community Wood Heat Project will substantially
reduce high costs for heat for the Galena Interior Learning Academy School (GILA) by utilizing woody biomass harvested and processed from local forests. The project will implement Phase
III Final Design and Phase IV Construction over a two (2) year period to install a biomass boiler system for the GILA campus. Local coordination among the stakeholders group is strong,
infrastructure and administrative resources are in place to support the project, and the Galena City School District has committed to purchasing the resulting heat. Existing Feasibility
Studies and strategic community planning documents align with the project.
The Alaska Gateway School District (AGSD) Heat Loop Project request is for Phase III Design and Phase IV Construction of a waste heat recovery application for AGSD?s existing 5.5 MMBTU
woody biomass energy facility. The project will recover waste heat which would otherwise be rejected and distribute it to ten (10) State-owned and Community building-clusters. The district
heat loop will directly replace heat from the existing fossil fuel heating systems, offsetting the equivalent of 49,100 gallons of fuel oil #1 per year. Heat customers will be charged
for heat on a cost-based rate, and the hydronic heat sales are exempt from RCA regulations. Over the 18-month project period, AGSD plans to explore various collaborative business structures
with the local utility, Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T) and other potential contractors to operate and maintain the heat loop. AGSD is prepared to independently operate and maintain
the district heat loop.
Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T) proposes to conduct a Phase III project that will complete the Final Design and Permitting for a 2MWe biomass CHP (combined heat and power) system. The
system will offset up to 1M gallons of fossil fuel per year and create a market for approximately $1M of locally sourced woody biomass, much of which would otherwise be wildfire hazardous
fuels. AP&T, with support from the Alaska Gateway School District, the Tok Umbrella Association, the Upper Tanana communities of Tok, Tetlin, Dot Lake and Tanacross, the State of Alaska
Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and working with contracted Consultants, Foresters and Economists, is collaborating to develop a CHP system utilizing locally sourced woody biomass
as fuel. The project will create the final design for the system, and thoroughly assess and prepare the permitting process for the biomass energy project.
NOTE:
Most of the detail in this grant application is from pre-feasibility work and the (full) Feasibility Study (FS Final Report pending November 2012, however excerpts are added to this
document as attachments). AP&T is completing a screening level study of alternative generation strategies, as part of the Biomass CHP Feasibility Study. Also being considered in comparison
to Biomass CHP are the following power generation scenarios: Diesel, Wind, Wind with pumping and storage, (trucked) Natural Gas, and Hydro.
The proposed project will undertake final design and construction of a wood-fired hydronic heating system in three Seward schools. A Feasibility Study (FS) was completed in July, 2011
by Dan Parrent, USDA Forest Service, which served the purpose of both Reconnaissance and Feasibility. The Feasibility Study was also reviewed in a document prepared by Lew McCreery
(USDA FS) of the USDA Wood Education and Resource Center (WERC). Both reports (attached to this application) attested to the viability and readiness of the project, which is now ready
to proceed to Final Design and Construction Phases. This proposed Seward Schools Biomass Heating System project will implement the following multi-phased process:
? Phase III, Final Design of a wood-fired hydronic heating system to heat the combined Seward High, Middle and Elementary School campus with woody biomass fuel.
? Phase IV, Construction, Commissioning, and Operation of the heating system and follow up reporting on operation and maintenance.
The project is designed to proceed without the delay of additional grant year cycles. Reports from the 2011 feasibility assessment and a 2011 District energy evaluation will serve as
the reference documents for this project.Location ? latitude and longitude or street address or community / communities served:
The proposed project will serve the community of Seward, AK, located on the Kenai Peninsula.
The three locations for the project are:
1. Seward Middle School, 304 Sea Lion Avenue, Seward, AK 99664 (60.132177,-149.431508)
2. William H. Seward Elementary School, 606 Sea Lion Avenue, Seward, AK 99664 (60.132209,-149.431658)
3. Seward High School, P.O. Box 1049, Seward, AK 99664 (60.133855,-149.422388)
To conduct a study on the feasibility of installing a biofuel system at the Kodiak High School to provide fuel/heat to the building, decrease the overall waste going into the Kodiak
landfill and provide a biofuel education service through the Kodiak High School Career and Technical Program.
The Gartina Falls Hydroelectric Project (Project) will include construction of a small diversion dam and intake structure just above Gartina Falls, installation of a steel penstock,
a powerhouse at the base of the falls, a new access road, 0.1 miles of transmission line buried in conduit, and installation of power poles for 3.8 miles of overhead transmission line
within the access road right-of-way. The purpose of the Project is to divert water from above the waterfall into the power plant and then discharge water back to the base of the waterfall.
The new hydroelectric system will have an installed capacity of 455 kilowatts (kW) and will therefore be used to avoid an estimated 30 percent of Hoonah\'s current diesel-powered electricity
through hydro generation.
AVCP Housing intends to construct a Wood Biomass Heating System plant within its campus to reduce high energy costs. The wood biomass heating system is expected to supplant 85% of the
estimated heat usage. The current diesel fuel cost is $6. 78/gal. in Bethel. Without the benefit of a biomass heating system, it is estimated we will be using 67,766 gallons of heating
fuel annually beginning in the winter of 2012-2013.
Tlingit-Haida Regional Electrical Authority (THREA) is applying for funding to conduct feasibility, design, and obtain a FERC license for the Walker Lake Hydro Project. THREA filed a
preliminary FERC permit application on June 11 , 2012 since it has municipal preference. THREA proposes to work with Inside Passage Electric Cooperative (IPEC) the certificated utility
for the service area of Klukwan and the Chilkat Valley in order to provide the lowest cost power for the benefit of IPEC\'s members/customers. The proposed project includes constructing
two small dams at Walker Lake; intake and reservoir outlet works; a 24" penstock of approximately 12,000 feet in length; a powerhouse with installed capacity of approximately 1 MW;
a tailrace of approximately 50\' length; and a 12.4 KV underground transmission line of approximately 4 miles in length interconnecting with the existing transmission system of IPEC.
The existing lake is at an elevation of 1,180 MSL and drains into Walker Creek and the Little Salmon River.
The project is located on USGS maps shown on both Skagway B-3 and B-4
Please refer to Appendix A Map of Walker Lake Hydro Project Application
The proposed Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie is a 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan Public Utilities
(KPU). The Intertie will include 14 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line to be constructed on Annette Island between Metlakatla and Walden Point and an approximate three mile
submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Walden Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation. The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for the integrated
operation of the interconnected systems? generating plants. Final design of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie is underway. Construction of the line began in June 2010 and all poles
are set for the overhead line. Approximately 20% of the conductor is installed along the line. The control system upgrades were completed in July 2011.
The Municipality of Skagway (Municipality) proposes to construct the West Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on West Creek, approximately 7 miles west of Skagway and adjacent
to the small community of Dyea. The primary purpose of the Project would be offsetting diesel generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway from May through September each year. Up
to five cruise ships per day dock in Skagway for 12-15 hours and continuously operate their diesel plants to provide for on-board electricity consumption. The continuous stack emissions
spread a blue haze at about the 1,500 foot elevation where vegetation has been noticeably affected. The Project will improve air quality and save vegetation in the area (there may be
other unknown environmental benefits). To emphasize how serious the air quality of the area is being taken, the National Park Service, Municipality of Skagway, and Alaska Power & Telephone
Company (AP&T) have a cooperative agreement to place and maintain equipment at AP&T?s Dewey Lakes Hydro project site to monitor this pollution. Preliminary results of this monitoring
are attached as an appendix. A secondary purpose of the Project is to provide winter energy to the local utility when they have a shortfall of hydro energy from their hydroelectric
projects (2011 = Dewey Lakes Hydro, Lutak Hydro, Goat Lake Hydro, Kasidaya Creek Hydro) as well as to sell winter energy to other utilities in the area.
The City & Borough of Sitka proposes to raise the project dam from spill elevation 342 feet mean sea level (msl) to elevation 425 feet msl; construct a new powerhouse containing three
5.3-megawatt (MW) units; install new intake works and a surge chamber; and modify the power conduit to accommodate higher hydraulic pressure and connect new or relocated project features.
In addition, the existing 0.670-MW fish valve unit generator would be replaced with a new 1-MW unit and the existing 0.870-MW pulp mill feeder unit would be decommissioned. The total
authorized capacity of the project would rise from 7.5 MW to 16.9 MW.
This project involves placing supplemental cord wood fired boilers in the schools. The supplemental heating system would be located at the Hydaburg City Schools in Hydaburg, AK on
Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska.
We intend to use wood biomass to heat the school buildings, replacing diesel as the energy source. The project involves placing two Garn type wood fired boilers adjacent to the school
site and running underground pipes from the wood fired boiler to plumb into the school?s heating system.
The Eagle Solar Array Project will provide renewable energy to the communities of Eagle and Eagle Village. The Project will consist of one hundred sixty three solar panels, six three
phase inverters, a programmable logic controller, SCADA system, and diesel powerplant interface for the towns of Eagle and Eagle Village. Energy derived will be used to offset diesel
fueled generation; particularly during the summer months.
Connelly Lake is an 85 acre alpine lake, and drains into the Chilkoot River. The Project facilities will include a dam at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW
powerhouse with two generating units, a 14-mile-long buried 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Phase III has not been completed yet with field studies, permitting
and final design continuing. The Project will be developed by the Applicant to provide additional generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems (existing 15-mile
submarine cable), to provide backup renewable power to Haines should the submarine cable fail, or should the only other storage project in Upper Lynn Canal, Goat Lake Hydro, have a
major problem with a long term shutdown. And in the early years of operations to possibly provide summer power to cruise ships moored at Haines or Skagway to help pay off any debt as
quickly as possible. The Project will be on state and private land, including the Haines State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve.
As a condition of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing of the Cooper Lake Plant in 2007, Chugach agreed to construct a project to divert water from Stetson Creek
into the Cooper Lake reservoir and a related structure to release water into Cooper Creek. The project will enhance fish habitat and add water to Cooper Lake which will result in additional
hydroelectric energy generation. Most importantly, constructing this project allows the license for the Cooper Lake hydro facility to be renewed for 50 years. A schedule showing how
the project will proceed is attached.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough seeks funding to conduct a wind reconnaissance study on the behalf of the City of Egegik. The project will consist of the installation of a needed 10-meter
or 30-meter, whichever is appropriate, wind tower within the city to gather one year of wind data. The wind data will be analyzed by a professional firm that specializes in the interpretation
of wind data. Following the completion of the data gathering, the firm will prepare a report that will give the LPB and Egegik an indication on whether or not the wind resources merit
a feasibility study on the eventual construction of a wind turbine.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough seeks funding to conduct a wind reconnaissance study on the behalf of the Levelock Village Council and its utility Levelock Electric Cooperative, inc.
The project will consist of the installation of a needed 1 0-meter wind tower within the city to gather one year of wind data. Rich Stromberg of AEA has indicated the study can be done
for approximately $10,000 using a smaller, 10-meter tower. The wind data will be analyzed by a professional firm that specializes in the interpretation of wind data. Following the completion
of the data gathering, the firm will prepare a report that will give the LPB and Levelock an indication on whether or not the wind resources merit a feasibility study on the eventual
construction of a wind turbine.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough seeks funding to design an approximate 1 OOkW wind turbine system in the village of Igiugig. The design of the turbine will include its integration into
the new generation system recently installed to maximize output and efficiency. The wind study is not complete, but the 11-month data point for the feasibility report includes the winter
months when winds and demand are highest. LPB will finish the grant with a design that can be put out to bid.
The total for the project is $250,000 and LPB is offering a $45,000 match.
The City of Saxman was issued a license for the Mahoney Lake hydroelectric project by the FERC on 01-22-98 (Project No. P-11393). The project was licensed to be a storage-type project
with a lake tap of Upper Mahoney Lake, a tunnel-and-pipe penstock, a single unit powerhouse, and an overhead transmission line con-necting to the existing KPU transmission system at
the Beaver Falls substation. The licensed capacity is 9.6 MW and the estimated potential annual generation is 41.7 GWH. Design documents were submitted to FERC for review in 2001 in
anticipation of starting construction in 2002. However, at that time a decision was made to construct the Swan-Tyee Intertie instead of the Mahoney Lake project; the Mahoney Lake project
license was stayed until requested by Saxman, but no later than 6 years after completion of the Swan-Tyee Intertie. Saxman has until 2015 to request lifting of the stay. The design
documents submitted to FERC in 2001 proposed to construct the penstock using horizontal directional drilling (HDD), which was a different penstock design than licensed and an untested
tech-nology for the hydroelectric industry. FERC had not commented on the design submittal prior to the stay being issued. Load growth in the SEAPA-interconnected systems and the potential
for new industrial loads now makes it timely to resume the development of the Mahoney Lake project. However, because of the long delay, it is necessary to reexamine some aspects of
the project, in particular:
? Re-evaluate the HDD-based design based on advances in the HDD industry in the last decade. It now appears possible to simplify the design and eliminate some expensive elements.
? Re-evaluate the storage potential of the upper basin, either by lowering the lake tap in Upper Mahoney Lake or adding storage in two natural lakes above Upper Mahoney Lake. Additional
storage would allow more wintertime generation by the project, which is critical for the SEAPA-interconnected system.
? Route the transmission line north along the existing road system on Cape Fox land to an interconnection to the Swan Lake line at the White River, rather than south over USFS land to
the Beaver Falls substation.
? Review permit status, and renew or revise permit applications as appropriate.
? Update the design drawings, specifications, and design report as appropriate for changes in the design concept.
? Update the cost estimate and economic analysis for the project, including any revisions to the design as described above.
? Begin power sales negotiations, and prepare a business and operational plan based on the anticipated power sales agreement.
At the completion of this work, KEC will be ready to begin construction on the project as soon as final financing is arranged.
INNEC proposes to conduct a feasibility study related to increasing tne capacity pf tne existing Tazimina Hydroelectric Project by replacing eitner one or two of tne existing generating
units witn larger generating units. Tne study will evaluate existing energy use and future energy requirements for tne region. An economic analysis will compare tne costs of future
generation under a variety of scenarios. A procurement package will be prepared if tne project is found to be feasible.
The proposed project will evaluate the technical and financial feasibility for integration and optimization of renewable energy based heating technologies to offset heating oil and electricity
usage in the following Petersburg facilities: Stedman Elementary School, Mitkof Middle School, Petersburg High School, Petersburg Aquatic Center, Mountain View Manor Elderly Housing,
and the City Municipal Building.
This project would provide a renewable energy intertie to part of the City of Coffman Cove, Alaska that presently are self-generating because they are not on the islands micro-grid.
The City of Coffman Cove was connected to Prince of Wales Island (POW) renewable energy microgrid in 2011, shutting down the diesel generators serving the community. However, significant
portions of the community are not connected to the distribution system. There are 91 privately owned lots that must self-generate at an approximate cost of $2.35/kWh (based on the cost
of residential fuel; small generator costs; and, the monthly average kWh used by those on the islands grid); the formula for determining this can be found below in the application.
The renewable energy micro-grid on POW has a rate of $0.2243/kWh for a residential rate, which would provide a significant savings to these unserved lots .
This project will encompass performing a feasibility study to determine if a proof of concept hydrogen (or Ammonia) prototype should be designed, constructed, and operated as an alternative
to spill during times of low production and high inflows of the hydroelectric plants in the SEAPA system, which serves the loads of Ketchikan, Wrangell, and Petersburg, Alaska. This
stored energy would then be used for generation either by supplementing diesel combustion or through the operation of fuel cell technology during times of hydroelectric shortages. When
surplus hydro generation conditions occur, typically all hydro operators in the region are not fully utilized. With an isolated system, there is no alternative other than spilling surplus
energy over a spillway. The region is also experiencing significant winter load growth that has caused and will continue to cause both energy and capacity shortages. These shortages
are met with diesel-electric generation that dispatches at a cost differential of four-to-one over the current hydro cost of 6.8 cents/kWh. The information obtained from performing
this feasibility study will also be directly transferrable to all hydroelectric and wind utilities in Alaska.
The City & Borough of Juneau is proposing the design and construction of a geothermal HVAC system to serve the heating and cooling needs at the new Dimond Park Library. The community
of Juneau recently received a $7 million grant from Alaska Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development to construct the new library in Juneau?s Mendenhall Valley. The
City & Borough of Juneau Assembly is interested in reducing the carbon footprint of Juneau and reducing the operating costs of their facilities. The use of a geothermal HVAC system
rather than traditional oil-fired boilers and chillers provides an opportunity to achieve both goals of the City & Borough of Juneau and to expand the use of renewable energy in city
facilities.
This project expands on a previous Feasibility study that has been ongoing for 2 years. In 2010 a Single 175W Solar A"ay was installed at the proposed location to see if Solar PV would
be feasible for the Northwest Arctic. The panel has been facing south-east and is connected to a single Enphase inverter that is cogenerating with the Kotzebue Electric Association
(KEA) grid. It was found that it produced 165 Kwh during 1 year average. @ $ 0. 54/Kwh this equals a savings of$ 89. 1 0/year A build-out of the a"ay to 10 Kw would save the Northwest
Arctic Borough approximately $ 5, 132. 00/year in electric bills.
? This would also be a good match as the Borough operate mainly day time, when the sun is available.
? The project aims to match the load of the building and offset just enough energy to try to get to stop the electric meter, this is important as we do not want to be paid for any generated
electricity by the KEA Coop.
? The project would consist of 42 pc. 240 watt panel, for a total of 10KWatts configured on the roof of the building in a configuration to match the load of the building.
? It would be a "fixed" array, non tracking.
? It would also be configured in 2 directions, southeast and south, to match the electric needs of the building, so not to overproduce with one large peak power during the day.
? Each individual panel will have it\'s own enphase micro-inverter.
? The entire array will be displayed and monitored on a website that can be accessed for educational purposes.
Cantwell is currently served by GVEA via the power transmission line between MEA and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and
lower the cost of the community of Cantwell?s power system. To accomplish this we propose to build a storage hydroelectric project on the Jack River, a short distance from Cantwell.
The reconnaissance study currently under way has identified several project configurations with capacities between 700 kW and 7 MW that may be feasible. A feasibility study is necessary
to identify which of these configurations would best meet the community?s needs.
Karluk is located on the west cost of Kodiak Island in Alaska. The village is cut-off from any road system. Fuel oil has to be shipped by barge to Karluk. Therefore, it is a high energy
cost village with fuel oil at 4.92 $/gal. This project will perform a feasibility study and complete the design & permitting for a wind energy system and a heat recovery system to serve
the existing power plant in Karluk, Alaska. For the wind energy system, wind data from a meteorological monitoring tower already installed at the proposed wind turbine location will
be available for the analysis and design. The wind energy systems would consist of wind turbines installed on the mountain 0.7 miles south of the existing power plant, the transmission
line to the power plant, and the electric boiler for excess energy utilization. The heat recovery system would consist of upgrading the existing power plant generators with waste heat
recovery units and installing a total length of up to 1000ft hydronic heating loop to connect the power plant with the community buildings.
The project seeks to optimize existing installations and in-progress wind projects in the community. NJUS is utilizing REF?Round I funding to install a 900 KW wind turbine in summer
2012. Another REF?Round I project allowed NJUS to construct a power transmission line to Banner Wind, an independent power producing facility privately owned by Sitnasuak & Bering Straits
Native Corporations, from which NJUS purchases wind power under a contract. Through installation of a new wind integration control system and modification of the diesel generation system
at NJUS? Power Plant, the project focuses on the optimization of existing diesel generation equipment within the community in order to maximize benefits from renewable energy supplies.
Under the scope of this project smaller, peaking diesel generator sets will be integrated into Nome?s Power Plant and plant controls will be reconfigured to provide system wide benefits
of reduced operating costs, greater stability, and improved efficiency. In the event NJUS or Banner Wind expands wind generation capacity in the future, the community can potentially
recognize additional benefit from the project.
Native Village of Port Graham is proposing the construction of GARN Boiler hot water distribution system to provide heat to five community buildings, homes throughout the Port Graham
community, and eventually be connected to a central CHP biomass fired facility. A conceptual design and feasibility review for a central combined heat and power (CHP) biomass-fired
plant was completed in 2009. Detailed engineering and economic evaluations were included. The existing diesel-fired hot water heating equipment will be retained and used for backup.
The proposed biomass system will displaces 80-85% of the diesel to heat these community buildings.
Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) is building a new electric generating facility in Eklutna, Alaska that will have a generating capacity of 103 to 171 MW and an operational date of
late 2014. The estimated recoverable waste heat resource associated with this power plant is 154,000 MMbtu annually. Eklutna, Inc. (EI) holds rights to the waste heat that will be generated
by this plant, and owns land adjacent to the plant where waste heat uses would be sited. EI proposes to perform a reconnaissance study of potential uses of this waste heat resource.
The reconnaissance study will define the potential uses of this waste heat resource, evaluate the technical and economic viability of these uses, and make recommendations for further
study.
The Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project is a low-impact run-of-river renewable energy project proposed near Seward, Alaska. The project would be located east of the Spring Creek
Correctional Facility and Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park, across Resurrection Bay from the City of Seward. The project is anticipated to have an installed capacity of 5.4 MW and
provide an estimated 21,700 MWh of energy annually. The project would supply approximately 1/3rd of Seward Electric System\'s annual energy requirements. This proposed project phase
(design and permitting) is contingent upon the favorable outcome of a feasibility study that is scheduled to start in September 2011. In the event the feasibility study determines that
the project is not viable, Independence Power, LLC (IP) intends to withdraw this application from consideration.
The wastewater treatment facility is the single largest electrical consumer in the city of Alakanuk, averaging 16,000 kWh per month or $5009.51 $1 kWh based on current PCE rates. The
city is provided power by AVEC, some of which is wind that is or will be generated in Emmonak. This proposal is to evaluate, design, permit and install a stand-alone wind generator
to service the wastewater treatment facility sized to provide a base loading of electrical equipment as decrease the utility spend for this facility.yy
Reconnaissance Study of Thomas Bay Hydrological Resources.
The continued objective of this project is to install a RISEC (River In-Stream Energy Conversion) device on the Kvichak River near the village of Igiugig. This lake outlet location
provides an ideal site for the study, testing and implementation of river in-stream energy conversion (RISEC) that will also benefit other Alaska communities considering this renewable
energy. A RISEC plant will convert available river kinetic energy into electric power, and feed into the existing Igiugig electric grid to reduce diesel fuel consumption at the Igiugig
power plant.
The project builds on existing reconnaissance level engineering work recently completed for a hydroelectric power plant in Adak, and makes use of Adak?s existing infrastructure such
as dams, access roads, and possibly an existing penstock. The reconnaissance studies show that a series of alpine lakes in the immediate vicinity of the city have the potential to displace
the diesel power plant as the primary energy source for Adak. Resource availability, engineering considerations, land ownership and permitting issues were all considered. The diesel
power plant would still be required for backup, and would be available to parallel with the hydroelectric facility during high load conditions. TDX?s engineering feasibility studies
will focus on two areas;
-Quantifying the hydroelectric potential. Work will include a detailed mapping and hydrology studies, a permitting evaluation including onsite studies and agency consultations, assessment
of alternatives, a detailed cost analysis for the selected project and development timeline; and,
- Interconnection requirements for integration with the utility, including analysis and selection of optimum generator and hydro-turbine size, type, and configuration; identification
of requirements for paralleling switchgear and controls, and all other major power system components.
An anemometer tower to collect wind data will be installed the Fall of 2011 by the Lake and Peninsula Borough. The met tower will also be equipped with a pyranometer for monitoring the
solar resource. We have an MOU in place to work with Marsh Creek, LLC to analyze the data and produce resource reports. A hydrokinetic assessment study is in progress by Alaska Energy
and Engineering. Marsh Creek, LLC will report on the technical and economic feasibility of integrating renewable solar, wind, and the potential hydrokinetic resources with our diesel
plant and to incorporate battery storage with the system to maximize the offset of diesel for both heat and electricity in the community.
We propose to complete the integration of the existing 65 kW Vestas V-15 Wind Turbine Generator (WTG) with our existing diesel generation plant by adding a synchronous condenser, an
additional thermal load to the Waste Heat Recovery System, and revisiting the effort to modify the supervisory controls. We intend for the WTG to be fully operational with the diesel
plant and for the excess energy to maximize reduction of diesel used to provide heat to large community building.
The project would provide design and construction of a ground source heat pump system consisting of a water-to-water heat pump and loopfield as the primary source of heat for the new
Kodiak High School. It is estimated that the heat pump will supply 85% of the heating load and the fuel oil boilers will supplement the remaining load.
This project will be a modest, run-of-the-river hydroelectric facility using Waterfall Creek and consisting of a concrete diversion/intake structure, 4,500? HDPE penstock pipeline, 16?x40?
metal powerhouse on concrete slab, Pelton Impulse Turbine and induction generator, remote-automatic control system, and 5,000? access road. This facility will be a working partner
to the city?s existing and highly successful Delta Creek hydroelectric project, which has been operating for the last fifteen years.
The proposed Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project consists of four major components, including:
-A creek diversion structure- The diversion structure would create a small impoundment that would divert a portion of flow from Fivemile Creek into a pipeline (penstock).
-A penstock. The penstock is a pipeline that will transport water from the intake structure to the turbine powerhouse. The penstock for this project will be around 12-inches in diameter
and 10,000 linear feet long. Its primary purpose is to pressurize and deliver the water from the creek to the turbine power plant.
-A hydroelectric turbine power plant ? The power plant will house the turbine and electrical generating equipment and controls. Water from the penstock will spin the turbine and generators
and produce electricity. The power plant will include a tailrace that will return water from the penstock to the creek bed.
- Electrical tie-in ? An overhead high voltage line will connect the turbine power plant to the existing electrical distribution system near the airport.
-Diesel integration ? The proposed hydro will be linked to the community?s existing, AEA type, diesel powerhouse module.
The proposed project is a high penetration wind diesel system for the community of Kipnuk. Kipnuk is located at the western mouth of the Kuskokwim River, and has a population of 690
permanent residents. The project will be owned and operated by the Kipnuk Light Plant and the community of Kipnuk and will consist of three Northwind 100 wind turbines. These turbines
are to be integrated into the current power system through the use of a control module and two heat recovery boilers. The control module will house new switchgear, metering, and controls.
The module will be designed to interface with the existing and proposed new diesel power plants, as well as provide space and electrical connections for future energy storage system
options such as a battery or a flywheel system. The control module will be located nearby the existing and proposed future diesel plant. The wind turbines will connect to the existing
power grid through a 5 pole, 12470 volt 3 phase power line extension. Wind diesel power will be regulated using two controlled 200 kW electric boilers - one located in the community
center and one located in the newly commissioned washeteria/water plant. The wind turbines are well proven in Alaska and the control and integration method is well understood. Geotechnical
investigations have already been conducted and the wind turbines, power poles and power/control module will be placed on driven piles. Property has been provided by the community for
the installation of up to 5 wind turbines. Kipnuk?s electrical load has grown by nearly 30% since the commissioning of the new water system in December of 2010. A new school is being
constructed in Kipnuk during the winter of 2012/2013. This new school will increase the average electrical load from 50 to 75 kW with a commensurate increase in heating fuel usage estimated
at over 20,000 gallons. Construction of the school in Kipnuk is scheduled to begin the Fall 2012 and continue through 2013. Coordination with the school construction could result in
cost savings sufficient to install a 4th wind turbine. Significant savings would result from the day rental of heavy equipment such as cranes, loaders and pile drivers, and specialized
personnel that will be mobilized for the school construction. The control and integration capacity in the proposed design can accommodate up to 5 wind turbines. Power produced from
a possible fourth wind turbine would result in additional fuel savings of up to 18,000 gallons. Cost savings would result from unburdening the wind project from carrying the full cost
of heavy equipment mobilization, rental, and over-wintering from the Fall of 2012 to the Spring of 2013. This wind diesel system architecture is scalable through the addition of wind
turbines, new diesel gensets, and energy storage. Kipnuk is a productive wind site in which each Northwind 100 turbine has the potential to annually produce 300,000 kWhrs of electricity.
This equates to a per turbine potential fuel displacements of 18,000 to 20,000 gallon of diesel fuel and a total displacement for 3 turbines of upwards of 55,000 gallons.
The Nenana Student Living Center (NSLC) is a 27,000 sq ft student dormitory in Alaska?s Interior village of Nenana that houses and feeds 88 students and 10 staff members during the school
year. The building is owned by the City of Nenana, but operating costs are paid by the Nenana School District. This building has in-floor radiant heating across approximately 20,000
square feet. Due to the architecture of the building (1-story, view from above looks like a U) there is more than 11,000 square feet of exterior wall. Over a typical year, the building
burns 27,000-30,000 gallons of heating fuel, consuming 150-200 gallons each day during the coldest parts of the Interior Alaskan winter. Operating costs are passed directly onto the
already burdened school district. Integrating a large solar hot water array with heliodyne flat-plate solar collectors, a large solar hot water storage tank, dual coil DHW tank, forced
air heating preheat loops and already planned insulation upgrades we can offset up to 30% of the building?s heating costs. With heating fuel at $3.50 gal coming into this winter that
will save $30,000 in the first year alone.
Cook Inlet Region, Inc. (CIR]), created a special purpose entity called Fire Island Wind, LLC (FIW) to develop a wind farm on Fire Island. The Fire Island Wind Farm ("the Wind Farm")
is a utility-scale wind generation facility under development, ultimately planned to have a nameplate capacity of 52.8 MW and to be comprised of 33 wind turbine generators. Pursuant
to a recently completed Power Purchase Agreement (PP A), Chugach, as Buyer, has agreed to purchase the electrical output from Phase I of the Wind Farm, which will be comprised of 11
General Electric ("GE") 1.6MW type XLE turbines for a total Phase] of 17.6 MW. The Project that is the subject of this grant application includes the construction of the transmission
line, which will interconnect the Fire Island Wind Farm (as well as a few retail electric customers on Fire Island), with Chugach\'s 34.5kV system at the International Substation. The
Wind Farm will initially consist of 11-1.6MW OE wind turbines that will be consolidated into a single 34.5kV feeder. The feeder will be routed to a collector yard. The collector yard
will connect to a double-circuit 34.5kV overhead transmission line running approximately 2.8 miles to the northeast coast of Fire Island. At that point, it will be connected to two
34.5kV 3 phase submarine cables. The submarine cables will run approximately 3.2 miles under the Cook Inlet to the mainland coast near Point Campbell and Anchorage International Airport.
At Point Campbell, the conductors will be separated into single conductors and buried in a trench. The transmission lines will then continue approximately 6.2 miles to the International
Substation and connect to the 34.5kV bus at the International Substation. Portions of underground mainland section will be installed in conduit. Splice cabinets will be required at
various points on the underground section of the project. A map and drawing outlining the wind farm site and transmission Project is attached as Appendix 1.
Mentasta?s predicament, as is the case for most of rural Alaska, is its dependence on imported expensive petroleum heating oil for space heating of essential community facilities and
infrastructure which support the provision of valuable social, health and safety services to residents of Mentasta. This Project will construct one centrally located woody biomass space
heating plant to substitute for expensive, imported heating oil use and will heat 80% of Mentasta?s public facilities with high efficiency bio-mass (wood-fired) heating. Mentasta?s
community facilities are centrally located and can be serviced by one woody biomass heating plant strategically located adjacent to Mentasta?s clustered public facilities (see Map Attachment).
Mentasta Traditional Council is requesting AEA Round 5 in the amount of $400,000 and will construct a single woody biomass plant to heat five (5) community facility which is estimated
to displace 10,800 gallons of imported heating oil and create local wood-harvesting employment/small business opportunities.
Tanacross? predicament, as is the case for most of rural Alaska, is its dependence on imported expensive petroleum heating oil for space heating of essential community facilities and
infrastructure which support the provision of valuable social, health and safety services to residents of Tanacross. This Project will construct one centrally located woody biomass
space heating plant to substitute for expensive, imported heating oil use and wil heat 80% of Tanacross? public facilities with high efficiency bio-mass (wood-fired) heating. Tanacross?
community facilities are centrally located and can be serviced by one woody biomass heating plant strategically located adjacent to Tanacross? clustered public facilities (see Map Attachment).
Tanacross Village Council is requesting AEA Round 5 in the amount of $420,000. Tanacross Village Council will contribute $170,000 of in-kind building materials to this exciting Project.
Combined, Tanacross Village Council will construct a single woody biomass plant to heat four (4) community facility which is estimated to displace 26,500 gallons of imported heating
oil and create local wood-harvesting employment/small business opportunities.
The Tanana Solar Thermal Public Facilities Spacing Heating Project seeks to demonstrate and implement the market transformative benefits of combining biomass space heating technologies
currently being installed at Tanana?s public facilities with solar thermal collectors. During the winter months the heat energy generated by the biomass boilers offsets a substantial
amount of the fuel oil normally required. The cordwood fuel source also allows many of the operating costs to remain in the community since the supply of the cordwood and manpower required
to feed and boilers is local. During the summer the biomass boilers are a less desirable alternative. The focus and energies of the community are diverted to essential traditional cultural
activities. The solar thermal, which is a passive heat energy source that can operate largely unattended, allows those activities to continue uninterrupted. Thus it is an excellent
companion to the biomass and can contribute substantially to the heat energy requirement for at least nine months of the year. The combination of the two heat energy sources virtually
eliminates the dependency on fuel oil as the heat energy source.
The City believes that the integration of solar thermal is essential to the continued development and expansion of the biomass program in Alaska. The resulting combination system is
more compatible with the life styles and cultural activities of people in rural Alaska, further reduces the ongoing operational costs of the heat energy system, and reduces the long
term impact on the area biomass resource due to the system operation. For this project, the City of Tanana has selected four buildings in Tanana that have biomass systems ? the washeteria,
the tribal complex, the teacher housing duplex, and a single residence teacher housing unit. This mix represents a good cross section of both commercially and residentially oriented
systems. Due to the highly variable temperatures found in the biomass systems, the City has selected indirect, glycol based evacuated tube collectors with variable speed circulation
pumps and supplemental heat storage tanks for the solar thermal systems. In the washeteria, the integral storage of the GARN boilers will be utilized. In the other facilities that are
utilizing Econoburn gasification boilers with limited internal storage capacity, supplemental storage tanks will be installed in conjunction with the solar thermal.
AVEC is proposing to complete final design and permitting for four wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation systems in St. Michael and Stebbins. Work under this grant
will also be used to design controls for the power generation system at a power plant in Stebbins. AVEC has completed the design and obtained permits for the intertie between St. Michael
and Stebbins. Once work done under this grant is completed, AVEC will seek funding to construct turbines and an intertie to serve both communities.
This project would add two additional NW100B turbines to the existing wind farm (consisting off our NW100B turbines) in Emmonak to complete the originally planned wind farm serving the
communities of Emmonak and Alakanuk.
AVEC proposes to install a 10 kWh solar array in Upper Kalskag. The array would be installed on the side of the existing power plant facility that is owned and operated by AVEC. Work
would involve shipping materials to the community, installing, integrating, testing, and commissioning the array. A small solar array in Upper Kalskag would help AVEC evaluate the
benefits of solar arrays installed at power generating facilities.
Currently, AVEC?s three wind turbines (Northern Power Systems 100A models) in Gambell generate in excess of community requirements when there is moderate to heavy wind and when the community
load is light. Much of this excess is not captured,since there is no economic way to store the energy. AVEC, together with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium with input from the
City of Gambell, are planning to design and construct a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy to power water treatment plant space heating, drinking water loop circulation
heating, and water storage tank heating. Design of the proposed equipment would be based on the secondary load installations and adapted to installation into the water treatment plant.
Currently, AVEC?s four wind turbines (Northern Power Systems 100B models) in Chevak generate in excess of community requirements when there is moderate to heavy wind and when the community
load is light. Much of this excess energy is not captured, since there is no economic way to store the energy. AVEC, together with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium with input
from the City of Chevak, are planning to design and construct a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy to power space heating at the water treatment plant and drinking
water storage tank heating. Design of the proposed equipment would be based on AVEC?s other secondary load installations adapted to installation into the water treatment plant.
The primary financial benefit from this project would be to determine whether the wind resources are suitable to provide power to the community and to prepare a conceptual design of
a wind facility. Assuming installation of one NW100 turbine, it could produce 230,000 kWh annually. The possible displacement of diesel fuel used for village power generation in Goodnews
Bay could be 13,000 gal/yr (HOMER simulation, assuming 80% turbine availability, Tab G). This project could save about $72,400 during the first year of operation (2014). See the detailed
project benefits in Section 5.0.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met)tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Shishmaref. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the land owner for the placement of the met tower, geotechnical field work, permitting,transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year,and conducting a reconnaissance - level geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual
design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. This project will also consider other turbines that can be relocated, if the
village decides to move to another location.
AVEC proposes to complete erection,startup,and commissioning of wo NW100 wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation system for Mountain Village. AVEC would also upgrade
the switchgear and add remote control to the system.
AVEC?s two wind turbines (Northern Power Systems 100B models) in Shaktoolik when started up later this year will generate in excess of community requirements when there is moderate
to heavy wind and when the community load is light. Much of this excess will not be used, since there is no economic way to store the energy. AVEC, together with Alaska Native Tribal
Health Consortium, with input from the City of Shaktoolik, are planning to design and construct a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy to power water treatment plant
space heating, drinking water storage tank heating, and circulation loop heating. Design of the proposed equipment would be based on AVEC?s other secondary load installations and adapted
to installation into the water treatment plant.
A detailed feasibility study has been completed. This analysis has clearly shown that the project is both feasible and cost effective. These next two phases of the project(design and
construction) will build on the work that has been done to date. AVEC has already implemented electric boilers within its facilities in several villages. These efforts have clearly
demonstrated the ability to integrate the electric boilers into the existing systems. The challenge of this project will be to demonstrate that the electric boiler technology and controls
can be successfully used to provide heat to the various use points at the water treatment plant on an interruptible basis. The availability of the water tank for thermal storage greatly
reduces any risks. Currently, AVEC?s two wind turbines Northern Power Systems 100A models) in Mekoryuk generate in excess of community requirements when there is moderate to heavy wind
and when the community load is light. Much of this excess is not captured,since there is no economic way to store the energy. AVEC,together with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative,Inc. Mekoryuk Water System Surplus Wind Energy Recovery Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 3 of 138/26/2011
(ANTHC) with input from the City of Mekoryuk, are planning to design and construct a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy to power space heating at the water treatment
plant, drinking water storage tank heating, and washeteria hot water heating and clothes drying. Design of the proposed equipment would be based on AVEC?s other secondary load projects
adapted to installation into the water treatment plant.
AVEC proposes to complete construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of three Wind turbines and Secondary Load Controls (SLC) to supplement the existing power generation system
for currently intertied communities of St. Mary\'s and Pitka\'s Point. As a part of this project, AVEC would upgrade the electrical distribution line between St. Mary\'s and Pitka\'s
Point to a three phase line.
ORPC Alaska, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC (collectively, ORPC), develops technology and projects generating emission-free electricity from water
currents. Its technology includes the proprietary TidGen? Power System, which includes one or more TidGen? devices connected to an on-shore station with power and data cables. In ORPC?s
Cook Inlet TidGen? Project, ORPC will install a four-device TidGen? Power System with a rated generating capacity of 600 kW in a 6-knot current. AEA Round 4 funding to ORPC will help
fund a single-device TidGen? Power System. This Round 5 project, called the TidGen? Array Project, will expand the system to a four-device TidGen? Power System, by adding an array of
three TidGen? devices.
The purpose of this project is to investigate the geothermal potential of the Ivanof Bay area. The region is located at the base of the Kupreanof Volcano and there are reports of hot
springs in the general area of Stepovak Bay. Active volcanic systems such as Kupreanof volcano, and deep fracture and fault systems create favorable settings for development of geothermal
systems. Previous studies on geothermal resources of the Aleutian Arc have not identified a known hot springs or geothermal source however three areas of fumaroles have been reported
in the Stepovak Bay consisting of a chain of five volcanoes that includes Kupreanof (Wilson, 1990). The first area is at the head of Big River and is located near the center of the
Kupreanof volcanic edifice (Yount and others, 1985). The second, 5.5 miles southwest, was observed by Eakins (1970) on the southeast side of volcano 4, at the head of an unnamed stream
that flows into Ramsey Bay. At the time of the study, steaming fumaroles were visible at the west end of a sulfur deposit at about 2,950 foot elevation. The third, an unverified fumaroles
field, is inferred from 1940 air photos of unnamed volcano 1, north of Clark Bay (Wilson, 1990). These sites are about 28 miles east of Port Moller and 14 miles northwest of the Kupreanof
Peninsula. Kupreanof\'s latest activity was an ash/steam eruption in 1987 (Wilson, 1990). In addition to the surface manifestations, a wildcat well drilled by Philips Petroleum in 1976-1977,
Big River A-Ol encountered high temperatures at depth. The well was advanced approximately 7 miles west, northwest of Ivanof Bay, in the general area of the observed sulfur deposits.
The well chips/core is available for study. We request funding for a reconnaissance study of the region with a planned timeline of approximately 16 months. The study will include the
necessary fieldwork, the permitting and environmental analysis, preliminary design analysis, market analysis, simple economic analysis, and a final report. The fieldwork will include
mapping, remote sensing, aerial and ground based geophysics, and geochemical sampling of soils and waters. In addition, we will obtain samples from the Big River A-Ol Well in order
to conduct additional petrographic analysis of the core. This is the complete scope of work we are requesting funding for with this grant, but if this work is successful and promising,
future work would include the drilling necessary to confirm and develop the resource, necessary permitting, and power plant and infrastructure construction.
The project will include extending a new hot water heating / return loop from the recently completed Biomass Heating Plant to two (2) additional buildings on the Tok School Campus and
will include the required integration work within the two buildings. The first building is the multipurpose building which houses an ice hockey rink and shooting range. The intent is
to use the biomass plant to heat the shooting range and toilet group portion of the multipurpose building, approximately 10,000 square feet. The second building is the Zamboni garage
which would approximately 1,400 square feet. The heating loop will connect to the Tok School Biomass Plant that was completed in the fall of 2010. (The Tok School Biomass Plant was
developed using AEA Round I Grant Funding. The project consisted of a Biomass heating facility that contained an automated biomass heating system that now provides heat to the existing
K-12 School.) Since the completion of the Tok School Biomass Plant a steam turbine and electrical generation system have been added to create a combined heat and power (CHP) system.
The original biomass boiler was sized to allow for the CHP expansion and the additional load of the multipurpose building and Zamboni garage. The CHP project will be completed the fall
of 2011. When the CHP system is operational it will generate a substantial amount heat as a byproduct. The heat created will surpass the required heat demand of the existing K-12 School.
The intent is to recover the surplus heat and supply it to meet the heating demand of additional buildings mentioned above. The cost for maintenance and operation as well as for biomass
fuel will be negated for this project due to the planned operation of the CHP system.
The project will include extending a new hot water heating / return loop from the recently completed Biomass Heating Plant to a new 24?-0? x 100?-0? greenhouse and 20?-0? x 30?-0? processing
facility on the Tok School Campus. The greenhouse and processing facility would only use surplus heat from the Biomass Plant and would benefit from the electrical generation of the
Combined Heat and Power (CHP) system. Prodcue would initially be used to supplement the schools Food Service Program, providing fresh vegetables to student who otherwise would not have
access. The Biomass Plant has capacity to support additional greenhouses in the future if the demand for local produce in the region exceeds the anticipated yield capacity of the first
greenhouse.
The project will include extending a new hot water heating / return loop from the recently completed Biomass Heating Plant to a new 10,000 square foot net-zero Training and Administration
Center (TAC). The TAC would benefit from heat from the biomass boiler, surplus heat created as a byproduct of the electrical generation process of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP)
system, and would also benefit from the electrical generation of the CHP. The heating loop will connect to the Tok School Biomass Plant that was completed in the Fall of 2010. (The
Tok School Biomass Plant was developed using AEA Round I Grant Funding. The project consisted of a Biomass heating facility that contained an automated biomass heating system that now
provides heat to the existing K-12 School.) Since the completion of the Tok School Biomass Plant, a steam turbine and electrical generation system will be added to create a combined
heat and power (CHP) system. The original biomass boiler was sized to allow for the CHP expansion and the additional load of the multipurpose building and Zamboni garage. The CHP project
will be completed the fall of 2011. The TAC will be a net-zero facility. The facility will reduce utility demands through low energy building practices, such as super insulation, location
on site, natural ventilation, and day lighting. The TAC will also incorporate incorporating energy efficient building technologies such as high efficiency lighting, communication, and
back up HVAC systems.
The City of Elim and its partners, the Native Village of Elim, Elim Native Corporation, and the University of Alaska Fairbanks are proposing a Resource Assessment (Reconnaissance) /
Feasibility Analysis of potential geothermal sites near the community. A number of known moderate temperature hot springs as well as other identified thermal anomalies, based on local
knowledge, are located in the area surrounding Elim offering potential energy sources for the
community. Known sources include Kwiniuk/Elim Hot Springs (41?C at 22 gpm), and Clear Creek Hot Springs (65?C at 230 gpm). No significant geothermal exploration has occurred at Elim
to date, although the Alaska Energy Authority identified geothermal energy, along with wind, and wood, as potential energy options for Elim in the 2010 Energy Pathway. This project
will combine low cost airborne and ground-based reconnaissance and mapping techniques to develop a conceptual model of the system, and complete a preliminary design and cost analysis
to refine the numbers included in the Pathway.
False Pass is currently dependent on diesel fuel for all of its electrical generation and heat production. This project will perform a reconnaissance and feasibility study to determine
if tidal energy can be economically harnessed to provide electrical and perhaps heating loads to the community. The reconnaissance phase of the project will include gathering existing
energy usage data, including leveraging existing AEA funded efforts to assess the viability of tidal energy power at False Pass, preliminary geophysical data on ocean current velocities,
and conducting modeling efforts to determine if a feasibility study is warranted. The feasibility phase of the project will involve geophysical data collection including more rigorous
current velocity and bathymetric data collection to locate a viable deployment area. This data will be utilized to initiate consultations with permitting agencies and to perform an
economic analysis of a conceptually designed project utilizing one or more of Ocean Renewable Power Company?s (ORPC?s) TidGen Power Systems to determine if a tidal energy project is
economically, environmentally and technologically feasible at False Pass.
This project will conduct a reconnaissance study of potential renewable energy sources for use by the community of St. Michael to support our water and sewer utility and major community
structures. Our water and sewer utility has very high per capita energy use, and we need a more cost-effective energy source to help sustain this utility. This study will identify potential
renewable energy sources and examine their associated utilization methods, technical and economic feasibility, and other potential benefits, such as energy cost savings and reduced
operation and maintenance expenses.
The City, in partnership with the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC), is seeking funding to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines at the community water treatment
plant (WTP) to offset electrical costs with a renewable energy source. The City seeks to analyze the feasibility of utilizing wind turbines for capturing wind energy to provide electricity
for the existing WTP. The feasibility study will, at minimum, complete the following activities: ? Determine the available wind resources around the WTP site; ? Estimate the long-term
viability of the proposed project based on expected load growth; ? Provide a conceptual-level system design; ? Prepare a conceptual-level cost estimate for the construction effort and
the operations and maintenance of the proposed system; ? Identify easements and permits required; Prepare a comprehensive economical analyses of alternatives; ? Provide recommendations
to move forward with the project design activities; and ? Evaluate the potential uses of wind turbines to convert wind energy to electricity.
This project will determine the feasibility of a small wind farm to provide electricity and heat for the Native Village of Goodnews Bay water treatment plant. Goodnews Bay is classified
as a Class 5 Wind Power site in Appendix B of the Alaska Rural Energy Plan. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) considers Class 5 sites to be "excellent" for harnessing
wind power. Between electricity and fuel, the annual energy cost to operate the water treatment plant is approximately $21,000. Conservatively, it is estimated that electrical usage
can be reduced by 75% and fuel consumption by 30% through the use of renewable energy.
This project will provide a heat recovery system to support the heating requirements of five City operated and owned buildings in Togiak. The objective of this project is to reduce the
consumption of expensive heating fuel by utilizing available recovered heat. There are several community buildings within a 500 foot radius of the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
(AVEC) power plant, offering an excellent opportunity to capture a maximum amount of waste heat from the plant for hydronic heating. A detailed Heat Recovery Analysis was completed
for the City of Togiak and Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) in June 2010 by Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (Report Attached). The findings and preferred alternatives
developed by this analysis will be used as the basis for the project proposed in this application. The proposed project will design and construct a heat recovery system between the
AVEC power plant and the following end-user community buildings: 1) Water treatment Plant, 2) Clinic, 3) Police Station, 4) City Office, and 5) "Old School" Community Activity Building.
The new system will capture jacket water heat generated by the AVEC plant that is currently wasted to the atmosphere by power plant radiators. The recovered heat will be transferred
by insulated glycol piping to the end-users. The new system will tie into the end-users\' heating systems using heat
exchangers, control mechanisms and any required upgrades to the existing building hydronic systems.
Currently, AVEC is not utilizing either the jacket heat from its diesel engines or the heat generated by the electric boiler installed to dispose excess wind energy. This project would
recover heat from both sources at the AVEC plant and send that heat to the water treatment plant to heat the building, the circulated water loops, and the water storage tank. The AVEC
power plant and the Savoonga water treatment plant are located next to each other in Savoonga. A feasibility study has been done for this project and the design will be completed in
the near future with other funds. Funds are being requested for construction only.
The City of Shishmaref proposes to design construct a heat recovery system in the community in accordance with the findings and recommendations of a heat recovery study conducted by
Alaska Energy and Engineering Inc. The project will recover available jacket water heat from diesel generators that produce electricity at the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
power plant and convey the heat to core city facilities. The heat currently produced by the generators is released to the atmosphere via radiators. This project is estimated to reduce
the annual diesel heating fuel consumption of nearby community
buildings by about 7,900 gallons/year. The construction scope will include the installation of the waste heat transmission line, pumps, heat exchanger, and other system appurtenances.
This project will involve coordination with the City of Shishmaref (City), AVEC, and the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC).
This project will provide a feasibility study to determine the benefits of installing a wind turbine system in Old Kasigluk. The wind turbines will be used to convert wind energy to
heating and electrical energy that will be used to heat and power the water treatment and washeteria facility located in Old Kasigluk. The project will:
? Determine the feasibility of installing a wind turbine system for heating and electricity needs
? Estimate the long-term viability of the proposed project based on expected load growth,
? Provide a conceptual level system design,
? Prepare a conceptual level cost estimate for the construction effort and the operations and maintenance of the proposed system,
? Identify easements and permits required,
? Prepare a comprehensive economical analyses of alternatives,
? Update the utility business plan, and
? Make a recommendation to move forward with the project design activities.
This project will complete a study to determine the feasibility of a biomass fuel system for the existing water treatment plant (WTP) and wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) in Klawock,
Alaska. It is proposed that a biomass heating system will be used to heat the WWTP buildings and supply heat to other ancillary building components that require a heat source. Resources
for the City to supply the proposed biomass system are readily available in and around the community of Klawock and throughout Prince of Wales Island, on which Klawock is located. This
study will demonstrate the cost savings that will be
associated with the implementation of a biomass fuel system at the City\'s WTP and WWTP. The project will complete the following tasks:
? Determine the amount of energy required for both facilities;
? Estimate the long-term viability of the proposed project based on expected load growth;
? Provide a conceptual-level system design;
? Prepare a conceptual-level cost estimate for the construction effort and the operations and maintenance of the proposed system;
? Identify easements and permits required;
? Prepare a comprehensive economical analyses of alternatives for selection by the City;
? Update the utility business plan; and
? Make a recommendation to move forward with the project design activities.
This project will study the feasibility of a heat recovery system to displace fuel oil heat used by the city water utility. This study will look at the heat available from the electric
power plant and the heat demand of the water distribution and storage system. An estimate of the energy savings and cost savings to the utility will be developed. This project will
provide a recommendation based upon energy savings, benefits/cost, and other criteria.
This project will determine the feasibility of constructing a heat recovery system and/or an excess wind energy electric boiler to supplement the heat used to serve the City of New Stuyahok
owned water utility. A new Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant is being built in an area approximately I mile from town, adjacent to the newly constructed school
and a new water storage tank that is under construction. The school currently has an agreement with AVEC to purchase recovered heat from the new power plant. AVEC plans to construct
an electrical intertie with Ekwok in the near future, providing electricity from the New Stuyahok electric plant. When this occurs, it is possible that recovered heat will be in excess
of the school\'s needs, leaving some available to heat the adjacent water storage tank. AVEC also anticipates installing some wind turbines in this location, making the availability
of excess wind energy to operate an electric boiler at the large tank likely, which is another potential source of water tank heating this study will investigate.
This project will determine the feasibility of capturing excess heat energy from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power generation plant in Toksook Bay and utilizing
it to provide heat for community buildings. The project will: ? Determine the amount of excess heat energy available for reuse, ? Estimate the long-term viability of the proposed project
based on expected load growth, ? Provide a conceptual-level system design, ? Prepare a conceptual-level cost estimate for the construction effort and the operations and maintenance
of the proposed system, ? Identify easements and permits required ? Prepare a comprehensive economical analyses of alternatives, ? Update the utility business plan, ? Make a recommendation
to move forward with the project design activities, and ? Evaluate the potential uses of waste heat.
The proposed project will complete a feasibility study to review the potential for a biomass heating system for the City of Lower Kalskag (City) water treatment plant (WTP). Specifically,
the feasibility study will include the following scope items: 1. Site Visit to assess facilities to be served 2. Land use assessment 3. Forest inventory and harvest assessment (Subcontract)
4. Report Development 5. Presentation to Community. The report development will focus on site assessment; conceptual mechanical and civilAEA 12-001 Application 7/1/2011 engineering
recommendations; financial evaluation; and review of required permits. A new WTP for the City is currently being designed by the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) through
a cooperative project agreement (CPA) with the City. Currently, the design for the WTP is 65% complete and is projected to be completed in mid-20l2. Following the completion of design
activities, the City and the ANTHC will apply for construction funding for the WTP improvements and it is anticipated that construction activities will commence in 2013. If the feasibility
study shows that the biomass boiler is a viable renewable energy resource, then the City will also apply for funding for design and construction of a new biomass boiler system for the
WTP. This will be during the same time frame that the application for the rest of the improvements associated with the new WTP are. The new biomass system would be used to heat the
WTP in addition to supplying heat to any fixtures that require it which may include heat add systems, etc. This project will involve coordination with the City and the ANTHC via a CPA.
This project will provide a site specific wind study to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines at the vacuum sewer plant in Selawik, Alaska. Specifically, the feasibility
study will include the following scope items: Equipment purchase; Initial site visits and equipment setup; Monitoring and Data collection; Report Development; Equipment Demobilization;
Presentation to Community. The report development will focus on site assessment; conceptual electrical and civil engineering recommendations; financial evaluations; and review of required
permits.
Currently, Middle Kuskokwim Electric is not utilizing the jacket heat from its diesel engines. This project will recover heat from the engines at the Middle Kuskoquim Electric plant
and send it to the water treatment plant to heat the building, the circulated water loops, and the water storage tank. The Middle Kuskoquim Electric power plant and the Sleetmute water
treatment plant are located in Sleetmute. A feasibility study has been done for this project as part of an energy audit of the water treatment plant, and the design will be completed
soon with other funds. Funds are being requested for construction only.
AVEC records from 2007 show that approximately 127,463 gallons of diesel fuel were consumed for power generation in Scammon Bay to generate 1,651,855 kW of electricity. This project
will displace 1,031,865 kWh per year (Scammon Bay Feasibility Study 2003) equating to a net 82,549 gallons of displaced fuel or $569,829.27 per year at a current retail price of$7.23/gal.
This project will be able to produce power at a rate significantly lower than the cost of present electrical generation, resulting in reduced cost of power for residents. Paying for
basic power generation has become much more of a challenge, and reduction of the power costs to the consumer will provide an economic boost to individuals trying to make ends meet for
their families. Reducing the cost of power will also be a boon to economic development in the community. Any project providing stimulation to the economy cannot be cost effective without
going hand-in-hand with a reduction in utility rates to help generate revenue. Other benefits to the Alaskan Public: The anticipated benefits of installation of the wind turbines include
reducing the negative impact of the cost of energy by providing a renewable energy alternative. This project could help stabilize energy costs and provide long-term socioeconomic benefits
to village households. Locally produced, affordable energy will empower community residents and could help avert rural to urban migration. This project would have many environmental
benefits resulting from a reduction of hydrocarbon use.
These benefits include:
? Reduced potential for fuel spills or contamination during transport, storage, or use (thus protecting vital water and subsistence food sources)
? Improved air quality
? Decreased contribution to global climate change from fossil fuel use
? Decreased coastal erosion due to climate change.
This project will determine the feasibility of a small wind farm to provide electricity and heat for the City-owned water treatment plant and sewer vacuum station. Kotlik is classified
as a Class 4 to 5 Wind Power site in the Renewable Energy Atlas of Alaska. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) considers Class 5 sites to be "excellent" for harnessing wind
power. The estimated annual electricity cost to operate the Kotlik water treatment plant and vacuum station is about $35,000.
The City of Noorvik in partnership with the Alaska Native Tribal health Consortium (ANTHC) is seeking to determine the feasibility if installing a heat recovery system in the community
for heating the community water treatment, water storage and water distribution systems. The City of Noorvik seeks to determine the feasibility of capturing excess heat energy from
the existing AVEC generator plant and utilizing it to provide heat for the existing water treatment plant and water distribution system and other community buildings. The feasibility
study project will: ? determine the amount of excess heat energy available for reuse,
This project will provide the design and construction of a heat recovery system that will utilize waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant
for use at the WTP and three L YSD teacher housing units in Russian Mission, Alaska. The design will be developed based on recommendations from the Russian Mission, Alaska Heat Recovery
Study (see attached) that was completed by Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E). The construction scope will include retrofitting the AVEC generators and installing a waste heat
transmission line, circulation pumps, heat exchangers, and other system appurtenances. The proposed project will involve coordination with the AVEC, the City, L YSD, the Alaska Native
Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC), as well as the Alaska Rural Utility Collaborate (ARUC).
The Atmautluak washeteria, the only sanitation facility community owned by Atmautluak Traditional Council, has high energy costs for heating water for use in washers, showers, and building
heat. This facility includes the water treatment plant. Safe drinking water is made here and used by local residents. This project will provide recovered heat for the washeteria. This
project will be combined with an Indian Health Service (IHS) project rehabilitating the washeteria to meet the community\'s water needs and reduce the associated costs. This project
will construct an enclosure (utilidor) for the sewage force main and recovered heat lines and move heat from the power plant to the sewage lift station and washeteria. The IHS project
will repair the washeteria foundation and make internal improvements to effectively use the recovered heat.
The City of Golovin in partnership with the Alaska Native Tribal health Consortium (ANTHC) is seeking to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in the community for heating
the water treatment facilities. Golovin currently stores approximately 2 million gallons of treated water to provide safe drinking water to community residents. In addition, Golovin\'s
water storage is due to increase to approximately 3 million gallons in two years with the construction of a new water storage tank, which will serve homes that currently do not have
running water. This stored water, as well as the community piped water distribution system, is heated using multiple oil-fired boilers. The energy requirement and fuel consumption to
keep this water from freezing each year is extremely high, and escalating fuel price have the potential to limit Golovin\'s ability to provide adequate sanitation services to its residents
due to prohibitive heating costs. The City of Golovin now seeks to determine the feasibility of utilizing wind turbines for capturing wind energy to provide heat and electricity for
the existing water treatment plant, water storage and water distribution system. The feasibility study project will:
? determine the available wind resources around the water treatment plant,
? estimate the long-term viability of the proposed project based on expected load growth,
? provide a conceptual level system design,
? prepare a conceptual level cost estimate for the construction effort and the operations and maintenance of the proposed system,
? identify easements and permits required, prepare a comprehensive economical analyses of alternatives,
? update the utility business plan, ? make a recommendation to move forward with the project design activities,
? Evaluate the potential uses of wind turbines to convert wind energy to heat.
The City of Kake Hydroelectric Resource Analysis study will review the potential hydroelectric energy sources within or near the community of Kake, Alaska. The proposed project will
complete a resource (feasibility) analysis of the potential, readily accessible hydroelectric resources available to the community and will provide a conceptual design for the selected
hydroelectric alternative. Traditional hydroelectric turbines and infrastructure and low head, hydrokinetic technologies including Archimedes Screws will be considered as a part of
this resource analysis. Alternatives that could potentially be retrofitted to the existing Gunnuck Creek Dam will be considered as a part of this resource analysis. Previous hydroelectric
studies for the Kake area will be reviewed and incorporated into this analysis, which will include updated estimated capital and annual operation and maintenance costs. The resource
analysis will compare the alternative project costs and will determine the most feasible alternative to offset some or all of Kake\'s diesel-driven electrical supply. A conceptual design
of the preferred alternative will be prepared as part of the resource analysis.
The City of Kobuk seeks to incorporate a biomass boiler system in their water treatment plant facility. This project will provide design and construction for a wood burning boiler system
in Kobuk, Alaska. The intent for this project is to increase the use of locally available, biomass energy for thermal heating. This project will include:
? System Design
? Right of way and Survey requirements ? Construction Permitting
? Installation of a wood burning boiler system (Gam unit proposed)
? Construction of a covered wood splitting and storage shed
? Gravel Pad/Foundation
? Perimeter fencing
? Hydronic piping and other mechanical components ? Electrical Controls
? Harvesting and Processing Equipment (Saws, wood splitters, etc.)
? Freight and travel costs.
This is a combination of applications 839 and 898. The 839 project involves the expansion of NJUS? awarded REF Round I wind power project (installation of a 900 kW wind turbine) through
the installation of a second 900 kW wind turbine at the planned project site. The project aims to take advantage of economies of scope to incorporate the installation of a second wind
turbine generator during the construction of NJUS? Round I awarded project. At this time, conceptual design and feasibility studies have been completed and the project is ready to continue
with final design, permitting, and construction activities.
The 898 project seeks to optimize existing installations and in-progress wind projects in the community. NJUS is utilizing REF?Round I funding to install a 900 KW wind turbine in summer
2012. Another REF?Round I project allowed NJUS to construct a power transmission line to Banner Wind, an independent power producing facility privately owned by Sitnasuak & Bering Straits
Native Corporations, from which NJUS purchases wind power under a contract. Through installation of a new wind integration control system and modification of the diesel generation system
at NJUS? Power Plant, the project focuses on the optimization of existing diesel generation equipment within the community in order to maximize benefits from renewable energy supplies.
Under the scope of this project smaller, peaking diesel generator sets will be integrated into Nome?s Power Plant and plant controls will be reconfigured to provide system wide benefits
of reduced operating costs, greater stability, and improved efficiency. In the event NJUS or Banner Wind expands wind generation capacity in the future, the community can potentially
recognize additional benefit from the project.
The proposed project is to build and install a Combined Wood Pellet Boiler and Solar Thermal System that would provide heat for both a 3,200 sq ft shop/office building and a 1,160 sq
ft administrative building. This project includes construction of a building addition to house the boiler system, purchase and installation of the solar thermal and pellet boiler, and
focused monitoring and evaluating of the project. This project would be used as a demonstration project for the community to learn about solar thermal and wood pellet boiler systems
and to encourage the use of local renewable resources for heating.
The Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential hydroelectric resource in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley with an estimated installed capacity of 6.5 MW and annual energy generation
of 34,100 MWh. The preliminary estimated project cost is $25 million, and estimated benefit-cost ratio is 3.29. This proposed feasibility study is contingent upon the favorable outcome
of a reconnaissance study that is scheduled to start in August 2011. In the event the reconnaissance study determines that the project is not viable, Eklutna Inc. intends to withdraw
this application from consideration.
The proposed project is a high head run-of-river hydroelectric power plant on Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon with an installed capacity of 177 kW. Project will include a 9-foot tall
concrete dam, 3,260 foot long 18- inch and 16-inch diameter penstock and access trail; 400 square foot power house; 1,550 foot long access road with a bridge across Packers Creek to
the powerhouse; and a 1,750 foot long overhead power line extension to the existing distribution system and 3,000 foot long control connection to the existing diesel power plant.
The City of Ouzinkie (?City?) proposes to replace an existing timber buttress dam at Mahoona Lake, located approximately 1.5 miles east of the City on Spruce Island near Kodiak, Alaska.
Funds requested in this Renewable Energy Grant application are needed to perform a feasibility analysis and conceptual design for a proposed replacement dam located downstream of the
existing wooden dam. The feasibility analysis will include evaluation of the existing 6,000 foot, 18-inch diameter PVC penstock, a 1.5 mile access road, and a (125 kW) hydroelectric
powerhouse. The replacement dam will be designed to allow for an increase of holding capacity from a current 400 acre-feet, to a post-construction capacity of 600 acre-feet. This 50%
increase in capacity will provide uninterrupted use of the hydroelectric generators, a potential increase in power production capacity, and eliminate the need for supplemental diesel-generated
power. The scope of this project will be consistent with the requirements of Phase II Feasibility Analysis, Conceptual Design, as set forth in Section 2.4 of the Round V grant application
instructions dated 1 July 2011.
The proposed project will finalize the feasibility and conceptual design, build, and install a wood-fired hydronic heating system in three Seward schools. Phase I, Reconnaissance Study
was completed in July, 2011. (See attached reports) This proposed Seward Schools Biomass Heating System project will implement the following multi-phased process:
? Phase II, Finalize Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design.
? Phase III, Final Design of a wood-fired hydronic heating system to heat the combined Seward High, Middle and Elementary School campus with woody biomass fuel.
? Phase IV, Construction, Commissioning, and Operation of the heating system and follow up reporting on operation and maintenance.
The project is designed to proceed without the delay of additional grant year cycles. Reports from a 2011 preliminary feasibility assessment and a 2011 District energy evaluation will
serve as the reference documents for this project.
The Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility would consist of 5 MW of installed capacity with an average annual output of 20,600 MWh of energy, installed on the Grant lake watershed near Moose
Pass, Alaska. The proposed Project is comprised of a diversion dam at the outlet to Grant Lake (under consideration), an intake structure in Grant Lake, a tunnel, a surge tank, a penstock,
a powerhouse, a tailrace detention pond, a switchyard with disconnect switch & step-up transformer, and an overhead or underground transmission line. The intake would be in Grant Lake
near its outlet. Water would be conveyed from the intake through a 3200? penstock to a powerhouse containing two Francis-type turbines. The powerhouse would be located near the bank
of Grant Creek and would discharge through a second penstock into Grant Creek. A transmission line would connect the facility to the Railbelt grid near Moose Pass. Please see the attached
Project Description that was filed with FERC on August 13th, 2010. Kenai Hydro LLC, whose sole member is the Homer Electric Association (HEA), was created in 2008 to evaluate and possibly
develop this site as a low impact hydroelectric facility.
This biomass project will replace one of our existing boilers with a pellet boiler system. The project will also entail adding a small addition next to the boiler room for storage
and loading of the pellets.
We will build a sewage sludge destruction and energy co-generation facility at or near one of Juneau?s sewage treatment plants. The sludge will be destroyed using a thermo-chemical process
of supercritical water oxidation (SCWO, rhymes with ?grow?). The SCWO technology is quite simple, essentially being a very high pressure, very high temperature pressure cooker. We heat
water to 600? Celsius (1,100 Fahrenheit) under 4,000 psi of pressure at which point it is no longer a liquid or a gas. It is then a ?supercritical fluid?. It penetrates and diffuses
into compounds like a gas, but dissolves like a liquid. The reactions are incredibly rapid at only 60 seconds and very thorough with all organics, carbon, and hydrogen compounds converted
to gases. The effluent is cooled and separated. It would be adequate at that point. But we take it a step further by injecting liquid oxygen, which oxidizes all of the compounds produced
to their highest state. All carbon is converted into CO2 (carbon dioxide). All hydrogen is converted into H2O (water). We actually produce more water than that with which we started.
All minerals are rendered to inert oxides. The oxidation process is exothermic, which makes the process self-sustaining through the production of phenomenal amounts of heat. That heat
perpetuates the reaction and can be converted into surplus electricity or district heating. At the end you have only clean industrial gases, really clean water, and a mineral ash high
in marketable silica and phosphorus.
This project is to help ascertain the feasibility of using biomass and/or other wood-based alternative energy source to provide long-term sustainable energy sources for a 30,000 s.f.
Multi-Disciplinary Combined Facility (?MDCF?) in the Copper River Valley region. The planned facility located in Tazlina, AK, has already been accepted as a Phase II Site Selection
and Evaluation Report (?SSER?) schematic approved eligible Joint-Venture Project by the Indian Health Service. The results of such an analysis will help determine if alternative energy
sources can reduce long term operating costs over the life of this planned primary care facility, help to ascertain if an expansion of existing CVEA power facilities utilizing biomass
sources nearly Glennallen is warranted, or, if separate, stand-alone biomass-based power units housed within or attached to separate facilities is a more efficient business model.
lPEC proposes to use Renewable Energy grant funds to perform a feasibility study of a small hydroelectric project at Walker Lake. Walker Lake is located close to existing distribution
facilities for the Chilkat Valley, Klukwan Village, and the 10 Mile Haines Highway interconnection point with AP&T\'s Haines/Skagway communities. The feasibility study will include
an alternative analysis and selection of a preferred alternative. A stream gage will be installed to measure flow. A reconnaissance level geotechnical investigation will also be made.
The results of these tasks will be presented in a report which will include a written project description, energy generation estimate, cost estimate, cost of energy calculation, a description
of licensing and permitting issues and conceptual design drawings.
The proposed Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie is a 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan Public Utilities
(KPU). The Intertie will include 14 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line to be constructed on Annette Island between Metlakatla and Walden Point and an approximate three mile
submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Walden Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation. The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for the integrated
operation of the interconnected systems? generating plants. Final design of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie is underway. Construction of the line began in June 2010 and approximately
three miles of the overhead line is complete. The control system upgrades were completed in July 2011.
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development consists of a 1 +MW run of the river hydropower project located in the Tongass Forest within the Admiralty Island National Monument based on a proposal
that Kootznoowoo submitted in March 2000 which is described more full in the Angoon Hydrologic Project Feasibility Evaluation Report currently on file with the AEA (Project). The development
would be located on Thayer Creek approximately 6 miles north of Angoon. Thayer Creek flows out of Thayer Lake (64 square mile reservoir) at a gentle grade through a broad forested valley
then steepens for 6,800 feet through a narrow forested canyon and finally flattens again for 2000 feet before flowing into Chatham Strait. The development will tap the energy potential
in the steep section of the stream and will avoid any impact on anadromous fish that use the lower portion of the creek. The average flow of Thayer Creek is approximately 370 cfs and
can vary from 25 cfs during the coldest periods of the winter to over 2000 cfs during storms in the fall and winter. The generating facility has a head of 250 feet which is approximate
because of the wording of the Forest Service Record of Decision (ROD) requiring maintenance of fish habitat. An additional restriction set forth in the ROD which is not considered in
the HDR proposal requires the overland transmission line be buried where feasible along the access road to the community of Angoon. The transmission line funding will be submitted in
a separate companion application for Round V funds.
The City & Borough of Wrangell in conjunction with Trident Seafood?s proposes to purchase and install a capacitor bank that will offset fish processing reactive power demands and voltage
instability over the Tyee Transmission System.
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development consists of a 1 +MW run of the river hydropower project located in the Tongass Forest within the Admiralty Island National Monument based on a proposal
that Kootznoowoo submitted in March 2000 which is described more full in the Angoon Hydrologic Project Feasibility Evaluation Report currently on file with the AEA (Project). The development
would be located on Thayer Creek approximately 6 miles north of Angoon. Thayer Creek flows out of Thayer Lake (64 square mile reservoir) at a gentle grade through a broad forested valley
then steepens for 6,800 feet through a narrow forested canyon and finally flattens again for 2000 feet before flowing into Chatham Strait. The development will tap the energy potential
in the steep section of the stream and will avoid any impact on anadromous fish that use the lower portion of the creek. The average flow of Thayer Creek is approximately 370 cfs and
can vary from 25 cfs during the coldest periods of the winter to over 2000 cfs during storms in the fall and winter. The generating facility has a head of 250 feet which is approximate
because of the wording of the Forest Service Record of Decision (ROD) requiring maintenance of fish habitat. An additional restriction set forth in the ROD which is not considered in
the HDR proposal requires the overland transmission line be buried where feasible along the access road to the community of Angoon. The generating facilities funding will be submitted
in a separate companion application for Round V funds.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a combination of geothermal energy and waste heat recovery to enhance district space heating for residential use. Existing waste heat includes
the power plant and warm processed wastewater from the treatment plant. This reconnaissance study is intended to determine if known underground resources are capable of providing geothermal
energy in combination with waste heat recovery to support space heating of residential homes, commercial and public buildings. The study will include collection of existing data, identification
of additional resources, and analysis to prepare recommendations.
This project proposes to add waste heat recovery heat exchangers by connecting the Tatitlek Generator system to the adjacent Tatitlek Community Center thereby providing the majority
of the heating and domestic hot water needs. This project was fully engineered and designed as an alternate additive to a renovation project of the building in 2006; the plans will
need to be updated and a new fire marshal permit received for the project to be ready for construction. The generator system was originally designed by Alaska Energy Authority to utilize
waste heat recovery and the community center mechanical system was designed and replaced so that it will be able to utilize the generator waste heat to heat the entire building with
an oil fired boiler as a back-up and/or supplemental system. Oil heat is the current heating system. Program objectives:
? Reduce heating costs within the community.
? Recover wasted energy
? Reduce barging requirements into the community and conflicts between generator requirements and homeowner fuel needs.
? Provide more reliable heating systems
? Reduce total community energy cost
The seven communities named in this proposal: Northway, Tanacross, Nenana, Circle, Eagle, Stevens Village, and Minto, have all participated in energy planning meetings with Interior
Regional Housing Authority (the applicant), Tanana Chiefs Conference, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, Denali Commission, Alaska Energy Authority, and others, and have identified
wood heating in public facilities as a key opportunity to displace fuel oil, reduce energy costs, utilize locally available renewable resources, and create local employment. This proposal
calls for feasibility assessments that include study of public facilities where wood heating might be applicable, pre-engineering analysis of the size and type of boilers that would
be required (including the "Garn-in-a-box" option), estimated fuel displacement and cost savings, capital cost and payback period, and forest inventory and wood harvest plan. The applicant
proposes a three-pronged approach: (1) subcontract with a qualified biomass energy specialist (e.g., Thomas Deerfield, who is presently evaluating wood heating feasibility in eight
Interior villages with a RE Fund-Round 4 grant) to conduct 1- to 2-day site visits in each community and prepare feasibility assessments for each, (2) subcontract with Alaska Native
Tribal Health Consortium for staff engineer with expertise in water and sewer systems to conduct site inspection and prepare feasibility assessment for those systems, and (3) subcontract
with Will Putman, head forester for Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) to conduct forest inventory and wood harvest planning. Following the completion of these reports, project staff Kim
Carlo of Interior Regional Housing Authority (lRHA) will continue to communicate with residents of the communities and facilitate their internal planning processes to determine whether
each community wants to move forward with final design and construction phases of the respective wood-heating projects, pending available funding. It bears mentioning this proposal
is identical in scope to one submitted by IRHA under Round 4 of the RE Fund for wood heating feasibility work in eight other Interior communities. This represents a deliberate approach
whereby the applicant is proceeding in stages with conducting feasibility work prior to conceptual design, final design, and construction. It is anticipated that the phased approach
will allow IRHA to conduct full assessments for most communities in the region.
The project will design and construct a manual cordwood wood energy system in the community of Huslia, Alaska. The wood energy system will provide heat for the community water plant,
washeteria and health clinic. The project is projected to save approximately $41,516 annually in fuel costs for the three facilities out of a total fuel expenditure of $30,416/year.
The water plant and washeteria are co-located and are adjacent to the health clinic. All three facilities will be served by a common wood-fired heating plant consisting of two Gam WHS
2000 boilers and a fuel storage building. The biomass resource will be purchased from residents of the community by the Huslia Traditional Council.
The project will design and construct wood heating systems in three Interior Alaska communities. IRHA is currently conducting feasibility assessments including forest inventories and
wood harvest assessments in eight Interior Communities. Once the assessments are complete, three out of the eight communities will be selected for design and construction of high efficiency,
low-emission biomass boiler systems. Projects will be selected based on the highest likelihood of successful project implementation. Factors considered will include the amount of fuel
oil displaced, cost savings to the community, commitment by the community and facility personnel and a reliable and consistent supply of fuel. IRHA will partner with ANTHC and the individual
tribes for the project.
As a condition of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing of the Cooper Lake plant in 2007, Chugach agreed to construct a project to divert water from Stetson Creek
into the Cooper Lake reservoir and a related structure to release water into Cooper Creek. The project will enhance fish habitat and add water to Cooper Lake which will result in additional
hydroelectric energy generation. Most importantly, constructing this project allows the license for the Cooper Lake hydro facility to be renewed for 50 years.
The project will be a small scale "Wood Products for Heat" (Biomass) operation with a heavy emphasis on the development of a viable small scale wood pellet production facility. The project
will work to achieve the following three (3) strategic objectives (SO): 1) SO1: Displace 100% of the very expensive fossil fuels used for heat production in our community. 2) SO2: Manage
our wood products for heat production operation to ensure sustainability and, 3) SO3: Create local jobs in our rural community supported by our natural resources. Small scale pellet
operations do not enjoy the "economies of scale" of their larger cousins and experience higher production costs "per ton of pellets produced". This fact makes it important to identify
all the production costs and manage them properly, to remain a self-supporting, on-going concern. Higher production costs in rural Alaska are not a problem unless they exceed the sales
income and result in \'Jobs\' in rural Alaska". This reality of the lack of "economies of scale", leads to the importance of SO2 "Sustainability": The sale of "wood products for heat",
especially wood pellets must return enough financial resources (sales) to maintain, over time, the production and capital replacement costs of the operation. The operation must "breakeven"
to be sustainable. A preliminary analysis determined, based on the current market, the production costs must be at or below $120 per ton with attention to all the cost factors to sustain
an on-going pellet producing operation. This cost is not set and is dependent on the level of actual sales. We currently have "unsolicited" orders for 60 tons of pellets per year for
boilers being installed in the region. 60 tons won\'t support the operation, however it is an indication wood pellets are in demand and commodity in the region. Based on research there
are 1099 housing units in the area and 31% of these units utilize some type of wood products for heat. It is expected as the global economy recovers and the cost of energy increases
the use of wood for heat will increase.
CVEA is currently in the process of purchasing a new runner for Unit 2 at the Solomon Gulch hydroelectric facility. This project will increase CVEA?s renewable energy capacity. The new
runner will be manufactured utilizing state of the art flow analysis which will result in efficiency gains of approximately 10%. The installation of the runner along with the overhaul
of Unit 2 will occur in late fall 2012.
The Allison Creek Project is a run of the river (ROR) alternative involving construction of a diversion structure on Allison Creek at elevation 1,300 feet. Water will be diverted from
the creek into a 42 inch surface / buried penstock to a 6.5 megawatt powerhouse near tidewater. Attachment A is the Final Feasibility Study which provides details on this project as
presented and approved by the CVEA Board of Directors.
(Hydrokinetic) Atmocean proposes to deploy 600 of our Wave Energy/Sequestration Technology (?WEST?) devices about 1-2 miles off Cannon Beach near Yakutat, Alaska to generate up to 90%
of Yakutat?s annual kWh, at projected fuel cost savings of 44%. Payback for this project is estimated at about 4 years. WEST devices convert wave energy into hydraulic pressure which
is transmitted by seafloor hose then onshore pipe or hose (as appropriate) to hydraulic motors driving existing electrical generators ? avoiding the high cost of seafloor electrical
cable, and utilizing existing onshore generation, transmission, and distribution. Using this hybrid system architecture, WEST provides primary generation and the existing diesel system
provides backup and peak generation.
This Project is for the installation of a biomass boiler system to provide heat and hot water for the Glennallen School Facilities ( Glennallen High School/Elementary School Building,
Vocational Training Building, District Office/Distance Learning/Rural Cap Building) of the Copper River School District. The system will utilize a Messersmith Boiler System similar
to those already employed at the Tok School and Delta High School and will use readily available chips in the Copper Valley. Glennallen Campus Biomass Heating Project will be a similar
system to that of the Tok and Delta Schools. This project is a result of regional biomass planning and collaboration between government agencies, local businesses and regional stakeholders.
The Whitman Lake Project will install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at an existing dam, supporting near-term capacity demand increases in the Ketchikan area and displacing
diesel generation as the existing Tyee Lake (SEAPA) resource becomes fully utilized. It will also replace the aging water supply system of the SSRAA Whitman Lake hatchery, providing
increased water quantity, reliability and redundancy to a facility that is critical to the region?s commercial fishing, seafood processing and sportfishing industries.
AVTEC will partner with the City of Seward to renovate, refurbish, and upgrade the City\'s existing Marathon Hydroelectric plant, which is currently unused. The plant will become an
educational and training tool that supports AVTEC\'s Hydro Power Plant Operator training program, sponsored by the Alaska Energy Authority. The intent is to return the plant to productive
use and maximize the training benefits it can provide.
Power deliveries from SEAPA to Kake across the proposed Kake to Petersburg Intertie would affect the voltage profile across the SEAPA network if new supplementary equipment is not installed
in Petersburg and possibly Wrangell, Alaska. Additionally, changes to existing equipment located in either Petersburg or Wrangell may be necessary as a result of the proposed Kake -
Petersburg line. Since the May 2009, Kake-Petersburg Intertie Report (D. Hittle & Associates), substantial load growth has occurred in Petersburg, Wrangell and Ketchikan. This project
consists of engineering analysis and preliminary design work that will identify the effects on the SEAPA system that result from power deliveries to Kake. The engineering analysis will
determine existing equipment changes, and new equipment rating, new equipment location, and estimations for new equipment life cycle costs. Cost estimates will include: final design,
site specification, procurement, installation, commissioning, ongoing O&M costs, and future replacement costs. A final report will organize the analysis results by proposed KPI path
(route). Previous electrical engineering studies such as the Kake-Petersburg Intertie. Study Update by D. Hittle & Associates for the Southeast Conference, and SEAPA\'s internal studies
(power flow and power transient) will be used as reference works.
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA) requests funding of $72,630 from Round V of the Renewable Energy Fund, with a matching contribution from SEAPA of $8,070 for a total cost of
$80,700, for a Phase I (reconnaissance) wind site assessment in Ketchikan and the region surrounding High Mountain on Gravina Island, and funding of $142,500 from Round V of the Renewable
Energy Fund, with a cash contribution from SEAPA of $7,500, for a total cost of $150,000 for Phase II (feasibility analysis and conceptual design/permitting) from Round V of the Renewable
Energy Fund. The total project cost for both phases is projected to be $230,700. SEAPA is the grantee and Dave Carlson, CEO, has overall authority for the project. Eric Wolfe, Director
of Special Projects, will be the primary contact representing SEAPA and has day-to-day responsibility to ensure that the project is on schedule and within budget. SEAPA, or its retained
contractor, will install a wind-measuring meteorological ("met") tower and complete geotechnical work to solidify the options of installing wind turbines at or near Ketchikan. The work
will include conducting an initial site assessment, obtaining a letter of non-objection for placement of a wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting,
and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for one year and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site.
A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. This design will address the current hydropower and distribution
system to identify any upgrades that are needed to integrate wind power. A variety of wind turbine models and quantity configurations will be considered. The study is proposed to determine
if it is feasible to use wind power to supplement the energy needs and conserve water used for hydropower for the communities it services, which include Ketchikan, Petersburg, and Wrangell,
with the long-term objective and goal of serving the power needs of additional communities, including Kake.
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA) requests funding of $72,630 from Round V of the Renewable Energy Fund, with a matching contribution from SEAPA of $8,070 for a total cost of
$80,700, for a Phase I (reconnaissance) wind site assessment along transmission line paths owned by Southeast Alaska Power Agency, which extend from the City of Ketchikan, Alaska, located
on the western coast of Revillagigedo Island, near the southernmost boundary of Alaska, to the City of Petersburg, located on the north end of Mitkof Island in Southeast Alaska. SEAPA
is the grantee and Dave Carlson, CEO, has overall authority for the project. Eric Wolfe, Director of Special Projects, will be the primary contact representing SEAPA and has day-to-day
responsibility to ensure that the project is on schedule and within budget. The project seeks funding for analyzing the raw wind data and preparing a wind assessment report. Based on
the wind assessment results/report, a subsequent proposal may be submitted for a Phase II feasibility analysis and conceptual design. The study will also analyze the potential impacts
to existing and migrating avian species. The study is proposed to determine if it is feasible to use wind power to supplement the energy needs and conserve water used for hydropower
for the communities serviced by SEAPA, which include Ketchikan, Petersburg, and Wrangell, with the long-term objective and goal of serving the power needs of additional communities,
including Kake.
The overall 34kV power line route is approximately 12 miles long. Approximately 0.9-mile of the westernmost section is an existing APC 2kV distribution line that will be overbuilt. The
line will cross Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island. The route primarily follows existing logging roads. The power line will begin at a point along Hydaburg Road about 0.45 miles northeast
of the town. It will continue northeast along the existing logging road passing north of Deer Bay and intersecting Hetta Inlet opposite Jumbo Island. This section is adjacent to private
forested land with a small section of Muskeg and is 7.0 miles long. The logging roads are mostly mild to moderate cut sections with a few rock cuts. The first 0.9 miles of this section
is an existing APC corridor adjacent to the road established for a 2kV line. The water crossing over Hetta Inlet will be accomplished with 3 multi-pole structures with one on each side
of the inlet and one at the pinnacle of Jumbo Island. Jumbo Island slopes steeply toward the water on both sides and is heavily forested. A new corridor will need to be established.
The structure on the island will likely be set by helicopter. This crossing is 0.9 miles across. The power line will continue in a new corridor for 0.3 mile to the east until it intersects
an existing logging road. Approximately 1500 feet of temporary or permanent access road spurs will need to be constructed to access 2 line structures along this section. The line route
then turns south and follows existing logging roads 3.8 miles southeast to the powerhouse/switchyard location near Copper Harbor. This section is adjacent to private, recently harvested
forest land with very steep and rocky terrain prone to slides. The logging road is primarily full bench construction with several rock cut sections. There are danger trees (and boulders)
above the power line route on the eastern side slopes that may need to be removed/secured to protect the power line.
Connelly Lake is an 85-acre alpine lake and drains into the Chilkoot River. The Project facilities will include a dam at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW
powerhouse with two generating units, a 14-mile-long 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Field studies, permitting and final design for this Project will be completed
during Phase III. The Project will be developed by the Applicant to provide additional generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems, to possibly provide summer
power to cruise ships moored at Haines, and to provide backup renewable power to Haines, should the submarine cable fail. The Project will be on state and private land, including the
Haines State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve.
The Project is to interconnect communities reliant on diesel generation to Tok where a renewable energy project will be constructed in the next 3-4 years. By beginning the interconnection
during the summer of 2012, completion of the distribution lines will coincide closely with the startup of the renewable energy project. There would be two stages for this project:
Stage 1: Would consist of a 25 mile 34.5 kV distribution line on wood pole structures to Tok from the APC closed grid that currently connects Slana, Chistochina, and Mentasta. These
communities are on the Tok Cutoff of the Glenn Hwy, south of Tok. Stage 2: Would consist of a 40 mile 34.5 kV distribution line on wood pole structures to Tok from the APC closed grid
that currently connects Northway, Northway Junction, and Northway Village. These communities are located southeast of Tok along the Alaska Highway.
The Applicant proposes to construct a 17-foot-high by 100 feet long rockfill dam and spillway at the outlet of Black Bear Lake (BBL) to raise the lake 12 feet and increase the active
storage by 2,420 acre feet (from 2,870 acre-feet to 5,290 acre-feet). The storage increase will provide for additional generation during the winter and spring when diesel generation
is often required currently due to low lake inflows during those periods. In addition, the storage increase will allow the Applicant to more easily meet the minimum instream flow requirements
of the FERC license for the project, which has become difficult with normal operation. The incremental average annual generation is estimated to be 1,264 MWh/yr.
Chugach is proposing to continue the process of permitting and design for a new transmission line linking a geothermal project being developed on the west side of Cook Inlet to the existing
Chugach system. The specific proposal for a Round V renewable energy grant is the design of the substations at each end of the transmission line. One substation would be at Ormat\'s
facility and the other at Beluga Power plant. Ormat Nevada, Inc. (Ormat), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Omlat Technologies, Inc (NYSE "ORA"), secured 15 geothermal leases on Mt. Spurr
from the State of Alaska in 2008 and has since embarked on a multi-phased exploration and development plan, with a goal to explore and build a utility scale 50-100 MW geothermal plant
to be connected to the Railbelt power grid around 2016. Ormat has built over 1,600 MW of geothennal plants during the last 3 decades all over the western United States and several locations
internationally. Ormat\'s Mt. Spurr project is progressing with the drilling this summer of a 3,500\' deep core hole. They recently announced drilling results for this well and the
results were not as positive as hoped or expected. While Onnat assesses its future development plan, Chugach is moving forward with this grant application to stay on a parallel path
with Ormat. Chugach\'s proposed project would include one or more high voltage transmission lines which would connect to the existing substation and transmission lines at Beluga. The
line would be built for a maximum operating voltage of 230 kV but could initially be operated at a lower voltage to match first stage development of 50 MW of the geothermal project.
The line would cover a distance of at least 40 miles, depending on the routing. Chugach received a Round IV renewable energy grant which will soon be used for the route selection phase
of this project. The plan is for Round V renewable energy grant funds to be for the design of substations at each end of the line. Subsequent phases of the project would be for final
design and permitting of the transmission line and for construction.
The Pillar Mountain High Penetration Wind Project is the integration and installation of three General Electric (GE) 1.5 megawatt (MW) wind turbines along with an energy storage system
that allows the stable integration of high wind penetration rates onto KEA?s isolated grid. This project is the next step in a series of KEA?s renewable energy developments aimed at
displacing the use of diesel fuel for electric generation which will allow KEA to achieve its vision to endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost effective renewable power solutions
by the year 2020. The energy storage system will regulate system frequency on a short-term basis as the wind resource unpredictably comes and goes. Terror Lake will provide the long-term,
macro-energy storage of wind energy on an annual basis. Therefore, the Pillar Mountain High Penetration Wind Project is not simply a wind turbine construction effort, but an innovative
demonstration of how high generation rates of wind can be stably integrated onto an isolated electric grid through the installation of a energy storage system that bridges Pillar Mountain?s
variable wind energy resource with the Terror Lake hydroelectric Project?s dispatchable hydropower.
The City of Petersburg is proposing construction (Phase IV) of a hybrid ground source heat pump system to serve the heating needs at the City of Petersburg\'s new public library facility.
The new Petersburg Public Library is a 9,770 sq. ft. facility to be located in downtown Petersburg. It will serve primarily Petersburg residents, as well as visitors and temporary workers
in our community. Construction of the facility is scheduled to begin in the spring of 2012 and be completed in the summer of 2013. The City of Petersburg Administration, Community Development
and Public Library Departments are directly involved with the design and construction of the facility. The hybrid system consists of a ground source heat pump system to meet the facility\'s
heating needs and a supplemental electric heat system serving as a back up. The use of a hybrid ground source heat pump system in lieu of conventional oil or electric heat systems
at the new Petersburg Public Library facility is supported by the City of Petersburg Administration, Community Development, and Public Library Departments, and the City of Petersburg
City Council. The Renewable Energy Fund Grant request herein is for the additional construction cost for the ground source heat pump system. This funding request is only for the costs
associated with the ground source heat pump portion of the hybrid system; the costs associated with the supplemental electric boiler and water heaters are excluded from this request.
The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwell?s power system. Currently, they obtain power from the line between MEA
and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). To accomplish this, they propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River, a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this
plant will be in excess of 1 MW. It will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
The Municipality of Skagway (Municipality) proposes to construct the West Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on West Creek, approximately seven miles west of Skagway and
adjacent to the small community of Dyea. The primary purpose of the Project would be off-setting diesel generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway from May through September each
year. Up to five cruise ships per day dock in Skagway for 12-15 hours and continuously operate their diesel plants to provide for on-board electricity consumption. The continuous stack
emissions spread a blue haze at about the 1,500 foot elevation where egetation has been noticeably affected. The Project will improve air quality and save vegetation in the area (there
may be other unknown environmental benefits). To emphasize how serious the air quality of the area is being taken, the National Park Service, Municipality of Skagway, and Alaska Power
& Telephone Company (AP&T) have a cooperative agreement to place and maintain equipment at AP&T\'s Dewey Lakes Hydro project site to monitor this pollution. Preliminary results of this
monitoring are attached as an appendix. A secondary purpose of the Project is to provide winter energy to the local utility when they have a shortfall of hydro energy from their hydroelectric
projects (2011 - Dewey Lakes Hydro, Lutak Hydro, Goat Lake Hydro, Kasidaya Creek Hydro) as well as to sell winter energy to the Yukon Territory, Canada through their generation company
Yukon Energy. The Alaska Power Authority had a feasibility study conducted for the Project by R. W Beck and Associates in 1981-82. That study focused on a development that would meet
the electricity needs of Skagway and Haines rather than the nascent cruise ship industry. It recommended an installed capacity of 6.0 MW and a 20,000 acre-foot reservoir formed by a
120-feet high concrete-faced rockfill dam. The proposed Project will be significantly different than proposed by Beck in that the installed capacity will be greater and the reservoir
storage will also be greater. Nevertheless, the Beck study provides an excellent starting point for the proposed reevaluation of the site, and therefore the Municipality believes that
a Phase I reconnaissance study is not necessary. West Creek drains from an ice field into the Taiya River. The Municipality has already requested the Project site land from the State
as Municipal Entitlement Land. Since the stream is glacial, flows are very high in the summer, which is also when the cruise ships are active. Preliminary analysis indicates that a
Project with a capacity to serve one large cruise ship could be operated on a run-of-river basis. Increasing the capacity so the Project could serve two or three cruise ships is possible
and a storage reservoir would be required to make the generation dependable. The costs and benefits of these capacity/storage alternatives will be a primary focus of the proposed Phase
II studies.
Application to AEA for $30,000 grant to evaluate the technical and financial feasibility for integration and optimization of heat pump technologies to offset heating oil and grid electricity
usage in Centennial Hall and the adjacent Kettleson Memorial Library on the waterfront in downtown Sitka.
Application to AEA for $20,000 grant to evaluate the technical and financial feasibility for integration and optimization of heat pump technologies to offset heating oil and grid electricity
usage in the Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant on the waterfront on Japonski Island Sitka.
The City and Borough of Sitka is proposing the design and construction of a hybrid ground source heat pump system to serve the heating needs at the City and Borough of Sitka\'s Japonski
Island Boathouse Historical Rehabilitation Project. The Japonski Island Boathouse Historical Rehabilitation Project is an historically accurate renovation of the small boat repair and
launch facility originally constructed by the U.S. Navy in 1941. The Japonski Island Boathouse Heat Pump project hybrid system will consist of a ground source heat pump system that
will meet approximately 81% of the facility\'s heating needs, with a supplemental electric heat system to make up the difference during periods when the facility\'s heat loads exceed
the capacity of the ground source heat pump system. The proposed hybrid ground source heat pump system will be installed in tidelands adjacent to the Boathouse. The Renewable Energy
Grant Fund request herein is for the additional design and construction costs for the hybrid ground source heat pump system.
(Project description edited for length and clarity)
This is a proposal to add electric thermal and battery energy storage to the existing Kwigillingok wind/diesel system in order to increase the village?s use of wind energy and further
displace the use and expense of diesel fuel. The project will increase power conditioning capabilities of the Kwigillingok facility through the installation of a lithium-ion battery
battery and power conditioning system capable of providing 250 kWhrs of energy for 15 minutes, which is sufficient time to start a diesel generator after a long period of diesel off
operation, and the installation of an additional 92 kW Electric Thermal Storage (ETS) units in community facilities. The installation of the 250kW Battery Storage System in the existing
power facility will provide: 1) adequate fault ride-through; 2) voltage and frequency support; 3) excess wind energy storage and 4) sufficient energy for extended periods of ?Diesel
Off? operation. When successful, this project will provide a cost effective smart grid system which can be widely replicated throughout the state.
This is a proposal to add electric thermal and battery energy storage to the existing Tuntutuliak wind/diesel system in order to increase the village?s use of wind energy and further
displace the use and expense of diesel fuel. The project will increase power conditioning capabilities of the Tuntutuliak facility through the installation of a lithium-ion battery
and power conditioning system capable of providing 250 kW of energy for 15 minutes, which is sufficient time to start a diesel generator after a long period of diesel off operation,
and the installation of an additional 92 kW of Electric Thermal Storage (ETS) in community facilities. The installation of the 250kW Battery Storage System in the existing power facility
will provide: 1) adequate fault ride-through; 2) voltage and frequency support; 3) excess wind energy storage and 4) sufficient energy for extended periods of ?Diesel Off? operation.
When successful, this project will provide a cost-effective smart grid system which can be widely replicated throughout the state.
Proposed project is a high head run-of-river hydroelectric power plant on Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon with an installed capacity of 145 kW. Project will include a 9 foot tall timber
dam, 3,220 foot long 16 inch diameter penstock and access trail; 400 square foot power house; 1,500 foot long access road with a bridge across Packers Creek to the powerhouse; and a
1,700 foot long overhead power line extension to the existing distribution system.
The City of Palmer owns and operates the Palmer Ice Arena which is located at 480 E. Cope Industrial Way, Palmer Alaska. The Ice Arena was built in 2004, and opened in 2005, though the
building is new, the compressors and refrigeration system are a 1950 design and were acquired from the decommissioned Bonnie Cusack Ice Arena. Wolf Architecture, Inc. performed the
energy audit of the Ice Arena and identified the refrigeration system accounting for 45%, and the heating accounting for 32% of the annual costs. The energy audit recommended replacing
the current equipment with new, more efficient, correctly sized equipment for the facility. With more modern compressors, the facility would easily be able to increase efficiency by
20% or more. It was recommended to use a central Geothermal Ground Source Heat Pump system for the cooling and heating demands. Additionally, waste heat recovery could be implemented
with the new equipment in order to use the heat created in the required heating areas of the building. This project would be competitively bid according to the City ordinances and managed
by the Public Works Department. The City Council has adopted resolution no 10-042 and 10-060 establishing a budget for the Ice Arena Expansion project.
The proposed project is a medium- to high-penetration wind system for the community of Kipnuk, Alaska. The project will be owned and operated by the Kipnuk Light Plant and the community
of Kipnuk, and consists of three Northwind 100 wind turbines, a modular hybrid wind diesel power conditioning control module, a 200 kW frequency controlled heat recovery boiler, 20
residential electric thermal storage devices. This hybrid power system is designed to fit with the existing diesel power plant, and wrap into any new plant proposed for the future.
The wind turbines are well proven in Alaska, the power conditioning and controls module is able to be located next to the existing or new power plant. The power control and conditioning
module will contain new wind-diesel controls and switchgear, a grid regulating inverter and energy storage unit for grid stabilization. The 20 electric thermal storage devices will
capture any excess available wind energy and store it as heat for residential heating. The wind turbines and hybrid controls and power conditioning module will be mounted on pile foundations
on property provided by the community. This wind diesel system architecture is scalable through the addition of wind turbines, new diesel gensets, addition of more real energy storage
in the form of batteries, flywheel or capacitors. The system is also capable of accommodating the addition of residential electric thermal storage devices when additional wind energy
capacity becomes available.
Community Energy Information and Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Assessment The purpose of this project is to remove barriers to improving the energy efficiency, using renewable
energy and increasing the reliability of existing energy infrastructure and is based on collecting and analyzing the information needed to make good decisions.
This project has four elements that will result in a comprehensive community-based renewable energy plan based on wood, wind and solar power. The four elements of the work plan consist
of the following:
1. Community Energy Surveys
2. Community Energy and Resource Monitoring
3. Wood Energy Assessment
4. Wind and Solar Energy Assessment
This project demonstrates the use of flywheel energy storage to stabilize any village power grid. Grid stability is needed to achieve increased use of wind and other renewable energy
sources in diesel mini grids. The proposed project consists of installation of a Powerstore flywheel energy storage system, along with a state-of-the-art Distributed Digital Control
System, to create a very high-penetration wind diesel system with residential thermal storage in Kongiganak, Alaska. The demonstration of this system will enable the effective sizing
and cost reduction measures to be identified so that the system can be widely replicated throughout the state and other power systems throughout the country.
Besides photovoltaic power, the only clean emissions free renewable power source with the potential for significantly lowering energy costs in Napakiak, (pop. 370) is wind energy. The
community has selected a wind site on land owned by the corporation along a newly-constructed 8.9 mile, 12470 V, 3 phase tieline over which the community receives all of its electricity
from Bethel Utilities. This tieline is capable of handling up to 2 MW of power. Funding is being sought to complete final designs, construction cost estimates and integration studies
needed for a construction ready project. The preliminary feasibility favors the installation of sufficient wind capacity to meet the majority of the community energy requirements and
potentially sell wind energy back across the tie line into Bethel.
The project will utilize landfill gas (LFG) generated by wastes at the former Merrill Field Landfill site to fuel one or more boiler units at the adjacent Anchorage Fire Department (AFD)
Fire Training Complex. The complex has four buildings which use boilers for primary heat. The project would include either installation of a central boiler system feeding into the existing
boiler heat systems or modification of existing boilers at individual buildings. The project will also include expansion of existing LFG collection systems at the landfill site, as
well as gas process, compression and transmission equipment, as needed. Ultimately the current gas production could support local generation of electricity (100 to 200 kw) or an expanded
district hating system providing base heat load for facilities adjacent to the Fire Training Center. Because of uncertainties in gas impurities, off site facility configurations and
other limitations, this grant proposal has been developed toward a district heat system for the Fire Training Facility only. The first phase of the grant project would be a feasibility
study to develop other options, optimize the system and identify potential revenue streams which could flow from this project.
Replace diesel generation of electricity for the community of Tenakee Springs with renewable hydroelectric power. The City of Tenakee Springs proposes to construct a hydroelectric project
on Indian River. This will be a low head, run-of-river plant displacing the use of 44,400 gallons of diesel fuel annually. Design, engineering, and construction will involve the City
of Tenakee Springs, multiple state and federal agencies, private contractors, and the Alaska EnergyAuthority.
Conduct a comprehensive reconnaissance study of small hydro resources on the southern railbelt. The study would focus on alpine rivers and streams in proximity to the areas currently
served by MEA, CEA, HEA, MLP, and SES. The emphasis of the study would be on low-impact run-of-river resources between 500 and 5,000 kW installed capacity. Investigated resources would
include rivers and streams shown on USGS 1:63360 maps located in economic proximity to existing electrical transmission and distribution infrastructure. The study would be conducted
in three screening stages. The first stage would include a desktop assessment of the resources to estimate power potential and fatal flaws (technical, environmental, economic and/or
political barriers). The second stage resource screening would be a desktop technical and financial analysis of the resources that pass stage 1 to identify the most cost effective resources.
The third stage resource screening would be a field visit to those resources that pass stage 2 to collect further data about the resource and provide reconnaissance-level technical
and financial analyses. The budget allows for up to 30 projects to receive stage 3 review and analysis. The final deliverable for the project would be a report detailing the resources
investigated and the results of all screening stages. The outcome of the study would be the most comprehensive list yet compiled of the most promising hydropower resources in the southern
railbelt region, ranked by development viability. This would guide AEA, utilities, and other regional decision makers to implement more effective planning efforts for power supply in
the railbelt.
The Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project is a low-impact run-of-river renewable energy project proposed near Seward, Alaska. The project would be located east of the Spring Creek
Correctional Facility and Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park, across Resurrection Bay from the City of Seward. The project is anticipated to have an installed capacity of 5.4 MW and
provide an estimated 21,700 MWh of energy annually. The project would supply approximately one third of Seward Electric System\'s annual energy requirements.
The project will include a run-of-river hydroelectric project between Crooked Creek and Jim?s Lake (the upper project), and a second storage hydroelectric project between Jim?s Lake
and tidewater (the lower project). According to Polarconsult?s June 2010 Reconnaissance Study, the upper project would have an estimated installed capacity of 50 kW, and the lower project
would have an estimated installed capacity of 150 kW. These projects will meet an estimated 97% of Elfin Cove?s existing electrical demand, and also provide a substantial amount of
interruptible excess electricity
The Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project is an approximately 75 MW storage project proposed for the Glacier Fork of the Knik River. Electricity from the project would be delivered into
the railbelt transmission grid via a new approximately 20-mile transmission line to existing transmission infrastructure in the vicinity of the Old Glenn Highway bridge over the Knik
River. A map of the project is included at the end of the application in Attachment I.
The Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential hydroelectric resource in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley with an estimated installed capacity of 6.5 MW. This proposed reconnaissance
study will investigate the resource to determine if a project is viable and to also perform preliminary feasibility work on the project location, size, and resource availability.
Port Graham Village Council and Chugachmiut are planning implementation of a 1.45 mmBtu biomass community building heat utility for Port Graham, Alaska. A feasible biomass technology
option has been identified to utilize a GARN Boiler to provide hot water heat from a woody biomass fuel source that can be obtained from Port Graham Village Corporation lands on a sustained
basis. An existing road system supplies access to the fuel source. The project will provide hot water to heat Port Graham community buildings (New Fire Hall (and accessory building
housing a 4-wheeler foam fire trailer), the Old Fire Hall, the Port Graham Health and Dental Clinic, the Port Graham Village Council Office, the Port Graham Museum/HeadStart Center
and the Port Graham Corporation Office) at a price sufficiently below the cost of current heating costs using fuel oil to justify investment. Existing community buildings fuel oil heating
systems can be retro-fitted to accommodate hot water from the proposed wood-burning GARN Boiler and rely on the existing fuel oil-fired hot water heating equipment for backup. The GARN
Boiler community building heating option will provide heat at less than the current fuel oil based system displacing more than an equivalent amount of diesel fuel on a Btu basis.
(Project description edited for length and clarity)
The City of Pelican proposes to complete the renovation and upgrade of the existing community hydroelectric project to replace the current failing, obsolete, inefficient and unsafe facility,
and to expand the use of underutilized available hydroelectric power to meet unserved electric needs in the community
IPEC proposes to construct a heat recovery project in the community of Hoonah. The Project will recover available jacket water heat from IPEC-Hoonah diesel generation that is currently
being rejected to the atmosphere via radiators and reduce annual diesel heating fuel consumption of nearby community buildings by over 55,000-gallons/year.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough, along with the City of Port Heiden, proposed to install a single commercial-grade wind tower in Port Heiden to reduce the amount of fuel burned and to
lower electricity rates for customers. Prompted by the success of small-scale wind towers and recommendations laid out in the 2008 Lake and Peninsula Borough Regional Energy Plan, the
Borough commissioned a private firm, Knight-Piesold, to analyze Port Heiden. The results of this wind study indicated a favorable cost/benefit ratio and the Borough plans to move forward
with the project. Drawing on the unique methods used by the Borough in a successful wind tower installation in the Village of Kokhanok, the Borough proposes a four-step process to reach
the end goal of a successful installation of a wind tower. The first step will be the Borough selecting an owner?s representative to provide engineering and technical support. The second
step will be the Borough, Port Heiden, and the owner?s representative to create an RFP for the actual wind tower construction and maintenance, and evaluate the bids on the RFP. The
third and fourth stages are construction of the wind turbine and systems upgrade, followed by a five-year maintenance and operation contract with the winning bidder that incorporates
training for local employees. This will be discussed in further detail later in the application.
The City of Napaskiak requests funding for a wind study which includes an avian study and feasibility report as the first and second steps towards supplementing the high cost of diesel
generators currently in use. These studies will satisfy both Phase I Reconnaissance and Phase II Feasibility components of the AEA\'s basic outline of the Wind Resource Development
Partnering Plan Procurement. The studies will result in a feasibility report on the benefits, costs and guidelines for implementing the next three phases of a wind turbine system, both
in terms of a stand-alone system operated independently by Napaskiak Electric Utility and in the context of a possible sub-regional intertie. The feasibility study will include a Heat
Recovery System that utilizes jacket water from the diesel generators and excess electricity from wind generated power. This project will solicit community participation from the beginning
and will promote wind-diesel O&M training opportunities to appropriate candidates.
The New Koliganek Village Council respectfully requests project funding for a Wind and Heat Recovery Feasibility Study. Analysis of the raw meteorological data by V3 Energy, LLC indicate
a Class 4 wind regime which merits investigation. The project will result in a report of the technical, economic, financial and operational viability of installing a wind-diesel system
for electric distribution and heat recovery in the village of Koliganek.
The grant will be managed by the New Koliganek Village Council. Marsh Creek Energy Systems has been selected to carry out the technical, analytical and reporting tasks of the project.
The Bristol Bay Native Association (BBNA) and Marsh Creek will also be available to provide support, as needed, to the Project Manager and Koliganek Tribal Administrator in the preparation
of financial reports stipulated in the grant.
The waters of Cook Inlet offer a clean and renewable power source for the communities of South Central Alaska. Our project will utilize existing infrastructure, namely the King Salmon
platform, and proven submersible technologies to capture the tidal energy of the Inlet. Baker Hughes Centrilift develops electrical submersible pumps (ESP) for the oil industry and
given our product?s reliable history in very demanding oil well environments, their ESP system was chosen as the power generating unit. The smaller diameter of an ESP Generator allows
for higher speed operation and lower impact to fish than propeller-based systems. The ESP Generator would consist of: 1) aquatic life diverters to protect the environment and minimize
the environmental impact of the system, 2) rotating multistage turbine anchored in water at optimum flow velocity depth, 3) submersible electric power cable would carry the energy to
shore connecting to 4) local utility substation or transformer. Buoys would be placed strategically near the system to alert boat traffic. The existing platform would act as an anchoring
structure and intermediate for power distribution.
By partnering with UAF, we will utilize existing in-stream testing sites, thus allowing the deployment of prototypes aimed at providing power to rural communities. With that said, our
project will also target rural communities situated on a viable year long hydro-resource. The system will be designed to produce adequate energy during low-flow conditions of the winter
season. Our anchoring system will look to anchor the system throughout the year, yet enabling a break-away during significant ice/debris flow. Enabling retrieval of the system without
significant damage to the internal components of our equipment, which will allow a quick turnaround once the obstruction has passed.
The proposed Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project consists of four major components, including:
>A creek diversion structure- The diversion structure would create a small impoundment that would divert a portion of flow from Fivemile Creek into a pipeline (penstock).
> A penstock ? The penstock is a pipeline that will transport water from the intake structure to the turbine powerhouse. The penstock for this project will be around 12-inches in diameter
and 8,500 linear feet long. Its primary purpose is to pressurize the water from the creek.
> A hydroelectric turbine power plant ? The power plant will house the turbine and electrical generating equipment and controls. Water from the penstock will spin the turbine and generators
and produce electricity. The power plant will include a tailrace that will return water from the penstock to the creek bed.
> Electrical tie-in ? An overhead high voltage line will connect the turbine power plant to the existing electrical distribution system near the airport.
Provide wood boilers for community facilities in Igiugig, Illiamna, Kokhanok, and Port Alsworth. Wood boilers in these villages have been the subject of a detailed feasibility/design
study, which shows they are economically and technically feasible. The project would allow the borough to advertise for a design/build RFP to construct these facilities, and to have
the expertise to evaluate potential designs and inspect finished construction. The competitive process would ensure the best and most appropriate design. Community organizations with
a record of maintaining community facilities are supporting and have committed to use and maintain the wood boilers. Landowners where the wood will be gathered also support the project.
Cold Bay requests funding for this wind study as the first step towards supplementing the high cost of diesel generators currently in use. The wind study and avian study will satisfy
Phase I, Reconnaissance and Phase II, Feasibility, and the study will result in a feasibility report on the technical, economic, financial and operational viability and guidelines of
implementing the next three phases of a wind energy system.
The grant would be managed by the Aleutians East Borough and calls for the solicitation of a contractor to perform the analysis and a community meeting with the contractor for presentation,
review and discussion of the results.
Participants in the project will include:
1. G&K Electric Utility
2. Aleutians East Borough who will provide overall project management.
3. A contracted firm who will provide civil and electrical system engineering.
4. Contractor to perform the avian and environmental studies.
5. A supplier for the met towers.
Nelson Lagoon requests funding for this wind study as the first step towards supplementing the high cost of diesel generators currently in use. The wind study and avian study will satisfy
Phases I, Reconnaissance and Phase II, Feasibility, and the study will result in a feasibility report on the technical, economic, financial and operational viability and guidelines
of implementing the next three phases of a wind energy system.
The grant would be managed by the Aleutians East Borough and calls for the solicitation of a contractor to perform the analysis and a community meeting with the contractor for presentation,
review and discussion of the results.
Participants in the project will include:
1) Nelson Lagoon Electrical Cooperative (owned by the Native Village of Nelson Lagoon)
2) Aleutians East Borough who will provide overall project management
3) A contracted firm who will provide civil and electrical system engineering
4) Contractor to perform the avian and environmental studies
5) A supplier for the met towers.
False Pass currently produces all their electricity from diesel generators and heating from burning fossil fuels. Data from a met tower set up several years ago was compromised and has
data gaps when bears damaged the equipment, but the data still may be useful if analyzed using appropriate assumptions and software. The wind resource may prove to be good, but we won?t
know until the data is analyzed and a wind resource report is completed. In addition, an avian study will determine if birds will be of concern and/or if mitigation measures are necessary.
This project seeks funding for analyzing the raw wind data and preparing a wind assessment report for False Pass. Based on wind assessment results/report a subsequent proposal may be
submitted for conceptual design. In addition, an avian study will determine if migrating or nesting birds present concerns to a wind project and determine mitigation measures. The principal
goals of baseline bird studies are to quantitatively describe the temporal and spatial use by birds of the study area and provide baseline information on avian species and their habitat
sufficient to use in evaluating the probable impact of installation of a wind turbine. The specific goals are to provide avian monitoring protocol training to local agent(s), collect
avian data to determine bird activity at the delineated areas around the turbine site, record any dead or downed (injured) birds at the site that may be the result of collisions with
the meteorological tower, and prepare avian monitoring reports including back-up information and complete avian data.
The Kuskokwim River meanders above and below the community of Akiak leaving it on a peninsula which at its widest point is approximately 3 miles across. The bend immediately above Akiak
compress\' the flow of the river resulting in increased water velocity (speed). We intend to place an intake at that point in the bend with the greatest speed, and pipe the water we
collect, 1) across the peninsula, 2) to a small slough behind the village, or 3) parallel to the river to a point further down the bend depending on the results of a feasibility study.
The intake will be deep enough to avoid icing issues, permitting year round operation of a run of the river hydro facility. The reconnaissance will identify annual flow and the placement
of all facilities necessary for the hydro plant, pipeline, intake and transmission needs.
The Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential run of river hydroelectric resource located near Sutton, AK with a capacity up to 1.5 MW.
This is a project to divert water from the upper watershed of the middle branch of Battle Creek into Bradley Lake. Based on Battle Creek stream flow measurements from 1991 to 1993, diverting
a portion of the stream flow to Bradley Lake has the potential to increase annual energy output by 27,000 to 45,000 MWh, depending on the amount of flow diverted. Environmental, geotechnical,
preliminary engineering and analytical work is needed to evaluate fish habitat, the potential energy resource, and diversion dam and conveyance (i.e., tunnel, pipe, open channel) alternatives
to divert the water.
As part of the FERC relicensing of the Cooper Lake plant in 2007, Chugach agreed to spend up to $11.04 million ($12.5 million in 2009 dollars) to construct a project to divert water
from Stetson Creek into the Cooper Lake reservoir and a related structure to release water into Cooper Creek. The purpose of the project is to enhance fish habitat. It will add water
to Cooper Lake and result in additional hydroelectric energy generation.
Based on the conclusions of our completed feasibility and conceptual-design efforts, the Village of Atmautluak (Village) will, with Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) assistance, complete
the design process to successfully install a wind-diesel system in the community. This includes automated controls and the equipment necessary to regulate, control and deliver reliable
energy to the residents of the community. The project will produce the final designs and plans and complete the necessary permitting for two projected wind turbines and the associated
equipment installations to upgrade the existing power generation and distribution system to produce power from a wind turbine-diesel engine configuration. The Village of Atmautluak,
will hire and contract with WH Pacific to complete this design project and provide management oversight of any subcontracted engineering/design firms. WH Pacific will also complete
the RFP process: provide overall project management oversight of the necessary civil work and work closely with Northern Power to install Northwind100/21 B model wind turbines, manage
the startup and commissioning.
A conceptual design report has been completed for the six towers of highest avalanche risk (LaRue, 2010). The report was based on experience and engineering resources gained during
the 2008 and 2009 avalanche repairs. The recommended mitigation construction cannot be completed in one year; hence the requested funds would be used over a 2011-2012 period. In 2011,
we propose to construct the replacement of tower 3/4 and structural modifications to existing towers 4/1, and 4/2 for an estimated $1,562,000. In 2012, we propose to construct a large
steel diversion structure above tower 4/5 similar to one constructed in 2009 above tower 4/6. We also would construct a smaller diversion structure above tower 4/4 for an additional
combined cost of $2,457,600.
See Proposal #670
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development consists of a 1 +MW run of the river hydropower project located in the Tongass Forest within the Admiralty Island National Monument based on a proposal
that Kootznoowoo submitted in March 2000 which is described more fully in the Angoon Hydrologic Project Feasibility Evaluation Report (Project). The development would be located on
Thayer Creek approximately 6 miles north of Angoon. Thayer Creek flows out of Thayer Lake (64 square mile reservoir) at a gentle grade through abroad forested valley then steepens
for 6,800 feet through a narrow forested canyon and finally flattens again for 2000 feet before flowing in to Chatham Strait. The development will tap the energy potential in the steep
section of the stream and will avoid any impact on anadromous fish that use the lower portion of the creek. The average flow of Thayer Creek is approximately 370 cfs and can vary from
25 cfs during the coldest periods of the winter to over 2000 cfs during storms in the fall and winter. The generating facility has ahead of 250 feet which is approximate because of
the wording of the Forest Service Record of Decision (ROD) requiring maintenance offish habitat. An additional restriction set forth in the ROD which is not considered in the HDR proposal
requires the overland transmission line be buried where feasible along the access road to the community of Angoon. The transmission line funding will be submitted in a separate companion
application for Round III funds.
This proposal is being evaluated as a combined proposal with #671.
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development consists of a 1 +MW run of the river hydropower project located in the Tongass Forest within the Admiralty Island National Monument based on a proposal
that Kootznoowoo submitted in March 2000 which is described more fully in the Angoon Hydrologic Project Feasibility Evaluation Report (Project). The development would be located on
Thayer Creek approximately 6 miles north of Angoon. Thayer Creek flows out of Thayer Lake (64 square mile reservoir) at a gentle grade through a broad forested valley then steepens
for 6,800 feet through a narrow forested canyon and finally flattens again for 2000 feet before flowing into Chatham Strait. The development will tap the energy potential in the steep
section of the stream and will avoid any impact on anadromous fish that use the lower portion of the creek. The average flow of Thayer Creek is approximately 370 cfs and can vary from
25 cfs during the coldest periods of the winter to over 2000 cfs during storms in the fall and winter. The generating facility has a head of 250 feet which is approximate because of
the wording of the Forest Service Record of Decision (ROD) requiring maintenance of fish habitat. An additional restriction set forth in the ROD which is not considered in the HDR proposal
requires the overland transmission line be buried where feasible along the access road to the community of Angoon. The transmission line funding will be submitted in a separate companion
application for Round III funds.
To determine and document the feasibility and conceptual design of a wind diesel turbine facility in the community of Akiachak, Alaska. Akiachak Native Community (ANC) proposes to install
a wind meteorological (met) tower and to complete the necessary geotechnical work to determine the economic feasibility of installing wind turbines in Akiachak, Alaska. The work will
involve:
(1) obtaining a letter of non-objection for placement of the wind tower and
(2) geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower,
(3) studying the wind resource for one year and documenting the results and
(4) conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site.
A conceptual design will be created based the met tower data recordings and geotechnical investigation. This will provide adequate information to determine whether there is enough wind
resource to justify taking a project to design and ultimately the construction of a wind-diesel system for the community of Akiachak.
The intent of this project is to increase the use of locally available, biomass energy for thermal heating and biomass needs. This project will be located in the upper Kobuk River Valley
and will serve the villages of Ambler, Kobuk, and Shungnak. The applicant is Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority (NIHA).Other project partners include NANA Regional Corporation, Maniilaq
Association, WHPacific Inc., and the Kobuk, Shungnak and Ambler Village Councils. There are four phases to this project and this application is for phase three.
The purpose of this project is to determine the feasibility of converting paper, cardboard and other wood-based waste into thermal energy for heating the municipal water system of Kotzebue,
Alaska. The City of Kotzebue proposes to complete a feasibility study and conceptual design for a paper/wood waste thermal energy system. To this end, the City will study the paper/wood
waste stream in Kotzebue, environmental impacts of the combustion process, and the economics of the process. This total project concept could be segmented into the following phases:
Phase 1. Feasibility study & conceptual design.
Phase 2. Financing and paper/wood waste collection agreements.
Phase 3. Permitting, design and engineering.
Phase 4. Construction.
Phase 5. Operations and maintenance.
Kenai Winds LLC has received AEA support to develop and erect a 10 MW wind energy facility located in the Nikiski industrial area on the Kenai Peninsula. Through prior discussions with
Homer Electric Association, the project size is being increased to 15MW. This proposal is submitted to secure funding needed for the expansion. The facility will consist of 5 to 10
wind turbines disbursed throughout the site, electrically interconnected to either HEA?s Nikiski substation or Chugach Electric Association?s Bernice Lake substation. The project will
sell its electrical output to CEA. Letters of support from HEA and CEA are including in Appendix E and Appendix L. Kenai Winds LLC was included on the Round III renewable energy projects
approved by the Alaska state legislature for funding. Due to budget cuts, those funds were not received. This application will help restore funding which will directly result in lower
power price to the Alaska ratepayer.
Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T) proposes to conduct a Phase II project that will complete the Feasibility Analysis, (Biomass) Resource Assessment and Conceptual Design for a 2MWe biomass
gasification CHP (combined heat and power) system. AP&T, in partnership with Nexterra Systems, and with support from GE Energy, the Upper Tanana communities of Tok, Tetlin, Dot Lake
and Tanacross, the State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Contracted Consultants, Foresters and Economists, will collaborate to assess the feasibility of a system utilizing
locally sourced woody biomass as fuel. The project will thoroughly assess the long-term sustainability and projected costs of the biomass resource. The project will also develop the
conceptual design, assess the project site, and identify any remaining technical and operational barriers. This will refine the Benefit/Cost Ratio projections and better define public
benefits. Most of the detail in this grant application is from pre-feasibility work previously done by AP&T. All the data presented herein will be thoroughly assessed for confirmation
or adjustment in the proposed analysis.
Organized Village of Kwethluk (OVK) requests funding for an AEA Round IV Phase II Feasibility Analysis to further assess technical, economic, financial and operational viability of
a wind system for Kwethluk and to narrow the focus of final design and construction of such a system.
During this project, we will install a wind meteorological (met) tower to solidify the options of installing wind towers in Kwethluk. The work will involve obtaining a letter of non-objection
for placement of the wind tower, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location and studying the wind resource for one year. A conceptual design for a wind farm
will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings.
(Project description edited for length and clarity)
Alaska Mental Health Trust (AMHT) is applying to the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Renewable Energy Fund Round IV Phase IV grant program, seeking funding for equipment purchase and installation
of a GARN biomass heating system for the community of Ionia. The Ionia community is building a two-story 6,000 square foot community center/barn on their property near Kasilof for the
purpose of demonstrating renewable energy systems and sustainable living strategies for their neighbors of Kenai Peninsula and other rural Alaskans.
(Project description edited for length and clarity)
We are constructing a facility to manufacture wood fuel pellets utilizing local wood and biomass that has no other commercial value and would normally go to waste as feedstock. Our
operation will involve harvesting, chipping, and processing the material into wood fuel pellets for residential and commercial markets.
The first phase of the project is under construction. We are erecting a 30? by 40? metal building for the pellet plant. The first pellet production line will be installed in the building.
We will shortly be accepting delivery of the equipment for this first line, which will produce one ton of pellets per hour. Based on the number of inquiries and orders we have already
received, we anticipate this will not keep up with demand. We anticipate expanding the operation by installing additional production lines as demand warrants.
The Turnagain Arm Tidal Electrical Generation Project (TATEP) consists of the installation of patented and proven Rance tidal electrical generation turbines housed in a barrage located
in Cook Inlet. (See Map, p. 107.) TATEP is modeled on the La Rance tidal electrical generation plant built at La Rance, Brittany, France in 1966 at a cost of $88 million. The turbines
are housed in a barrage approximately one-half mile long. (See illustration, p. 109, 110.) The tidal electrical plant has been in operation since 1966, with 240 MW of electrical capacity.
The plant produces electricity at 1.2? / kWh to France?s consumers. There have been no mechanical breakdowns in 44 years with normal maintenance. The Rance turbines work in areas with
at least 80 ft. of water at high tide and 54 ft. low tide, similar to Turnagain Arm tides. TATEP turbines will be housed underwater horizontally and will turn the same direction on
incoming and outgoing tides with generators located on top of the barrage. Specific sites of the turbines will be selected after further research into environmental, hydrodynamics of
tides and water movement. The La Rance plant has twenty-four 10 MW generators for a total of 240 MW. TATEP?s plan calls for fifty to one hundred twenty 10 MW generators which would
produce 500 MW to 1200 MW net electricity. The project will be developed in stages. The first stage calls for 50 turbines which would be sufficient to provide 500 MW net electricity:
100% of the baseline demand currently in the railbelt region. Cost of the project at that point would be $1.5 billion instead of $2.5 billion. At that point, tidal power would be used
in combination with utilities? current gas turbines, wind, coal, and hydroelectric power for the peak demand and slack period. The tidal electrical production can be expanded as needed
over time by adding more turbines. Turbines will be connected by transmission lines; and submarine cable will bring the electricity produced to Chugach Electric on the Anchorage side
and to Homer Electric on the Kenai side, accessing existing utility corridors as much as possible to produce inexpensive electricity to Alaska Railbelt consumer. The project is priced
for all stages to be built: however, the first stage would produce enough electricity to be competitive with hydroelectric, geothermal, natural gas, and other renewables.
ORPC Alaska, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC (collectively, ORPC), develops technology and projects generating emission-free electricity from tidal,
river and ocean currents. ORPC requests Phase IV funding for the TidGen? Project to complete the first stage of ORPC?s larger Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project. The TidGen? Project involves
installing a 4- device TidGen? Power System with a total rated generating capacity of 600 kW in a 6-knot current. ORPC?s TidGen? Power System consists of one or more TidGen? devices
(which include a turbine generator unit [TGU] mounted on a bottom support frame) connected to an on-shore substation using underwater power and control cables. ORPC expects to receive
the pilot project license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) by December 2011. ORPC will release the initial TidGen? Project components for manufacture by January
2012 and will ship the components of the first of four TidGen? devices to Anchorage by May 2012. The TidGen? Power System will be assembled at the Port of Anchorage and will be installed
in phases from June 2012 to July 2013. ORPC will then monitor the system to collect essential site development and environmental data. In subsequent stages of the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy
Project, which are not in the scope of this application, ORPC will deploy an OCGen? Power System to increase the rated capacity to 0.9 MW by the end of 2013 and to 3 MW by the end of
2014. ORPC will ultimately increase the rated capacity to commercial scale ? up to 100 MW ? by 2020 under a FERC operating license that ORPC will obtain before the end of the pilot
project license period.
The proposed project will assess the tidal energy potential and development feasibility of four sites within Kachemak Bay. With assistance from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), the project will utilize historical water level and current data, recent sea floor mapping data, and new ocean current measurements to construct a comprehensive ocean circulation
model of the entire Kachemak Bay region. The model and tidal current data analyses will provide detailed information on tidal energy potential throughout Kachemak Bay. With this tidal
power information and consideration of effective tie-in to the electric grid, four sites will be selected and power production costs, output, and availability, as well as potential
environmental issues, will be assessed to determine initial feasibility of tidal energy projects. For all feasible sites, a conceptual design to optimize tidal energy production will
be produced, along with a construction cost estimate for that design.
This proposal represents the second phase (field testing) of ?Optimizing Heat Recovery Systems for Power Generation in Rural Alaska,? a proposal funded by the Denali Commission ($250,000)
and the Alaska Energy Authority ($54,306). The project involves laboratory testing of a 50 kW precommercial ORC unit to test the efficacy of generating power using recovered waste heat
from a mid-sized rural power plant. The testing will take place at the University of Alaska Fairbanks in winter 2010-2011, with the Phase 2 field testing called for in this proposal
to begin in October 2011. The Phase 2 testing includes performance data collection and analysis, evaluation of operation and maintenance requirements, economic analysis of potential
power generation / cost savings, and establishing guidelines for future ORC applications throughout rural Alaska and a methodology for selecting appropriate village sites. Both phases
of the overall project include data collection and comparison of a 250 kW ORC unit presently being tested in Cordova, Alaska. No funding is requested in this proposal for monitoring
the Cordova project.
AVTEC, in partnership with the City of Seward, intends to renovate, refurbish, and upgrade the City of Seward\'s existing unused Marathon Hydro-electric plant to be used as an education
and training tool in support of AVTEC\'s Hydro Power Plant Operator training program sponsored by the Alaska Energy Authority. The intent is to return the plant to productive use and
maximize the training benefits it can provide.
The proposed Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie is a 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan Public Utilities
(KPU). The Intertie will include 14 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line to be constructed on Annette Island between Metlakatla and Walden Point and an approximate three mile
submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Walden Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation. The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for the integrated
operation of the interconnected systems? generating plants. Design of the Metlakatla- Ketchikan Intertie is nearly complete. Transmission poles have also been procured and are currently
stored in Metlakatla.
The proposed Triangle Lake hydroelectric project will be located on the west side of Annette Island near the route of the proposed Metlakatla- Ketchikan Intertie. The project as presently
envisioned will be comprised of a small embankment dam at the outlet of Triangle Lake, a 1.3 mile long penstock and a powerhouse containing a single horizontal Francis turbine generating
unit with a capacity of 4.0 MW. The Triangle Lake project will provide additional hydroelectric power to Metlakatla and, with construction of the Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie, to the
interconnected electric systems of Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg. MIC will develop and own the Triangle Lake project.
The Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal system was extensively studied in the late 1970s and early 1980s using a variety of geological, geochemical, and geophysical techniques. Unfortunately
the execution of these surveys and interpretation of the data did not result in a thorough understanding of the area, and the most important conclusions for potential future development
? such as locating the upflow zone of the geothermal fluid ? was not determined.
In 2010, the University of Alaska Fairbanks began Phase I of an intensive new exploration program of the Pilgrim Hot Springs resource, funded mainly through a Department of Energy grant
with cost share provided through a $613,174 award under Round III of the Renewable Energy Grant Fund. This first Phase, which is currently underway, involves the use of an innovative
geophysical remote sensing techniques (including forward looking infrared radiometry, or FLIR) intended to map the spatial extent and total heat flow to the surface and make a preliminary
estimation of the developable extent of the reservoir. These remote sensing techniques are being coupled with more traditional ground-based exploration techniques to pinpoint the location
of the upflow zone, map the spatial extent and total heat flow to the surface, and estimate the temperature and depth of the reservoir.
This proposal addresses Phase II and III of this project. Phase II involves drilling and testing two 500 ft temperature gradient holes and two 2500 ft confirmation holes into the resource
to confirm the results from Phase I. The third Phase will involve developing a more complete understanding of the reservoir through flow testing and water sampling of the holes, and
development of a numerical reservoir model. The end result of this project will be an economic and geothermal resource model of the Pilgrim Hot Springs site and surrounding area to
determine if it can be economically developed, and to what extent.
The Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydroelectric Project proposes to install a third hydro turbine capable of producing an additional 11.25 megawatts (MW) in the existing Terror Lake plant. The
original engineers of the Terror Lake facility had the foresight to design the facility for the expansion to three turbines. The original design assumed the day would arrive when additional
capacity would be required. That day has arrived. Kodiak?s growing electrical demand has surpassed the current capacity of Terror Lake. Expanding the capacity at Terror Lake by 11.25
MW with a third turbine generator will enhance the stability of KEA?s isolated grid system allowing additional forms of renewable energy to be integrated and Kodiak?s dependence on
diesel fuel to be minimized. The third turbine at Terror Lake is the cornerstone necessary for KEA to achieve its? Vision Statement: Endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost
effective renewable power solutions by the year 2020.
Mount Spurr represents what currently appears to be the best opportunity in Alaska to develop a Utility-scale base-load geothermal energy power plant. Located 80 miles west of Anchorage
on state lands leased by Ormat Nevada Inc. in October of 2008, a successful power project at Mt. Spurr would serve communities along the Railbelt through power purchased by one or more
of the Railbelt electric utilities.Ormat is leading a rigorous exploration campaign, to be partially cost shared by AEA using a grant to be awarded in the framework of round III of
the Renewable Energy Fund. Exploration to date includes desktop studies based on exploration work done by the Alaska Volcano Observatory and others during the mid 1980?s; a field reconnaissance
trip and geochemical analysis done by Ormat in August 2009; intense geological and geophysical exploration (including mainly a heli-magnetic survey, satellite imagery, LiDAR survey,
ground-based Magneto-Telluric survey and ground-based gravity survey) performed during July and August
2010 and initial results of core drilling that started early September 2010 and is currently ongoing. Analysis of all data collected during the above mentioned exploration work is very
encouraging as to the potential existence of a commercial size geothermal resource. However, further exploration ? planned for this fall and for summer of 2011, before funds described
in this application are requested - is required in order to confirm it. This grant request is for the next phase of project development ? to be sometimes referenced in this application
as ?phase III? - which is to start construction of the geothermal well field and later on (beyond the scope of this grant application), the power plant itself. The first step in construction
of a commercial geothermal well-field is to drill a full-size deep geothermal production well, in order to tap into the geothermal reservoir and flow test the geothermal fluid in order
to measure its temperature, pressure, chemical composition and other attributes. The location of this well will be based on a synthesis of 2010 and 2011 exploration work mentioned before.
Follow-up steps (beyond the scope of this grant application) will include drilling additional production wells; drilling one or more injection wells; performing a long-term multi-well
flow test to measure the size of the geothermal reservoir; drilling additional production and injection wells and building a power plant, including a geothermal gathering system, utility
interconnection facilities etc.
Phase IV: Construction, Testing, and Assessment ? Naknek-G #3. The Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project has drilled Naknek-G#1 to depth and is ready to begin assessing
its geothermal fluid production characteristics. Drilling Naknek-G #2 is scheduled to begin in October 2010 and completed before the end of the year. After Naknek-G #2 has been drilled
and the capacity for geothermal fluid production for electric and heat energy generation is thoroughly understood NEA will contract for design, permitting, and construction of a modular
generation facility. In addition to traditional geologic and geophysical logging in the Naknek wells includes a logical and well-considered set of activities undertaken during and
after drilling that will serve to characterize the reservoir and communication between the first two wells in the production field. Naknek-G #3 drilling tasks are scheduled to begin
September 2011, and the costs of achieving its drilling (construction), testing and evaluation objectives are the substance of NEA?s request for REFGP Round IV funding. Preliminary
results support temperatures and flow adequate for the production of electricity. Well field construction including production and injection wells will continue until required MW capacity
is met.
The Chefornak Wind Turbine Feasibility, Design and Permitting project involves all preconstruction activities to support the installation of three (3) 100 kW wind turbines on the eastern
edge of the City of Chefornak. This proposal requests funding to complete Phase II and Phase III project activities. Funding received through this application will be utilized to accomplish
the following scope of work:
1. Procure and install a MET tower at the proposed wind turbine installation location
2. Collect one year of resource data and process recordings through appropriate modeling software
3. Perform geotechnical analysis at the project site
4. Develop final project designs and cost estimates
5. Apply for and obtain relevant project permits
This scope of work proposed in this application will support the eventual installation of a 300 kW wind power installation that will be owned by the City of Chefornak and operated by
the Naterkaq Light Plant (NLP). The NLP is wholly owned by the City of Chefornak and the electricity produced by the installed turbines will be distributed to the utility without charge.
The wind turbines will be connected into NLP?s electrical distribution system through a new three-phase distribution line running from the project site to the existing power plant.
The project will offer benefits to the community of Chefornak and its electric customers through a system-wide reduction and stabilization of energy prices. The City of Chefornak has
assembled a project team headed by STG Incorporated that is prepared to immediately begin work on an accelerated schedule. Among others, the project team includes members from Powercorp
Wind Diesel North America, DNV Global Energy Concepts Inc, Erricos Engineering, Alaska Line Builders, Duane Miller Associates, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell, BBFM Engineers and Aurora
Consulting. All aspects of the feasibility, design, and permitting project, detailed in the following pages of this application, can be completed within one year from the receipt of
funding.
The Copper River School District (CRSD) proposes to install a 1.8MBTU wood pellet fueled boiler at the Kenny Lake School. This boiler will displace 18,625 gallons of fuel oil every year.
The current boilers will be used for backup, low load and peak heat periods. This project will involve school district personnel, local contractors, design engineers and the Alaska
Energy Authority (AEA). This project will employee local residents in construction, keep energy money within the State of Alaska and utilize regional biomass resources from the Fairbanks
area. This project will introduce bulk delivery of pellets from the Superior Pellet Plant, located in North Pole, AK, to the Copper River Valley. Local residents may be able to expand
use of pellets for home heating use.
To determine the feasibility of installing wind towers in Stebbins, AVEC proposes to continue to monitor the existing wind meteorological (met) tower that was erected this year using
funding from the Denali Commission. AVEC would also perform geotechnical work to support an engineering effort. The work would involve obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner
for geotechnical fieldwork, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site.
A conceptual design would be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control would be obtained for the conceptual design
of this project.
To determine the viability of upgrading the Selawik wind turbines from the existing AOC machines to Northern Power NW100s, AVEC proposes to conduct a feasibility study and conceptual
design. AVEC will analyze and report findings to partners and community members. By reusing the existing site, we anticipate to drive down the total installed cost significantly. This
total project concept, with wind generation, could be segmented into the following phases:
Phase 1. Feasibility study & conceptual design.
Phase 2. Financing and negotiation of any power purchase agreement.
Phase 3. Design and engineering.
Phase 4. Installation of transmission and wind energy.
Phase 5. Operations and maintenance.
This proposal only covers phase 1.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Scammon Bay. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design would be
created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits would be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
AVEC proposes to complete final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of two wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation system for currently
intertied communities of St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), the electrical utility provider in Old Harbor, Alaska, is proposing to complete final design and permitting of hydroelectric project in
Old Harbor, Alaska. The proposed project is a 300 kW run of the river hydroelectric plant with a diversion structure, pipeline, powerhouse, and electric line. The project involves collecting
up to 7 cfs of water year round from Mountain Creek tributary of Barling Bay Creek and transporting it to a tributary of Lagoon Creek. The project would meet the existing electricity
demand of the community.
To better determine the feasibility of wind power in Marshall, AVEC proposes to build on the results of the already-completed wind resource study by commissioning a geotechnical study
for the site and performing a conceptual design study to determine the most optimal equipment configuration and layout. The geotechnical work would involve obtaining permanent site
control from the landowner with the intent of supporting follow-on turbine construction in a future project.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Koyuk. The work would involve obtaining
a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the wind tower(s) and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design would be
created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control would be obtained for the placement of the met towers and wind turbines.
AVEC proposes to install a 10 kW solar array in Kaltag. The array would be installed on the side of the existing power plant facility that is owned and operated by AVEC. Work would involve
shipping materials to the community, installing, integrating, testing, and commissioning the array. As a pilot study, installation of this small array in Kaltag would help AVEC evaluate
the benefits of solar arrays installed at power generating facilities
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Elim. The work would involve obtaining
a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location, studying
the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design would be created
based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control would be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Eek. The work will would involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design would be
created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control would be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
The project will be a study of the phenomena of river debris with an emphasis on developing technologies and protocols to mitigate the impact of the debris on the operation of hydrokinetic
turbines, in general, and specifically the hydrokinetic turbine operating in the Yukon River at Eagle, AK.. The Yukon River Hydrokinetic Project [YRHP] is a multiyear pilot study being
performed by AP&T to determine the viability of hydrokinetic technology in a remote isolated Alaskan community. The YRHP originally funded by the Denali Commission is currently operating
from funds granted by the Alaskan Center for Energy and Power [ACEP]. The YRHP will be operated for two more years through the operating seasons of 2011 and 2012. Recognizing that debris
mitigation is a critical issue to the success of the hydrokinetic concept AP&T will contract the University of Alaska-Fairbanks [UAF] to perform debris studies during the 2011 and 2012
operating seasons and analyzing and evaluating mitigating techniques from the data collected in the studies.
Please refer to the UAF Statement of Work [SOW] attached for more details. During the 2010 operating season a debris boom was deployed upstream of the hydrokinetic device. This first
generation debris mitigation system [DMS] failed to perform but lessons were learned and AP&T along with it contractors will manufacture a second generation DMS-2 through the winter
of 2010 that will be deployed with the hydrokinetic device at the beginning of the 2011 operating season. This new debris system will be designed primarily to deflect the surface debris.
Subsurface debris moving through the water column also needs to be deflected and the results of the UAF study will be used to upgrade the DMS-2 over the winter of 2011. The upgraded
third generation system DMS-3 will be deployed in 2012 and UAF will complete its studies with the collection of data through the 2012 operating season and its evaluation. If feasible
the hydrokinetic unit will be deployed in the years subsequent to the pilot study period. If this is the case the results of the UAF study will be utilized to determine if new improvements
should be made to the debris mitigation system.
The eight communities named in this proposal?Hughes, Ruby, Koyukuk, Nulato, Kaltag, Nikolai, Anvik, and Holy Cross?have all identified wood heating in public buildings as a priority
energy opportunity that can displace fuel oil, save the communities money, utilize locally available renewable resources, and create local employment opportunities. These communities
are interested in installing high-efficiency, low emission biomass boilers similar to the Garn boiler system currently in use in the Tanana washeteria and other Alaska communities.
The first step in this process is the preparation of a feasibility assessment that identifies potential buildings for wood heating, the size and type of boilers that would be required,
estimated fuel displacement and cost savings, capital cost and payback period, forest inventory and wood harvest plan, and so on. The applicant proposes to subcontract with Dan Parrent,
wood utilization specialist of the Juneau Economic Development Council, to conduct 1- to 2-day site visits in each community and prepare feasibility assessments for each. Parrent has
extensive experience in this area and has prepared numerous such reports for other Alaska communities. The forest inventory and wood harvest planning work will be conducted by Will
Putman, head forester for Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC). Following the completion of these reports, project staff Kim Carlo of Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) and Ross Coen
of TCC and the Alaska Center for Energy and Power at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) will continue to communicate with residents of the communities and facilitate their internal
planning processes to determine whether each community wants to move forward with final design and construction phases of the respective wood-heating projects. The applicant anticipates
submitting final design and construction proposal(s) to the RE Fund (Round 5) for those communities named in this proposal that wish to proceed.
This project consists of the construction of biomass heating system, using high efficiency, low emissions wood fired boilers to heat the school and the athletic complex. It includes
construction of wood-fired boiler heat building and a cordwood storage building, at the Thorne Bay School. An alternative plan could be to use the new self contained wood boilers housed
in a connex unit used at Stebbins if the unit becomes approved and proves efficient to use.
The Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility would consist of 5 MW of installed capacity with an average annual output of 20,600 MWh of energy, installed on the Grant lake watershed near Moose
Pass, Alaska. The proposed Project is comprised of a diversion dam at the outlet to Grant Lake (under consideration), an intake structure in Grant Lake, a tunnel, a surge tank, a penstock,
a powerhouse, a tailrace detention pond, a switchyard with disconnect switch & stepup transformer, and an overhead or underground transmission line. The intake would be in Grant Lake
near its outlet. Water would be conveyed from the intake through a 3200? penstock to a powerhouse containing two Francis-type turbines. The powerhouse would be located near the bank
of Grant Creek and would discharge through a second penstock into Grant Creek. A transmission line would connect the facility to the Railbelt grid near Moose Pass. Please see the attached
Project Description that was filed with FERC on August 13th, 2010. Kenai Hydro LLC, whose sole member is the Homer Electric Association (HEA), was created in 2008 to evaluate and possibly
develop this site as a low impact hydroelectric facility.
The Nikiski Combined Cycle Conversion (NCCC) project will convert the existing simple cycle 42MW gas turbine into a highly efficient combined cycle plant by adding a Steam Turbine Generator
(STG) and re-commissioning the existing Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG). The STG will recover waste heat from the existing gas turbine and produce an additional 18MW of capacity
with no additional fuel required. The plant conversion will increase the base load plant efficiency by 45% without increasing fuel consumption. AEEC is seeking grant funds for the construction
phase of this waste heat recovery project.
The Nushagak Community Wind Power Project proposes to erect two wind turbines (approximately 200-300 kW. e.g. Aeronautica 29-225kW) and connect them into the adjacent electric grid operated
by Nushagak Electric and Telephone Cooperative (NETC) serving Dillingham and Aleknagik, Alaska. This installation will deliver annually up to 900 mega watt hours of electric power and
replace more than 64 thousand gallons of diesel fuel.
The proposed Kanakanak site has enough wind to be considered a commercially viable site for a small commercial sized mid-scale turbine. Such a device would produce in excess of $155,000/yr.
Further, such wind turbines will serve as an important educational tool for NETC to gain the important skills and expertise to operate and maintain state of the art renewable technology.
Such knowledge is a central component to NETC developing a sustainable energy system that will integrate renewable power sources with existing diesel technology.
The purpose of this project is to investigate the potential of using the known geothermal resource at Tenakee Inlet to produce power and evaluate alternative uses of the source. Springs
near the head of Tenakee Inlet have the highest recorded surface temperature (176? F) of any of the numerous geothermal springs tested on Chichagof Island and listed on the Geothermal
Resources of Alaska Map. Geochemistry of the spring waters indicates a maximum subsurface temperature of 243? F. The surface flow rate of the spring has been measured at 90 L/min and
the convective heat discharge estimated at 0.5 MW. We request funding for a two-phase reconnaissance study of the resource with a planned timeline of approximately 18 months. Phase
I will include mapping, remote sensing, aerial and ground based geophysics, and geochemical sampling. If justified by the first phase, we will commence with Phase II - exploratory well
drilling. In this second phase, two wells would be drilled, although the second would have to be justified by the combined results of Phase I and the first well. This is the complete
scope of work we are requesting funding for with this grant, but if this work is successful and promising, future work would include additional drilling necessary to confirm and develop
the resource, necessary permitting, and power plant and infrastructure construction.
APC proposes to construct the 1.5 MW Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on Yerrick Creek, approximately 20 miles west of Tok. The Project would off-set diesel generation
in the communities of Tetlin, Tanacross, Dot Lake and Tok. The Project will consist of a small diversion structure, approximately 15,000 feet of penstock, powerhouse with a single generating
unit, tailrace, small substation, and transmission line. The Project operation will be run-of-river; annual generation is expected to be approximately 4,900 MWh/yr (approximately 40%
of the interconnected load). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than
diesel generation.
APC is actively looking to add another hydroelectric storage facility to its Upper Lynn Canal (ULC) system serving Haines, Skagway, and nearby communities. To date, APC has considered
Connelly Lake near Haines and Walker Lake near Klukwan, with Connelly Lake being preferred because of its much greater energy potential. However, some Haines citizens are opposed to
development of Connelly Lake, and have expressed their interest in APC evaluating the Schubee Lake site as an alternative. APC has made a very preliminary evaluation of the Schubee
Lake site and believe there is some potential; therefore the proposed grant is to study the Schubee Lake site to approximately the same depth as Connelly Lake so that a fair comparison
can be made between the two. In our view, this means bypassing the reconnaissance phase (Phase I) and proceeding directly with conceptual design and feasibility work (Phase II).
The overall 34kV power line route is approximately 12 miles long. Approximately 0.9-mile of the westernmost section is an existing APC 2kV distribution line that will be overbuilt. The
line will cross Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island. The route primarily follows existing logging roads. The power line will begin at a point along Hydaburg Road about 0.45 miles northeast
of the town. It will continue northeast along the existing logging road passing north of Deer Bay and intersecting Hetta Inlet opposite Jumbo Island. This section is adjacent to private
forested land with a small section of Muskeg and is 7.0 miles long. The logging roads are mostly mild to moderate cut sections with a few rock cuts. The first 0.9 miles of this section
is an existing APC corridor adjacent to the road established for a 2kV line. The water crossing over Hetta Inlet will be accomplished with 3 multi-pole structures with one on each side
of the inlet and one at the pinnacle of Jumbo Island. Jumbo Island slopes steeply toward the water on both sides and is heavily forested. A new corridor will need to be established.
The structure on the island will likely be set by helicopter. This crossing is 0.9 miles across. The power line will continue in a new corridor for 0.3 mile to the east until it intersects
an existing logging road. Approximately 1500 feet of temporary or permanent access road spurs will need to be constructed to access 2 line structures along this section. The line route
then turns south and follows existing logging roads 3.8 miles southeast to the powerhouse/switchyard location near Copper Harbor. This section is adjacent to private, recently harvested
forest land with very steep and rocky terrain prone to slides. The logging road is primarily full bench construction with several rock cut sections. There are danger trees (and boulders)
above the power line route on the eastern side slopes that may need to be removed/secured to protect the power line.
APC proposes to construct a small run-of-river hydroelectric project at Neck Lake, a 1,000 acre lake located 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island.
The Project would supply power to the community of Whale Pass, and would offset diesel generation, which is currently the sole source of electricity. The relatively high and modulated
flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end of the outlet stream provide a good opportunity for a small run-of-river hydroelectric development. Facilities would
include an access road, intake structure, 400 feet of penstock, a containerized power plant, a tailrace channel, and upgrade of 4 miles of transmission line. The hydroelectric facilities
will be designed to avoid interference with the existing salmon rearing and collection facilities operated at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA).
APC conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2008, and determined that there is sufficient potential to almost always provide enough generation for Whale Pass loads (see Section
10 for a copy of the reconnaissance report). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for APC?s Whale Pass customers.
The Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project (Project) will be located in Southeast Alaska, approximately 14 miles northeast of the City of Haines and 10 miles southwest of the City of Skagway.
Connelly Lake (formerly known as Upper Chilkoot Lake) is an 85 acre Alpine Lake, and drains into the Chilkoot River. The project will be on state and private land, including the Haines
State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve. The project facilities will include a dam at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW powerhouse with two generating
units, a 14-mile-long 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Final dimensions and capacities of these facilities will be determined by optimization studies to be
conducted during Phase II. The Project will be developed by APC to provide additional generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems.
APC proposes to construct the 300 kW Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project), which will be located approximately 8 miles north of Slana on the Glenn Highway (Tok Cutoff). The
Project would off-set diesel generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Slana, Chistochina, and Mentasta. The Project will consist of two small diversion structures,
approximately 13,200 feet of penstock, a powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and a very short length of transmission line. For about half the year,
the Project operation will be run-of-river, but during the colder months the Project will draw water from Carlson Lake. The potential annual generation is estimated to be approximately
1,200 MWh/yr, which is about equal to the current annual requirements of the three communities.
Therefore, the Project has the potential to almost offset 100% of the current diesel generation. The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization.
The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation.
AEA Renewable Energy Fund grant guidelines require a multi-phase approach to project development. The Borough is requesting funds for the first two phases in this application: Reconnaissance
and Feasibility/Conceptual Design Studies. The tasks for this project are described in Section 2.4 of the grant application instructions
This project is a conceptual design/feasibility study of localized testing and evaluation of electric vehicles and related infrastructure in an Alaska community, using locally-generated
renewable electricity to displace the use of gasoline and diesel vehicle fuel. The community served by this project is Wrangell, Alaska. Directly involved in this project is the City
and Borough of Wrangell (City), through Wrangell Municipal Light and Power (WMLP), and the Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA). The City is requesting grant funds for a feasibility/design
study/cost estimate of an electric vehicle charging station in Wrangell, presumably to be located at City-owned buildings such as the WMLP/public works, well as a feasibility/market
study of the types of electric vehicles most appropriate for use in Wrangell. Different business models, including an EV rental car pool, would be explored. Cost estimates for partially
converting the city?s vehicle fleet to EVs could also be prepared.
The proposed project is to design and build a redundant wood fired heating plant to heat the Susitna Valley High School with fuel wood which will be sustainably harvested from an appropriately-scaled
, designated, land-base selected from nearby Borough timber lands. It includes the Energy Building which houses the boilers, the connection piping to the building and the controls required
to monitor and control the system. The project also includes the on site storage of the split cordwood. A long-term management plan for the designated timber lands will be developed
in which a Secondary Vocational-Education curriculum can be enfolded that will directly involve student and community participation in ongoing studies of forest regeneration, biodiversity,
timber harvest, wood products development, trail development and managing for multiple use.
The Native Village of Eyak proposes a feasibility study to evaluate the potential of installing a biomass heating system to heat one or more community buildings. The community would
utilize wood waste from the community burn pile and cardboard from the landfill. Alder from right-of-way clearing of roads would also be considered as a fuel source. The community
would develop a community energy audit protocol as part of the feasibility process.
(Project description edited for length and clarity.)
This project is the continuation of the Hot Springs Bay Valley Geothermal Reconn. Project, previously funded under AEA REF Grant Agreement #2195475. Surface exploration & analysis, a
preliminary technical feasibility assessment and economic assessment were completed in 2009-2010. With the City?s commitment of an additional $1.2 million, exploratory drilling of two
test wells was completed 8/10. Drilling program confirmed presence of a geothermal resource sufficient for final design & permitting as described in Phase III requirements listed in
Section 2.5 of RFA AEA 11-005. This Round IV grant application is a request for funds to complete Phase III, Final Design & Permitting.
The proposed Whitman Lake Project will install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at an existing dam, supporting near-term capacity demand increases in the Ketchikan area and
displacing diesel generation as the existing Tyee Lake (SEAPA) resource becomes fully utilized. It will also replace the aging water supply system of the SSRAA Whitman Lake Hatchery,
providing increased water quantity, reliability and redundancy to a facility that is critical to the region?s commercial fishing, seafood processing & sportfishing industries.
The City of Coffman Cove and Craig partnered in a King Salmon Enhancement Program. We built a hatchery at the Craig water treatment plant with Pacific Sustainable Salmon Funds. This
was the first year of return for Port St Nick?s fish. Upwards of 6,000 fish returned to the area. Next year will be Coffman Cove?s first year of returning fish. The Port St. Nick
site was chosen due to the availability of generous quantities of high pressure water feeding the Craig water plant. An 8 inch line is currently side tapped into a 12 inch line to
feed the hatchery. Inside the hatchery there are pressure reduction valves to step down the pressure from 250 lbs to an operational pressure of 10 PSI. This results in a waste of
hydro energy that could be used to drive a small hydro electrical plant effectively producing power and depressurizing and providing the hatchery needs simultaneously. Electricity
produced from a small hydro plant could be used to provide power to the grid, be used to supplement or provide power to the water plant and be purchased to provide funds for rearing
of King Salmon smolts.
The primary purpose of this application for preliminary permit is to secure the right to investigate the power potential at Silver Lake and determine the best adapted use of that power
potential in the geographic area, including CVEA?s system. Detailed maps showing the project boundary and study area are provided in Exhibit 3-Project Maps & Photos. CVEA proposes to
step down from generation voltage at the project to serve local requirements in the immediate area. The transmission segment that would connect the proposed Silver Lake project to CVEA?s
system in Valdez is therefore not jurisdictional as a ?primary line? and would be constructed under State of AK approvals. Two alternative approaches to this line are provided in Exhibit
4.1, Alternative Transmission Line Routes.
Phase I of the Tok School biomass heating project is scheduled to be complete Oct. 2010. Project was developed using AEA Round I Grant funding. Project consisted of a biomass heating
facility that contained an automated biomass heating system that will heat the existing K-12 school. Phase II which is seeking AEA round IV grant funding, is an extension of the Tok
School biomass heating project and will consist of the bid alternates that were developed during Phase I but not constructed. Bid alternates that would be of most benefit to the facility
& will be part of the scope of work for Phase II will consist of: 1)Bid Alternate 1: Extending a hot water heating loop & related mechanical & electrical integration from the biomass
heating facility to a detached multipurpose building which houses an ice hockey rink and shooting range and also to an additional detached Zamboni garage. Both buildings are located
on the Tok School campus. 2) Bid Alternate 3: Adding a heat exchanger in the K-12 school building to isolate new biomass boiler system fluid from existing K-12 school heating system
fluid.
GVEA plans to award the EPC contract and wind turbine purchase contract in April 2011. The wind turbine purchase contract will require a 10% down payment based on discussions with possible
wind turbine suppliers. GVEA will be purchasing 12-24 wind turbines depending on the results of a wind turbine evaluation. The turbines under review are sized from 1-2.2 MW. The total
planned output of the Eva Creek Project is 24 MW.
Chugach is proposing to bring the process of route selection and permitting for a new transmission line linking potential renewable energy projects on the west side of Cook Inlet to
the existing Chugach system. Ormat Nevada, Inc. (Ormat), a wholly owned subsidiary of Ormat Technologies, Inc. (NYSE ?ORA?), secured 15 geothermal leases on Mt. Spurr from the State
of Alaska in 2008 and has since embarked on multi-phased exploration and development plan, with a goal to explore and build a utility scale 50-100 MW geothermal power plant to be connected
to the Railbelt power grid around 2016. Ormat has built over 1,000 MW of geothermal plants during the last 3 decades all over the western United States and several locations internationally.
Phase 1 of Ormat?s exploration, focusing on both aerial and ground based geological and geophysical surveys was completed in August 2010. Phase 2a, focusing on drilling four 500? to
1000? core holes, to measure temperature gradients and other geological features, started early September 2010 an is expected to be completed by the end of the month. Phase 2a will
move on to drilling additional, deeper, slim holes in 2011. Both phases (1 and 2a) will be partially cost shared by Oramat and AEA as part of Round IIII of the Renewable Energy Grant
Program. Future Ormat exploration and development phases, planned for 2012-2013, will focus on additional drilling in an attempt to confirm and delineate the geothermal resource. Subsequent
geothermal field development and power plant construction and commissioning are expected to take place in 2014-2016. Hydroelectric resource assessment at Lake Chakachamna is not as
far along, but a project in the future is possible.
Chugach?s proposed project would include one or more high voltage transmission lines which would connect to the existing substation and transmission lines at Beluga. The line would
be built for a maximum operation voltage of 230 kV but could initially be operated at a lower voltage to match first stage development of 50 MW of the geothermal project. The line
would cover a distance of at least 40 miles, depending on the routing. The initial phase would investigate feasible routes and select a preferred route, including permitting and right
of way acquisition. While Chugach would own and operate the line, all purchases (presumably all Railbelt utilities) would be able to access the renewable energy. The line would be
designed to accommodate future development of a hydro resource at Lake Chakachamna.
This proposal is for a 700 watt Solar PV array, to be installed on each of the ten NWAB high schools in the Borough, co-generating with the grid. The project explores modular inverter
technology for redundancy and also provides a platform for understanding Solar (PV) technology for our student base, supporting an upcoming curriculum-addendum at high school-level
and a class at Chukchi College. With an ongoing program for alternate energy in our curriculum, the schools could expand the alternate energy program every spring to the extent allowable
by the local utility (KEA) and AVEC and also communicate the technology & teachings to other schools in the State of AK. Over time, the schools could become more and more efficient
in their use of energy as each high school finishing class would contribute a project to offset the energy usage in the school. As we incorporate alternate energy sources in Alaska?s
rural communities, it is important to make a way available for our coming generations to become proficient in the new implementation of the resources. After all, they will live with
what we create and have to be able to understand and work with the systems. If this doesn?t happen and we have to rely on outside expertise to service the new energy systems, then
the cost of operation will be excessive and our effort of lowering energy cost for the region will be hampered. We need to take responsibility now for what we create for future generations.
This project will be a start.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a wind energy and area-wide energy management system, consisting of wind diesel integration, end-use energy efficiency, automated building controls,
and conservation. This phase of the project involves the final design and permitting for three anticipated wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Wainwright. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough, a contracted engineering/design firm, and Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont (wind
turbine experts and supplier). The contractor will provide overall project management and electrical system engineering for the project, as well as, in the final phase of the project,
the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100B model
wind turbines plus startup & commissioning services.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a wind energy and area-wide energy management system, consisting of wind diesel integration, end-use energy efficiency, automated building controls,
and conservation. This phase of the project involves the final design and permitting for three anticipated wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Point Lay. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough, a contracted engineering/design firm, and Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont (wind
turbine experts and supplier). The contractor will provide overall project management and electrical system engineering for the project, as well as, in the final phase of the project,
the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100B model
wind turbines plus startup & commissioning services.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a wind energy and area-wide energy management system, consisting of wind diesel integration, end-use energy efficiency, automated building controls,
and conservation. This phase of the project involves the final design and permitting for three anticipated wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Point Hope. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough, a contracted engineering/design firm, and Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont (wind
turbine experts and supplier). The contractor will provide overall project management and electrical system engineering for the project, as well as, in the final phase of the project,
the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100B model
wind turbines plus startup & commissioning services.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a wind energy and area-wide energy management system, consisting of wind diesel integration, end-use energy efficiency, automated building controls,
and conservation. This phase of the project is the feasibility study phase of a three phase project which will include phases for design and permitting, and construction and commissioning
for three anticipated wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution system for the community of Kaktovik. Participants in the project include North Slope
Borough, a contracted engineering/design firm, and Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont (wind turbine experts and supplier). The contractor will provide overall project management
and system engineering during this phase of the project. During the construction phase, MSB will recruit an engineering and construction contractor for design and installation of all
civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100B model wind turbines plus startup & commissioning
services.
This phase of the Barrow to Atqasuk Power Transmission Project will initiate the engineering phase of the project concept that was proven to be the most viable in the feasibility study.
The intent of the feasibility study was to first determine if there is an economical solution for providing electric power to Atqasuk from a low cost energy source. That source, of
course, is the natural gas that is available in the Barrow area. The next goal of the study determines which power transmission concept is the most economical and compatible with the
prevailing technical, environmental and social constraints. In short, the most attractive power transmission concept will be the result of the feasibility study.
The winning concept then enters the preliminary engineering phase. The purpose of the preliminary design is to adequately define the project so that all stakeholders can understand
it. These stakeholders include the owners, end-users, financiers and the concerned regulatory bodies. It is the basis for gaining approval and agreement to go forth with the project.
It should be noted that this preliminary phase of engineering constitutes about 30% of the entire engineering effort. The 70% balance is for final design engineering and is required
solely for constructing the project. The final design consists of detailed drawings, specifications and other materials relevant to the construction phase.
Tasks involved during this preliminary engineering phase include the following:
? Establishing the transmission line route
? Determine physical constraints such as rivers, lakes, roads, infrastructure
? Analyze ice and wind loading
? Determine optimum structure types
? Plan structure height, spacing and conductor sag curves
? Determine wire sizes
? Determine grounding requirements
? Identify insulation and hardware requirements
? Assess environmental permit requirements
? Schedule critical procurement and contracting
? Produce cost estimates
This feasibility study will be used to elect the best technology and to develop a preliminary design for a renewable biomass based CHP (combined heat and power) system to replace diesel
fuel for --
1. The Galena electrical power supply and
2. To provide district heating for the utilidor system that serves the Galena Interior Learning Academy (GILA).
The proposed system will provide about 1000 kilowatts of electrical generation capacity and will provide recovered heat for the utilidor. The CHP project is expected to replace about
a million gallons of diesel fuel per year by using locally harvested biomass in the form of wood chips.
The technology options appear to be either a steam powered generator and heating system or a biomass gasification system. A reconnaissance study is already in progress to provide the
baseline information for this feasibility study. The reconnaissance survey by WH Pacific is scheduled for completion by December 31, 2010.
Between 1995 and 2001, Lime Village became the first community in Alaska to develop a hybrid solar and diesel fuel generation electrical system. Hybrid systems use more than one power
source to meet its community energy needs. This proposal is to upgrade and retrofit the existing solar system, develop remote monitoring system and provide for ongoing maintenance of
the system. The system consists of an array of solar panels that can produce 12KW of electricity. The electricity generated by the solar panels is stored in a battery system. The
community\'s electrical energy needs are then supplied by the batteries and supplemented by a diesel generator. The existing cost of diesel fuel in Lime Village is approximately $8.00
per gallon. This generates an average electrical cost of $1.00 to $1.50 per kilowatt. The community uses approximately 7,000 KW per month and has 30 units using electricity. The proposed
retrofit is predicted to result in a significant reduction in the cost of electrical energy.
The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwell?s power system. Currently, they obtain power from the line between MEA
and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). To accomplish this they propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River, a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this
plant will be in excess of 1 MW. It will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
The project consists of acquiring & installing equipment that will dry approx. 13,000 tons of wood waste per year produced as a byproduct of the sawmilling process. Dried wood would
then be burned in publicly owned facilities to provide reduced cost, district-style heat for these facilities at a reduced cost to the public entities that operate these facilities.
The project enables recipient facilities to burn renewable fuels to provide heat at lower costs over time than the cost to burn fossil fuels to produce heat.
Phase II includes a site survey; wind resource monitoring installation, data gathering and reporting on 10 month?s data in conjunction with existing wind data and will result in completion
of feasibility & conceptual design within two quarters of wind data compilation. The project will include the feasibility of building new wind energy capacity and leveraging in other
wind projects being planned by the City of Bethel and the Housing Authority. TDX Power is a seasoned rural energy operator with extensive wind turbine experience. TDX Power will complete
a Phase III final design by the end of the second year of the project. Phase IV construction will commence in the first quarter of year 3 and will be completed by the end of year 4
with an operating 1 MW rated wind turbine producing 3,050,000 kWh and leveraging a potential additional wind farm capacity of 1 MW to provide a total of 6,100,000 kWh from the combined
2MW of renewable energy to the Bethel utility grid.
Development of hydroelectric power at Takatz Lake would include construction of a 200-foot high main concrete arch dam, a small 30-foot high secondary saddle dam, power intake, unlined
tunnel, power penstock, power plant, tailrace, and transmission line segments including: underground, submarine, and overhead sections. the project would produce approx. 106,900 MWh
per year via two 13.8 MW turbine-generators.
Phase 1: Reconnaissance & project feasibility was funded. It includes a site survey; wind resource monitoring installation, data gathering and reporting on first year?s data; Feasibility
Study and conceptual design. This activity is a preliminary engineering and financial analysis of the potential for a hybrid renewable project. The proposal is for Phase II, Preliminary
Design: this proposal will advance the assessment and engineering evaluations conducted in Phase 1 with the preliminary design efforts necessary to advance the potential project to
the stage that it?s ready for final design, permitting and construction. Phase III (Final Design & Permitting) will include the final design of the winning resources. Phase IV (Construction)
will cover the construction portion of this project.
The project, located in Valdez, AK will capture waste heat generated at the Petro Star Refinery. Waste heat will be collected by a shell & tube glycol medium recovery system. The medium
will drive 2 technologies operating in a series. Ammonia absorption technology will create cooling for 45 million pound -20 degree cold storage facility. An organic Rankin Cycle Generator
will use the medium once it has exited the ammonia absorption system to create 600 wk?s of power which will be used to operate the cold storage facility as well as the Solomon Gulch
Hatchery. The final benefit will be to use the cold cycle of the generator to create a salmon rearing facility.
The purpose of the AVCP Housing Wind Turbine Project is to construct two turbine towers for wind generated energy, with the purchase of land from the City of Bethel for the site, a power
generation/controls building, and complete Operations and Maintenance training of permanent employees. The calculated annual projected kWh usage of the Low Income Rental units, Lulu
Herron Congregate housing and the AVCP RHA Office Complex and warehouses is 581,573 kWh.
Application combined with #517 - only this one (#523) scored
Project Type: Hydro, including run of river, Transmission of Renewable Energy.
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development consists of a 1MW + run of the river hydropower project located in the Tongass Forest within the Admiralty Island National Monument based on a proposal
that Kootznoowoo submitted in March 2000 which is described more full in the Angoon Hydrologic Project Feasibility Evaluation Report (Project). The development would be located on
Thayer Creek approximately 6 miles north of Angoon. Thayer Creek flows out of Thayer Lake (64 square mile reservoir) at a gentle grade through a broad forested valley then steepens
for 6,800 feet through a narrow forested canyon and finally flattens again for 2000 feet before flowing into Chatham Strait. The development will tap the energy potential in the steep
section of the stream and will avoid any impact on anadromous fish that use the lower portion of the creek. The average flow of Thayer Creek is approximately 370 cfs and can vary from
25 cfs during the coldest periods of the winter to over 2000 cfs during storms in the fall and winter. The generating facility has a head of 250 feet which is approximate because of
the wording of the Forest Service Record of Decision (ROD) requiring maintenance of fish habitat. An additional restriction set forth in the ROD which is not considered in the HDR
proposal requires the overland transmission line be buried where feasible along the access road to the community of Angoon. The transmission line funding will be submitted in a separate
companion application for Round III funds.
Project Type: Wind and Storage of Renewable.
We currently generate power with diesel generators and hydro electric. There are periods of time the hydro is not capable of operation due to weather conditions and we wish to maximize
our efficient generation of power to our customers benefits. We already have a track record of passing benefits on to the customers that we gain from hydro operations.
Project Type: Heat Recovery from existing sources, Transmission of Renewable Energy.
City of Houston wished to demonstrate the feasibility of using natural gas fired fuel cells to produce lower cost electricity and heat.
To accomplish this they will hire an engineering firm to design the siting and transmission requirements, determine KW and BTU requirements and size the system.
They will hire a project manager who will gather data on current electrical and thermal needs and submit that to the engineers, research and fill out all required permits, meet with
the school and potential commercial recipients of heat and/or power Coordinate with city staff and fill out all required reports.
The Angoon Commercial Demonstration Tidal Power Project will install a Midrange 375KW nominal nameplate capacity free stream tidal power converter made up of triple counter rotating
units of 125KW each. The neutrally buoyant steel hulled unit will be anchored in position with pilings at one of two sites identified within intertie distances from the existing diesel
power house. The tidal power diesel intertie will form an integrated mini grid where the diesel will provide peaking, emergency, tide slack coverage and the predictable tidal power
component will become the new base power supply. Part of the study will determine a phase two installation where the distance between the two installations provides offsetting slacks
and then the existing diesel can be designated emergency power only.
The project consists of installing and operating frequency-based equipment at specified public facilities using a programmable priority system selected by the community. The equipment
?captures waste energy off a utility system? and determines (dispatches) and uses the excess electricity generated. The system senses low electrical demand which causes the frequency
to rise. Controls located at each building sense the increased frequency and adds loads based on its sequencing priority. As loads are added the frequency drops and the controls take
the buildings off-line again based on prioritizing. Independent solid state frequency modulators monitor each load governor and its relays have the ability to react to changes rapidly
cutting in and out as required. This efficiency enables the hydro power plant to convert its water up to capacity.
Rural residents in NW Alaska are facing some of the highest costs anywhere in the nation. In order to proactively address the region?s energy crisis, KEA is working to implement long
term energy options. While there are a variety of alternative energy options available to the Kotzebue region, such as wind, solar, and geothermal; wind energy has a proven track record
of success in this community.
The goals of the proposed project are:
1. To increase the wind capacity of KEA from 1.14MW to 2.95MW using 2 EWT 900KW wind turbines.
2. To integrate the increased wind capacity with a 500KW/3.7 MW Premium Power Flow Battery.
3. To utilize the excess electricity in a distributed heating system. This is a two year project. year one involves performing all pre-construction and foundation
construction tasks. Year two involves the wind turbine erection and commissioning.
Application combined with #523 - only that one (#523) scored and not this one.
Project Type: Hydro, including run of river and Transmission of Renewable Energy.
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development consists of a 1MW + run of the river hydropower project located in the Tongass Forest within the Admiralty Island National Monument based on a proposal
that Kootznoowoo submitted in March 2000 which is described more full in the Angoon Hydrologic Project Feasibility Evaluation Report (Project). The development would be located on
Thayer Creek approximately 6 miles north of Angoon. Thayer Creek flows out of Thayer Lake (64 square mile reservoir) at a gentle grade through a broad forested valley then steepens
for 6,800 feet through a narrow forested canyon and finally flattens again for 2000 feet before flowing into Chatham Strait. The development will tap the energy potential in the steep
section of the stream and will avoid any impact on anadromous fish that use the lower portion of the creek. The average flow of Thayer Creek is approximately 370 cfs and can vary from
25 cfs during the coldest periods of the winter to over 2000 cfs during storms in the fall and winter. The generating facility has a head of 250 feet which is approximate because of
the wording of the Forest Service Record of Decision (ROD) requiring maintenance of fish habitat. An additional restriction set forth in the ROD which is not considered in the HDR
proposal requires the overland transmission line be buried where feasible along the access road to the community of Angoon. The transmission line funding is the subject of this funding
and is a companion to the separate companion application for Round III funds.
Project Type: Wind & Transmission of Renewable Energy.
This project includes final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of four wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
systems for the villages of Saint Mary?s, Mountain Village, and Pilot Station.
At present, Saint Mary?s and Pitka?s Point are connected by a distribution power line, but Mountain Village and Pilot Station are stand-alone diesel powered communities. This project
would:
? Electrically intertie Mountain Village and Pilot Station to Saint Mary?s
? Install 900 kW of wind between Pitka?s Point and Saint Mary?s to create a wind-diesel
hybrid power system
? Install a secondary load boiler to dump excess wind power
? Manage the new integrated power system with a new SCADA system
Standby generation capability will be maintained in Mountain Village and Pilot Station but primary generation will be delivered by the existing St. Mary?s power plant.
A meterological (met) tower installed in New Stuyahok between 2003 and 2005 found that winds were class 3 (fair to good); however, placement of the met tower was hindered by the active
runway at the time (location new airport has now been constructed out of town), and it is expected that the wind resource could be better. Before going forward with the final design
and construction of wind turbines, AVEC would like to better determine the wind potential in the community.
The work would involve permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine
the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
A meterological (met) tower installed in New Stuyahok between 2003 and 2005 found that winds were class 3 (fair to good); however, placement of the met tower was hindered by the active
runway at the time (location new airport has now been constructed out of town), and it is expected that the wind resource could be better. Before going forward with the final design
and construction of wind turbines, AVEC would like to better determine the wind potential in the community.
The work would involve permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine
the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
The project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of three wind turbines to supplement a new power generation system for the communities
of Teller and Brevig Mission. AVEC is currently working on preliminary design and permitting of the wind turbines under a Round 2 AEA grant award. This work will be accomplished in
the next year, prior to initiating this phase.
Project Type: Wind, Transmission of Renewable Eneryg.
To determine the feasibility of installing wind towers in the vicinity of Kivalina, AVEC proposes to complete a wind power study and conceptual design. To this end, AVEC will install
a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work. AVEC also proposes to conduct a feasibility study and conceptual design to examine the extension of a power intertie
from Kivalina to the power system at the AIDEA-owned DMTS Port, 17 miles to the southwest, with the addition of wind power generation along the intertie. AVEC will analyze and report
findings about both areas to partners and community members. AVEC This total project concept, with wind generation and an intertie, could be segmented into the following phases:
? Phase 1. Feasibility study & conceptual design.
? Phase 2. Financing and negotiation of power purchase agreement.
? Phase 3. Design and engineering.
? Phase 4. Installation of transmission and wind energy.
? Phase 5. Operations and maintenance.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Stebbins. The work will involve obtaining
a letter of non-objection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location, studying the wind resource
for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome
of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
The Slana Wind Project is located approximately seven miles west of Slana and will contribute up to one MW of clean, renewable wind power to the Alaska Power Company Slana distribution
system. Grant monies from this application will initially be used to help erect and monitor one 50-meter meteorological tower to confirm that favorable wind energy is available at
the site to justify commercial development. A favorable resource assessment will result in final design, permitting and construction.
The communities served will include all communities within the Alaska Power Company (APC, an Alaska Power & Telephone Company public utility subsidiary) service area including Slana
(2009 population 110), Chistochena (81) and when it is connected, Mentasta (126). The total population of the served area will be 313.
The project will include construction of a 1.7 mile long transmission line across Ahtna Corporation and state-owned land from the Tok Cutoff to the proposed wind power generation facility
on the ridgetop. The power generation facility will include approximately one MW of wind turbines, the size and type subject to final design. These turbines will be founded in shallow
bedrock prevalent on the ridge crest. Power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation. Overhead transmission lines (distribution
voltage) from the transformer substation will extend 1.7 miles to the existing APC distribution line on the Tok Cutoff.
The grant participant is Village Wind Power LLC who has three Alaska wind projects under development (Tok, Slana, and Bethel). There will be a number of contractors involved in completing
the project. In addition to our own in-house efforts, other experienced contractors will be chosen to carry out selected components of the project. These components may include:
? State Land Use Permit for Wind Resource Assessment ? already completed
? State and Native Corp easement for the transmission line
? State land lease acquisition for the wind farm site
? Topographic mapping for the wind farm and transmission line
? Wetlands mapping for the wind farm and transmission line
? Archeological review for the wind farm and transmission line
? Detailed design for the wind farm and transmission line
? Power Purchase Agreement with APC
? Transmission line construction
? Wind farm construction
? Electrical hookup
? Commissioning and testing
This Phase II project will investigate, evaluate, and provide a conceptual design for partially stabilizing wind-generated power at the Delta Wind Farm with locally-produced natural
gas. It is intended to address the technical, economic, financial, and operational viability of producing natural gas from the Jarvis Creek area 30 miles south of Delta Junction. If
sufficient natural gas is present, the conceptual design will include piping that gas to Delta Junction for use within the community for space heat and stationary power uses.
Stabilizing wind power with a rapidly controllable natural gas generator will allow the wind project to better serve its customers with a more stable power supply. Rapid variations in
the amount of wind energy available can be smoothed using natural gas generation, and operational procedures involving anticipatory wind turbine shutdowns, or sequential wind turbine
startups, as well as wind forecasting.
The waters of Cook Inlet offer a clean and renewable power source for the communities of South Central Alaska. Our project will utilize existing infrastructure, namely the King Salmon
platform, and proven submersible technologies to capture the tidal energy of the Inlet. Baker Hughes Centrilift develops electrical submersible pumps (ESP) for the oil industry and
given our product?s reliable history in very demanding oil well environments, their ESP system was chosen as the power generating unit. The smaller diameter of an ESP Generator allows
for higher speed operation and lower impact to fish than propeller-based systems. The ESP Generator would consist of 1) aquatic life diverters to protect the environment and minimize
the environmental impact of the system, 2) rotating multistage turbine anchored in water at optimum flow velocity depth, 3) submersible electric power cable would carry the energy to
shore connecting to 4) local utility substation or transformer. Buoys would be placed strategically near the system to alert boat traffic. The existing platform would act as an anchoring
structure and intermediate for power distribution.
Project Type: Wind, Hydro, including run of river, Geothermal, including Heat Pumps.
We propose to accomplish the four phases of a project to integrate one or more renewable energy resources with a properly sized efficient diesel plant in Adak, Alaska.
Phase I (Reconnaissance) was funded.
Phase II, this proposal, addresses Resource Assessment/Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual Design.
Phase III (Final Design and Permitting), will include the final design of the winning resource(s). Phase IV (Construction) will cover the construction portion of this project.
The Tatitlek IRA Council, in partnership with Tatitlek Corporation, has a teaming agreement with TDX Power to complete the wind resource assessment, feasibility study, and conceptual
design with funding from Round II of the Renewable Energy Grant Program. Assuming the resource proves adequate and the project economical, we propose to proceed with the final design,
permitting, and construction of a high penetration wind-diesel project. We understand our current diesel plant will require a new low-load diesel gen-set and new automated controls
in order to successfully integrate wind energy.
Project Type: Wind, Hydro, including run of rivers, Geothermal, including Heat Pumps.
The west side of Cook Inlet contains several energy projects that may well provide the majority of future electrical energy supply for the Railbelt region of Alaska where 70% of the
Alaska populations resides. These projects include the Chakchamna hydropower project, Mt. Spurr geothermal project, in-situ coal gasification, and wind generation. While there are limited
existing pioneer roads in the area of consideration, if any or all of the potential projects move forward, infrastructure needed for the development and operation of these projects
could be significant. Funds provided under this application would be used to conduct field inventories of fisheries and wildlife resources in the area and their habitat. The project
would evaluate the individual and cumulative infrastructure needs of the energy projects and the subsequent environmental impact that this infrastructure might have on area fisheries
and wildlife. The largest majority of the funding will be utilized to inventory area fisheries, and their seasonal and
aerial distribution throughout the study area. Infrastructure of concern which may impact these
resources include temporary and permanent access roads, bridges, airfields, and transmission lines.
Project Type: Wave Power.
TDX Power will work with Voith Hydro Wavegen to deliver this project. Voith Hydro Wavegen is an industry leader in the development of wave power technologies and a long track record
of success with the deployment of their nine year old commercial wave power generation facility in Scotland. Management from TDX Power have worked with Wavegen since 1999 and have formed
a joint relationship to pursue the development of Alaska\'s first wave power generation facility together. It is our intention that this project will be a continuation of a study that
has already been started by the project team and will be completed prior to grant award. The objective of the initial phase will be to identify 3 suitable sites for fixed Oscillating
Water Column wave energy plants in Alaska. The initial phase will be carried out using publicly available data from NOAA and other public bodies. This data will be used to generate
a preliminary assessment of wave resource, transmission infrastructure, other site users and energy demand for various sites throughout the state. The data will then be used to expand
and update the report \'Wave power in Alaska: Community Profiles\' written by Nick Goodman in 1999. From this report 3 sites will be selected and a full technical, economic and environmental
assessment will be carried out. It is this full site assessment that is the subject of this grant
application. Upon completion of the study, it is anticipated that the project team will be in possession of all the data required to apply for a full FERC license for the sites selected.
TDX Power will assess the existing diesel plant owned by the City of St. Paul electric utility. TDX will design and engineer the necessary modifications so that this plant will efficiently
integrate wind energy from the POSS Camp Wind Farm. TDX will design and engineer modifications to the controls at the POSS Camp Wind Farm in order to sell electrons to the City of St.
Paul electric utility. TDX Power will assess, engineer, and construct all required distribution line additions and upgrades.
Acceptance of any funding from this grant is contingent upon a power purchase agreement
between TDX Power and the City of St. Paul. In the event TDX cannot secure a PPA with the City of St. Paul, and agree on the TDX conceptual design for the integration, no project funds
will be requested.
ORPC Alaska, LLC (?ORPC?) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC (?the Company?), which was founded in 2004 to develop technology and projects generating
reliable, economical, emission-free electricity from tidal, river and deep-water ocean currents. ORPC is currently developing two projects in Alaska: the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project
and a river in-stream hydrokinetic project in Nenana. The Company?s proprietary ocean current generation technology is adaptable, and is used in different design configurations depending
on the current and water depth of the application. The bottom-mounted RivGen? Power System is designed for small river applications, particularly in remote communities without a centralized
power grid; the bottom-mounted TidGen? Power System is designed for shallow tidal current applications; and the buoyant, moored OCGen? Module is designed for deeper tidal and ocean
current applications.
The Company expects to receive a Pilot Project License for the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (?FERC?) by October 2010. This license permits
the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project to be built to a rated peak generating capacity of 5 megawatts (?MW?) in a 6-knot current. The first part of this 5 MW project will involve installing
the TidGen? Power System, with a rated peak generating capacity of 1 MW in a 6-knot current. The TidGen? Power System will consist of four (4) TidGen? devices; each TidGen? device is
made up of a single TidGen? turbine generator unit (?TGU?) and a bottom support frame. The TidGen? Project will begin in the third quarter of 2010, and will incorporate environmental
and site characterization studies performed to date; consultations with federal and state agencies; and data obtained in the summer 2010 testing of a TidGen? Power System prototype
in Maine. The TidGen? Project will include detailed engineering and specifications for all project components, including the TidGen? TGUs, the bottom support frames, the power electronics
and transmission system, the deployment and retrieval systems, the environmental monitoring systems, and the data acquisition systems. Upon completion of this phase and receipt of the
FERC Pilot Project License, ORPC will release the TidGen? Project components for manufacture by February 2011, allowing for the completion of fabrication and shipment of the first of
four TidGen? devices to Anchorage by May 2011. The TidGen? Power System will be assembled at the Port of Anchorage, and installed in phases from May to October 2011. ORPC will extensively
monitor the system to collect data essential to further site development.
In the second round of the Alaska Renewable Energy Fund, the Alaska Energy Authority (?AEA?) recommended ORPC for full funding of the reconnaissance and feasibility phases of the Cook
Inlet Tidal Energy Project; however, due to state budget concerns, this funding was never awarded. Despite the lack of state funding, ORPC was able to raise sufficient private funds
to complete these two phases of the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project. As the first stage of the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project, the 1 MW TidGen? Project is estimated to cost $6,501,066,
of which $4,514,650 will be funded by the Company and $392,426 will be funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy. Through this proposal ORPC requests that the AEA fund the
remaining $1,954,000 for the final design and construction phases of the TidGen? Project. The subsequent stages of the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project, which are not in the scope of
this application, will follow one year of testing and monitoring of the TidGen? Power System. These subsequent stages will include the deployment of OCGen? Modules to gradually increase
the generating capacity to 2 MW by the end of 2012, to 5 MW by the end of 2013, and ultimately to a commercial scale (up to 100 MW) development of the site. In order to develop to this
level, ORPC will obtain a FERC Operating License before the end of the Pilot Project License term in 2019, in all likelihood by 2015. The TidGen? Project will be interconnected to the
Railbelt power grid through the Chugach Electric Raspberry Substation; the electricity generated will be sold to the Railbelt utilities under purchase agreements yet to be negotiated.
ORPC will complete the TidGen? Project work with the cooperation of Terrasond LTD, HDR|DTA, The University of Alaska Anchorage, LGL Alaska Research Associates Inc., Aquacoustics, PND
Engineering, the Port of Anchorage, Port MacKenzie, and other local contractors.
This project is to investigate the potential of using the known geothermal resource at Tenakee Inlet to supply a geothermal power plant. Springs near the head of Tenakee Inlet have
the highest recorded surface temperature (176? F) of any of the numerous geothermal springs tested on Chichagof Island and listed on the Geothermal Resources of Alaska Map. Geochemistry
of the spring waters indicate a maximum subsurface temperature of 243? F. The surface flow rate of the spring has been measured at 90 L/min and the convective heat discharge estimated
at 0.5 MW. Using geophysical and geochemical exploratory methods, we propose to conduct a field exploration of this resource in order to choose a location for two exploratory wells.
This phase of the project will culminate with the drilling and testing of two exploratory wells, which will allow for an economic and technical assessment of the potential power generation
from this resource. This work is a necessary first step in determining the viability of generating region-wide power from this resource.
The proposed project will assess the tidal energy potential and development feasibility of four sites within Kachemak Bay. With assistance from the National Oceanic and Atmos-pheric
Administration (NOAA), the project will utilize historical water level and current data, recent sea floor mapping data, and new ocean current measurements to construct a comprehensive
ocean circulation model of the entire Kachemak Bay region. The model and tidal current data analyses will provide detailed information on tidal energy potential throughout Kachemak
Bay. With this tidal power information, four sites will be selected and power production costs, output, and availability, as well as potential environmental issues, will be assessed
to determine initial feasibility of tidal energy projects. For all feasible sites, a conceptual design to optimize tidal energy production will be produced, along with a construction
cost estimate for that design.
There are numerous projects that are planned or are being implemented, especially in rural Alaska, that will use biomass as the sole or major energy source for heat and/or power. These
projects have dealt with such questions as how much energy needs to be produced, boiler size and type, and capital costs for installation of biomass burning equipment, and in some cases
actual construction. However, they have for the most part ignored the supply side of the equation. Some important questions that must be addressed before Alaska communities can expect
to successfully and sustainably use biomass as an energy source are: how much biomass is needed for any given energy producing system; how much biomass is currently available; how much
land is needed to supply the biomass; what is the total cost of supply including harvest and logistics of handling, storage, and transport; how fast will biomass regrow with or without
management; and it is feasible to farm biomass in Alaska? All must be considered before the myriad of biofuel projects proposed and envisioned can successfully move forward, and before
existing, commercially available technologies that use biomass to produce energy for heat, fuel, and power can be most effectively, and most successfully, deployed. Although some information
exists to address these questions, it is scattered and often in formats not readily available. This
project addresses the availability, quality and feasibility of sustainable, economic use of agricultural and forestry biomass in Alaska. The goal of the project is to 1) assimilate all
existing information on the total forest and crop biomass available in Alaska into one data base, 2) determine the gaps in the data base and the information needed to fill the gaps,
and 3) when possible, determine the biological, physical, and economic feasibility of using Alaskan biomass as biofuels. The project will have major statewide application as it will
serve as the basis for all agricultural and forestry biomass-based energy projects; the greatest number of which are being proposed for rural and village communities. Project cooperators
are the School of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences(SNRAS) and the Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station(AFES) at the University of Alaska Fairbanks(UAF) (project primary/agricultur
al energy crops and forest biomass), Fairbanks Economic Development Corporation(FEDC) (logistics, data support, and information dissemination), Alaska Division of Forestry (forest biomass,
and harvest, transport, and storage technologies), and Tanana Chiefs Conference (current biomass assessment projects, forest inventories)..
The City of Napaskiak requests funding for a Wind Study as the first and second steps towards supplementing the high cost of diesel generators currently in use. This Wind Study will
satisfy Phases I, Reconnaissance and Phase II, Feasibility of the AEA?s basic outline of the Wind Resource Development Partnering Plan Procurement. The study will result in a feasibility
report on the benefits, costs and guidelines of implementing the next three phases of a wind turbine system, both in terms of a stand-alone system operated independently by Napaskiak
Electric Utility, and in the context of a possible sub-regional intertie.
Project Type: Storage of Renewable
This project uses flywheel energy storage to stabilize the Tuntutuliak wind-diesel power grid. Grid stability is needed to achieve increased use of wind and other renewable energy sources
in diesel mini grids. The proposed project consists of installation of a Powerstore flywheel energy storage system, along with a state of the art Distributed Digital Control System,
to create a very high-penetration wind diesel system with residential thermal storage in Tuntutuliak, Alaska. The demonstration of this system will enable the effective sizing and cost
reduction measures to be identified so that the system can be widely replicated throughout the state and other power systems throughout the country.
The Copper River School District (CRSD) plans to install a wood pellet-fired heating system at the Kenny Lake School. With this application, CRSD is requesting grant monies for Phase
IV ? Construction. This will include purchase of pellet-fired boiler, pellet storage bin, delivery system, and boiler building construction. Public bid solicitations will be advertised
for purchase of the wood pellet boiler system and facility infrastructure construction. Local contractors will be targeted.
The Hoonah City Schools desires to upgrade our heating system to employ the use of low-emission nontoxic wood biomass as the source for wood-fired boilers to provide heat (through an
insulated pipe distribution system) initially to the K-12 School building and the combined gymnasium/pool building. The school will reduce our dependence on costly fossil fuels, while
employing cleaner, renewable, and locally available resources, through the use of locally available wood biomass material. A resource assessment and preliminary feasibility study was
completed in October 2008. The resulting report was directed toward the use of hand-stoked hydronic heaters with background information on bulk fuel boilers. An in-depth feasibility
study is required to identify land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis. A conceptual design analysis and cost estimate will be included, followed by a 35% conceptual
design plan set.
The Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project is a low-impact run-of-river renewable energy project proposed near Seward, Alaska. The project would be located east of the Spring Creek
Correctional Facility and Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park, across Resurrection Bay from the City of Seward. The project is anticipated to have an installed capacity of 5.4 MW and
provide an estimated 21,700 MWh of energy annually. The project would supply approximately 1/3rd of Seward Electric System\'s annual energy requirements.
The Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project is an approximately 75 MW storage project proposed for the Glacier Fork of the Knik River. Electricity from the project would be delivered into
the railbelt transmission grid via a new approximately 20-mile transmission line to existing transmission infrastructure in the vicinity of the Old Glenn Highway bridge over the Knik
River. A map of the project is included at the end of the application in Attachment H.
The Archangel Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential hydroelectric resource located in Hatcher Pass, AK with a capacity of 1.7 MW. A feasibility study is required to determine the
appropriate project size and to scope development issues.
Chugach is proposing to begin the process of route selection and permitting for a new transmission line linking the potential geothermal renewable energy resource at Mt. Spun to the
existing Chugach system. The project would include one or more high voltage transmission lines which will connect to the existing substation and transmission lines at Beluga. The line
would be built for a maximum operating voltage of 230kV but could be initially operated at a lower voltage to match first stage development of 50 MW of the geothermal project. The line
would cover a distance of at least 40 miles, depending on the routing. The initial phase would
investigate feasible routes and select a preferred route, including permitting and right of way
acquisition. While Chugach would own and operate the line, all purchasers (presumably all Railbelt utilities) would be able to access the renewable energy. The line would be designed
to also accommodate the development of a hydro resource at Lake Chakachamna.
Project Type: Wind, Hydro, including run of river, Geothermal, including Heat Pumps, Heat recovery from existing sources, solar, biomass or biofuels, transmission of renewable energy,
hydrokinetic and storage of renewable.
This project will develop a comprehensive Tribal Energy Plan for the community of Chistochina that includes a reconnaissance study of various renewable energy resources, preliminary
engineering on renewable energy systems for the most abundant and available resources, and a technical/cost analysis of constructing an intertie system that would connect Chistochina
to the appropriate electrical grid (Copper Valley or AP&T). The project will also contribute funds to support Ahtna, Inc.?s efforts to complete a regional energy plan to ensure that
Chistochina?s Tribal Energy Plan is compatible with the broader regional energy plan.
This GIS-based project will conductould be a detailed statewide run-of-river hydropower resource assessment with, but a particular focus on southwest, south central and southeast Alaska.
If the project scope and budget do not allow for a full statewide assessment, the project team will indentify priority areas for study in consultation with AEA staff. The study will
determine the current hydropower resource and estimate the future hydropower resource (in 2060) using available data on climate trends. The project will benefit from synergies with
the active AEA-funded statewide hydrokinetic energy assessment and with the AEA-supported and DOE-funded nationwide hydrokinetic energy assessment project which wilthat willl begin
in Dec. 2009.
The study will be conducted using river/stream discharge data generatedconsolidated by the University of Alaska team and using the Rapid Hydro Assessment Model (RHAM), a GIS tool developed
by Kerr Wood Leidal of Burnaby, BC. RHAM calculates the amount of hydroelectric power available on all streams in a study area, screening out sites within protected or environmentally
sensitive areas, and estimates project costs. RHAM can also assess the suitability of hydroelectric development in a given area, taking into account economic, environmental and social
factors, and can assess storage hydro and clustered developments. The resulting data and GIS maps would improve and build upon existing public data sources on Alaska hydropower including:
? Alaska Energy Authority hydroelectric site database
? US Department of Energy, Hydropower Program (Idaho National Laboratory): statewide hydropower resource computer models done in 2006, 2004 and 1997.
? USGS hydrology data from all over the state
? Other data sources from state and federal agencies such as topographic maps (digital elevation models, and existing public GIS files with layers for existing road and power
transmission line and generation infrastructure, power plants, land status, protected areas, and fish habitat information.
Port Graham Village Council along with its regional non-profit corporation Chugachmiut are working to implement (develop and operate) a 1.5-megawatt biomass combined heat and power (CHP)
system for Port Graham, Alaska. A feasible biomass technology option was identified in 2007 by an independent research group, Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC) at the University
of North Dakota (a copy is supplied in the CD for this RFA). This research identified feasibility of generating three-phase 220-volt electrical power from a woody biomass fuel source
that can be obtained from Port Graham Village Corporation lands and local Native allotment lands on a sustained basis. An existing road system supplies access to the fuel source. The
project will provide electrically generated heat to Port Graham?s and Nanwalek?s community buildings and homes at the price comparable to current heating costs using fuel oil. Heating
cost from biomass-generated electricity is anticipated to increase at a much lower rate than heating with fuel oil. Community buildings and homes can be retrofitted for electrical heating
at a much lower cost than installing a community wide biomass heated hot water distribution loop and hot water heating systems in each community building and home. Current oil-fired
hot-water baseboard heating will remain as a backup heat system in each community building and home. The electrical heating option and electrical power will provide power cost without
the need for state sponsored price cost equalization supplement and would experience less cost increase over time.
Project Type: Storage of Renewable.
This project demonstrates the use of flywheel energy storage to stabilize any village power grid. Grid stability is needed to achieve increased use of wind and other renewable energy
sources in diesel mini grids. The proposed project consists of installation of a Powerstore flywheel energy storage system, along with a state of the art Distributed Digital Control
System, to create a very high-penetration wind diesel system with residential thermal storage in Kwigillingok, Alaska.
The demonstration of this system will enable the effective sizing and cost reduction measures to be identified so that the system can be widely replicated throughout the state and other
power systems throughout the country.
The proposed project consists of the installation and integration into the Pilot Point community diesel power system, one Northwind 100, 21 meter wind turbine wind, on a 38 meter tubular
steel tower. The project will include the upgrading of approximately 1.5 miles of 3 phase power line, diesel plant controls, and communications improvements, and installation of a heat
recovery boiler in the school. The proposed system provides scalable village wind-diesel power system architecture, using proven components, which can be expanded to add wind capacity
as well as other sources of alternative energy sources.
On February 3, 2009, the City of Angoon (Angoon) filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for a three-year preliminary permit under Section 4(f) of the
Federal Power Act (FPA) to study the feasibility of the proposed Scenery Lake Hydroelectric Project No. 13365-000. On October 2, 2009, the City of Angoon received the FERC preliminary
permit for the project. The project would be located on Scenery Creek and Scenery Lake near Petersburg, Alaska. The project would be located within the Tongass National Forest, which
is administered by the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service). The proposed project would consist of: (1) a 15-foot-high concrete dam with a spillway impounding Scenery Lake; (2) a lake
tap or siphon; (3) a 13,000-foot-long by 8-foot-diameter buried steel penstock; (4) a powerhouse containing two to four new generating units having a total installed capacity of 30
megawatts; (5) a 7-mile-long, 69-kilovolt (kV) and a 22-mile-long, 138-kV transmission line; and (6) appurtenant facilities. The proposed Scenery Lake Hydroelectric Project would have
an estimated average annual generation of 130 gigawatt-hours. On October 2, 2009, the City of Angoon received the FERC preliminary permit for Scenery Lake.
Project Type: Storage of Renewable.
This project demonstrates the use of flywheel energy storage to stabilize any village power grid. Grid stability is needed to achieve increased use of wind and other renewable energy
sources in diesel mini grids. The proposed project consists of installation of a Powerstore flywheel energy storage system, along with a state of the art Distributed Digital Control
System, to create a very high-penetration wind diesel system with residential thermal storage in Kongiganak, Alaska.
The demonstration of this system will enable the effective sizing and cost reduction measures to be identified so that the system can be widely replicated throughout the state and other
power systems throughout the country.
The proposed project is a village wind power and heating system for the community of Kipnuk, Alaska. The project will be owned and operated by the Kipnuk Light Plant and the community
of Kipnuk, and includes the installation of 675 kW of wind generation capacity, using three Vestas V- 2 7 wind turbines, new wind diesel controls and switchgear, a Power store flywheel
energy storage unit for grid stabilization and 30 thermal electric heating and energy storage devices distributed throughout the community. The wind power and heating system ties in
with the power plant and power store module through the existing power distribution grid. The wind turbines and power store module will be mounted on pile foundations, on property provided
by the community. The power store and control/switchgear modules will be placed near the diesel power plant The system is designed to produce, capture and meter excess wind energy separately
from diesel generation. Thirty electric thermal heating stoves will be placed in residential homes and three-80 KW electric thermal boilers will be placed in community building. These
storage units will be used to capture excess energy to lower heating costs. The Power store flywheel will provide the grid stability allowing the village energy system to accept any
and all contributions from the wind turbines. This wind diesel system architecture enables ease of e xpansion by adding more wind turbines and more electric thermal storage devices
Project Type: Transmission of Renewable Energy and Hydrokinetic (Tidal Energy).
The Turnagain Arm Tidal Electrical Generation Project (TATEP) consists of the installation of patented and proven Davis tidal electrical generation turbines in areas with at least 80
ft. of water at high tide and 54 ft. low tide, housed in piling supported platforms designed to allow ice flow beneath the platforms. Specific sites of the platforms will be selected
after further research into environmental, hydrodynamics of tides and water movement in specific areas of the inlet. The plan calls for 200 10MW generators with a total capacity of
2000 MW at 60% efficiency which produces 1200MW net electricity. Platforms will be connected by transmission lines and submarine cable will bring the electricity produced to Chugach
Electric on the Anchorage side and to Homer Electric on the Kenai side, accessing existing utility corridors as much as possible. Electricity produced by the project will be available
for purchase by all the electric utilities in the railbelt area at a rate between 6? to 8? per kilowatt hour, which will reduce the cost of electricity to railbelt consumers by 50%
to 67% and will benefit the70% of the Alaskan population who live in this area. (See Map.)
Construct 16 x 20 building adjacent to Tok Main office building to house pellet boiler, water storage tank and pellet storage.
Install pellet boiler, water storage and radiant heating system in the Tok Main office. Purchase pellets on contract with local pellet manufactures in Dry Creek (50 miles from Tok
with trees harvested from the Tanana Valley State Forest) currently producing pellets. Track use of pellets for three year period and compare cost to fuel oil usage and cost. Invite
other state and federal agencies and general public to visit the facility to learn the local renewable biomass heating options, the environmental benefits, local economic benefits and
the cost savings, This is a very simple, straight forward, proven, dependable system with a high quality dependable fuel source that we have already used 6 tons in small pellet stove
this last year in the office. Radiant heating systems are used extensively in the Tok area with the outside wood boilers. No
engineering will be required. We will also displace a 50 gallon electric hot water heater with
domestic hot water exchanger to provide all the hot water we could use.
Project Type: Solar and Biomass or Biofuels.
Alaska Mental Health Trust is applying to the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Renewable Energy Fund Round III grant program, seeking funding for equipment purchase and installation of
a GARN biomass heating system for the community of Ionia. The Ionia community is building a two-story 6,000 square foot community center/barn on their property near Kasilof for the
purpose of demonstrating renewable energy systems and sustainable living strategies for their neighbors of Kenai Peninsula and other rural Alaskans.
Ionia has been a successful example of sustainable and healthy ?intentional community? living for many years and is now expanding its outreach to a more active demonstration and educational
center. There are many books, magazines, websites, and videos about sustainable living, intentional communities, and conscious living. Ionia is a living-breathing village where seekers
and the merely curious can interact and get a real feel for viable alternatives.
The Ionia Renewable Energy Training Center (RETC) will be the first renewable energy educational center located on the Kenai Peninsula. The Center, in its design and use of sustainable
and renewable energy technology, will serve as an educational resource and conference center for the demonstration of renewable energy technologies specific to local ecosystems. A wind
?met tower? (anemometers and wind vane on a 100 foot tower connected to a data logger computer) was recently installed nearby to assess the wind resource for proper sizing of a wind
turbine, as part of the overall suite of community scale renewable energy systems. A combination of grants and private funds has been raised for the construction of the RETC building.
The Ionia Community has provided all the labor and the log milling for the project.
GARNs use cordwood, (not chips or pellets), burned hot and fast?cleanly--in a boiler to heat a large reservoir of liquid, which is pumped through tubes in floors and radiators to heat
the building. This request also includes funding for a solar-thermal heating system to augment the biomass system for this unique community. Both systems will provide heat for the RETC
and for the South-facing greenhouse on the side of the building.
The Ionia RETC building is already under construction and is approximately 30% finished (as of October ?09). When completed, the building will serve as barn/storage, classrooms, meeting
and office space, and conference center. The building itself will be an integral part of the demonstration of energy efficient building techniques, a renewable energy heating system
and food production, preparation and storage. The anticipated date of the commissioning and start-up of the educational center is October 1, 2011.
This funding request is to complete Phase IV (Construction and Commissioning) of renewable energy systems to heat the educational center, which includes the Garn cordwood boiler, solar
thermal system, radiant heat flooring and hydronic radiators. The project will establish an integrated, alternative energy heating system for the building that effectively models energy
conservation while using local renewable resources (wood and solar).
Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T), in partnership with Nexterra Systems, and with support from GE Energy, the Upper Tanana communities of Tok, Tetlin, Dot Lake and Tanacross, and the State
of Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR), propose a Phase IV Construction project with grant support from the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA). This collaborative project will demonstrate
the AEA?s commitment to community-scale renewable energy systems for rural Alaskans through the deployment of a 2MWe CHP (combined heat and power) system utilizing locally sourced woody
biomass as fuel. The system combines Nexterra?s proprietary gasification technology and syngas conditioning systems with GE Energy?s high-efficiency internal combustion engines. The
system is an Internal Combustion (IC) engine powered by conditioned syngas produced from the gasification of locally sourced woody biomass, with excess heat being made available for
district heating. The system will serve the rural Alaskans on the local (isolated) power grid of Tok, Tetlin, Dot Lake and Tanacross, now fueled by diesel generators.
Project Type: Wind, Geothermal, including Heat Pumps and Solar.
The Kodiak Island Borough is proposing to perform analysis or assessment to evaluate the potential for use of alternative energy sources to supplement the use of oil in the Kodiak High
School facility. Specifically, we will investigate the potential for utilization of the following:
? Ground source heat pumps utilizing latent ground heat tapped through a closed loop wellfield and distributed throughout the building via conventional heat pumps;
? Site generated wind power;
? Photovoltaic power generation;
? Solar heat and power generation in conjunction with daylighting.
Mount Spurr represents what currently appears to be the best opportunity in Alaska to develop a utility-scale base-load geothermal energy power plant. Located 80 miles west of Anchorage
on State lands leased by Ormat in October of 2008, a successful power project at Mt. Spurr would serve communities along the Railbelt through power purchased by one or more of the Railbelt
electric utilities. Preliminary analysis of data from field reconnaissance of the region conducted by Ormat in July-August 2009, coupled with historical exploration work from the mid-1980\'s,
is encouraging as to the potential existence of a commercial size geothermal resource. However, further exploration is required in order to confirm it. The grant request is for a two-phase
program for continued resource studies and assessment surveys with a planned timeline of roughly one year (from July 2010 to mid summer of 2011). Phase I ? reconnaissance - will include
mapping, further geochemical sampling, remote sensing, and aerial and ground-based geophysics. These studies will eventually culminate in gradient/slim hole drilling to be performed
in the second phase, if justified. If successful, future work beyond the scope of this grant application will include further slim/production hole drilling in 2011-2012, and if the
resource is confirmed, construction of a power plant and drilling of additional geothermal production and re-injection wells will follow.
Project Type: Solar and Biomass or Biofuels.
The City of Tanana in collaboration with the Tanana Tribal Council proposes to install a biomass heating source and solar panels for the Assisted Living Facility for elders in Tanana,
the Tanana Tribal Offices and the Internet high tech training center in Tanana. All three buildings are located close to one another. The City of Tanana will oversee the construction
and implementation of this project; the Tribal Council will provide in-kind and collaborative oversight of the project. The project site is on 4.3 acres of land dedicated to this project.
The Biomass Center building will be located in the middle of the complex of three buildings within 100 feet of the center of these building. The Biomass Center will house three (3)
GARN heating units that will provide hot water heat to each of the buildings. The biomass heating units will greatly reduce the use of expensive fuel oil and save money for the Assisted
Living Facility and Tribal Council. The installation of 63 solar panels will provide electricity to the three buildings during the summer months significantly reducing the cost of
electricity.
The Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential hydroelectric resource in the Matanuska-Susitna valley to may be able to economically produce 6.5 MW or more. This phase of the
project, a reconnaissance study, involves investigating the resource to determine if a project is viable and to also perform preliminary feasibility work on the project location, size,
and resource availability.
The Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project is a run-of-river hydroelectric project located on Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon. The 190 kW project can provide for most of the communities
current power needs, which peak at about 125 kW. The project involves construction of an intake, a 4650 foot long, 18 inch diameter pipeline, a powerhouse, a 2000 foot long transmission
line, and access roads.
The Resurrection Valley Projects have a combined capacity of 7.0 MW based on a review existing maps. A reconnaissance study is required to determine the viability of the projects and
select the preferred developments.
The Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential hydroelectric resource located near Sutton, AK with a capacity of 1.5 MW. A feasibility study is required to determine the appropriate
project size and to scope development issues.
The Virgin Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential hydroelectric resource in the Girdwood valley with a capacity of 1.2 MW. A feasibility study is required to determine the appropriate
project size and to scope development issues.
This project is the continuation of the Hot Springs Bay Valley Geothermal Reconnaissance Project, previously funded under Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Renewable Energy Grant Fund application
#246. A surface investigation, detailed analysis of geological data, an economic analysis and project permitting are being completed under the existing grant authorization. The purpose
of this request for funding is to provide the supplemental funds necessary for test well drilling during the 2010 field season (June ? October). A heliportable coring drill rig will
be employed to drill four (4) slimholes, three at 1500 feet in depth and one at 3,500 feet. A baseline comprehensive well testing program will be conducted shortly after well completion,
followed by long-term well monitoring. The project will result in confirmation of the geothermal resource sufficient for final design and permitting as described in the Phase III requirements
listed in Section 2.5 of RFA AEA 10-015.
This grant request identifies the repairs and upgrades required to bring the system back on line and to improve its long term efficiency, output, and sustainability. Therefore, this
grant application is requesting funds for:
? Phase IV Final Design, Construction, Commissioning,
Operation
The tasks for this project are as defined in Sections 2.5 and 2.6 of the grant application instructions.
Wind Powering America and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) launched the Wind for Schools project in 2005 by conducting a pilot project in Colorado that resulted in one
small wind turbine installed in Walsenburg, wind energy curriculum development, and a great deal of enthusiasm for the Wind for Schools project\'s potential. The Wind for Schools project
will be replicated in Alaska by installing many more small wind turbines, engaging local citizens in a wind energy discussion, and developing a knowledge base for wind energy within
schools.
The general approach of the Wind for Schools project is to install small wind turbines at rural elementary and secondary schools (hosts) while developing Wind Application Centers at
higher education institutions. Teacher training and hands?on curricula are implemented at each host school to bring the wind turbine into the classroom through interactive and interschool
wind?related research tasks. The students at the Wind Application Centers assist in the assessment, design, and installation of the small wind systems at the host schools, acting as
wind energy consultants. They also participate in class work and other engineering projects in the wind energy field, preparing them to enter the energy workforce pursuing fields, such
as engineering and technical trades, as wells as economics, social science, education, and environmental sciences.
This project will incorporate a technical and economic feasibility assessment for replacing the University of Alaska coal-fired power plant with a waste-to-energy biomass energy project.
This study will compare three scenarios ? 1) the base case of coal only fuel, 2) a mixed fuel consisting primarily of municipal waste from the campus only and/or renewable energy from
local resources, and 3) 100% municipal waste and biomass, a portion of which would be diverted from the Fairbanks North Star Borough Landfill. In addition to comparing the economics
of these options, we will complete a comprehensive survey of waste-to-energy technologies that could be applicable for Alaskan communities. We will not limit the technical feasibility
assessment component to this site alone. There are a number of potential technologies that have been proposed for use in Alaska, including gasification, combustion, and plasma gasifiers.
We will consider each of these configurations, plus specific products and manufacturers and the market-readiness of their products.
The Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal system was extensively studied in the late 1970s and early 1980s with a variety of geological, geochemical, and geophysical studies. Unfortunately
the execution of these surveys and interpretation of the data from these earlier studies did not result in a thorough understanding of the area, and the most important conclusions for
potential future development ? such as locating the upflow zone of the geothermal fluid ? were not conclusively determined. This proposal will fund a ground-based survey to complement
a Department of Energy award under DE-FOA-0000109 in the amount of $4,616,879. A similar submission was recommended for funding under Round II, but fell below the cutoff for the $25
million in projects that was ultimately funded. The goal of the larger project (combining DOE and State funding) will be to pinpoint the upflow zone using advanced geophysical survey
techniques, and to verify the location, depth to the resource, and temperature through a new drilling program. Both the existing wells and the new hole will be flow tested to obtain
water samples for chemical
analysis, and to conduct pressure interference surveys between the wells. These data, combined with an airborne thermal imaging survey to determine total heat flow to the surface
should be adequate to determine total potential output of the system for sustainable long term
development. The proposed project is a joint effort between the Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) and the Catholic Bishop of Northern Alaska, (owner of Pilgrim Hot Springs).
The project will be led by ACEP. In addition to the project partners, letters of support have been provided by Mary?s Igloo Native Council (owners of property adjacent to Pilgrim) and
Nome Joint Utilities, both of whom would be impacted in their organizations? long-term decision making by conclusions reached through this study. Letters of support from both of these
organizations is included as attachments.
The Ruby Tribal Council is proposing to partner with the Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) to perform a geothermal Resource Assessment of the Horner and Melozi Hot Springs geothermal
resources for potential power generation and space heating for the City of Ruby and the neighboring areas. The project includes using available thermal infrared images to generate a
land surface temperature and emissivity map of the study area; using available optical data to create a landcover classification map; acquiring and processing hundreds of airborne thermal
infrared images; collecting in-situ field data for geometric rectification of airborne images, driving the remote sensing data analysis, and validating analysis results; conducting
economic analysis of the area?s energy resource potential; and community outreach.
The AVCP Housing Wind Turbine Project is to purchase land from the City of Bethel for the site of the two turbine towers, construct the power line extension to the new AVCP RHA Office
Complex, purchase and construct the wind turbines and the generator building. The total annual projected kWh usage of the Low Income Rental units, Lulu Herron Congregate Housing and
the AVCP RHA Office Complex and warehouses is 581,573 kWh. The two wind turbines are projected to supply 582,486 kWh annually.
Project Type: Wave Energy
The City and Borough of Yakutat is pleased to propose a Phase III Final Design and Permitting Project leading to the first Alaska Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration.
A Phase I Reconnaissance and Phase II Feasibility Analysis Phase was completed in 2009 by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) under Yakutat Power funding ($44,000) which evaluated
and assessed in detail the technical, cost, economic and operational viability of a WEC project. The study scope included; (1) a shallow water wave energy resource assessment, (2) a
conceptual design based on the Aquamarine Power Oyster shallow water wave energy conversion technology, (3) a cost assessment (capital and O&M), and (4) a economic analysis. The Aquamarine
Oyster was chosen after a trade-off analysis showed that a the 500 kW to 1 MW plant scale, a near-shore device would make most sense. Aquamarine Power?s shallow water wave energy conversion
technology Oyster has been identified as the best suited wave energy technology for the deployment site. Oyster is a wave actuated hydraulic pump that pumps fresh water to shore at
a pressure level of about 120 bars, where it is converted into electricity using a conventional hydroelectric system and then returns it to the Oyster in a closed
loop. The major project elements include; (1) the Oyster WEC device, (2) a high pressure (120 ) bar pressure supply sub sea pipeline and a low pressure (3 bar) return sub sea pipeline,
(3) a onshore turbine generator power station, and (3) a distribution line extension to connect the power station to the city electrical grid network. The proposed deployment location
and related project elements are shown in the following figure.
Oyster is well suited for the Yakutat location. The system elements that are most prone to require maintenance are located on-shore where the equipment can easily be accessed.
The EPRI study showed that Yakutat has an excellent wave climate for wave energy conversion. A shallow water wave transformation model (SWAN) was used to propagate a full-year of wave
data to the deployment location and 13m water depth. Shallow water power densities at the deployment site of interest were assessed at between 19kW/m and 22kW/m. Based on this wave
energy resource data, the resulting capacity factor of the 650 kW rated Oyster machine was assessed at 45.6%.
Cost elements, including; (1) device, (2) sub sea pipeline, (3) on-shore power station, (4) overland distribution line extension, (5) installation, and (6) operation and maintenance
were assessed for the plant at 4 different sizes (1,2, ,4 and 8 units at 650 kW per unit). Cost of electricity was then computed using a Municipal Utility Ownership economic model.
Cost of electricity is estimated to be about 45 cents/kWh (in constant Jan 1, 2010 dollars) for a 20 year plant-life. Cost and economic uncertainties at this early stage of project
development are still quite substantial and based on EPRI?s experience with similar projects at a conceptual stage of development is on the order of +/- 30%.
The cost at this relatively small scale (as far as sizes of utility power plants in the lower 48) is clearly dominated by infrastructure and operational considerations related to the
installation of the device in this somewhat remote location. However, present busbar cost of electricity from the existing diesel-based generation facility comes in at about 27 cents/kWh
and will only increase in the future. This is comparable to Oyster at an 8 unit scale plant and removes the issue of price volatility of diesel fuel generation. Diesel fuel cost has
dramatically increased since the year 2000 and is only temporarily lower at present because the global recession has reduced the demand on fossil fuels, creating a temporary more attractive
pricing structure. In the long-term energy cost are expected to increase, which creates an additional economic burden to small communities like Yakutat, that are heavily reliant on
diesel fuel.
One of the key results of the EPRI feasibility study was that the level of cost-reduction potential that could come from optimization is substantial. These cost reductions can only be
quantified through detailed design and engineering analysis because most cost elements are driven by site-specific considerations. A key part of the proposed next phase is to investigate
some of the identified alternate design options and detail the ?optimal? solution for the site of interest. Many cost reductions could come from improved installation and operational
procedures, economies of scale, and the potential to locate the plant closer to shore. These alternate topologies will be optimized in this proposed phase of development.
Therefore, we propose progressing to Phase III based upon the results of this study. And, if the results of Phase III show adequate benefit cost ratio, Yakutat intends to implement a
Phase IV Construction and Operations/Maintenance Phase
Alaska has more than 50% of the wave energy resource (about 1,200 TWhr/year) of the entire United States of America off its shores (and that is excluding the Bering Seas to the north
of the Aleutian Islands). We believe that wave energy will play an important role in meeting the energy needs of the State of Alaska in the future. With this pilot demonstration project,
wet propose to be an early adopter and evaluator of emerging Wave Energy Conversion (WEC) technology.
The goal of this Phase III is complete a detailed construction design of the wave pilot pant and perform permitting/licensing activities required to obtain a FERC 5 year pilot license
to construct and operate the plant. The goal of a future Phase IV to construct, operate and maintain the pilot plant rated at 650kW for 5 years. The results of this pilot demonstration
plant project will enable Yakutat Power to make an informed evaluation as to whether wave energy should be included in its energy portfolio and whether the technology is ready for building
out a full scale plant at Yakutat or anywhere else along the coast of Alaska. If successful, it will be possible to re-license the project to extend the project life to 20-years and
additional units could be added to displace additional loads within the village. This increase in deployment scale would further reduce cost of electricity (economies of scale) and
allow heating fuel to be displaced.
The specific objective of Phase III Final Design and Permitting is to conduct all work necessary to complete engineering design, conduct baseline environmental studies and submit all
license applications required for a pilot wave energy demonstration plant offshore Yakutat.
The specific objective of Phase IV is to implement the technology in the actual environment near Yakutat to obtain real operational experience, environmental, performance and other data
gathering and evaluation/analysis.
Results of this project could open up the possibility of more wave energy conversion plants at many sites in Alaska.
IPEC proposes to construct a run-of-the-river 1,300 kW hydroelectric project powered by Gartina Creek and Water Supply Creek (Project). The Project will supplement existing IPEC-Hoonah
diesel generation capacity and reduce annual diesel fuel consumption by almost 60% - over 250,000-gallons/year.
BRI proposes an 18-month program incorporating a field deployment of six (6) pre-production, 1kW Thermal Engine Generator System (TEGS) units for waste heat conversion to electric power
in Ugashik for the 2010 winter season. Unlike larger Renewable Energy (RE) resources (i.e. wind/hydrokinetic) that interface to an existing power grid, TEGS will produce energy for
individual structures. TEGS is designed for deployment in remote areas where electrical power is a scarce, but valued, commodity. The system is designed as a retrofit for existing heating
stoves, converting waste heat into mechanical energy. The heart of the system is a proprietary, single-cylinder, beta-type Stirling cycle heat engine. The project includes installation
to meet safety standards, assessment of mechanical and electrical performance, reliability, maintainability, and overall suitability for commercial sales. Appropriate instrumentation,
spares, operating instructions, training, data analysis, and reporting are included in this effort. Stoves used in tests will be renovated or replaced following the conclusion of the
test.
AVTEC, with the concurrence and approval of the City of Seward, intends to renovate and update the City of Seward?s existing unused hydro power plant to be used as an operation training
tool in support of AVTEC?s Hydro Power Plant Operator training program sponsored by the Alaska Energy Authority.
TGER is a ?Hybrid System? incorporating two complementary technologies:
? Bioreactor to convert carbohydrates, sugars, some cellulosic waste into vaporous ethanol
? Thermo chemical gasifier to convert bioreactor residuals into ?fuel gas?
? Fuel gas and vaporous ethanol are fumigated into the diesel engine as a substitute for diesel fuel
? System of energy & materials exchange between subsystems for o/a system efficiency
? System outputs are benign ash and CO2*
* With exception of Petroleum-based plastics conversion, system is ?carbon-neutral?
How it Works:
? Mixed waste is loaded into a chute where wet food waste is separated for fermentation
? Solid waste is ground up and converted into fuel pellets for delivery to a downdraft gasifier
? Hydrous ethanol from fermentation and syngas from thermal decomposition are blended and aspirated into a 60kW generator to produce electricity
Products:
? Electricity ? can be used immediately, diverted to a power micro-grid, or used to charge batteries
? Ash ? environmentally benign
? Engine exhaust ? EPA certified
? Grey water ? environmentally benign (filtered and boiled)
? Excess thermal energy-250,000 BTUs captured for heat, hot water, field sanitation, etc.
Kenai Winds LLC has received AEA support to develop and erect a 10 MW wind energy facility located in the Nikiski industrial area on the Kenai Peninsula. Homer Electric Association has
requested that the capacity of the facility be expanded from 10 to 15 MW. This proposal is submitted to secure funding needed for the expansion. The facility will consist of 5 to 10
wind turbines disbursed throughout the site, electrically interconnected to HEA?s Nikiski substation.
Project Type: Solar and Biomass or Biofuels.
This proposed $1.86M program including 50% applicant cost share will develop and demonstrate a 10kW hybrid solar/biomass system powered entirely by renewable resources with more than
65% combined cycle efficiency, more than 95% thermal efficiency, and very low emissions. Using a high efficiency biomass boiler, high efficiency solar collectors, and organic Rankine
cycle (ORC) technology to make this possible. The carbon-neutral emissions may be contained for use in greenhouses to aid the year round growth of produce and net reduction of CO2 GHG.
The program will be completed in 1 Y2 years and the product can then be commercialized for markets in Alaska and the lower 48.
The main objective of this project is to demonstrate a 10 kW carbon neutral combined heat and power (CHP) systems using entirely renewable resources. The CHP system is designed to utilize
heat from a biomass boiler and solar sources to power an ORC turbine system and produce electricity. The excess heat from the ORCs and thermal energy source will be used for water and
space heating and directed into colocated greenhouses where produce will be grown. The carbon dioxide from the biomass combustion will be sequestered for the produce in the greenhouses.
The main objective of this project is to develop and operate a 2 MW Waste Energy Recovery power plant system at the Flint Hills Resources North Pole Refinery. The power plant is designed
to produce electricity using organic Rankine cycle (ORC) systems to extract heat from the heated post-distillation oil. The heated post-distillation oil has the potential to produce
4 MW of electricity that will be sold to the refinery. This project will increase the overall efficiency and reduce operating costs at the refinery providing a model for utilizing waste
heat other refineries and plants in the state can follow
The vision for this project is to construction a small scale hydroelectric plant to serve the Native Village of Chenega Bay, Alaska. In 1992, Phukan Consulting Engineers and Associates,
Inc. prepared a hydroelectric study for the Alaska Energy Authority which identified a viable project site and estimated costs for two alternative designs for completing the project.
In 2008-09, an AEA-funded grant allowed the engineering firm of HDR Alaska, Inc to complete a reconnaissance study which confirmed a feasible development site for construction of a
hydroelectric facility. This grant funding request is for the design and permitting which are the next steps for this hydroelectric generation project.
Project Type: Geothermal, including heat pumps and Transmission of Renewable Energy.
Naknek Electric Association, Inc. is committed to lowering utility rates and the cost of living in the Bristol Bay Region. To that end the utility has begun characterizing; developing
and testing the geothermal resource for production of utility scale electric, home heating and direct use applications. A transmission network will extend the benefits of indigenous,
clean and renewable energy to the region. The project will create sustainable ?New Energy? jobs during construction and career employment opportunities in operations and maintenance
throughout the life of the project. Long-term and regional in scope, both energy generation and distribution aspects of the project are multi-phased to achieve near and long-term economic
development, energy security and independence. Initially a 25 MW generation plant, district heating system and interconnection will serve eight communities in the Northern Bristol Bay
area, and later up to 50 MW for a larger region of Southwest Alaska. The project will increase economies of scale, replace not displace the use of No.1 and No.2 diesel fuel, and reduce
costly and potentially hazardous transportation of fossil fuels along habitat sensitive waterways in Bristol Bay, home of the world?s largest wild salmon runs.
The City of Seward (City) is owner of the Alaska SeaLife Center (ASLC), which is leased and operated by the Seward Association for the Advancement of Marine Science (SAAMS). In conjunction
with SAAMS, the City proposes construction of Phase II an innovative heating system that utilizes an emerging heat pump technology that will "lift" latent heat from raw seawater and
transfer this energy into low temperature building heat. The proposed seawater heat pump system will serve as a demonstration project designed to test and prove an emerging energy technology
that shows promise for providing financial benefits to Alaskans in coastal communities. Construction costs will be reduced by making use of the ASLC\'s existing seawater intakes and
seawater pumping system. Demonstration of this innovative system to the public will be facilitated through creation of a public display that will show ASLC visitors and other communities
the benefits and mechanics of the system in real-time.
Project Type: Hydro and Transmission of Renewable Energy.
A preliminary visit to the site in July 2009 was made by Hatch Acres, CVEA?s consultant for Allison Lake and a draft of the project layout was presented below. In fall 2009 CVEA installed
two stream gages, one located on the Duck River and one near the outlet of Silver Lake. In the spring of 2010 water quality data will be collected and further evaluated.
Project Type: Wind and Solar.
The Matanuska-Susitna Borough proposes to conduct a renewable energy reconnaissance study for the existing and planned public facilities within the borough to evaluate options to decrease
energy costs and reduce dependence on fossil fuels. A reconnaissance report will summarize the assessment and findings. This project will be administered and managed by the MSB and
will be conducted by a consultant chosen by the MSB. Locations shown to have significant renewable energy potential will undergo a feasibility study and include a conceptual design
for identified renewable energy resources.
The proposed Triangle Lake hydroelectric project will be located on the west side of Annette Island near the route of the proposed Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie. The project as presently
envisioned will be comprised of a small embankment dam at the outlet of Triangle Lake, a 1.3 mile long penstock and a powerhouse containing a single horizontal Francis turbine generating
unit with a capacity of 4.0 MW. The Triangle Lake project will provide additional hydroelectric power to Metlakatla and, with construction of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie, to
the interconnected electric systems of Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg. MIC will develop and own the Triangle Lake project.
The proposed Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie is a 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan Public Utilities
(KPU). The Intertie will include 16 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line to be constructed on Annette Island between Metlakatla and Walden Point and an approximate two mile
submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Walden Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation. The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for the integrated
operation of the interconnected systems? generating plants.
Design of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie is presently underway. Transmission poles have also been procured and are currently stored in Metlakatla.
The project would be constructed at the existing utility power plant and adjacent buildings. A new low fuel consumption diesel 4,160v generator and switchgear would be installed to replace
existing older 480v inefficient diesel generator unit #2. Existing waste heat system from the power plant would be extended by this project to provide space heat to the gas station,
bulk fuel office and bulk fuel pump house to replace existing electric baseboard heat. Increase fuel efficiency and reduced electric heat load would benefit all existing electric customers
through lower power generation costs. New diesel generator would reduce current high overhaul and maintenance cost for old generator to be replaced. The City would administer the
project and contract out to qualified consultants for the final design, and contract with a qualified contractor to install the diesel generators, switchgear and waste heat piping.
The existing city workforce would operate and maintain the new equipment.
Replace diesel generation of electricity for the community of Tenakee Springs with renewable hydroelectric power. The City of Tenakee Springs proposes to construct a hydroelectric project
on Indian River. This will be a low head, run-of-river plant displacing the use of 44,400 gallons of diesel fuel. Design, engineering, and construction will involve the City of Tenakee
Springs, multiple state and federal agencies, private contractors, and the Alaska Energy Authority.
The full project is a hydroelectric power plant, and associated infrastructure for access and connection, to serve the community of Elfin Cove. We are currently contracted with Polarconsult
for a feasibility study of the project. As part of the feasibility study, in addition to collecting further data from the Crooked Creek/Jim?s Lake site, the contractors recommended
we examine the potential of Roy?s Creek as an alternative project site. Roy?s Creek is much closer to the existing power plant, reducing construction and connection costs, and simplifying
operation and maintenance. If Roy?s Creek is found to be a feasible location, the hydroelectric plant would be a run-of-river project on Roy?s Creek. Otherwise, the power plant will
be located at the mouth of Crooked Creek, a tributary of Port Althorp in Cross Sound. If located on Crooked Creek, the hydroelectric facility will include: a diversion structure on
Crooked Creek; an 800 to 1,200-foot long diversion conduit from Crooked Creek to Jim\'s Lake; and a 1,700-foot long penstock from Jim\'s Lake to a powerhouse located at tidewater near
the mouth of Crooked Creek. The powerhouse would house a Turgo-type turbine, a generator, programmable automatic paralleling switchgear and controls. The project would also include
access trails and a 5,800-foot power line and communications from the powerhouse back to the existing distribution system at the back of the Inner Cove. Dedicated communications may
extend an additional 3,000 feet to the existing diesel powerhouse. On Roy?s Creek, a hydro development would include a diversion structure at about the 500-foot elevation on Roy?s Creek;
a 1,300 foot penstock down to tidewater in Elfin Cove; and a powerhouse at tidewater housing a Turgo or Pelton-type turbine, generator, programmable automatic paralleling switchgear
and controls. The powerhouse would be located on the boardwalk, and the project would include a boardwalk to the intake site for access. The project would include approximately 50 to
100? of power line to tie into the distribution system, and 2,000 feet of communications cable back to the diesel powerhouse. At the end of Phase 3 (proposed here) we should be prepared
to begin construction on the hydroelectric power project.
Project Type: Heat Recovery from existing sources, biomass or biofuels, transmission of renewable energy and storage of renewable.
This application supports a wood-heating project in Fort Yukon, Alaska. Gwitchyaa Zhee Corporation Board is
the authorizing Board for the Applicant, Gwitchyaa Zhee Utility. Local partners include the Council of Athabascan Tribal Governments (DOE recipient of biomass grant support $1.2 million),
Gwitchyaa Zhee Native Corporation & Utility, Gwitchyaa Gwich?in Tribal Government, Yukon Flats School District and the City of Fort Yukon. A wood energy supply analysis, a feasibility
and 35% conceptual design analysis has been completed for a destrict heating loop for primary commercial buildings. This analysis has been integrated with heat capture from a new power
plant to be co-located with the wood boiler plant. The feasibility included Net Simple Payback for several size plants and a sensitivity analysis for displacing heating fuel oil based
on costs of $4-$6/gallon. A centralized wood chip fired boiler will require approximately 1,500-2,000 tons of chips annually, depending on moisture content, to displace up to 149,000
gallons of fuel of 90+% of the oil used in commercial buildings. The cost is approximately $18/MMBTU )($175/ton @ 25% moisture) for chips, as compared to $29-43/MMBTU for fuel oil ($4-6gal).
This project is being conducted in concert with a project funded by Denali Commission, US DOE through an Alaska Village Initiatives earmark, and GZ Corporation to develop a wood harvesting
system, wood yard and a wood energy utility to supply and maintain the boilers. Both projects have been developed through technical support from Alaska Village Initiatives, Alaska Wood
Energy Associates, CATG Resource Department, e-Four Engineering, and ALaska Energy and Engineering. Principle personnel to date include Bill Wall PhD, Peter Olsen, Ben Stevens, Jerry
Carroll, Greg Koontz (ME) and Steve Stassel (Alaska Energy and Endgineering).
Project Type: Wind, hydro, including run of river, Hydrokinetic, geothermal, including heat pumps and transmission of renewable energy.
This project is a combination of reconnaissance, resource assessment and feasibility analysis. The deliverable resulting from the expenditure of grant and matching funds is the first
Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) for the interconnected cities of Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg as well as the cities of Kake and Metlakatla. Interties to Kake from Petersburg and
to Metlakatla from
Ketchikan are presently in the planning phase. Some funding is already in place for both of these interconnections. Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg currently benefit from existing
SEAPA and local utility-owned hydro which has provided for very stable power rates. The City of Kake, served by IPEC, is a 100% diesel-dependent community with rates that are 5 or 6
times higher. Providing renewable power to Kake with hydroelectric generation or other alternatives is a
critical part of this IRP. Building a transmission line to Kake would not be prudent if adequate
renewable generation resources have not been identified to meet their existing and future loads.
In general, an IRP identifies the future resource portfolio that achieves a set of objectives that have been established by stakeholders of the IRP process. The stakeholders will include
the
local utilities, communities, commercial and industrial customers, Federal and State agencies and the general public. The resource portfolio is a set of supply-side and/or demand-side
improvements that eliminate any identified energy or capacity deficits. Supply-side improvements would be new generation construction, or modifications to existing generation assets,
such that energy production or available capacity is increased. This would include the addition of existing generation through an interconnection to Metlakatla. Demand-side improvements
are system efficiency improvements or peak load modification measures. The stakeholders and the IRP issuing body (SEAPA) establish the objectives that govern how the resource portfolio
is established. Most IRP objectives are governed by the 3 major categories of cost, risk and environmental impact. The IRP process includes stakeholder input with final content decisions
made by the issuing body (SEAPA).
Developing an IRP requires an analysis of the regions generation and transmission system, and an estimation of the regions load growth. Generation and load forecasts are modeled to determine
when and to what extent future energy and/or capacity deficits occur. Energy and capacity deficits are resolved by a combination of constructing new generation facilities and through
load growth rate or peak hour value reduction via demand side management. The IRP then documents a short term and long term plan to address the energy and capacity deficits.
AP&T proposes to construct the 300 kW Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project), which will be located approximately 8 miles north of Slana on the Glenn Highway (Tok Cutoff). The
Project would off-set diesel generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Slana and Chistochina. The Project will consist of two small diversion structures, approximately
13,200 feet of penstock, a powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and a very short length of transmission line. For about half the year, the Project
operation will be run-of-river, but during the colder months the Project will draw water from Carlson Lake. The potential annual generation is estimated to be approximately 1,200 MWh/yr,
which is greater than the current annual requirements of the two communities. Therefore, the Project has the potential to offset 100% of the current diesel generation. The Project
will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation.
The Project would be located on two bays and adjacent lands in Port Frederick, which is an inlet off of Icy Strait near the city of Hoonah in Southeast Alaska. As currently envisioned,
the Project would be a two-basin tidal energy development wherein the two bays (known as North Bight and South Bight) are isolated from Port Frederick by dikes and gate structures,
with a low-head power plant located between the two bays. During high tides, water would be let into South Bight from Port Frederick, and during low tides water would be released from
North
Bight into Port Frederick. Water would be continuously released from South Bight into North Bight through the power plant. By controlling the flows, a head can be maintained between
the two basins, thus generating power continuously in spite of the variability of the tides. This continuous generation will allow the power to be usable in the small isolated electrical
system of Hoonah.
AP&T is actively looking to add another hydroelectric storage facility to its Upper Lynn Canal (ULC) system serving Haines, Skagway, and nearby communities. To date, AP&T has considered
Connelly Lake near Haines and Walker Lake near Klukwan, with Connelly Lake being preferred because of its much greater energy potential. However, some Haines citizens are opposed to
development of Connelly Lake, and have expressed their interest in AP&T evaluating the Schubee Lake site as an alternative. AP&T has made a very preliminary evaluation of the Schubee
Lake site and believe there is some potential; therefore the proposed grant is to study the Schubee Lake site to approximately the same depth as Connelly Lake so that a fair comparison
can be made between the two. In our view, this means bypassing the reconnaissance phase (Phase I) and proceeding directly with conceptual design and feasibility work (Phase II).
AP&T proposes to construct a small run-of-river hydroelectric project at Neck Lake, a 1,000 acre lake located 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island.
The Project would supply power to the community of Whale Pass, and would offset diesel generation, which is currently the sole source of electricity. The relatively high and modulated
flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end of the outlet stream provide a good opportunity for a small run-of-river hydroelectric development. Facilities would
include an access road, intake structure, 400 feet of penstock, a containerized power plant, a tailrace channel, and upgrade of 4 miles of transmission line. The hydroelectric facilities
will be designed to avoid interference with the existing salmon rearing and collection facilities operated at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA).
AP&T conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2008, and determined that there is sufficient potential to almost always provide enough generation for Whale Pass loads (see Section
10 for a copy of the reconnaissance report). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for AP&T?s Whale Pass customers.
The overall 34kV power line route is approximately 12 miles long. Approximately 0.9-mile of the westernmost section is an existing APC 2kV distribution line that will be overbuilt.
The line will cross Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island. The route primarily follows existing logging roads. The power line will begin at a point along Hydaburg Road about 0.45 miles northeast
of the town. It will continue northeast along the existing logging road passing north of Deer Bay and intersecting Hetta Inlet opposite Jumbo Island. This section is adjacent to private
forested land with a small section of Muskeg and is 7.0 miles long. The logging roads are mostly mild to moderate cut sections with a few rock cuts. The first 0.9 miles of this section
is an existing APC corridor adjacent to the road established for a 2kV line. The water crossing over Hetta Inlet will be accomplished with 3 multi-pole structures with one on each side
of the inlet and one at the pinnacle of Jumbo Island. Jumbo Island slopes steeply toward the water on both sides and is heavily forested. A new corridor will need to be established.
The structure on the island will likely be set by helicopter. This crossing is 0.9 miles across. The power line will continue in a new corridor for 0.3 mile to the east until it
intersects an existing logging road. Approximately 1500 feet of temporary or permanent access road spurs will need to be constructed to access 2 line structures along this section.
The line route then turns south and follows existing loggings roads 3.8 miles southeast to the powerhouse/switchyard location near Copper Harbor. This section is adjacent to private,
recently harvested forest land with very steep and rocky terrain prone to slides. The logging road is primarily full bench construction with several rock cut sections. There are danger
trees (and boulders) above the power line route on the eastern side slopes that may need to be removed/secured to protect the power line.
AP&T proposes to construct the 2.0 MW Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on Yerrick Creek, approximately 20 miles west of Tok. The Project would off-set diesel generation
in the communities of Tetlin, Tanacross, Dot Lake, and Tok. The Project will consist of a small diversion structure, approximately 15,000 feet of penstock, powerhouse with a single
generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and transmission line. The Project operation will be run-of-river; annual generation is expected to be approximately 4,900 MWh/yr (approximately
40% of the interconnected load). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower
than diesel generation.
The Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project (Project) will be located in Southeast Alaska, approximately 14 miles northeast of the City of Haines and 10 miles southwest of the City of Skagway.
Connelly Lake (formerly known as Upper Chilkoot Lake) is an 85 acre alpine lake, and drains into the Chilkoot River. The project will be on state and private land, including the Haines
State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve. The project facilities will include a dam at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW powerhouse with two generating
units, a 14-mile-long 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Final dimensions and capacities of these facilities will be determined by optimization studies to be
conducted during Phase II. The Project will be developed by AP&T to provide additional generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems.
The Port Alsworth Improvement Corporation, the Tanalian Electric Cooperative, Tanalian Incorporated, Lake Clark National Park and Preserve, and the Lake and Peninsula Borough support
AGE?s proposal to conduct Reconnaissance and Feasibility studies related to locating a micro-hydroelectric facility on the Tanalian River. The project will reduce the community?s dependence
on expensive diesel fuel that must be flown into Port Alsworth to provide heat and power.
The reconnaissance phase will include preliminary engineering, environmental determinations and hydrological studies and analyses on the Tanalian River to identify its hydroelectric
resource potential. This phase will include scoping meetings with the community and agencies
to identify issues and study needs that will need to be addressed during the feasibility phase. From a land use and permitting perspective, it will be especially important to work with
the National Park Service (NPS) to determine NEPA requirements for work within the Lake Clark National Park and Preserve and to determine the appropriate legal framework and permitting
requirements for the potential construction of a micro-hydro facility within the National Park?s boundary that serves users in addition to the NPS. It is anticipated that an environmental
assessment will be required at a minimum and the reconnaissance level assessment will establish the scope and level of NEPA documentation required during the feasibility phase. It should
be noted that the project lies outside the wilderness boundary and the NPS is cooperating with the State of Alaska and private in-holders to issue easements across the Tanalian River
to access the new State airport and private property. Conceptual designs and cost estimates will be provided during this phase and presented in the final report. The final report will
also include a preliminary economic analysis and an energy cost and market analysis.
The Grant Lake site facility would be constructed with a dam at the upper falls and diversion tunnel to maximize the power potential at approximately 3.12 MW (397 feet-net head). However,
to minimize the impact on salmon resources in Grant River below the dam site the construction as proposed would consist of a canal from behind the dam to an intake structure located
in an adjacent dry channel. The dam constructed at the upper falls will be a concrete dam with an uncontrolled spillway. With a maximum height at El 504 and a 225 foot wide spillway
at El 500 the spillway flows will be diverted away from the toe of the dam via a concrete apron onto bedrock nearby. The @1 mile diversion canal, 20 foot deep (1/1 side slopes), with
an invert 468 El will have a minimum drawdown of 23 feet to El 477. A dike in the canal will direct the water flow into the low pressure 60 inch 6,600 foot long pipeline leading to
the surge tank and penstock. The 3,100 foot 48 inch penstock will link the surge tank to the power house. The powerhouse will contain two 1,350 kW generators driven by two 2,000 hp
turbines under a rated net head of 233 feet (average 215 ) with 92cfs. This project will necessitate the construction of approximately 45-65 miles (depending on routing) of new underground
three phase transmission tie line from the project site to a new power substation constructed near the village of Aleknagik.
Project Type: Waste Energy Recovery.
The project, located in Valdez, Alaska, will capture waste heat generated at the Petro Star Refinery. Waste heat will be collected by a shell and tube glycol medium recovery system.
The medium will drive two technologies operating in a series.
Ammonia absorption technology will create cooling for a 45 million pound, -20degree cold storage facility. An organic Rankin Cycle Generator will use the medium once it has exited the
ammonia absorption system to create 600kw?s of power which will be used to operate the Cold Storage facility as well as the Solomon Gulch Hatchery.
The final benefit will be to use the cold cycle of the generator to create a salmon rearing facility.
The city of Seldovia would like to ask for grant funding to study the feasibility of utilizing wind energy to help alleviate the winter demand and temporary failure of the current gas
generation facilities. The city of Seldovia sees an increase of demand for electricity in the winter months that has outpaced their production capabilities. The proposed plan calls
for the study and possible installation of Four 15kw Proven wind generators. The city would like to test several sites for wind and accessibility, the relatively small size of the turbines
is beneficial in helping the city locate an area that will be readily accessible with the current infrastructure, this may reduce overall costs while maintaining performance of the
wind systems.
Installation of testing equipment for feasibility information gathering with installation of Two 15KW Proven Turbines with a future development of one or more turbine installations.
The Native Community of Tyonek would like to install one 15kW Proven on a 82ft monopole and a 6kW Proven on a 82ft Momopole on top of a bluff looking over the cook inlet. These turbines
would be connected directly into the power line to produce clean power to our Native Community.
On February 3, 2009, the City of Angoon (Angoon) filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for a three-year preliminary permit under Section 4(f) of the
Federal Power Act (FPA) to study the feasibility of the proposed Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project No. 13366-000. On November 5, 2009, the City of Angoon received the FERC preliminary
permit for the project. The project would be located on Delta Creek and Ruth Lake near Petersburg, Alaska. The project would be located within the Tongass National Forest, which is
administered by the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service). The proposed project would consist of: (1) a 170-foot-high concrete arched dam at the exit of the natural Ruth Lake; (2) the
existing 130-acre Ruth Lake (at a current surface elevation of 1,350 feet above mean sea level (msl)) would be impounded by the proposed dam to provide an estimated storage capacity
of 17,000 acre-feet at a surface elevation of about 1,520 feet msl; (3) a proposed 12,600-foot-long, 6- to 12-foot-diameter combination bored tunnel and steel penstock; (4) a powerhouse
containing three generating units having a total installed capacity of 20 megawatts ?MW?; (5) a
proposed tailrace channel up to 600 feet long; (6) a proposed 2.8-mile-long access road; and (7) appurtenant facilities. The proposed Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project would have an estimated
average annual generation of 70 gigawatt-hours ?GWh?, which would be sold to local utilities currently serving the communities of Petersburg and Wrangell, eventual proposed service
to the communities of Ketchikan, Kake and Angoon. The proposed Ruth Lake Project would be located partially on federal lands in the Tongass National Forest, which is administered by
the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service).
The ultimate goal of this project is to produce electricity, training and employment both sustainably and locaally. Thus the name ?Keep It Sustainable and Keep it Local (KISKIL) Renewable
Energy Project.? The project will be located thirty miles east of Delta Junction. The KISKIL Renewable Energy project will serve much of the Interior by providing electricity for Golden
Valley Electric Association (GVEA) via the grid. Additionally, the project will serve Delta Junction, Healy Lake, Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tok and the surrounding areas by hiring regionally
and purchasing wood for fuel locally. The project will produce electricity using 105 KW Sterling generators and raw wood gas as the fuel source. Delta Mine Training Center has the expertise
to build and operate a power plant. Additionally, DMTC can and will develop the curriculum needed to provide training for Alaskans to learn the process of building the plant, developing
the fuel resource and operating and maintaining the plant. This training is more valuable than the electricity itself.
This project will evaluate the potential for cultivating short rotation woody biomass crops in varied regions of Alaska, and will help to establish growing practices specific to each
region. This work is a necessary precursor to implementing biomass cropping as a sustainable energy solution in rural Alaska. The work will complement a project currently being performed
by the University of Alaska Fairbanks and Division of Agriculture to determine adaptability of various plant species to management as biomass crops under Alaskan agricultural conditions.
Our work will also be performed in conjunction with a project being conducted by the Chugachmiut tribal organization to determine the potential for biomass production by various willow
species under non-intensive management in interior Alaska. Specifically, this project will seek to address the following questions:
1) What is the current nutrient status of typical soils in regions likely to establish biomass
plantations in the near future?
2) What are the nutrient requirements for woody species likely to be used as biomass crops?
3) Can biosolids, an abundant and inexpensive resource potentially available in many Alaskan communities, be successfully utilized as a fertilizer to maximize biomass production?
4) Would the utilization of biosolids as a fertilizer for biomass crops present unintended environmental consequences such as pathogen mobility or heavy metal emissions?
This proposal, ?Greenhouse Feasibility and Application in Rural Alaska,? seeks to expand on a project currently recommended for funding by the Environmental Protection Agency to construct
and operate a greenhouse in Galena, Alaska, that utilizes recovered heat from the city power plant to extend the growing season by a few months in both the spring and fall, and provide
fresh, affordable produce for the community and schools. This proposal builds on that project in four ways: (1) provide additional staff time for project managers and equipment to ensure
successful greenhouse operation, (2) provide summer employment for six Galena high school students on the project to build organizational capacity and community support, (3) use the
Galena project as a model to conduct feasibility studies for similar greenhouse projects in six communities in rural Alaska, and (4) prepare a final report that includes economic analysis
and an engineering assessment of the pre-project heat recovery system and subsequent
load placed on the system by the greenhouse. In addition to the goals of the EPA-funded greenhouse itself (e.g., fresh produce, economic development, energy efficiency), this proposal
will result in a template for establishing community greenhouses in villages throughout rural Alaska by expanding local capacity, providing training, and evaluating technical and economic
feasibility.
This proposal represents the second phase of two current projects: (1) Test Evaluation of Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) Engines Operating on Recovered Heat from Diesel Engine Exhaust (funded
by the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Environmental Conservation through the Alaska Energy Authority), and (2) Optimizing Heat Recovery Systems
for Power Generation in Rural Alaska (presently recommended for funding by the DenaliCommission). Both projects employ pre-commercial ORC technologies to test the efficacy of
generating power from recovered heat in power plants in rural Alaska. The first phase of both projects includes laboratory testing at the University of Alaska Fairbanks of an ammonia-water
cycle engine and a glycol-based engine. This proposal calls for Phase 2 field testing of both units?the first in Ruby and the second in Galena?and data analysis, including economic
analysis, that will result in a report on the applicability of such systems throughout rural Alaska and a methodology for selecting appropriate village sites.
The proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 11841 (Project) will be located approximately four miles east of the City of Ketchikan, Alaska, and will be connected to the
existing Ketchikan Public Utilities (KPU) distribution system. KPU will install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at the existing Whitman Lake Dam, providing a source of clean
renewable energy for customers in the Ketchikan Gateway Borough and displacing diesel generation. The project will help support significant capacity demand increases anticipated in
the short term, as well as continuous load growth over time. The new facilities associated with the Project will also benefit the existing Whitman Lake Hatchery by providing a continued
supply of temperature-controlled water.
Project Type: Wind, Transmission of renewable energy, storage of renewable.
The Chefornak Wind Turbine Installation involves the installation of three (3) 100 kW wind turbines on the eastern edge of the City of Chefornak. The completed project, with a total
size of 300 kW, will be owned by the City of Chefornak and operated by the Naterkaq Light Plant (NLP). The NLP is wholly owned by the City of Chefornak and the electricity produced
by the installed turbines will be distributed to the utility without charge. The wind turbines will be connected into NLP?s electrical distribution system through a new three phase
distribution line running from the project site to the existing power plant. The project will offer benefits to the community of Chefornak and its electric customers through a system-wide
reduction and stabilization of energy prices. The City of Chefornak has assembled a project team headed by STG Incorporated that is prepared to immediately begin work on an accelerated
schedule. Among others, the project team includes members from Powercorp Wind Diesel North America, DNV Global Energy Concepts Inc, Erricos Engineering, Alaska Line Builders, Duane
Miller Associates, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell, BBFM Engineers and Aurora Consulting. All aspects of the Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, detailed in the following
pages of this application, can be completed by March 2011 or sooner if grant funds are made available prior to July 1, 2010.
Project Type: Geothermal, including heat pumps. Solar. Solar thermal system. Storage of Renewable.
Examine the feasibility and develop a conceptual design of a hybrid ground source heat pump (GSHP) system that utilizes solar thermal collectors and storage capacity (STC&SC) to offset
the year-round non-renewable energy resources currently being consumed in a group of City and Borough buildings. This project would demonstrate that a hybrid GSHP system combined with
a STC&SC system is a viable alternative to reduce the consumption and costs associated with the current heating system. The integration of solar thermal system with a ground source
heat pump could compliment each system?s strengths. The result could be a significant year-round source of renewable-generated heat for water and space heating needs at the Denali Borough
School District?s school and the City of Anderson?s public buildings.
Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) proposes to conduct the preliminary feasibility study, feasibility analysis, and resource assessment to determine the necessary conceptual design
and construction to build and operate a community greenhouse located in Healy, Alaska, and to determine the optimal business structure for the operation. The greenhouse will utilize
waste heat from the Healy Clean Coal Plant as its main energy source, and will create a working partnership between several public and private entities in the Healy community to demonstrate
teach and encourage resource recycling, alternative energy, and local food production
Project Type: Wind, Hydrokinetic, Storage of Renewable.
The variability of the output of wind power projects is a major technical and economic obstacle. Energy storage systems can mitigate the variable output, but are often so expensive that
they are not practical. Through a fortunate coincidence, GVEA expects to be able to provide energy storage for a wind project by taking advantage of improvements in the battery technology
that will be installed at the BESS to support the Healy Clean Coal Plant (HCCP). This project will determine the feasibility, develop a conceptual design, and implement control system
modifications to allow the BESS to respond to variations of wind energy or hydrokinetic generation.
Project Type: Hydro, run of river. Transmission of renewable energy.
The AK-BC Intertie would provide a further opportunity to secure the energy future for Southeast Alaska. The AK-BC Intertie is a 26.5 mile transmission line from the existing Tyee Lake
Project to the AK-BC border.
A feasibility study was conducted by Hatch Energy in 2005. This phase of the project would continue the project from the feasibility stage into the permitting engineering phase. The
purpose of this project is to export surplus power for sale in British Columbia/Pacific Northwest which would encourage development of new projects and provide additional reliability
benefits. The ability to export power would encourage early development of new hydro generation, as well as provide revenue from exports, which will help ensure future maintenance of
the current overall status of a clean hydro-powered region, offer operating flexibility for the southeast Alaska power system, and provide future benefits to the region under the proposed
marketing oversight proposal. Power sales agreement for power generated projects encouraged by the AK-BC Intertie could be structured to return payment to the state.
Power sales agreements could be structured to include a call-back provision when load in southeast Alaska grows and power is needed to serve the native load. The proposed AK-BC Intertie
would extend from Tyee Lake along the Bradfield river to the AK-BC border and along the Craig River to a proposed substation at Forrest Kerr in British Columbia.
The export of energy through the AK-BC Intertie will enable the completion of interties throughout Southeast Alaska. Energy export could lead to the development of a number of hydro-electric
projects in many locations in Southeast Alaska meeting domestic power needs and providing a surplus for export. The goal is to provide the energy needed for economic development in
Southeast Alaska resulting in jobs for Alaskans and providing reliable, less costly alternatives to diesel generated energy for Alaskan communities.
Project Type: Lower Energy Consumption.
Purchase and installation of new Low-Emitting Diode (LED) street lighting fixtures, replacing existing High Pressure Sodium (HPS), Low Pressure Sodium (LPS) and Mercury Vapor (MV) fixtures.
Engineering design, survey services, permit acquisitions, material purchase and constructions for the extending the existing distribution line on Spur Road with an additional 17 pole
spans.
Project Type: Hyrdo, run of river. Transmission of renewable energy.
The City and Borough of Wrangell would like to install new underground distribution systems on Front Street, replacing the existing overhead distribution systems. This project can be
incorporated with the current Downtown Revitalization Plan which has already secured funding to upgrade the water, sewer, roadway and sidewalks along Front Street.
Project Type: Hydro, including run of river. Transmission of renewable energy.
The City and Borough of Wrangell would like to develop an alternative source for both power and water. Every summer the Tyee Hydroelectric Facility, which supplies power to Wrangell,
shuts down for annual maintenance and the City uses diesel generators for power. Additionally the City?s reservoir has periodically run very low, critically endangering Wrangell?s water
supply. Sunrise Lake is an economically feasible source to provide both to Wrangell. In 1997, The Bentley Company performed a reconnaissance study to determine the feasibility of developing
hydroelectric power at Sunrise Lake. The Sunrise Lake Project can be easily interfaced into the Tyee Transmission Line, thus supply power to the City of Wrangell. This power can be
used as a back-up when Tyee shuts down as well as in the event of catastrophic failure, similar to the one experienced in Juneau in the summer of 2008. By utilizing the outflow from
the Sunrise Hydroelectric project?s turbines the City would have an additional water source to access when the reservoir drops below critical levels again.
Clearwater Wind Farm is located 3 miles East of Delta Junction on Road HHH one mile North of Nistler Rd. The farm will deliver 1.8 MW of clean renewable wind power to Golden Valley Electric
Association (GVEA) through the distribution grid.
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of three wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Point Hope. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough, a contracted A&E firm, a contracted General Contractor, and a supplier for the wind
turbines and supporting towers. The North Slope Borough will provide overall project management. The contracted A&E firm will provide civil and electrical system engineering for the
project. The General Contractor will be responsible for the installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines and supporting towers, and installation of all ancillary electrical
systems. The supplier for the wind turbines and supporting towers will also provide startup & commissioning services.
Note: Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont, is supplier of wind turbines and supporting towers that have been proven to work effectively in Alaska. References to
Northern Power provided Northwind 100/21 B model wind turbines within the remaining sections of this application are for descriptive purposes only to indicate that product or a comparable
product.
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of three wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Point Hope. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough, a contracted A&E firm, a contracted General Contractor, and a supplier for the wind
turbines and supporting towers. The North Slope Borough will provide overall project management. The contracted A&E firm will provide civil and electrical system engineering for the
project. The General Contractor will be responsible for the installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines and supporting towers, and installation of all ancillary electrical
systems. The supplier for the wind turbines and supporting towers will also provide startup & commissioning services.
Note: Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont, is supplier of wind turbines and supporting towers that have been proven to work effectively in Alaska. References to Northern Power provided
Northwind 100/21 B model wind turbines within the remaining sections of this application are for descriptive purposes only to indicate that product or a comparable product.
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of three wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Point Lay. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough, a contracted A&E firm, a contracted General Contractor, and a supplier for the wind turbines
and supporting towers. The North Slope Borough will provide overall project management. The contracted A&E firm will provide civil and electrical system engineering for the project.
The General Contractor will be responsible for the installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines and supporting towers, and installation of all ancillary electrical
systems. The supplier for the wind turbines and supporting towers will also provide startup & commissioning services.
Note: Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont, is supplier of wind turbines and supporting towers that have been proven to work effectively in Alaska. References to
Northern Power provided Northwind 100/21 B model wind turbines within the remaining sections of this application are for descriptive purposes only to indicate that product or a comparable
product
IAE proposes to develop the Anchorage geothermal district heating project. The reconnaissance study will be followed by a more detailed pre-feasibility study. The purpose of this additional
step will be to conduct a more comprehensive field exploration and evaluation of potential geothermal resources that could supply the heat for the Anchorage project. IAE has signed
a Memorandum of Understanding with the Municipality of Anchorage to facilitate these studies. The Municipality of Anchorage has agreed to support the pre-feasibility study efforts by
providing to IAE information about the potential for geothermal energy use in Anchorage as well as right-of-way information. If the results of the pre-feasibility study prove to be
positive for development, IAE will work towards developing the Anchorage district heating project.
The project consists of acquiring and installing equipment that will dry approximately 13,000 tons of wood waste per year produced as a byproduct of the sawmilling process. The dried
wood would then be burned in publicly owned facilities to provide reduced-cost, district-style heat for these facilities at reduced cost to the public entities that operate these facilities.
The project enables recipient facilities to burn renewable fuels to provide heat at lower costs over time than the cost to burn fossil fuels to produce heat.
The City & Borough of Juneau is proposing the design and construction of a ground source heat pump system to serve the heating needs at the Juneau School District?s Gastineau Elementary
School. The community of Juneau recently approved the sale of $11.8 million in bond debt to fund a comprehensive renovation of the school facility. The building?s heating plant and
distribution system are to be replaced as part of the project. The City & Borough of Juneau Assembly is interested in reducing the carbon footprint of Juneau and the Juneau School District
is interested in reducing the operating costs of their facilities. The conversion of the school?s heat plant from oil-fired boilers to a ground source heat pump provides a unique opportunity
to achieve goals of both the City & Borough of Juneau and Juneau School District.
The Renewable Energy Fund Grant request herein is for the additional design and construction
costs of the ground source heat pump system as compared to a traditional oil-fired heat system.
We are proposing to conduct a biomass feasibility study for the utilization of waste wood from the community to heat one or a few public buildings. Astronomical heating costs are inspiring
new creativity in planning for sustainable and affordable energy sources for our community in Cordova, Alaska. We have collaborated as a community to develop solutions for our energy
needs. Affordable fuel sources have been identified, chief among them the waste cardboard that is currently taken to the landfill and the wood waste generated at the community burn
pile. Historically, the community has squandered these potential energy sources by burning them in an open pit. The burn pile will better serve the community when transitioned from
a community dump into local-source heating fuel. The community will also save valuable landfill space by converting waste cardboard into a fuel source. The purpose of this project is
to develop a system
that will take advantage of the valuable resources currently being underutilized. The wood and cardboard waste will become fuel for a biomass boiler to heat one of our community buildings
such as the city baler, pool, hospital or school. We need financial assistance to fully develop this project, which can then become self-sustaining. The first step in a renewable energy
project such as this is to conduct a feasibility study that will examine our community?s energy needs and identify areas where improvements can be made. The feasibility study will look
at how and where energy is being used and examine the available BTUs that can be generated by our waste stream. We must also conduct energy audits on the potential buildings to determine
which building would be the most efficient and economical candidate for a waste-wood boiler. A community-wide energy audit has not been done in Alaska before, and so we can use this
study to create protocol for conducting community energy audits that can be applied to other communities throughout Alaska. This information will be analyzed to determine which building
would be the best fit for the project. We must also determine the heat load available so that we can then examine potential buildings and pair the current waste heat load with a building
of a comparable load. The study will also investigate the potential methods of fuel treatment and system equipment and create parameters for the system design. The design will determine
required purchases ? a boiler, wood chipper and other components ? and identify required integration work. The City of Cordova owns and operates the burn pile and has endorsed this
project. The Cordova School District, a potential beneficiary of the project, is also very supportive. See letters of support on pages 30-31.
Cordova Electric Cooperative (CEC) is requesting $4 million to implement a construction-ready, state-of-the-art hydroelectric facility on Humpback Creek that would generate up to 4 million
kWh per year, meeting 16% of Cordova?s annual energy needs with a renewable energy source. CEC operates an isolated electric system and therefore is solely responsible for serving
its 1,560 customers. Cordova?s high electricity costs have been cited in several formal and informal community planning documents as a primary inhibitor of economic development, and
this project would assist in making electricity rates more affordable for residents and businesses as well as displacing diesel fuel, and reducing our particulate emissions. Competitive
bids for project construction exceeded expected cost by $5,500,000, so CEC is requesting additional funding to that provided in AEA round 1 RE grant.
This proposal is for a 4Kw Solar PV array, to be installed on each of the 11 NWAB High-schools in the Borough, Co-generating with the grid.
The project explores modular inverter technology for redundancy and also provides a platform for understanding Solar(PV) technology for our student base, supporting an upcoming curriculum-addendum
at High-school level and a class at Chuckchi College.
With an ongoing program for Alternate Energy in our curriculum, the Schools could expand the arrays every spring to the extent allowable by the local utility (KEA) and AVEC and also
communicate the technology and teachings to the other schools in the State of Alaska.
Over time the Schools would become more and more efficient in their use of Energy as each high-school finishing class would contribute a project to offset the Energy usage in the School.
As we incorporate Alternate Energy sources in Alaska?s rural communities, it is important to make a way available for our coming generations to become proficient in the new implementation
of the resources. After all, they will live with what we create and have to be able to understand and work with the systems.
If this doesn?t happen and we have to rely on outside expertise to service the new Energy systems, then the cost of operation will be excessive and our effort of lowering Energy cost
for the Region will be hampered.
We need to take responsibility, now for what we create for the future generations.
This project will be a start..
Development of hydroelectric power at Takatz Lake would include construction of a 200-foot high main concrete arch dam, a small 30-foot high secondary saddle dam, power intake, unlined
tunnel, power penstock, power plant, tailrace, and transmission line segments including; underground, submarine, and overhead sections. The project would produce approximately 106,900
MWh per year via two (2) 13.8 MW turbine-generators.
Louden Tribal Council is taking the lead in this application to purchase, install, and commission a new steam powered Combined Heat and Power (CHP) facility that will eventually be owned
and operated by the City of Galena as an Independent Power Producer. The new project will include assessment and management of the local biomass resources, formation of a partnership
with the biomass owner (Gana-a?Yoo Native Regional Corporation), purchasing and installation of the harvesting equipment, boiler, steam powered generator, and heat recovery systems
including Organic Rankine Cycle generators, and providing steam heat for the existing utilidor and buildings occupied by the Galena City School District. We hope and anticipate that
the project will eventually be expanded to provide wood pellets for home heating fuel to villages in the local region, and to radically reduce the cost of electric power through interties
to other villages.
The Division of Forestry at Milepost 267.5 Richardson Highway, Delta Junction is proposing a project using wood pellets for heating two governmental buildings. The boiler system will
combine two heating systems, a 3,840 square foot (sf.) main office building, proposed 3,000 sf. addition, and a 1,792 sf. warehouse/shop/maintenance facility. The boiler will be located
in a separate building which will house a heating system and pellet storage. The grant will involve local contractors for construction of the building and retrofit of the plumbing systems.
A request for proposal (RFP) or a bid process will be used for all aspects of the project. Maintenance of the boiler will be performed by local contractors.
The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwells power system. Currently they obtain power from the line between MEA
and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). To accomplish this they propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River, a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this
plant will be in exccess of 1 MW. It will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
The Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydroelectric Project would install a third turbine capable of producing an additional 10 MW in the existing Terror Lake plant. The original engineers of the Terror
Lake facility had the foresight to design the facility for the expansion to three turbines. The original design assumed the day would arrive when additional capacity would be required.
That day has arrived. Kodiak?s growing demand has surpassed the current capacity of Terror Lake. Expanding the capacity at Terror Lake by 10 megawatts (MW) with a third turbine generator
will enhance the stability of KEA?s isolated grid system allowing additional forms of renewable energy to be integrated and reduce KEA?s dependence on diesel fuel. The third turbine
at Terror Lake is the cornerstone necessary for KEA to achieve its? Vision Statement: Endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost effective renewable power solutions by the year
2020.
The Delta/Greely School District proposes a Wood Chip Boiler Heating System to heat 77,000 sq. ft. of educational space in the sub-arctic. The legal description of the Delta High School
complex is 64 degrees 02? 35.66? N 145 degrees 42? 57.10?W. The building would be located 50 feet away from the Delta High School new mechanical room. This Wood Chip Boiler Heating
System constructs and installs the following: Cement building to house wood chip boiler, chip storage room, 4 chip storage trailers, and a chip feeding and chip drying process.
The direct impact of this Wood Chip Boiler Heating System will be the Delta High School complex staff and students as well as the community groups that use this facility on a weekly
basis. The following communities are served by this facility: Delta Junction, Fort Greely Garrison and its contractors, Gerstle River, and the greater Deltana area. The businesses,
non-profit agencies, Farm Forum, Relay for Life, Fish and Game, Department of Motor Vehicles, Delta Chamber of Commerce, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts to name a few groups. All use the
Delta High School complex during the year. Future plans include hooking the boiler to our Vocation/Agriculture building and Career Advancement Center building. There is also the
possibility of adding a large greenhouse that would supply the schools in the district with fresh
2.4Project Description continued
produce year round. Finally, the following groups will be involved in this project: Delta/Greely School District (DGSD), the Delta/Greely School Board, DGSD Facilities Committee, Alaska
Department of Natural Resources Forestry, CTA, CE2 Engineers, T.R. Miles Technical Consultants, Delta Logging and Milling Associates, Salcha Big Delta Soil & Water Conservation District.
USKH (an architecture, engineering, land surveying and planning company).
SEE ATTACHMENT 2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION MAP
This new department will be responsible for 1. energy assessment 2. seek and secure funds related to energy 3. assist tribal members with : a. weathrization application and b. heating
assistant applications (to help with the high cost of fuel we pay in Noatak) 4. long term goals will be to look into alternative energy for Noatak.
There are many types of wood-fired boiler systems available on the market but they are very costly and the freight to bring them to the villages would likely triple the cost of the boiler
system. We are proposing to build a wood stove from local scrap metal, e.g., old fuel tanks that are no longer used, but the water containers must be shipped to the village because
we do not have the capabilities or the resources to manufacture them. The project will be located in the village of Marshall and the Ohogamiut Traditional Council EPA Department will
oversee the project.
Wood biomass for the production of bulk commercial wood pellets and briquettes, bulk and/or bagged residential wood
pellets, wood chips for commercial use and cordwood. Facility will be located at milepost 112 Richardson Highway, 190
miles from Anchorage and 250 miles from Fairbanks. Communities served will include all villages and cities in Alaska. The
grant project will incorporate varying degrees of assistance from Ahtna, Incorporated and its subsidiaries, State
agencies, Federal agencies, local borough, city and village government bodies and various contractors and consulting
firms.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough, the Lake and Peninsula School District and the Bristol Bay
Native Corporation have indicated written or verbal support for this project (see attached letters
of support). The Lake and Peninsula School District supplies power to the school and Chignik
Lake community with their diesel generators. They used over 65,000 gallons of diesel in the
2007/2008 school year which must transported 5000 gallons at time in a tanker truck from
Chignik via a small vessel that can navigate the Chignik River. Diesel cost $3.87 a gallon
delivered to Chignik plus a $1.10 per gallon surcharge to transport it from Chignik to Chignik
Lake for a total of $323,050 for the 2007/2008 school year.
The State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources February 2000 report titled Coalbed
Methane and Exploration Targets for Rural Alaska Communities identifies the Chignik Bay
Basin within the Alaska Peninsula Province as having potential CBM resources. The Chignik
Basin is underlain by bituminous coal. This project will confirm this potential resource by drilling,
coring and testing CBM resources in the Chignik Lake area. A specific drilling plan will be
prepared during the Reconnaissance Phase. Once the final location is determined, the drilling,
coring and testing will take place during the Resource Assessment/Feasibility phases.
While the community is assessing other alternative energy resources, CBM gas is the only
potential resource that could provide Chignik Lake with a sustainable, low cost fuel option 24/7,
365 days a year without interruption. This assessment project will determine CBM?s viability
and compare its potential to other alternative energy resources.
Results of the assessment will be presented in a report that will also make recommendations on
how best to delivery the CBM resource to Chignik Lake if commercially viable quantities of the
resource are found. The report will also identify possible means of delivering the CBM to
Chignik Lagoon and Chignik and identify additional study or testing requirements.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 14 9/3/2008
If viable quantities of CBM gas are found, AGE will work with the Chignik Lake community, the
Bristol Bay Borough, BBNC, Chignik Lake Traditional Council and Chignik River Limited to fund
future phases. The CBM development will employ Fowler Oil and Gas Company?s horizontal
drilling which allows a larger well spacing and minimizes land use impacts. Fowler?s technology
also employs down well dewatering to avoid above ground water management and its
associated environmental issues.
AWE is requesting additional funds for Phase 1 to add two Vestas V39 turbines to the existing power generation system to dramatically decrease the total consumption of diesel fuel and
stove oil in Sand Point, Alaska. The harbor community of Sand Point is located several hundred miles southwest of Anchorage on the Shumagin Islands, just south of the Aleutian chain.
This commercial fishing village of nearly 1,000 residents serves as a regional hub for crab and salmon fisheries, as well as other fisheries, and has generally enjoyed a healthy economy
over the past ten years. TDX Sand Point Generating (TSPG), a wholly owned subsidiary of TDX Power, owns and operaqtes the Sand Point electric utility. AWE will design, construct,
operate, and maintain the entire project.
Tatitlek, located in northeastern Prince William Sound, is about 30 miles south of Valdez on the eastern side of the Tatitlek Narrows. The community of Tatitlek will be served by this
project. With the "upwardly mobile" price of diesel these days, we can afford to leave no stone unturned in our quest to exploit an alternative energy resource. We are aware that
a good hydro resouce exists nearby. But, is it too far from our community to be economically developed? Local anecdotal information, the Renewable Energy Atlask of Alaska, and AEA\'s
Draft Regional Wind Study suspect that Tatitlek has an excellent wind resource. But we also have a mountain directly behind the village. Will the winds be too turbulent? Site specific
monitoring and feasibility studies can answer these questions and provide direction for further design, permitting, and construction. TDX Power has a Teaming Agreement with Tatitlek
Corporation and the Tatitlek Village IRA ouncil to manage this project with active participation from the IRA Council, Corporation, and Tatitlek School.
Adak is a former military base now owned by the Aleut Corporation (TAC). It is located on Adak Island near the end of Alaska Aleutian Island Chain. Presently there are approximately
75 residents at a base where a population of 6,000 military personnel and their families were once housed. The site was turned over to TAC by the US Navy in 1999. TAC aspires to re-populate
the island with shareholders and employees of the fishing industry. The location is in good fishing grounds and has an established processing plant. The US Navy houses and Missile
Defense Agency house an enormous radar facility in the harbor there for part of the year. This expensive piece of equipment requires reliable shore-based power.
The RCA recently ruled that the City of Adak was not capable of managing nor operating the utility electric utility. TDX Power agreed to take over the utility while the people of Adak
were under emergency conditions. TDX Adak Generating, LLC will complete the project using personnel from its parent company, TDX Power.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource
assessment and analysis at the community of McGrath, Alaska. The model would compile the
best available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and
restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and
proposed energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model
produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific
size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for
biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the
resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and
where is it?
? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass
energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of McGrath,
although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local conditions.
While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for McGrath, the model produced by this
project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template, or
framework, for data processing and compilation. As such, this project would interact with
similar projects being proposed in applications also submitted under this RFA for the
communities of Tanana, Nenana, and Tanacross. Also, by producing a tool that can be used to
examine the availability and sustainability of biomass resources in some detail, the project could
be integrated with alternative energy resource assessments prepared by AEA and others to
evaluate proposed projects. The project as proposed lies at the intersection of several
professional disciplines, including forest inventories and silviculture, community and forest
economics, and geographic information systems (GIS). The work will be conducted through
technical assistance provided by the Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) Forestry Program, with
coordination, direction, and consultation provided by staff at the McGrath Traditional Council
and McGrath community members.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 12 9/3/2008
In the first round of applications specified by this RFA, a separate proposed wood energy project
to AEA by McGrath Light and Power also included wood supply assessment and land-use
planning functions. This project would easily complement that effort, and full cooperation and
collaboration with that project would be an integral component of this proposed project.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource
assessment and analysis at the community of Nenana, Alaska. The model would compile the
best available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and
restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and
proposed energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model
produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific
size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for
biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the
resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and
where is it?
? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass
energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of Nenana,
although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local conditions.
While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for Nenana, the model produced by this
project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template, or
framework, for data processing and compilation. As such, this project would interact with
similar projects being proposed in applications also submitted under this RFA for several other
communities in interior Alaska. Also, by producing a tool that can be used to examine the
availability and sustainability of biomass resources in some detail, the project could be integrated
with alternative energy resource assessments prepared by AEA and others to evaluate proposed
projects. The project as proposed lies at the intersection of several professional disciplines,
including forest inventories and silviculture, community and forest economics, and geographic
information systems (GIS). The work will be conducted through technical assistance provided
by the Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) Forestry Program, with coordination, direction, and
consultation provided by staff at the Nenana Native Council and Nenana community members.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource
assessment and analysis at the community of Tanacross, Alaska. The model would compile the
best available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and
restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and
proposed energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model
produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific
size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for
biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the
resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and
where is it?
? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass
energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of
Tanacross, although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local
conditions. While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for Tanacross, the model
produced by this project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a
template, or framework, for data processing and compilation. As such, this project would
interact with similar projects being proposed in applications also submitted under this RFA for
the communities of Tanana, McGrath, and Nenana. Also, by producing a tool that can be used to
examine the availability and sustainability of biomass resources in some detail, the project could
be integrated with alternative energy resource assessments prepared by AEA and others to
evaluate proposed projects. The project as proposed lies at the intersection of several
professional disciplines, including forest inventories and silviculture, community and forest
economics, and geographic information systems (GIS). The work will be conducted through
technical assistance provided by the Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) Forestry Program, with
coordination, direction, and consultation provided by staff at the Tanacross Tribal Council and
Tanacross community members.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource
assessment and analysis at the community of Tanana, Alaska. The model would compile the
best available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and
restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and
proposed energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model
produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific
size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for
biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the
resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and
where is it?
? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass
energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of Tanana,
although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local conditions.
While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for Tanana, the model produced by this
project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template, or
framework, for data processing and compilation. As such, this project would interact with
similar projects being proposed in applications also submitted under this RFA for the
communities of McGrath, Nenana, and Tanacross. Also, by producing a tool that can be used to
examine the availability and sustainability of biomass resources in some detail, the project could
be integrated with alternative energy resource assessments prepared by AEA and others to
evaluate proposed projects. The project as proposed lies at the intersection of several
professional disciplines, including forest inventories and silviculture, community and forest
economics, and geographic information systems (GIS). The work will be conducted through
technical assistance provided by the Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) Forestry Program, with
coordination, direction, and consultation provided by staff at the Tanana Tribal Council and
Tanana community members.
ORPC has obtained a FERC Preliminary Permit for a tidal energy site in a portion of Cook Inlet and Knik Arm adjacent to the waterfront of Anchorage for the purpose of deploying a commercial
scale tidal energy project. The project will involve the deployment of ORPC\'s
proprietary ocean current generation (OCGen?) modules consisting of four turbine-generator units (TGUs). Each TGU consists of a proprietary underwater permanent magnet generator
with four (2 per side) advanced design cross flow (ADCF) turbines attached to and rotating on a common shaft. OCGen? technology is deployed well below the water surface and held in place
with a deep sea mooring system so as to be operable beneath the winter ice and avoid any conflicts with marine navigation. It will be licensed under the FERC hydrokinetic Pilot Project
License program and initially installed at a capacity of 1MW (a single OCGen? module) for testing and monitoring of its operation, including any potential environmental impacts. After
the initial OCGen? module has been operated for a year, additional OCGen? modules will be installed to bring the generating capacity of the project up to the limit of 5 MW allowed under
the Pilot Project License. Full build out of the project will occur after a long term FERC Operating License has been obtained, estimated to be in 2012 or 2013. The project will be
interconnected to the railbelt power grid through either Chugach Electric or ML&P and the electricity generated will be sold to the railbelt utilities. Preliminary site bathymetric
and current surveys have been performed, reporting and compliance required under FERC rules for the existing Preliminary Permit have been completed, meetings with regulatory and environmental
agencies and project
stakeholders have been held, strong relationships with the local communities have been established and the application for the Pilot Project License is well underway. The next phase
of development of the project involves significant field studies and data collection, including a detailed analysis of the tidal currents within the site boundary to identify the optimal
locations for turbine deployment and provide information pertinent to the engineering of the OCGen?
modules, mooring system, and power transmission system. The information gathered from these studies will be used to complete the conceptual design of the mooring system, the power transmission
system, the grid interconnect system, the deployment plan, and to refine the design of the OCGen? module specifically for the Cook Inlet environment. Environmental impact studies will
also be designed in this phase that will include potential impacts to marine life and sediment transport. This project work will be completed with the assistance and cooperation of
Terrasond LTD, Devine Tarbell and Associates, The University of Alaska Anchorage, LGL Alaska Research Associates Inc., Aquacoustics, PND engineering, Port
McKenzie, and the Matanuska-Susitna Borough.
Phase I of the project will involve assessment of the current diesel and fuel oil
users within the ONC controlled assets in Bethel; to estimate the volume of
CNG to be supplied, the extent of modification required to accommodate the
switchover7 to natural gas, and of course the willingness of the village
residents to be involved.
Phase II will build on the inventory data from the first stage, and will entail
development of conceptual design elements sufficient to support the
economic analysis noted above, in 2.3. The second stage will also emphasize
a firm supply of pipeline quality natural gas or LNG, as well as identifying
critical path schedule constraints such as environmental or transport permits.
2.4.1 Project Location
The host community for the Pilot Test Program ? Bethel LCNG Conversion
will be the City of Bethel (focusing on facilities owned by ONC). Refer to the
following websites for more information on the community and the its related
native council corporation, Orutsararmiut Corporation
City of Bethel: http://www.cityofbethel.org/
ONC: http://www.nativecouncil.org/
2.4.2 Communities Served
The only community to be served by this initiative is a sub-set of the City of
Bethel. However, as stated, if deemed economically feasible during the
Phase III and IV ?Pilot?, the concept may be generally applicable to the region
and state.
2.4.3 Project Partners
Table 2 lists the partners and their responsibilities for the project.
This project will convert Biomass waste (municipal wastes, and sawmill/wood wastes) to renewable electric power. Possible site locations include Eielson Air Force base near Fairbanks
and landfill locations near Anchorage, Kodiak and Juneau. Our plant will provide electricity to local communities (local/military schools, residential, Air Force base and civilian airports).
The project will involve Solena Group and its partners (GE, MPR Associates, Ford Bacon & Davis and Deutsche Bank).
This project will construct buried piping, pumps, heat exchangers, and other system components required to recover waste heat from the existing AVEC power plant and confer this energy
to the new City water plant and washeteria in Ambler. This project will involve coordination between the City of Ambler, Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC), the Northwest
Arctic Borough, and the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC).
The proposed project will benefit every electric utility ratepayer in Sand Point and also the
public radio station in Sand Point. As such, one hundred (100) percent of the electricity
generated by the wind turbine will benefit the public. KSDP Radio / Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting, Inc. is an AM public radio station licensed to Sand Point, Alaska. The station?s
listening audience consists of approximately 3,000 year-round residents and an additional 2,000
seasonal residents in Sand Point, Chignik, Perryville, Port Moller, Nelson Lagoon, King Cove,
Cold Bay and False Pass. Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting, Inc.?s General Manager Kells
Hetherington will oversee the project with his five member Board of Directors. Members of the
radio station?s Board are elected from within the station?s listening area. The wind turbine and
associated equipment will be installed at the station?s transmitter site. The work will be done by
ABS Alaska, an alternative energy contractor with offices in Fairbanks, Anchorage and
Washington State.
The Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project (Project) will be located in Southeast Alaska,
approximately 14 miles northeast of the City of Haines and 10 miles southwest of the City of
Skagway. Connelly Lake (formerly known as Upper Chilkoot Lake) is an 85 acre alpine lake,
and drains into the Chilkoot River. The project will be on state and private land, including the
Haines State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve. The project facilities will include a dam
at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW powerhouse with two generating
units, a 14-mile-long 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Final
dimensions and capacities of these facilities will be determined by optimization studies to be
conducted during Phase II. The Project will be developed by AP&T to provide additional
generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems.
AVEC proposes a resource assessment/feasibility analysis/conceptual design project of geothermal sites
on the Seward Peninsula region, simultaneously involving the NANA/NW Arctic Borough Regions and the
Kawerak/Bering Straights Native Corporation Regions.
Goal: The SGAP goal is to ascertain the feasibility of geothermal power generation for regional
communities and develop conceptual design documents/reports for geothermal generation on the
Seward Peninsula. The SGAP strategic objectives are as follows:
SO 1: Identify potential geothermal sites in the Seward Peninsula Region.
SO 2: Undertake a geological, geochemistry, and geophysical assessment of targeted
sites for geothermal power generation potential.
SO3: Undertake a geothermal drilling program to promote regional geothermal
interests
SO4: Develop conceptual design and business plan for follow?on phases of the
projects.
SO5: Conduct an optimization phase in the conceptual design wherein how to supply
power either from one centrally located geothermal plant or from many smaller
geothermal plants, to the communities involved can be evaluated. Included will
be evaluating the use of transmission lines for power versus supplying hot water
via a pipeline to one or several geothermal power plant(s).
The SGAP program will include, at a minimum, the following sites:
1. Kwiniuk HS (~ 8 miles from Elim) Lat: 64.7 Long: 162.467
2. Lava Creek HS (50 miles S of Deering, 70 miles SW of Buckland) Lat: 65.217, Long: 162.9
3. Granite Mountain HS (40 miles S of Buckland, 60 miles S of Deering) Lat: 65.367, Long: 161.25
4. Division HS (40 miles S of Kobuk?Shungnak area) Lat: 66.367, Long: 156.767
The scope of work has the potential to benefit multiple communities, including Golovin, Elim, White
Mountain, Koyuk, Deering, Buckland, Shungnak and Kobuk.
The geothermal potential of localized regions in the Seward Peninsula region, Alaska, based on available
literature and limited data, is well summarized in the review report for the NANA Geothermal Assessment
Project (Kolker, 2008). Based on this report and knowledge of this area, six local regions containing known/potential hot springs have been identified as targets for further exploration
(Figure 1). In addition, Pilgrim Hot Springs, located 70km north/northeast of the city of Nome, Alaska, is the subject
of a companion investigation which, if funded, is scheduled to occur in the same timeframe. The Pilgrim
project proposes to perform an updated resource assessment to support the potential development of
the geothermal resource at Pilgrim for both power generation and direct use (space heating), including a
Controlled?Source Audio?Frequency Magneto?Telluric (CSAMT) survey and aerial thermal infrared
imaging. If both the Pilgrim project and this greater regional assessment are both funded, equipment
sharing being the two projects will result in a cost savings of $278,000. In addition, the team is aware
of other complementary geothermal assessment proposals being submitted by the Aleutians East
Borough and the City of Akutan to Alaska Energy Authority. Efforts will be made to collaborate with these
entities.
Once the most promising sites have been established, the University will conduct further ground?based
geophysical assessments in coordination with the geologic surveys to be conducted by Hattenburg, Dilley,
& Linnell. The study will also include a drilling program that would collaborate with the USGS/BLM Drill
rig and associated state drilling program, if in operation. Finally, AVEC is proposing conceptual designs and transmission routing studies for the proposed sites. As
a whole, this study will serve as an essential decision support tool for making policy decisions, planning
strategies for further exploration and development.
The proposed effort will involve the Tribal and City Councils of the above communities, Kawerak, village
corporations, and industrial interests in the area. Key partners in the project will include Bering Straights
Native Corporation, Kawerak, NANA Pacific/NANA Regional Corporation, the UAF/Alaska Center for
Energy and Power, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell (HDL), and additional engineering/scientific consultants.
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of
two wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution system for the
community of Shaktoolik. Participants in the project include AVEC, STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will
provide overall project management and electrical system engineering for the project. STG will be the
general contractor, responsible for the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind
turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100
wind turbines and startup and commissioning services.
The project involves the final design, permitting, and construction of an electrical distribution
tie line between the villages of Emmonak and Alakanuk and the final design, permitting,
construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of eight wind turbines to supplement a new
power generation system for the communities of Emmonak and Alakanuk. Participants in the
project include AVEC, STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management
and electrical system engineering for the project. STG will be the general contractor,
responsible for the design and installation of all civil works, installation of the electrical
distribution lines, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical
systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100 wind turbines and startup and
commissioning services. Site control is under final review and is expected within a week of
submission of this application. Permitting was completed for the met tower currently at the site
of the wind turbines; we expect no unusual permitting requirements for the site.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to
determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Stebbins. The work will involve obtaining a letter
of non?objection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting
and installing a met tower at this location, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a
geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A
conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical
investigation.
A meterological (met) tower installed in New Stuyahok between 2003 and 2005 found that winds were
class 3 (fair to good); however, placement of the met tower was hindered by the active runway at the
time (location new airport has now been constructed out of town), and it is expected that the wind
resource could be better. Before going forward with the final design and construction of wind turbines,
AVEC would like to better determine the wind potential in the community.
The work would involve obtaining a letter of non?objection for placement of the wind tower and
geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the
wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions
and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the
met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
Wind generators placed at the old airport could reduce the annual fuel consumption of the diesel
generators, thus reducing the cost of electricity within New Stuyahok, as well as reducing the overall
volume of fuel that is handled within the community and risks associated with handling fuel.
The City of New Stuyahok, the New Stuyahok Tribal Council, Stuyahok Limited, and the Southwest
Regional School District (SWSD) have expressed support for the project. The New Stuyahok
Comprehensive Plan (October 2005), states that the high cost of fuel and energy is one of the major
regional challenges in the area and that to respond to this challenge the community and region must
promote lower energy costs.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine
the possibility of installing wind towers in Scammon Bay. The work will involve obtaining a letter of nonobjection
for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting,
and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical
investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design
will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
A meteorological (met) tower installed near Pitka?s Point (Saint Mary?s and Pitka?s Point are connected
by a road and an electrical intertie) in October 2007 has revealed an outstanding Class 6 wind resource
with highly directional winds. A second met tower was installed in August 2008 at lower elevation and
closer to Saint Mary?s. This second site was chosen to evaluate possible trade?offs of wind resource and
rime icing risk. The Pitka?s Point met tower data has indicated that rime icing conditions appear to
possibly be a significant issue at that location. While rime icing is presumed to also occur at the lower
elevation Saint Mary?s met tower site, the desire is to contrast and compare the two sites with respect
to wind power and predicted power loss due to rime icing. A third met tower is presently stored in Saint
Mary?s and available for installation at a third site should early winter data collection at the Saint Mary?s
(the second site) indicate significant rime icing.
AVEC proposes to continue the wind resource assessment for an additional one to two years to include
evaluation and comparison of the two existing met towers and possible installation of the third met
tower at a site further from back from the Yukon River. The primary focus of continuation of the wind
study will be to further evaluate the icing problem at the met tower sites and to estimate as accurately
as possible turbine downtime during icing conditions. The evaluation of rime icing risk in Saint Mary?s
will be coordinated with efforts underway by the Alaska Energy Authority to predict at a state?wide level
rime icing risk for potential wind power sites.
Also, given the relatively large population of Saint Mary?s and Pitka?s Point and possible intertie options
to the villages of Mountain Village and Pilot Station, continuation of the wind resource study will include
wind farm sizing and layout options to power these two villages as well.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to
determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Teller. The work will involve obtaining a letter of
non-objection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing,
transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for 1 year, and conducting a
geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A
conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical
investigation.
The Archangel Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in Hatcher Pass, Alaska. The project will be located on state land in the Archangel Valley. Energy
from the project would be provided into the Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid.
Archangel Green Power, LLC (AGP) is the project proponent, and would contribute funding, own, and operate the project. AGP has already completed reconnaissance studies of the Archangel
Creek resource, and finds that the project warrants further study. Construction would be completed by qualified contractors and subcontractors selected through a competitive bidding
process.
The Applicant owns and operates Motherlode Lodge located near Delia Creek. The 4.9 acre plot of land is privately owned but segments of the proposed project will be located on land owned
by the State of Alaska Park Service. The Motherlode Lodge currently utilizes 2 diesel fuel generators, 1 boiler and 2 wood stoves to power the facility and accounts for a significant
percentage of annual operating expenses. The company plans to construct a 50 kWh run of river project with a flow of 3.5 cfs through a 10? pipeline from Delia Creek to the Powerhouse.
Peak production is estimated to be 140 kWh with a minimum of 16 kWh. The proposed project, The Delia Creek Alternative Energy Project (DCAEP), will utilize water flow from the Delia
Creek to power electricity to the Motherlode Lodge. The project will include an intake site, underground penstock and powerhouse. The hydroelectric system will be integrated with the
new MEA power line extension. The existing energy system will be removed immediately and a 2.75 mile MEA power line extension developed to displace all fuel costs. The first phase of
development was estimated by MEA to cost $150,000. All three phases of development are estimated at $750,000 by MEA. DCAEP will be headed by Project Manager, Jill Reese, Owner and sole
member of HPML LLC and Polarconsult Engineering Firm. HPML LLC will match funds of $50,000 to the total cost of development. This does not include HPML?s initial investment in the lodge
(paid, free and clear) plus an additional $850,000 in upgrades, permits and licensing.
This application seeks funding to conduct a feasibility study on using high efficiency, low emissions (HELE) biomass heat and power systems for the Sitka Community Hospital and the proposed
adjacent Sitka Community Greenhouse. Specifically, we are following the example of the system being used in the city of Craig, which is a wood chip fired gasifier burner that transfers
heat via a low pressure hydronic system. This study will be accomplished by contracting with mechanical engineers who will determine the specific equipment necessary, the fuel requirements
and availability, and the costs and payback period of the project. If this project is selected by the AEA and approved by the Alaska Legislature, the award recipient will be the City
and Borough of Sitka. The City will contract with the engineers to do the study. Sitka Community Hospital will provide the engineers with all the data and access to their facilities
necessary for the study. Direct technical assistance regarding the community greenhouse requirements will be provided by the Sitka Community Greenhouse Committee and other members
of the Sitka Health Summit. The City will be responsible for reporting to the Authority and providing AEA with the final report.
The project is a wood energy district heating project located in Venetie for three buildings: the
school, school housing and washeteria/water system. The applicant is the Venetie Village
Council. The project will be a two year project with completion of project development Phases
2-3 to occur in 2009 and construction Phase 4 to occur in 2010. A level one feasibility boilers
and a reconnaissance of forest wood resources has been performed in the summer of 2008
under a DOE Tribal energy grant for Yukon Flats. A table comparing round wood boiler and
chip fed boilers is attached to demonstrate initial analysis and initial potential designs. It is
anticipated that round wood fired boilers will be used for simplicity of the harvest system. This
will require installation of 3 stick-fired boilers which will require firing up to 4 times per day on
peak heat days and will require approximately 300-350 cords of wood annually to displace
33,390 gallons of fuel oil for heat.
A forest survey by boat and plane revealed an excellent wood resource, and a large fire with
significant amounts of standing dry wood near the village and on a trail system, and thus easily
accessible. There is a small wood harvester entrepreneur interested in increasing his
operations to fill the needs of the district heating system. The village council owns equipment
which could be used for increasing harvest, or a small harvesting system built around a farm
tractor could be installed. A small amount of harvest equipment maybe part of the construction
phase. Partners in the project will be CATG Resource Department, Alaska Wood Energy
Associates which includes Bill Wall, PhD, Peter Olsen and Greg Koontz.
The project is a wood energy district heating project located in Chalkyitsik for two groups of
buildings: District Heat 1: the school, school housing and water system; District Heat 2: the
washeteria/water plant and Village/Tribal Office. The applicant is the Chalkyitsik Village
Council. The project will be a two year project with completion of project development Phases
2-3 to occur in 2009 and construction Phase 4 to occur in 2010. A level one feasibility boilers
and a reconnaissance of forest wood resources has been performed in the summer of 2008
under a DOE Tribal energy grant for Yukon Flats through CATG. A table comparing round
wood boiler and chip fed boilers is attached to demonstrate initial analysis and initial potential
designs. It is anticipated that round wood fired boilers will be used for simplicity of the harvest
system. This will require installation of 2 district heating systems one at the school with 3 stickfired
boilers and the second at the Chalkyitsik Village Council office which will require 2 boilers.
Each system will require firing up to 4 times per day on peak heat days and will require
approximately 450-500 cords of wood annually to displace 40,750 gallons of fuel oil for heat.
A forest survey by boat and plane revealed a good wood resource near the village. There is a
small wood harvester entrepreneur interested in increasing his operations to fill the needs of the
district heating system. The village council owns equipment which could be used for increasing
harvest, or a small harvesting system built around a farm tractor could be installed. A small
amount of harvest equipment maybe part of the construction phase. Partners in the project will
be CATG Resource Department, Alaska Wood Energy Associates which includes Bill Wall,
PhD, Peter Olsen and Greg Koontz.
This application specifically develops the capacity to harvest and deliver 2000+ tons of wood
annually to the Village of McGrath, Alaska and to process the wood into usable form and store
the wood for later use. The biomass project will link and integrate with the heat recovery project
in future iterations of design and cost analysis in order to capture the synergies from both to
create an optimum design. A side by side analysis of both chip boilers (K?b) and stick fired
boilers (Garn) with estimated cost analysis and net simple payback for individual buildings was
conducted in the feasibility assessment (calculations attached). This application supports a
district wood heating project already in development in a previous application. The funding will
be used to purchase harvest and processing equipment and develop a wood processing,
storage and delivery system and storage yard. Matching funding will be used for development
of a forest harvest plan, training and technical support. Since the harvest system must integrate
to the boiler system installed, final decision on specific harvest equipment and design of wood
yard will be determined in coordination with the development of the final design of the boiler
systems. An initial list of the harvest equipment, with costs, is attached with a diagnostic of
harvest and delivery costs.
Local partners include the School District, City of McGrath, Village Safe Water, MTNT
Corporation, and McGrath Power and Light (applicant). A wood energy supply analysis, and a
Level 2 Feasibility (in writing phase) and conceptual design analysis has been completed for a
district heating loop for downtown McGrath to include the School, Gym, AC Store, School
District Office, Captain Snow building, Water Plant, Post Office, New clinic (to be built). This
Level 2 study has not been coordinated with an analysis for a heat recovery project being
proposed by MP&L and AE&E. This project is planned to be conducted in concert with the
Village Safe Water project to replace the entire water main and sewage system in McGrath in
2009-2011. The integration of these two projects has the potential to produce significant cost
savings for installation of piping, the most expensive portion of the project. Both projects have
been developed through technical support from Alaska Village Initiatives, and McGrath Power
and Light and e-Four Engineering. Principle personnel to date include Bill Wall, PhD, Peter
Olsen, Ernie Baumgartner, and Greg Koontz, ME, George Wilson, ME of Village Safe Water.
Linkages are planned with Steven J. Stassel, P.E., and president AE&E.
The Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project is located on Packers Creek in Chignik
Lagoon. The 190 kW project can provide for most of the communities current power
needs, which peak at about 125 kW. The plant would eliminate about 85% of 50,000
gallons of diesel consumed by the generators annually. There will also be excess
energy that could be used for heating the school and other local structures. The project
would also enable the community to add a freezer/processing facility to further improve
the local economy.
The Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project is an approximately 75 MW storage project proposed for
the Glacier Fork of the Knik River near the mouth of Metal Creek, located approximately 20
miles east of the Eklutna Hydroelectric Project powerhouse and 25 miles southeast of Palmer,
Alaska. Electricity from the project would be delivered into the railbelt transmission grid via a
new approximately 20-mile transmission line to existing transmission infrastructure in the
vicinity of the Old Glenn Highway bridge over the Knik River. A map of the project is included
at the end of the application before Attachment A.
Glacier Fork Hydropower, LLC (GFH) would be the project owner, and would contribute
funding, develop, own, and operate the project. GFH is currently owned by the five engineers of
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., an engineering consulting firm based in Anchorage, Alaska that
specializes in hydroelectric project development throughout Alaska. GFH is currently in
discussions with Chugach Electric Association (CEA) regarding the project. GFH, jointly with
CEA, intends to work with other Railbelt utilities and the State to develop the project.
The project would be constructed at the City landfill in Ataqan Subdivision on Saint Paul Island, the existing utility power plant, and within existing utility easements. The new turbines
would be tied into the existing City electric utility grid and control cables installed to tie into the existing power plant switchgear. A new low fuel consumption diesel 4,160v generator
would be installed in the existing power plant to replace an older unused 480v generator. Wind generated electricity would benefit all existing electric customers through lower power
generation costs. The City would administer the project and contract out to qualified consultants for the final design, and contract with a qualified contractor to supply, install
and maintain the wind turbines for the first 5 years and train local wind turbine maintenance personnel.
The Tok Wind Project is located approximately 12 miles south of Tok near the 5,000 foot level of Seven Mile Ridge and will contribute 2 MW of clean, renewable wind power to the Alaska
Power Company Tok distribution system.
The communities served will include all communities within the Alaska Power Company (APC, an Alaska Power & Telephone Company public utility subsidiary) service area including Tok (2007
population 1,353), Tanacross (173), Tetlin (165), and Dot Lake (15). The total population of the served area is 1,706.
The project will include construction of a 12 mile long transmission line, and a five mile-long construction access road across state-owned land from the old Eagle Trail west to the
proposed wind power generation facility. The power generation facility will include approximately two MW of wind turbines, the size and type subject to final design. These turbines
will be founded in shallow bedrock prevalent on the ridge crest. Power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation. Overhead transmission
lines (distribution voltage) from the transformer substation will follow the access road and Eagle Trail approximately 12 miles to the existing APC distribution line on the Tok Cutoff.
The grant participants are Village Wind Power LLC who have three Alaska wind projects under development (Slana, Tok, and Bethel). There will be a number of contractors involved in completing
the project. In addition to our own in-house efforts, other experienced contractors will be chosen to carry out selected components of the project. These components may include:
? State Land Use Permit for Wind Resource Assessment
? State easement for the transmission line and road
? State land lease acquisition for the wind farm site
? Topographic mapping for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Wetlands mapping for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Archeological review for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Detailed design for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Power Purchase Agreement with APC
? Access road construction
? Transmission line construction
? Wind farm construction
? Electrical hookup
? Commissioning and testing
The Slana Wind Project is located approximately seven miles west of Slana near the 4,000 foot level at VABM Cobb, and will contribute up to 2 MW of clean, renewable wind power to the
Alaska Power Company Slana distribution system.
The communities served will include all communities within the Alaska Power Company (APC, an Alaska Power & Telephone Company public utility subsidiary) service area including Slana
(2007 population 108), Chistochena (93) and when it is connected, Mentasta (1,404). The total population of the served area will be 1,605.
The project will include construction of a 1.5 mile long transmission line and construction access road across Ahtna Corporation and state-owned land from the Tok Cutoff to the proposed
wind power generation facility on the ridgetop. The power generation facility will include approximately two MW of wind turbines, the size and type subject to final design. These turbines
will be founded in shallow bedrock prevalent on the ridge crest. Power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation. Overhead transmission
lines (distribution voltage) from the transformer substation will follow the access road 1.5 miles to the existing APC distribution line on the Tok Cutoff.
The grant participant is Village Wind Power LLC who have three Alaska wind projects under development (Tok, Slana, and Bethel). There will be a number of contractors involved in completing
the project. In addition to our own in-house efforts, other experienced contractors will be chosen to carry out selected components of the project. These components may include:
? State Land Use Permit for Wind Resource Assessment
? State easement for the transmission line and road
? State land lease acquisition for the wind farm site
? Topographic mapping for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Wetlands mapping for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Archeological review for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Detailed design for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Power Purchase Agreement with APC
? Access road construction
? Transmission line construction
? Wind farm construction
? Electrical hookup
? Commissioning and testing
The Delta Wind Project is located approximately 25 miles south of Delta Junction near the end of Coal Mine Road and is designed to contribute 50 MW of clean, renewable wind power to
the Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) railbelt energy grid.
The communities served will include all communities within the GVEA?s service area including Delta Junction, North Pole, Fairbanks, Fox, College, Nenana, and Healy. In addition to local
communities, a number of large facilities are currently served by GVEA?s transmission system including Alyeska Trans Alaska Pipeline Pump Station 9, Fort Knox Gold Mine, and Pogo Gold
Mine. More distant utilities could also benefit through the railbelt electric grid.
An Interconnection Study with GVEA is currently being conducted by Power Engineers, Inc. to identify costs associated with integrating Delta Project wind power and GVEA?s existing transmission
system. The results of the interconnection study will be used to help formulate a power purchase agreement between GVEA and the project sponsors.
The project will include construction of a 20 mile-long transmission line, and a ten mile-long construction access road across state-owned land from the Richardson Highway south to the
proposed wind power generation facility. The power generation facility will include thirty 1.65 MW AAER wind turbines or equivalent, mounted on 65 meter high towers (subject to final
design and site suitability) set on buried concrete foundations. Underground power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation. A
five-acre lay down yard with a control building/service facility/warehouse will be installed within the wind farm area. Overhead transmission lines from the transformer substation will
follow the access road and Richardson Highway approximately 20 miles to the existing GVEA power transmission grid near Alyeska Pump Station #9.
The grant participants include Alaska Wind Power LLC who have four Alaska wind projects under development (Delta, Tok, Slana, and Bethel), and First Wind Alaska Holdings, LLC, a subsidiary
of First Wind Holdings, LLC, an experienced wind developer and independent power producer with 39 wind energy projects in various stages of development. In addition to our own in-house
efforts, we are retaining experienced consultants and contractors to assist with project development, which may include:
? Performing wind integration studies
? Securing State easement for the transmission line and road
? Securing State land lease acquisition for the wind farm site
? Conducting topographic mapping for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Conducting wetlands mapping for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Performing archeological review for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Creating detailed design for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Finalizing a Power Purchase Agreement with utility(s)
? Constructing and operating the Project
Using the existing seven (7) ton per day municipal solid waste stream, renewable resource biomass and digester gas, we will evaluate the Tactical Garbage-to-Energy (TGER) self-contained
bio-refinery technology and other viable low-volume alternatives. The waste-to energy project will be co-located with the existing baler source separation facility located on municipally-owned
land known as the Public Works Compound in Kotzebue. The City of Kotzebue will work with Decision Sciences and Maniilaq Services to perform the reconnaissance study to determine the
feasibility of deploying the TGER technology to produce fuel for heating and electricity at the Public Works Compound. The fuel from the TGER can produce enough energy to power 60 Kwh
for every ton of municipal solid waste. The heat and power savings, if reconnaissance proves feasible, is $2,900,000 over cost today for ten years not including the substantial landfill
costs found in the project benefit.
The project addresses the availability, quality and feasilbility of sustainable, economic use of agricultural and forestry biomass for bioenergy in Alaska. This must be considered before
the myriad of biofuel projects proposed & envisioned can move forward, and before existing, commercially available technologies that use biomass to produce energy for heat, fuel, &
power can be most effectively, and most successfully, deployed. The goal of the project is to 1) assimilate existing information on standing forest and agricultural biomass in ALaska,
2) conduct research and demonstration projects addressing agricultural bioenergy crop varities and crop management and addressing harvest methods in preperation for natural and managed
regenertation in mixed, single-aged forest stands, and, 3) determine the biological, physical, and economic feasibility of using Alaska agricultural energy crops and existing forest
stands for biomass as biofuels. The impetus for the study is the biomass/coal-to-liquids plant proposed for the Fairbanks area of interior Alaska, and its need for commercial/industrial-scale
volumes of biomass fuel stocks.. However, the study will have major statewide application as it will serve as the basis for all agricultural and forestry biomass-based energy projects;
the greatest number of which are being proposed for rural and village comminities. Work will take place in Fairbanks and Palmer, Alaska. Project cooperators are the School of Natural
Resources and Agricultural Sciences (SNRAS) and the Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station (AFES) at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) (project primary/agricultural energy
crops and forest biomass), Fairbanks Economic Development Corporation (FEDC) (logistics, data support, and information dissemination) and the Alaska Division of Forestry (forest biomass,
and harvest, transport, and storage technologies).
The City of Homer, with participation from Seldovia Village Tribe and the Port Graham Village
Council, proposes to assess the tidal energy potential and development feasibility of four sites
within Kachemak Bay. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) will be the
lead technology provider through the Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and
Services (CO- OPS) and the Kasitsna Bay Laboratory, which is the Coastal Marine Ecosystem
Research Laboratory for NOAA in Kachemak Bay. NOAA will deploy both stationary and roving
Acoustic Doppler Current Profiling (ADCP) devices, conduct bathymetric mapping, and integrate
other existing and new data to construct a comprehensive tidal, energetic, and circulation flow
model of the entire Kachemak Bay region. This model will be focused on providing the necessary
outputs to determine power densities and to conduct detailed and site specific tidal energy
feasibility studies, but it will also have multiple public benefits beyond assessing tidal energy,
such as improved spill response, mariculture siting, and impact assessment of local development
projects. Terrasond, an industry leading terrestrial and marine floor mapping consultancy
firm, will provide additional technical assistance on data collection and spatial data analysis to
contribute to the circulation model and generate power density values. Re vision consulting
LLC, a lead investigator and author on numerous Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and
other utility ocean energy studies, will then process the NOAA- generated data and model to
conduct technical and economic feasibility studies on four selected sites within Kachemak Bay?
two near Homer and one each near Seldovia and Port Graham/Nanwalek. A conceptual design
for optimal tidal energy production will emerge from the feasibility studies. The Kachemak Bay
Research Reserve, a collaboration between NOAA and the Alaska Department of Fish & Game,
will investigate potential biological impacts, inventory biological resources in areas identified
for potential development, and assist with associated permitting issues. Deerstone Consulting,
a renewable energy consulting firm working with the City of Homer on implementation of the
City?s Climate Action Plan, will provide additional technical assistance in the areas of
permitting, data collection and analysis, and project coordination. An assumed project start
date of July 1, 2009 will result in project completion in 12 months, i.e., July 1, 2010. The total
project budget is $1,154,341, of which $482,387 is requested via this proposal, and the
remainder, $671,954, is provided as matching contributions, for a 58% cost- share. Of the
$482,287 requested from AEA, Phase 1 (reconnaissance) would require $79,910 of AEA funds
and phase 2 (feasibility and conceptual design) would require $403,387 of AEA funds.
The Tanana area is blessed with a multitude of possible alternative energy resources including:
1) Wind Energy at is T. 5 N., R. 21 W. Sec. 10 located approximately 10 miles from downtown Tanana
proper.
2) Wind Energy at T. 4 N., R 20 W. This resource was eliminated as a possible because of transmission
line costs from the site to Tanana. The transmission line would have to cross the Yukon River.
3) Wind and Kinetic Hydro at T. 6 N., R 17 W. commonly referred to as ?The Rapids?. This has both
wind and water energy available however transmission line costs from The Rapids to Tanana, given the
terrain, would be very costly.
4) Geothermal at Little Melozitna Hot Springs (65.459, 153.312). There has been cursory analysis done
on this resource using chalcedony geo-thermometer methods by Kolker. These results are encouraging.
However, the magnitude of the resource needs to be defined better to determine if it would be
economically prudent to develop.
5) Traditional Hydro at Jackson Creek located at T. 5 N., R. 21 W. and T. 6 N., R 21 W. The project has
been studied before by the APA in the 1980s. Information regarding the study can be found in
?Reconnaissance Study of Energy Requirements and Alternatives for Tanana? Report Summary.
6) Kinetic Hydro Energy production using the Yukon River at Tanana using drag turbines.
Grant funds would be used to do engineering assessments of resources 4 and 5 with the contributed funds
and in kind resources of Tanana Power and the community of Tanana devoted to quantifying the
resources 1 and 6.
The ultimate goal being to determine ?the best? resource to develop of the community to meet the
community of Tanana?s long term energy needs most cost effectively.
Project Location
The location of the project is Perryville, Alaska. Perryville is located on the south coast
of the Alaska Peninsula, 275 miles southwest of Kodiak and 500 miles southwest of
Anchorage. It lies at approximately 55.912780? North Latitude and 159.145560? West
Longitude. (Sec. 27, T049S, R064W, Seward Meridian.) Perryville is located in the
Aleutian Islands Recording District. The area encompasses 9.2 sq. miles of land and
0.1 sq. miles of water. As can be seen in this image, the village benefits from southern
exposure to the sun and longer days due to its southerly latitude.Community To Be Served
The community was founded in 1912 as a refuge for
Alutiiq people driven away from their villages by the
eruption of Mt. Katmai. Many villagers from Douglas
and Katmai survived the eruption because they were
out fishing at the time. Captain Perry of the ship
"Manning" transported people from the Katmai area
to Ivanof Bay, and later, to the new village site. The village was originally called "Perry,"
but the "ville" was added to conform to the post office name, established in 1930. The
population is approximately 110.
Project Team
Project management is a collaborative approach. The Native Village of Perryville is the
applicant will be responsible for the overall management of AEA funds. George Sikat III
of Mat-Su Energy will serve as the Project Manager. Mr. Anthony Caole will be the
grants administrator and will be assisted by Ms. Charlene Yagie. Mr. Tom Humphrey,
P.E. will serve as the project\'s consulting electrical engineer and assist with data
analysis and economic/feasibility calculations.
The Port Alsworth Improvement Corporation, the Tanalian Electric Cooperative, Tanalian
Incorporated, Lake Clark National Park and Preserve, and the Lake and Peninsula Borough
support AGE?s proposal to conduct all pre-construction activities related to the construction of a
hydroelectric facility on the Tanalian River. The project will reduce the community?s
dependence on expensive diesel fuel that must be flown into Port Alsworth to provide heat and
power.
The Reconnaissance Phase will be multi-faceted and will include initial engineering,
environmental and hydrological studies on the Tanalian River to confirm its hydroelectric
potential. The reconnaissance phase will include scoping meetings with the community and
agencies to identify issues and study needs that will need to be addressed during the feasibility
phase. It will be especially important to work with the National Park Service (NPS) to determine
NEPA requirements for work within the Lake Clark National Park and Preserve. It is anticipated
that an environmental assessment may be required. It should be noted that the project lies
outside the wilderness boundary and the NPS is cooperating with the State of Alaska and
private in-holders to issue easements across the Tanalian River to access the new State airport
and private property.
The Resource Assessment, Feasibility and Conceptual Design Phase will take the findings of
the reconnaissance phase and delve into the project in greater detail. Specific hydroelectric
systems will be analyzed to determine the most feasible alternative with the least impact to the
environment. Public and agency meetings will be held as alternatives are developed. The
environmental assessment will be prepared during this phase. A selection process, that will
include public and agency input, will be developed to recommend the most feasible alternative.
A recommendation and analysis report will be developed that will include a preferred alternative
for the continuation for the project. This alternative will become the final design option.
The Final Design and Permitting Phase will prepare the detailed design and bid documents for
the preferred alternative and secure all the remaining permits to allow construction. The final
design will include the services of a landscape architect to ensure that construction and visual
impacts are minimized and mitigated.
The Construction Phase will install the preferred alternative.
Rising energy prices and demand for renewable systems could create demand for solar for hot water heating throughout the nation- even in the Arctic. Solar is often dismissed as a non-starter
in the Arctic- it should not be. Some of the world?s most successful solar projects have been in places where the solar fraction is about 50%. By strategically targeting entities
and institutions with solar technology, this could be an effective demand-side management option.
This project focuses on the installation of solar hot water heaters on residential, commercial, and public buildings in the Northwest Arctic Borough. If the technology proves to be economically
feasible, the eventual goal would be to install many solar water heaters on buildings and residences throughout the region. Before solar water heaters are installed on many buildings
throughout the region, a solar hot water heating demonstration project would be installed as a test case. Presumably, this demonstration solar water heater would be installed on commercial
and housing interests where the NIHA has a strategic influence, in Kotzebue or the surrounding communities. Key partners in the project include NANA Pacific/NANA Regional Corporation,
the Northwest Arctic Borough School District and additional engineering and building maintenance consultants. It is the team?s desire to develop monitoring and evaluation parameters
that can prove/disprove the technology in an Arctic setting.
The strategic objectives of this project are as follows:
? SO1: Develop monitoring and evaluation criteria and test methodology to evaluate the effectiveness of solar thermal hot water heating in the Arctic;
? SO2: Identify up to 5 commercial entities and 25 residential entities that are viable candidates for a solar hot water heating program in the NW Arctic/NANA Region;
? SO3: Design, procure, and install an appropriate solar hot water heating system;
? SO4: Evaluate the effectiveness of solar thermal hot water heating in NW Alaska.
The proposed project is located in Angoon, Alaska which is a remote native community with a population of approximately 400 residents. Electricity is generated locally by diesel-electric
generation. Most homes and larger buildings, including the schools, use diesel as a heating fuel. The heat recovery project will provide heat to the local schools and reduce their
annual heating fuel requirement. IPEC is working closely with the engineering firm, Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. to make this project successful.
objectives that have been established by stakeholders of the IRP process. The resource portfolio is a set of supply-side and/or demand-side improvements that eliminate any identified
energy or capacity deficits. Supply side improvements would be new generation construction, or modifications to existing generation assets such that energy production or available capacity
is increased. Demand side improvements are system efficiency improvements or peak load modification measures. Stakeholders include concerned citizen groups, commercial and industrial
customers, utility or city government officials, and representatives of state agencies. The stakeholders and the IRP issuing body (The Four Dam Pool Power Agency, FDPPA) establish the
objectives that govern how the resource portfolio is established. Most IRP objectives are governed by the 3 major categories of cost, risk, and environmental impact. The IRP process
includes stakeholder input with final content decisions made by the issuing body (FDPPA).
A note on restructuring:
The FDPPA is also undergoing a restructuring whereby two of the Agency?s four projects are being transferred or sold back to the member utilities. The FDPPA is a Joint Action Agency
organized under State Statute and will remain the same although the name will be changed to the Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA). This planned restructuring is scheduled to close
in January, 2009. SEAPA will remain the owner of the Swan Lake and Tyee Lake hydroelectric facilities as well as associated transmission lines providing Agency power to Ketchikan, Wrangell
and Petersburg including the Swan-Tyee Intertie.
Developing an IRP requires an analysis of the regions generation and transmission system, and an estimation of the regions load growth. Generation and load forecasts are modeled to determine
when and to what extent future energy and/or capacity deficits occur. Energy and capacity deficits are resolved by a combination of constructing new generation facilities, and through
load growth rate or peak hour value reduction via demand side management. The IRP then documents a short term and long term plan to address the energy and capacity deficits.
This project involves constructing a powerhouse, diversion structure with penstock, and substation for a new hydroelectric facility located on the Nenana River upstream of the Healy
Creek confluence. The new substation would connect the hydroelectric power generation facility to GVEA\'s existing high voltage transmission infrastructure in Healy. Electricity from
the new power generation source would be distributed to GVEA\'s 33,000 members from Cantwell to Delta Junction.
The Project is a Reconnaissance Project to investigate the possibilities of installing supplemental or replacement renewable energy for the lighting needs for the public docks and harbors
operated by NPRHA in Tatitlek and Chenega Bay, Alaska. It will include quantifying the renewable energy resource available by erecting a monitoring tower, completing other items of
the reconnaissance phase including consolidating our data into this process, completing environmental screening, reviewing system benefits, proposing a system design, other phase requirements
and lastly the analysis and recommendations.
This is a request for funding to construct a high-penetration wind-diesel system for the community of
Tuntutuliak. The wind diesel system will displace 30% of the diesel fuel currently being used to generate
electricity and used to provide residential home heating. The work plan consists of the installation,
control and integration of five major components:
1. Five (5) Windmatic 17-S Wind turbines on 80 feet-tall lattice towers
2. Diesel power system control and integration upgrades
3. Energy recovery boiler at the school
4. Smart metering system
5. 40 Residential electric thermal room heating units
The wind turbines will be installed 250 feet apart on pile foundations on the abandoned runway.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 39 9/3/2008
Construction will take place during the Summer and Fall of 2009. Each turbine will be connected to the
electrical distribution system via a buried armored cable. A fiber optic cable will be buried alongside the
power cable to provide a communications link with the powerplant.
Three hierarchical methods of integrating the wind into the diesel grid include:
1. Heat recovery with frequency control
2. Adaptations to diesel generators to enable low-load operation
3. An integrated control system that operates both the wind turbines and diesel generators in a
coordinated manner with ceramic thermal storage.
Conceptual Design, Feasibility, and Energy Monitoring
Wind Diesel System
This purpose of this work is to provide a conceptual design and construction cost estimate for to
use wind power to displace diesel fuel for power generation and heating. The scope of work will
include conducting energy use baseline studies, energy resource monitoring and the
development of conceptual designs and cost estimates for construction. This work would also
explore the management and financial feasibility of a wind project. This project would be in
conjunction with other efforts such as those of the Chaninik Wind Group, which is working in the
Bethel region.
The average consistent power in the wind across our region is some of the best to be found in
Alaska, however, this general data must be supplemented with simultaneous electric load data
in each location to better integrate the available wind with the energy needs. Village energy
system and wind monitoring stations will be purchased in Fall of 2009 and installed this winter,
and monitored for one year.
This work is needed in order to move forward with a renewable energy project and obtain future
funding.
Waste Heat Recovery Project: This project will tap off of the excess heat from existing generators at the Dutch Harbor Powerhouse to run a new generator designed to convert the waste
heat to electrical energy. When the NEw Powerhouse is constructed, the waste heat recovery system will be expanded to include excess heat from increased power demands. The Dutch Harbor
Powerhouse serves the residents and various industrial processes in the City of Unalaska and the International Port of Dutch Harbor, which is the number one fishing port in the United
States.
This project will provide a 20-kilowatt solar photovoltaic array of the roof of the Student Recreation Center on the University of Alaska Fairbanks campus. This array will generate
electric power to the University of Alaska Fairbanks electric power grid. All power produced by this project will offset power that the University will not have to purchase or generate.
WCA proposes a hydrokinetic renewable energy project to be implemented on the nearby
Tanana River, approximately 2000-3000 feet downriver from the Richardson Highway crossing
near Big Delta, Alaska. This proposed project encompasses Phases III and IV of a four-phase
program. Reconnaissance and feasibility studies were performed by Electric Power Research
Institute, Inc. (EPRI) in 2007 and 2008. The purpose was to assess technical, economic,
financial, and operational viability of a project and to narrow the focus of final design and
construction. The reconnaissance and feasibility studies have shown that this proposed project
is warranted. Electronic copies of the reconnaissance and feasibility reports are available on
EPRI?s website at http://oceanenergy.epri.com/risec.html#reports.
Building on information gathered in Phases I and II, WCA shall establish the project
configuration and specifications that will be used to guide construction, further refine project cost
estimates, finalize business plans, and obtain land use and resource authorizations required for
construction. This proposed project encompasses the final design and permitting and
construction/operation phases for a pilot RISEC plant and subsequent expanded generating
plant serving the Whitestone Community on the Tanana River. The electricity produced by the
pilot generating plant will be operated in two modes; first, exclusively connected to the remote
Whitestone power distribution grid, and then, when deemed successful, connected to the GVEA
power transmission / distribution grid. This project will be managed by WCA, with technical
support provided by EPRI; system integration and construction management support from CE2
Engineers, Inc. (CE2); a RISEC technology developer to be selected; and other necessary
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 16 9/3/2008
support contractors to be identified and selected. This phased project will be progressively
conducted with a gated decision process allowing for data evaluation prior to proceeding with
construction.
This project will provide a central chilled water system for the West Ridge area of the University of Alaska Fairbanks campus. This central chilled water system will meet the cooling
needs of the buildings on the West Ridge and the needs of the computer center. This project will replace the electrically-driven chillers that are in each building with a central absorption
chilling facility. This cooling system will utilize steam heat that is currently being wasted as its energy source.
Tlingit Haida Central Council (CCTHIA) will construct two containerized mobile biodiesel processing plants to be operated in tandem to take advantage of available feedstock, while also
servicing distinct geographical regions in Alaska. As the relative isolation of the Southeast and Southcentral regions of the state make prices of feedstock and finished biodiesel dependent
upon transportation, we expect to use lower-cost local production and local feedstocks, in addition to imported feedstocks, to bring down the overall costs of the final wholesale and
retail costs of Bioheat, a blended Home Heating Oil that can be used in virtually any existing fuel oil stove for residential and public space heating. The operations will be conducted
by AlaskaSmart Eco-fuels as per a memorandum of agreement.
Birch Creek Village Council is seeking funds to install a solar array in conjunction with a 35kw generator in the community of Birch Creek. The Tribal Council operates the electric
utility and like many others, is experiencing the negative affects of the high cost of diesel. With the solar panels, we anticipate we can generate enough electricity six months of
the year to utilize a 35kw gen set, thereby replacing the need to run the larger 65kw diesel powered generator for a significant portion of the year. The project and the utility serve
the village of Birch Creek. The tribal council and the village corporation (project management/personnel) will be involved in the project.
The Village of Igiugig is located at the outlet of Lake Iliamna, 240 air miles southwest of Anchorage, on
the southern shore of the Kvichak River. Igiugig has a year-round population of 56 (predominantly
Yupik, Aleut, and Athabascan) rising in summer to about 75. Igiugig also provides goods and services to
six area tourism lodges and their respective clients and workforce of 90 additional persons per week.
This lake outlet location provides an ideal site for the study, testing and implementation of river in-stream
energy conversion that will also benefit other Alaska communities considering this form of renewable
energy. A RISEC plant will convert available river kinetic energy into electric power, and feed into the
existing Igiugig electric grid to reduce diesel fuel consumption at the Igiugig power plant. Direct
beneficiaries include the Lake and Peninsula School District (LPSD) and Igiugig electric service
customers.
IVC will be the Grantee under the Renewable Energy Fund project. IVC has teamed up with the
engineering firm of Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E), Electric Power Research Institute
(EPRI), and the Bristol Bay Research and Science Institute (BBSRI). AE&E also brings to the team the
geotechnical firm of Duane Miller Associates, LLC.
AE&E is an Alaska-owned, Anchorage-based firm incorporated in 1993 specifically to provide design
and project management services for rural energy projects. AE&E has built its reputation on the ability to
provide practical design solutions and hands-on construction support to effectively meet the challenges of
rural Alaska. We have fostered excellent working relationships with permitting and regulatory agencies,
which ensures that our projects comply with current interpretation of state and federal regulations. The
engineering staff of AE&E has extensive experience designing and constructing projects in remote sites
throughout the state with particular emphasis in western Alaska. Our primary field of expertise is electric
power generation and distribution, rural fuel storage and handling facilities, and energy systems
integration.
EPRI is a non-profit, public-benefit organization leading innovation in strategic areas of electricity
technology through public-private partnerships. Over the past two and half years, EPRI has performed
techno feasibility studies for offshore wave and tidal energy conversion; wave energy in 2004 and tidal in
2005 and early 2006. The tidal work evaluated the application of water turbines to convert the kinetic
energy in a tidal stream to electricity. The tidal feasibility studies, for good sites, made a compelling case
for investing in projects using this technology to diversify our energy supply portfolio. The case made
was so compelling that within a couple of months of the completion of the EPRI feasibility studies,
approximately 30 applications for preliminary permits were filed by private investors to the FERC and
Nova Scotia Power announced a multi-million dollar tidal in-stream pilot plant in that province.
BBSRI is an independent research institute established by the Bristol Bay Economic Development
Corporation and is one of its non-profit subsidiaries. This multi-disciplinary team uses its technical
expertise to devise and conduct scientific research and monitoring to improve management of fish stocks,
fisheries, and the environments of the Bristol Bay region. The Institute also provides scholarships and onthe-
job training to increase participation by area residents. BBSRI is currently under contract to the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game to manage an ongoing seasonal Kvichak River smolt outmigration
study. They have an established base camp near Igiugig with on-site personnel experienced in the
operation of both traditional single beam upward-looking sonar and side-looking imaging DIDSON sonar
equipment. The fact that this crew will already be situated near the proposed RISEC installation site will
result in substantial savings for the planned RISEC fish impact study. AE&E has a long history of
successful energy-related projects throughout Alaska, and has worked with both IVC and the school
district on numerous projects dating back to 1995. EPRI just concluded an intensive feasibility study of
RISEC technology in Alaska and at the Igiugig site in particular.
Yakutat Power is located in Yakutat, Alaska. The City and Borough of Yakutat has a population of 631,
and is located at the mouth of Yakutat Bay along the Gulf of Alaska, 225 miles northwest of Juneau and
220 miles southeast of Cordova. Yakutat receives monthly barge service during the winter and more
frequent service during summer. Yakutat is equipped with two jet-certified runways and receives jet
service daily. The U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service have offices in Yakutat. This project
will investigate the conversion of readily available wave energy with the long term goal of integrating the
resource into the Yakutat Power electric grid. Direct beneficiaries of this project include all Yakutat
Power electric service customers.
Yakutat Power will be the Grantee under the Renewable Energy Fund grant. Yakutat Power has teamed
up with the engineering firm of Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E) ) and Electric Power
Research Institute (EPRI). AE&E also brings to the team the geotechnical firm of Duane Miller
Associates, LLC.
EPRI is a non-profit, public-benefit organization leading innovation in strategic areas of electricity
technology through public-private partnerships. Over the past four and half years, EPRI has performed
techno feasibility studies for offshore wave and tidal energy conversion; wave energy in 2004 and tidal in
2005 and early 2006. The wave energy work evaluated the application of linear attenuators and
oscillating water columns to convert the potential and kinetic energy in ocean waves to electricity. The
wave energy feasibility studies, for good sites, made a compelling case for investing in projects using this
technology to diversify our energy supply portfolio. The case made was so compelling that within a year
of the completion of the EPRI feasibility studies, approximately 10 applications for preliminary permits
were filed by private investors to the FERC for wave power plants in Oregon and Northern California.
AE&E is an Alaska-owned, Anchorage-based firm incorporated in 1993 specifically to provide design
and project management services for rural energy projects. AE&E has built its reputation on the ability to
provide practical design solutions and hands-on construction support to effectively meet the challenges of
rural Alaska. We have fostered excellent working relationships with permitting and regulatory agencies,
which ensures that our projects comply with current interpretation of state and federal regulations. The
engineering staff of AE&E has extensive experience designing and constructing projects in remote sites
throughout the state with particular emphasis in western Alaska. Our primary field of expertise is electric
power generation and distribution, rural fuel storage and handling facilities, and energy systems
integration. AE&E has a long history of successful energy-related projects throughout Alaska, and has
worked with Yakutat Power on several energy-related projects dating back to 1991.
This proposal is to conduct a reconnaissance and feasibility study for alternative energy use
for the school facilities in the communities of Whittier, Chenega Bay, and Tatitlek operated
by Chugach School District. Development of sustainable alternative energy is a School
Board objective in Chugach School District where fuel costs consume an escalating
proportion of the annual budget, detracting from the primary mission of education. Chugach
School District has been an education leader and model for other rural Alaska school
districts for over 15 years and now wants to be one of the first to create a solution to a
problem plaguing rural Alaska. A description of each communities is included here.Chenega Bay is located on Evans Island at Crab Bay, 42 miles southeast of Whittier in
Prince William Sound. It is 104 air miles southeast of Anchorage and 50 miles east of
Seward. The area encompasses 28.8 sq. miles of land and .3 sq. miles of water. Winter
temperatures range from 17 to 28; summer temperatures range 49 to 63. Average annual
precipitation includes 66 inches of rain and 80 inches of snowfall. The village was destroyed
and over half of all residents perished by tsunamis in the Sound after the 1964 earthquake.
The village was reestablished twenty years later on Evans Island, at the site of the former
Crab Bay herring saltery. In the summer of 1984, 21 homes, an office building, community
hall, school, 2 teacher\'s houses, a church and community store were constructed. Chenega
Bay is an Aluti?iq Native community where most residents practice a subsistence lifestyle.
The Chenega School is a 6,000 square foot facility.Tatitlek is located on the northeast shore of Tatitlek Narrows, on the Alaska Mainland in
Prince William Sound. It lies 30 miles east of Valdez by sea near Bligh Island, and 30 air
miles northwest of Cordova. The area encompasses 7.3 sq. miles of land and 0 sq. miles of
water. Winter temperatures range from 17 to 28; summers average 49 to 63. Annual
precipitation includes 28 inches of rain and 150 inches of snowfall. Fish processing and
oyster farming provide some employment in Tatitlek. A dam provides water, which is
treated and stored in a 170,000-gallon tank. A piped water and sewer system serves all 34
homes. The piped community septic tank system discharges via an ocean outfall. The
Tatitlek School is 9,500 square feet.
Whittier is on the northeast shore of the Kenai Peninsula, at the head of Passage Canal. It
is on the west side of Prince William Sound, 75 miles southeast of Anchorage. The area
encompasses 12.5 sq. miles of land and 7.2 sq. miles of water. Winter temperatures range
from 17 to 28; summer temperatures average 49 to 63. Average annual precipitation
includes 66 inches of rain and 80 inches of snowfall. The major employers in Whittier are
the City and Crowley Maritime. Water is derived from wells and a reservoir. Water storage
capacity is 1.2 million gallons. The entire community is served by a piped water and sewer
system, and over 95% of homes are fully plumbed. The Whittier Community School is a
21,000 sf facility.
This project will be managed by Chugach School District with expertise contracted for both
the reconnaissance and feasibility phases. The qualifications of the contractors are discussed
under Section 3.4 of this proposal.
The Municipality of Skagway (Municipality) proposes to construct the West Creek Hydroelectric
Project (Project) located on West Creek, approximately 7 miles west of Skagway and adjacent to
the small community of Dyea. The primary purpose of the Project would be offsetting diesel
generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway from May through September each year. Up to
five cruise ships per day dock in Skagway for 12-15 hours and continuously operate their diesel
plants to provide for on-board electricity consumption. The continuous stack emissions spread a
blue haze at about the 1,500 foot elevation where vegetation has been noticeably affected. The
Project will improve air quality and save vegetation in the area (there may be other unknown
environmental benefits). To emphasize how serious the air quality of the area is being taken, the
National Park Service, Municipality of Skagway, and Alaska Power & Telephone Company
(AP&T) have a cooperative agreement to place and maintain equipment at AP&T?s Dewey
Lakes Hydro project site to monitor this pollution.
The Alaska Power Authority had a feasibility study conducted for the Project by R.W. Beck and
Associates in 1981-82. That study focused on a development that would meet the electricity
needs of Skagway and Haines rather than the nascent cruise ship industry. It recommended an
installed capacity of 6.0 MW and a 20,000 acre-foot reservoir formed by a 120-feet high
concrete-faced rockfill dam. The proposed Project will be significantly different than proposed
by Beck in that the installed capacity will be greater and the reservoir storage will be much less
(possibly run-of-river with no storage). Nevertheless, the Beck study provides an excellent
starting point for the proposed re-evaluation of the site, and therefore the Municipality believes
that a Phase I reconnaissance study is not necessary.
West Creek drains from an ice field into the Taiya River. The Municipality has already
requested the land the Project would be on from the State as Municipal Entitlement Land. Since
the stream is glacial, flows are very high in the summer, which is also when the cruise ships are
active. This fortuitous coincidence between flow and load allows for a relatively large installed
capacity with little or no storage. Preliminary analysis indicates that a Project with a capacity
to serve one large cruise ship could be operated on a run-of-river basis. Increasing the capacity
so the Project could serve two or three cruise ships is possible, but a storage reservoir would be
required to make the generation dependable. The costs and benefits of these capacity/storage
alternatives will be a primary focus of the proposed Phase II studies.
This project is to conduct an assessment of potential sources of alternative energy for the schools and communities served by the Yukon Koyukuk School District. These communities are
Alakaket, Hughes, Huslia, Kaltag, Koyukuk, Manley Hot Springs, Minto, Nulato and Ruby. Potential alternative energy sources in the District include hydrokinetic, geothermal, biomass
(wood ), waste heat and wind. There is a high degree of interest in developing alternative energy in the Interior. The District plans to coordinate with other agencies working in this
area. The Gwitchyaa Zhee Corporation in Fort Yukon is developing a much larger wood fuel project than would be required by YKSD communities but they provide a model to follow. The
District will contract with the consultants assisting in the development of that project, Dr. William Wall, Ph.D. and Peter Olsen. The biomass potential community of Kaltag will be
address in a separate grant application. The Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council (YRITWC) has an experimental hydrokinetic project in Ruby that might have application to our
other river based communities. Dr. Brian Hirsch of the Council will assist in the evaluation of harnessing river power. River conditions in the Region will be reviewed and the two
most promising site will be selected for evaluation. Gwen Holdmann of the Alaska Center for Energy and Power at the University of Alaska Fairbanks will complete a basic reconnaissance
of the geothermal potential in the District for direct use and power generation applications. The District will review waste heat options with local utilities. Manley may have good
waste heat potential.From initial review it appears wind generation opportunities are limited. This will be confirmed with AEA. Kathy Christy will serve as the District?s project manager
responsible for coordinating the work of the consultants and the compilation of the Phase I report and recommendations.
This project is to develop a wood energy project for the Kaltag school and community. The school is the largest consumer of power in the community so that it is appropriate for the District
to take the lead role in the development of this project, but for biomass utilization to be sustainable in the community and to possibly expand to other nearby communities a cooperative
effort is required. This project will be developed in phases. The first phase will be to identify the energy requirements and to confirm the availability of the resource. A preliminary
cost benefit analysis will be conducted to verify that the project and fuel supply has the potential to be sustainable and that the projected cost will justify the development costs.
Environmental issues will be identified and community meetings held to confirm support for the project. Potential business partners will be identified. If the first phase of development
yields favorable results the project will proceed to Phase II and a more detailed business plan and project concept design will be developed. The District plans to contract with William
Wall, PhD. who is developing the Ft. Yukon Bio mass project, to perform the reconnaissance, feasibility studies and harvest management plan. To proceed to final design, Phase III
the commitment of a wood supplier is required. The existing heating system at the Kaltag School is in very poor condition and the District has designed a replacement system and is
waiting for approval of a Department of Education grant for construction. The design of a conventional hydronic heating system for the Kaltag School heating has been completed to the
design development level by WH Pacific. The engineer effort to date will be coordinated with wood heat engineering. Kathy Christy, an experienced project manager, will serve as the
District?s project manager responsible for coordinating the work of the consultants and the compilation of the reports and recommendations.
The project will be located in Mountain Village. The tribe with cooperation from the city will be the main entities involved in the project. We request to purchase and utilize small
wind turbines for the municipal and tribal government buildings, in all approximately seven buildings.
The Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal system was extensively studied in the late 1970s and early
1980s with a variety of geological, geochemical, and geophysical studies. Unfortunately the
execution of these surveys and interpretation of the data from these earlier studies did not result
in a thorough understanding of the area. By example, 6 very closely spaced holes were drilled
ranging from depths of 150 ft to 1001ft, passing through a very shallow plume of thermal water
that may be flowing in a southerly direction. Chemical analyses from this earlier work are
incomplete. It is proposed that the existing Pilgrim wellheads will be reconditioned so that static
and flowing temperature logs can be rerun in the existing wells and new water samples
collected. Additionally, a Controlled Source Audio Magnetotellurics (CSMAT) survey will be
combined with new shallow (+ 200?) temperature-gradient holes drilled away from the cluster of
existing wells to try to identify the location of the hotter upflow zone supplying thermal fluid to
the shallow aquifer. The goal of this project will ultimately be to drill a deeper hole into the
upflow zone to determine its temperature and water chemistry. The deeper hole, and perhaps
some of the other holes will also be flowed to obtain water samples for chemical analysis and
possibly collect some pressure interference data between the wells. These data, combined with
an airborne thermal imaging survey to determine total heat flow to the surface should be
adequate to determine total potential output of the system for sustainable long term
development. The proposed project is a joint effort between the following partners:
? Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP)
? US Department of the Interior (USGS/BLM)
? The Alaska Energy Authority
? The Catholic Bishop of Northern Alaska, (owner of Pilgrim Hot Springs)
The project will be led by ACEP. In addition to the project partners, letters of support have been
provided by:
? Mary?s Igloo Native Council (owners of property adjacent to Pilgrim)
? Nome Joint Utilities
The project has the potential to affect communities throughout the Seward Peninsula, including
Nome, Teller, Brevig Mission, and, if the resource is substantial, Kotzebue. This project, in
conjunction with a sister investigation of the greater Seward Peninsula led by the Alaska Village
Electric Cooperative (AVEC), is intended as a first leg of a broader geothermal drilling and
exploration program. For this reason, this project will include recommendations for next steps in
terms of this larger reconnaissance study.
The Mount Spurr area represents one of the best opportunities in Alaska for to develop a utility-scale
geothermal power plant. Phase 1 exploration efforts must be performed before moving forward to project
development. The target site is located 70 miles west of Anchorage on state land. Field work was
performed at the site in 1985. It is likely that the project would serve communities along the Railbelt and
the power purchased by one of the Railbelt electric utilities.
The grant request is for initial resource studies and assessment. The plan assumes a timeline of three
years with the bulk of the field work done in the summer months. The plan calls for an initial geological
scouting, mapping and sampling work, with progression to aerial and ground geophysics work,
culminating in a gradient and slim holes drilling program. Field surveys and surface studies during the
Summer of 2009, which Ormat would finance 100% from its own funds. The grant would cover
additional field surveys and geophysical studies and shallow temperature gradient wells during the
summer of 2010. A slim hole drilling program would occur during the Summer of 2011, if justified.
There are about 13 miles between the nearest road and the southeast flank of Crater Peak to our leases.
The objective of this field survey aspect of the potential geothermal area should be an early focus as to
cost for infrastructure and project development, including access roads and transmission. The primary
obstacle for this phase is the short time window (May through September) for exploration to avoid
extreme weather.
This project will assess the practicality of using heat pumps in different regions of Alaska.
Several technologies and unique configurations will be examined, including ground-source heat
pumps, air-source heat pumps, solar thermal storage, and diurnal thermal storage. In the case of
ground-source heat pumps, the ground temperature resource will be assessed by region.
Additionally, low-temperature heat applications will be explored. This project will be a joint
effort between UAF\'s Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) and the Cold Climate
Housing Research Center (CCHRC). The project will culminate with a final published report of
the findings.
The geothermal plant at Chena Hot Springs has been in continual operation since 2006 and is
the only operating geothermal plant in the State of Alaska. Since startup, there has been a
decline in geothermal fluid temperature and pressure. This may be due to either engineering or
reservoir issues. In order to operate the plant in a sustainable manner and develop other similar
and possibly more marginal projects sustainably, it is critical that we understand the underlying
mechanisms driving this production decline. Following this analysis, a suitable production
scheme and monitoring schedule should be developed. The proposed project is a cooperative
program between the University of Alaska and Chena Hot Springs Resort. A numerical
reservoir model of the Chena geothermal system will be created and its performance matched
to the historical production data. This model can then be used to assist in the making of
development strategy decisions.
Prior to production startup, geologic, geochemical, geophysical and well test information were
used to develop a conceptual model of the Chena Hot Springs system. However, to truly
understand the reservoir dynamics and adopt an appropriate production scenario, a numerical
model of the system is needed. Data from both the shallow geothermal system (less than 1000
ft depth) and the deeper source system (1000-4000 ft) are needed to characterize this model.
The shallow system properties have been well characterized in previous studies. To effectively
predict future performance, temperature, pressure and flow data relating to the deeper system is
also required. Chena Hot Springs has received a U.S. Department of Energy grant to drill a
deep well to explore for a higher temperature geothermal resource beneath the facility. The
information that will be obtained from drilling this well will prove invaluable for the understanding
of geothermal potential in Interior Alaska as well as providing crucial input data for the Chena
Hot Springs reservoir model. A resource assessment achieved through the testing of multiple
production scenarios will be integrated with a conceptual design of the power plant production
system. A generic feasibility analysis will generate recommendations for the final design of the
Chena Hot Springs geothermal project. The outcomes of the modeling effort may be transferred
to other geothermal systems such as Circle, Manley and Pilgrim Hot Springs and to other sites
within the Central Alaska Hot Springs Belt.
The proposed Victor Creek hydro project could produce up to 5-MW and would be located near
Lawing, Alaska just south of Moose Pass, Alaska (see the map below produced by HDR Alaska,
Inc.). Kenai Hydro seeks to develop the project in compliance with current low impact hydro
guidelines and practices. The scope of this project will look at the Victor Creek project as a
stand-alone hydroelectric facility. Power from the project would be available to customers of
Homer Electric Association and other areas served by the existing Railbelt transmission grid.
Kenai Hydro, LLC (KHL) is a partnership among Homer Electric Association, Inc. (HEA), enXco
and Cook Inlet Region, Inc. (CIRI) that was formed for the purpose of evaluating and developing
low impact hydroelectric facilities.
Along with many communities in Alaska, Chena Power is not located directly in one of Alaska?s
larger cities making it heavily reliant on diesel and other fossil fuels. In order to offset the rising
cost of fuel, Chena Power has undertaken well known steps to greatly reduce the amount of fuel
that it requires by means of renewable energy sources. By taking these steps, Chena Power is
providing cost effective solutions for many Alaskan communities (large and small) to become
less reliant on non renewable sources of energy. Chena Power is proposing to use excess
electricity that is produced by its geothermal power plant towards the production of hydrogen gas
at Chena Hot Springs Resort. Chena Power plans to install a 60 kg/day hydrogen generation
module, a 6667 psi compression module, a 76.5 kg hydrogen storage module, and a hydrogen
dispenser module all of which will be purchased from Hydrogenics. Also in this proposal is a
plan to convert three 12 passenger vans to run off of hydrogen. This will allow Chena Power to
produce hydrogen to reduce the use of diesel in transportation and to reduce the propane in the
operation of appliances on site.
The Manley Village Council is applying for a Planning, Feasibility, and Coordination grant to develop the geothermal resources available in and around Manley Hot Springs for the purposes
of providing economical, stable, reliable, and environmentally friendly power generation and home heating options to its tribal members and other comunity members. Pending partners
include the Bean Ridge Corporation, Doyon, Ltd., the Alaska Energy authority, UAF\'s Alaska Center for Energy and Power, Chena Hot Springs, and private landowners in the Manley area.
AEB proposes a resource assessment/feasibility analysis/conceptual design project of geothermal sites in the targeted service area.
Goal: The AGDAP goal is to ascertain the feasibility of geothermal power generation for regional communities and develop conceptual design documents/reports for geothermal generation
on the eastern Alaska Peninsula and associated Aleutian Islands. The AGDAP strategic objectives are as follows:
SO 1: Identify potential geothermal sites in the Aleutian Island Service Area.
SO 2: Undertake a geological, geochemistry, and geophysical assessment of targeted sites for geothermal power generation potential.
SO3: Undertake a geothermal drilling program to promote regional geothermal interests.
SO4: Develop conceptual design and business plan for follow-on phases of the projects.
SO5: Conduct an optimization phase in the conceptual design to determine how to supply power either from one centrally located geothermal plant or from many smaller geothermal plants,
so the communities involved can be evaluated. Included will be evaluating the use of transmission lines for power versus supplying hot water via a pipeline to one or several geothermal
power plant(s).
The communities represented by AEB are Akutan, Cold Bay, False Pass, King Cove, Nelson Lagoon and Sand Point. The Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association (APIA) will work with AEB to assist
in the with the community outreach and project coordination. The Aleutian Islands communities represented by APIA are Akutan, Atka, False Pass, King Cove, Nelson Lagoon, Nikolski, Sand
Point and Unalaska. Other communities that are a part of the Aleutian Chain, but not a part of AEB or APIA are: Adak, Amchitka, and Attu. Some of these Aleutian Islands Region communities
have been abandoned (Belkofski, Pauloff Harbor and Unga), and the Tribes have been relocated in other communities (e.g. Sand Point). Accordingly, we are proposing to focus on the geothermal
resources in and near Adak, Atka, Cold Bay, False Pass, King Cove, Nelson Lagoon, Nikolski, Sand Point and Unalaska.
The proposed effort will involve the Tribal and City Councils of the above communities, Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Utilities, village corporations, and industrial interests
in the area.
The AEB/APIA team is aware of other geothermal proposals that have a complementary scope of work and synergies that have or will be submitted to the Alaska Energy Authority. If jointly
funded there are opportunities for cost sharing and co-mobilization that would not be achieved with independent proposals. The AEB/APIA team is willing to cooperate with these other
projects to promote cost sharing, co-mobilization, procurement, and cooperation.
Once the most promising sites have been determined, the technical team will conduct further ground-based geophysical assessments in coordination with the geologic surveys to be conducted
by Hattenburg, Dilley, & Linnell. The study will also include a drilling program that would collaborate with the USGS/BLM drill rig and associated state drilling program if available
or a private sector sub-contractor. Finally, AEB is proposing conceptual designs and transmission routing studies for the proposed sites.
As a whole, this study will serve as an essential decision support tool for making policy decisions, planning strategies for further exploration and development.
The proposed effort will involve the Tribal and City Councils of the above communities, village corporations, and industrial interests in the area. Key partners in the project will include
regional non-profits and for profit corporations, NANA Pacific, the UAF/Alaska Center for Energy and Power, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell (HDL), and additional engineering/scientific
consultants.
This project is for a reconnaissance study to investigate using hydrokinetic power to supply approximately 1.0 MW of renewable electricity to the City of Galena. Hydrokinetic power
extracts power from the velocity of water using turbines lowered into a river, and is benign compared to hydropower since no dams are required. Aerial photos suggest that the Yukon
River is narrow and straight at Galena, suggesting an ideal location for hydrokinetic power. However, to understand the most advantageous location (where the highest velocity exists)
for deploying hydrokinetic turbines to produce power, a thorough scientific study of the site needs to be completed. The project will perform a quality investigation of river bathymetry,
ice thickness and current vector (velocity and direction) survey.
This grant request identifies the repairs and upgrades required to bring the system back on line and to improve its long term efficiency and output. Since the Akutan hydroelectric generation
system has been in place for nearly 15 years, many requirements such as site assessment, reconnaissance, conceptual design and site control do not apply. Therefore, this grant application
is requesting funds for:
?
Phase III Final Design and Permitting
?
Phase IV Construction, Commissioning, Operation
and Reporting
The tasks for this project are defined in Sections 2.5 and 2.6 of the grant application instructions.
AEA renewable energy grant guidelines require a multi-phase approach to project development. A feasibility assessment of the Loud Creek resource was previously completed at the direction
of AEA. The assessment found Loud Creek to be ?an obvious choice? for development. Therefore, the City of Akutan is requesting funds for:
?
Phase II Feasibility Analysis, Conceptual Design
The tasks for this project are defined in Section 2.4 of the grant application instructions.
The City of Akutan intends to evaluate the feasibility of developing the Hot Springs Bay Valley into an active geothermal resource for power generation and related applications. The
purposes and anticipated results of this effort are those set forth in Section 2.3 Phase I ? Reconnaissance Requirements of the renewable energy grant application instructions. The
project will involve four primary tasks:
1.
Prospecting: Analysis of existing data and previous scientific studies. Geological, geophysical and geochemical field work sufficient to support exploratory drilling.
2.
Exploratory Drilling and Well Testing: Includes mobilization, drilling of test wells, flow testing and demobilization based on the results of prospecting.
3.
Preliminary Feasibility Study: A comprehensive assessment of the proposed geothermal development project, including technical alternatives, land issues, environmental screening, financial
and operational viability.
4.
Economic Assessment: Examines Akutan?s growing infrastructure, including airport construction, port expansion and growth of Trident Seafoods. Assesses potential for cooperative development
among the City, Akutan Corporation, Aleut Corporation, Trident Seafoods and other stakeholders. Identifies public and private financing alternatives. Defines the key elements of the
business plan for development and operation of the resulting power system.
Completion of the Phase I Reconnaissance project will allow all potential stakeholders, including the State of Alaska, to determine the potential technical and economic viability of
the proposed geothermal development before proceeding with feasibility and conceptual design tasks (Phase II).
The NSB recently commissioned a preliminary feasibility study entitled "Energy Options for the City of Atqasuk"(Attachment A, disk copy). The recently completed study assessed the alternative
energy options that could reduce or replace Atqasuk\'s dependence on diesel fuel for its power and heating needs. Natural gas from the Barrow gas fields proved to be the most viable
energy source.
An economic analysis was performed on:
a) shipping natural gas frm the Walapka gas field to Atqasuk via pipeline,
b) shipping compressed natural (CNG) from Walapka to Atqasuk,
c) transmitting electric power from a gas fired power plant in Barrow to Atqasuk via a new overhead transmission line to supply electric power and continue the use of fuel oil for heating,
and
d) transmitting electric power from a gas fired power plant in Barrow to Atqasuk via a new overhead transmission line to provide both power and heating.
Alternative "d" proved to be the most attractive.
This application requests funds to:
*Evaluate and select the power transmission option (HVDC vs. 3 phase AC) via comparative lifecycle cost analysis, technical viability and system reliability.
* Evaluate the use of composite poles in the Arctic. The poles are 1/3 the weight and 4 to 5 times the strength of wood poles. They can also be shipped in 25 foot sections.
*Evaluate the capacity of the Barrow Utilities & Electric Cooperative Inc. power plant for the additional demand.
*Determine business structure, rates and O&M responsibilities
*Evaluate and select the optimum 70 mile long route from Barrow to Atqasuk.
*Evaluate the impace of the added demand on the Barrow natural gas reserves.
*Evaluate land ownership issues.
*Evaluate environmental issues.
*Identify permit requirements
*Determine design parameters for wind and ice loads in arctic conditions.
*Develop the design and cost estimate of a power transmission system that will serve Atqasuk, Walakpa Gas Field and also facilitate a future expansion to Wainwright.
The North Slope Borough will be the primary participant and will utilize internal expertise and retain external consultants and contractors that have special expertise in designing power
transmission systems, building remove facilities in the high arctic, performing environmental assessments in the NSB, permitting this kind of facility in Alaska, and evaluating natural
gas production impace and reservoir potential.
The NSB recently commission ed an update of the Project Analysis Report (feasibility study) entitled "Village Heat Recovery" dated February 2006. The prior study assessed the previously
constructed waste lines and costs associated with waste heat utilization in Arctic and/or permafrost conditions in six NSB villages. The study verified that use of waste heat could
reduce or replace dependence on diesel fuel for its heating needs in NSB area wide villages. With rising fuel costs, it is now feasible to install waste heat lines in Point Lay.
This application requests funds to cover the following expenses:
* Design and construction administration services
* Construction cost estimates
* Construction costs
* NSB employeed training in operating and maintaining waste heat systems.
The North Slope Borough will be the primary participant and will utilize internal expertise and retain external consultants and contractors that have special expertise in designing waste
heat pipe lines, connecting building heating plants to the pipe lines, and recommending operations and maintenance schedules.
The NSB recently commissioned an update of the Project Analysis Report (feasibility study) entitled ?Village Heat Recovery? and dated February 2006. The prior study assessed the previously
constructed waste lines and costs associated with waste heat utilization in Arctic and/or permafrost conditions in six NSB villages. The study verified that use of waste heat could
reduce or replace dependence on diesel fuel for its heating needs in NSB area wide villages. With rising fuel costs, it is now feasible to install waste heat lines in Wainwright.
This application requests funds to:
? Provide schematic design services
? Identify and mitigate environmental issues
? Provide construction cost estimates
? Finalize land, routing and site control issues
? Complete design and bid documents
? Provide construction costs
? Provide for construction administration services
? Provide NSB employee training in operating and maintaining waste heat systems
The North Slope Borough will be the primary participant and will utilize internal expertise and retain external consultants and contractors that have special expertise in designing waste
heat pipe lines, connecting building heating plants to the pipe lines, and recommending operations and maintenance schedules.
Phase III of the Wainwright Coal Bed Methane is in the vicinity of Wainwright, Alaska. The parties that will be involved in this will be the North Slope Borough, United States Geological
Survey and Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. This phase will consist of drilling delineation wells at the landfill and the Wainwright Lagoon.
The Alaska Gasline Port Authority (AGPA) will prepare a feasibility analysis for a new natural
gas distribution system to provide service to the 3300 potential customers ofNorth Pole, Moose
Creek, and Salcha, areas. Residents currently heat with home heating oil, coal, and/or wood.
Natural gas service from Fairbanks Natural Gas is not available outside ofthe city ofFairbanks.
The feasibility analysis would include but not be limited to preparing a conceptual design ofthe
high pressure and distribution system, preparing a base computer model ofthe proposed system,
preparing various design scenarios using the base model as a foundation, developing and
reviewing various design scenarios including location ofgate stations, district regulators, and
high pressure main routing, preparing conceptual rate schedule, preparing conceptual
construction costs estimates, preparing a cost/revenue comparisons between the various
scenarios, recommending a mostfeasible/practical conceptual design, and recommending
construction phasing.
Project will be located in the fishing ports of coastal Alaska. From Ketchikan to Dutch Harbor
we will be surveying the 20 larger communities involved in the fishing industry to catalog their
waste oil production, and where resources are presently used. That information will be shared
with state and local authorities to show potential as recyclable fuel and waste disposal. This oil
could be utilized as fuel in school buses, generators, garbage trucks, or as any #2 fuel.
2.3
EarthRun Energy will provide a sustainable source of high grade wood chips for biomass
heating in the city of Anchorage, Alaska while strengthening and beautifying the urban forests.
In Anchorage, urban forests are currently overgrown presenting fire and disease problems. It is
the right time to make a sick forest a productive and healthy forest. EarthRun has worked hard to
come up with the cleanest, quietest and least interruptive way of harvesting the dead and
unhealthy trees from our urban forests, chipping them, and heating one municipal building, the
Russian Jack greenhouse. EarthRun Energy will work closely with the municipality to return the
forests to a healthy state.
This funding request is for a three phased high penetration wind/diesel power and heating system that will eventually be capable of providing over half of Pilot Point\'s heating and
energy needs without a battery storage system. The project will serve Pilot Point and be located at the designated City owned wind park site which now has two small 10kWh wind turbines
and towers with one producing power for over five years and the second ready for installation in November. The site is located away from the coast, residential areas, and avian flight
and feeding routes. The project will produce excess power during cold, predominately north wind winter periods and provide heating for residential homes through electric thermal impact
stoves as well as a boiler grid interface system to heat centrally located public buildings. Our steadiest winds are from the north tend to occur in the winter, are very cold and are
strongest at the time when heating relief is the most needed. The project is also needed to stabilize kWh rates and allow for economic development. Pilot Point is rich in natural
renewable resources that cannot be developed without sustainable energy. This Intelligent Energy Systems will manage the engineering and field operations with Frederick Reynolds the
on site construction manager. Valerie Jefferies, a highly qualified and experienced City Manager will be the point of contact and execution for the grant representing the City and
Utilities interests with Steve Kramer the plant operator/electrician and mayor. Gregory Kingsley who has ten years of grant writing and management in Pilot Point will act as project
manager. All of the aforementioned have had years of experience in managing and working on similar projects in Alaska.
Pellet stoves utilized in homes will alleviate the high costs of heating homes. A self contained pellet plant can process pellets from willows found in all the myriad rivers of the
Yukon Delta. The use of biomass pellets will reduce consumption of fossil fuels and create needed jobs for residents. Kotlik has an estimated population of 670 and 130 households.
The success of a project as this can be expanded to other villatges in rural Alaska.
This project is located on the outskirts of Chitina, Alaska, to serve the City of Chitina, the
Chitina Airport, and the Chitina community. Generating low cost, sustainable renewable energy
and extending the existing power distribution utility to the hydro-electric facility are the two
main goals of this project. The existing 25 year old diesel generator plant provides expensive
environmentally dirty power of limited reliability.
The options for hydro-electric generation facilities have been previously studied for several
waterways in the area. (reference appendix) Development of the most affordable, permittable,
and sustainable option, Fivemile Creek near the Chitina Airport, with a line extension
connection to the existing utility distribution system would provide reliable, low cost, local
renewable energy source for a community dependent on high operation cost fossil fuel-powered
diesel generators.
The proposed four mile line extension from the City of Chitina to the hydro electric facility and
the pending new DC funded diesel powerhouse is a combination of overhead, underground, and
submerged electrical distribution facilities. (reference appendix) It will also provide renewable
interconnected power to the local clinic, Alaska DOT facilities and the Airport. Design for the
four mile extension of the distribution facilities has been developed, but funding is lacking to
complete the construction. The pending new diesel powerhouse funded by DC will have modern
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 16 9/3/2008
switch gear that will seamlessly integrate into the proposed new hydro project The design and
operation will be similar to other small hydro projects Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) is
currently working on. (Ouzinkie, Larsen Bay, Pelican, King Cove)
CEI seeks this grant in anticipation of project management support from Alaska Energy
Authority. Discussions regarding the management and construction of the proposed hydro
project have been held with Bruce Tiedeman, Kris Noonan and Alan Fetters with AEA.
In order to effectively reduce the amount of diesel consumption in KEA?s power
plant, thermal energy must be utilized to the fullest. In order to do so, heat from
both the jacket water system and the exhaust heat should be captured. KEA
currently utilizes roughly one third of the available thermal energy which
originates from the jacket water system. The exhaust will be captured via HRSR
stack heat exchangers, manufactured by Cain Industries. Waste heat absorbed
into the existing 50/50 glycol loop can generate net 162 kW electricity from an
Ammonia Power Cycle, designed by Energy Concepts. The recovered heat will
also be utilized in an updated ammonia absorption ice maker and an extended
district heating system.
5 MW Biomass Combined Heat & Power Project ("CHP" or "Cogeneration") as the first phase of the repowering of KAPP to provide the thermal energy needs of the ARRC, ADF&G and other commercial
customers within economic reach of the Project and provide power to help ML&P and Chugach meet new generation needs.
Kuskokwim kinetic energy can be measured in the billions. At present the indication is to use the technology born from recent success in tidal and wave kinetic projects in our state.
These were born from the successes of low revolving generators used in wind generating systems. Together they paint a pretty picture wind, oceans producing cheap renewable energy. Unfortunately
this isn?t the reality, they are any thing but cheap, the wind farms are plagued by rising maintenance cost, imagine what ours will be out here, with the damn thing under water and
ice. The price of a watt to install is staggering, close to 25 dollars a watt. The Prototype under our consideration will reduce the install cost to 1.50 to 3.00 dollars per watt, a
85% reduction. We are able to accomplish this by eliminating the generator from the kinetic hydro turbine and placing it on shore and transferring captured river kinetic energy in
the form of slowly revolving torque through a drive line configuration encased in line pipe or drilling casing. By eliminating the marriage of the generator to the turbine allows us
to develop torque farms by tying several turbines output to one line, thus eliminating the expensive slow RPM generator and replacing it with a more durable and inexpensive unit. At
present none of the Hydro-kinetic being consider are suitable for our shallow river, 20? deep channels exist but are rare. It is part of our efforts will be to design low profile turbines
to accommodate the rivers profile without dredging.
It Isn?t Easy To Be Green; But it is Entirely Possible.
Feasibility Study
This study examines the opportunity, analyzes the possibility, and determines the feasibility of providing a stand-alone fish waste-processing facility that produces and uses clean energy
from renewable resources. It serves the commercial fishery and processing plants (7 land-based processing facilities, 3 floating processing facilities and several smaller independent
seller/operators) and the community of Naknek, King Salmon, and South Naknek, Alaska. It is a model plant that, when proven successful, will be recreated throughout the fisheries of
the State and the nation, and the world.
This facility serves the ecology and the economy as it provides supplemental clean energy from renewable sources to the locally owned cooperative energy association. This energy counteracts
the drain on the power grid during the fish processing season ? which is what creates the drain. In short, this model plant and its subsequent generations are usage neutral.
A wonderful and significant side-benefit of this proposed facility is that it utilizes the approximately 30-40% waste of fish products currently being dumped into the environment as
waste. While this waste is generally bio-degradable and may not always be environmentally unfriendly, it represents a huge waste of resources; resources that required energy to obtain;
resources that could be (and, now, will be) transformed into fuel (and other useful and healthy value added products) instead of simply being dumped back into the environment as garbage.
This type of facility need not be a ?highly profitable? business in the traditional sense in order to be highly beneficial to the local economy and, eventually, the world economy. While
providing supplemental clean energy fuel, it reduces unnecessary waste with its inherent potential harm to the environment. Even though it may be argued that such potential harm is
negligible, such waste and potential harm, no matter how slight offends the sensibilities, especially when it is unnecessary waste of environmental products (fish) which, in this case,
also happen to be living creatures ? and particularly when the alternative is transforming such waste into useful by products including clean, supplemental energy.
Bristol Bay Borough and Naknek Electric Association have joined in this responsible and cooperative scientific effort in the largest sockeye salmon fishery in the world to perform this
study and assess the initial, as well as its ultimate, practicality and profitability of such a facility.
The creation of this facility carries with it an opportunity for the local population, including the indigenous native population, to operate a model business that produces clean energy
and healthy, useful products as it achieves an ideal of Native American traditionalists and Green Planet idealists: Self sustaining, environmentally friendly production ? with no waste.
1) Market Issues ? This study will prove that there is a huge future need as well as adequate demand currently for the energy (and the value added products) produced and conserved by
this facility. This facility will serve as a model of a clean renewable energy production and conservation and the reduction of waste of environmental products (fish) which, as stated
are also living creatures.
2) Organizational Issues ? This project combines the skills and talents ? and idealistic objectives ? of technical and scientific communities with the local workforce and values. This
facility can and will be staffed and managed to a significant extent by qualified locals. The feasibility study will demonstrate how that will be done effectively and profitably.
3) Technical issues ? The equipment and technology needed ? where it can be obtained ? cost of technology and equipment ? when it can be operational ? etc. will be determined by the
feasibility study. There will be extensive study into best practices to deal with the amount of possible waste to be processed and disposed of according to regulatory, practical, and
ideal (e.g. ecological) requirements.
4) Financial issues ? Start up costs ? operating costs ? revenue and energy projections ? sources of financing ? profitability analysis ? etc. are impossible to determine until the feasibility
study is complete. The feasibility study is what will determine and propose the processes, resources and equipment necessary to create the final products and services to be produced.
The ideal objective of our facility is to produce clean energy from fish waste to reduce to zero the waste produced in processing fish ? and operate from its own clean energy produced
from such waste (which will then no longer be considered ?waste?). We collect undesired fish processing waste from cooperating commercial processors and render it into value added products
and resources. In so doing, we use as much as possible only renewable sources of energy particularly those created or released in commercial fish processing.
That ideal objective achieves the high standard of Native American traditionalists and Green Planet idealists: No waste ? and no harm to the environment.
In reaching that ideal objective, we produce and utilize only clean energy from renewable sources such as fish oil biofuel rendered from fish processing and energy obtained by harnessing
wind and solar power in a cogeneration situation.
1-100% of the fish processing waste is cost-effectively or profitably converted to fish oil and fish pellets and other value added products and
2-100% of the fuel is cost effectively produced from renewable energy sources (specifically fish oil, biofuel, wind and solar)
Our practical objective is to approach the ideal objective ever closer until the ideal is achieved ? however long that takes.
The practical objective in its first phase ? that justifies the initial human effort and financial cost of creating and operating the facility is considered successfully accomplished
as?
1-[?]% of the fish processing waste is cost-effectively or profitably converted to alternative or supplemental fuels and value-added products. and
2-[?]% of the fuel used is from renewable energy sources (specifically fish oil, bio-fuel, wind and solar).
What are the percentages [?]. That will be determined by the feasibility study.
The study will also determine where this facility should be located and how.
This facility is created and developed with the end in mind of organizing techniques and technologies and proceeding with processes that smaller fish processing plants can share and
larger plants can share or build.
Further, the physical, financial and human resources management systems that are created and established can and will be duplicated and promoted through written and spoken mediums, convention
and association presentations, study publishing, consulting, etc.
This is a first-cut look at these issues. We have examined carefully the relevant facts and related experiments, both successful and unsuccessful, already available to us. We have discovered
that nearly every significant technology and resource has been discovered and utilized to some extent. This is an effort to bring all such techniques and technologies together into
an operating facility. The Bristol Bay fishery is renown throughout the world and would be the best location for a leading trend to be set as a model.
It is clear that this feasibility study is an excellent investment and is likely to achieve a profitable, earth friendly, payoff within the first year of operation ? and will move ever
closer to its ideal goal until it is at least 99% achieved ? likely within the decade, perhaps sooner.
The project, when it is completed, will include a hydroelectric power plant, and associated infrastructure
for access and connection, to serve the community of Elfin Cove. The power plant will be located at the
mouth of Crooked Creek, a tributary of Port Althorp in Cross Sound. Upon completion, the hydroelectric
facility will include: a diversion structure on Crooked Creek; a 1,000-foot long diversion conduit from
Crooked Creek to Jim\'s Lake; a 1,300-foot long penstock from Jim\'s Lake to tidewater; a hydro power
house with Turgo type turbine and programmable automatic paralleling switchgear at tidewater; an onground
transmission line to the newly renovated diesel power plant; fiber optic communication cable
between the hydroelectric powerhouse and the town site diesel power plant control room; and access trails
to the power house and diversion structure. This project will be carried out by local project
administrators, with technical and engineering support subcontracted to a consulting engineering firm. At
the end of Phase 3 (proposed here) we should be prepared to begin final construction on the hydroelectric
power project.
The ultimate goal of this project is to produce electricity and employment both sustainably and locally. Thus the name ?Keep It Sustainable, and Keep It Local (KISKIL) Energy project.?
The project will be located thirty miles east of Delta Junction. The KISKIL Energy project will serve much of the Interior by providing electricity for Golden Valley Electric Association
(GVEA) via the grid. Additionally the project will serve Delta Junction, Healy Lake, Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tok and the surrounding areas by hiring regionally, and purchasing wood for
fuel locally. The model will be applicable to all small communities and/or mines or other industrial type operations with significant biomass resources nearby. KISKIL Energy is a
subsidiary of Delta Mine Training Center (DMTC) organized specifically for this project. DMTC is a 501 (c) 3 nonprofit corporation. DMTC has policies and procedures in place to comply
with ISO 9000 standards. KISKIL will be managed by DMTC. With assistance from the Alaska Energy Authority and the resources and capabilities of DMTC, this project will be a success.
The AVTEC Renewable Energy Fund Wind Project involves the installation of one (1) 100 kW
wind turbine on the AVTEC campus located in Seward, Alaska. The completed project will be
owned and operated by AVTEC and connected into the electrical distribution system at the
school?s industrial electricity facility located on the northern edge of town. The project will offer
benefits to AVTEC/State of Alaska through a reduction of operating costs at the state owned
facility (electricity) and will be used primarily to support the creation of a world class winddiesel
training program that will provide opportunities for rural power plant operators to gain
hands on operational experience with wind energy technology. Essentially, the completed
project will support the alternative energy investments the state of Alaska is making through its
HB 152 legislation by providing a training center and program for wind-diesel system operators.
AVTEC has assembled a project team, headed by STG Incorporated, that is prepared to
immediately begin work on an accelerated schedule. The project team includes members from
Duane Miller Associates LLC, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell LLC and BBFM Engineers. All
aspects of the Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, detailed in the following pages
of this application can be completed by fall of 2009.
The City and Borough of Wrangell (City) has a need for an economical alternative power source during the annual maintenance shutdown of the Tyee Lake Hydroelectric facility and as an
alternative power source in the event of a catastrophic failure similar to the one experienced in Juneau in the summer of 2008. An additional need is another source of water for the
City reservoir, which periodically runs very low on water and has an eminent risk of running out of water for the City?s use. Since there is a pertinent need for the additional water
source that Sunrise Lake can provide, it is economical and feasible that the two projects be constructed simultaneously. Hence, by utilizing the outflow from the hydroelectric project
turbines, the City will have an additional water source. These two projects are mutually exclusive to each other. In 1997, The Bentley Company performed a reconnaissance study to determine
the feasibility of developing hydroelectric power at Sunrise Lake. Sunrise Lake is a 70 acre, 100 foot deep, perched lake on Woronkofski Island, an uninhabited island approximately
five miles from the City of Wrangell. The Sunrise Lake Project can be interfaced easily into the Tyee Transmission Line, thus allowing the potential of supplying power to the City of
Wrangell. This power can be used as a back?up in the case of catastrophic failure and during the annual shut?down of the Tyee Hydroelectric facility for maintenance. This power can
be used to offset power from the Tyee Lake Hydroelectric facility and from diesel generators, thus improving the reliability of the power system. The community served by this project
is Wrangell, Alaska. Directly involved in this project is the City and Borough of Wrangell and Wrangell Municipal Light and Power (WMLP).
The AK?BC Intertie would provide a further opportunity to secure the energy future for Southeast Alaska. The AK?BC Intertie is a 26.5 mile transmission line from the existing Tyee Lake
Project to the AK?BC border. A feasibility study was conducted by Hatch Energy in 2005. This phase of the project would continue the project from the feasibility stage into the permitting
engineering phase. The purpose of this project is to export surplus power for sale in British Columbia/Pacific Northwest which would encourage development of new projects and provide
additional reliability benefits. The ability to export power would encourage early development of new hydro generation, as well as provide revenue from exports, which will help ensure
future maintenance of the current overall status of a clean hydro?powered region, offer operating flexibility for the southeast Alaska power system, and provide future benefits to the
region under the proposed marketing oversight proposal. Power sales agreement for power generated projects encouraged by the AK?BC Intertie could be structured to return payment to
the state. Power sales agreements could be structured to include a call?back provision when load in southeast Alaska grows and power is needed to serve the native load. The proposed
AK?BC Intertie would extend from Tyee Lake along the Bradfield river to the AK?BC border and along the Craig River to a proposed substation at Forrest Kerr in British Columbia.
The export of energy through the AK?BC Intertie will enable the completion of interties throughout Southeast Alaska including completion of the Swan?Tyee connection. Energy export could
lead to the development of a number of hydro?electric projects in many locations in Southeast Alaska meeting domestic power needs and providing a surplus for export. The goal is to
provide the energy needed for economic development in Southeast Alaska resulting in jobs for Alaskans and providing reliable, less costly alternatives to diesel generated energy for
Alaskan communities.
AP&T proposes to construct the 300 kW Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project), which will be
located approximately 8 miles north of Slana on the Glenn Highway (Tok Cutoff). The Project would offset
diesel generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Slana and Chistochina. The
Project will consist of two small diversion structures, approximately 13,200 feet of penstock, a
powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and a very short length of
transmission line. For about half the year, the Project operation will be run-of-river, but during the
colder months the Project will draw water from Carlson Lake. The potential annual generation is
estimated to be approximately 1,200 MWh/yr, which is greater than the current annual requirements of
the two communities. Therefore, the Project has the potential to offset 100% of the current diesel
generation. The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost
to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation.
The proposed Triangle Lake hydroelectric project will be located on the west side of Annette
Island near the route of the proposed Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie. The project as presently
envisioned will be comprised of a small embankment dam at the outlet of Triangle Lake, a 1.3
mile long penstock and a powerhouse containing a single horizontal Francis turbine generating
unit with a capacity of 4.0 MW. The Triangle Lake project will provide additional hydroelectric
power to Metlakatla and, with construction of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie, to the
interconnected electric systems of Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg. MIC will develop and
own the Triangle Lake project.
In July 2008, Haines Assisted Living, Inc.(HAL) began construction on a senior assisted living/ residential complex comprising a total of 26,000 SF. The building site is on lots fronting
Third St. from Dalton to Union. Residents of Haines and Southeast Alaska will utilize the senior assisted living and senior affordable housing complex being built in 2008?2010. The
project is a collaboration seven years in development and funded by the Denali Commission, the Community Development Block Grant Program, the Rasmuson Foundation and the community of
Haines. The first phase of the project will be completed in the fall of 2009 at a cost of over $4 million. Key to the long term sustainability of the facility is the installation of
a Ground Source Heat Pump to extract geothermal energy from the earth and circulate it through a radiant in-floor heating system. The initial feasibility and design has been completed
as the follow-up to an extensive energy life-cycle cost analysis performed in 2007and updated in October 2008.The designed system estimate of 210% efficiency will eliminate fossil fuel
consumption in favor of renewable geo-thermal heat source and local hydro-electric power and result in significant operational savings for the life of the facility. Haines Assisted
Living, Inc., Dan Austin, Project Manager and Jim Rehfeldt, Alaska Energy Engineering LLC are the principals involved in this grant project. Resumes attached.
ATTACHMENT A. Resumes, Dan Austin, Jim Rehfeldt.
AP&T proposes to construct a small run-of-river hydroelectric project at Neck Lake, a 1,000
acre lake located 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island.
The Project would supply power to the community of Whale Pass, and would offset diesel
generation, which is currently the sole source of electricity. The relatively high and modulated
flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end of the outlet stream provide a
good opportunity for a small run-of-river hydroelectric development. Facilities would include
an access road, intake structure, 400 feet of penstock, a containerized power plant, a tailrace
channel, and upgrade of 4 miles of transmission line. The hydroelectric facilities will be
designed to avoid interference with the existing salmon rearing and collection facilities operated
at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA). AP&T
conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2008, and determined that there is sufficient
potential to almost always provide enough generation for Whale Pass loads (see Section 7-
Appendices for a copy of the reconnaissance report). The Project will provide clean, renewable
electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for AP&T?s Whale Pass customers.
The Kenai Winds project is a 9MW wind energy generation facility located in the Nikiski
Industrial Area, in Nikiski, on the Kenai peninsula. The project will consist of 5-6 wind turbines
disbursed throughout the site.
The project will be located in the City of Kake, and will serve the entire Kake community. The City of Kake, the Organized Village of Kake and Kake Tribal Corporation have committed
to a joint effort, sponsored by the City Council of Tlingit and Haida, the Applicant for this Grant, to implement this project. The project involves the installation of commercially
viable, modular technology consisting of a biomass gasifier combustor system (in use for 10+ years) integrated with hot water electrical generating equipment (in use for 20+ years)
to provide lower cost electric power generation to remote villages in Alaska that presently rely on high cost diesel fuel to meet their energy needs, for both heating and power. This
system is easily replicated in any village or for a particular business operation, the equipment is available within 16 weeks of order, can be installed in less than 12 months and the
system can be immediately operational once installed.
The project will be co-located with a planned parking garage on University land, adjacent to and west of
Providence Hospital. The project will contain two gas turbine generators each with a heat recovery
boiler and a thermal distribution system that will connect Providence Hospital and UAA buildings to the
plant. It will serve the UMED district with thermal energy and the exclusive service territory of ML&P with
electricity. ML&P, UAA and Providence are involved in the grant project. Other institutions may become
involved as thermal customers to the project based upon their own schedule and requirements.
2.2
$ 8,588,000 in construction funding is being requested by the Kipnuk Light and Power Utility
Board to build a wind-diesel- heat and power system. This system will reduce diesel fuel
consumption used for both power generation and heating for 180-residences by 40%.
The wind system will generate 4,000,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity. The wind energy
will displace (save) 200,000 gallons of diesel fuel, 75,000 gallons of which is now being used to
generate power, and 125,000 gallons of which will be captured and stored for use as heat. The
system as proposed will consist of:
1. Two (2) 750 kWe (kilowatt electrical) Wind turbines mounted on 40-meter-tall tubular
towers
2. Control integration equipment for power regulation and system stability
3. Energy recovery boilers at the school and central water station
4. Smart electrical metering system
5. Installation of 180 residential thermal energy storage units
The construction and maintenance will be overseen by the Kipnuk Light and Power Utility
Board and the Chaninik Wind Group Board of Directors. Project Management will be
provided by Dennis Meiners of Intelligent Energy Systems (IES), with Construction and
Project Management Assistance provided by STG, Inc.
Astronomical heating costs are inspiring new creativity in planning for sustainable and affordable energy sources for our community in Cordova, Alaska. Affordable fuel sources have
been identified: waste cardboard that is currently taken to the landfill and wood waste generated at the community burn pile. Historically, the community has squandered these potential
energy sources. The burn pile will better serve the community when transitioned from a community dump into local-source heating fuel. The community will also save valuable landfill
space by diverting waste cardboard into a fuel source. The purpose of this project is to 1) quantify 2) design and 3) deploy a system that will re-use these valuable resources currently
being wasted. The wood and cardboard waste will become fuel for a biomass boiler to heat our community through a district heating network. Potential buildings include the city hall,
pool, hospital and schools. We need financial assistance to fully develop this project, which can then become self-sustaining. The feasibility study will quantify the avaliable BTUs
that can be generated by our waste stream, and the potential methods of fuel treatment and system equipment. The data will help determine which buildings we can start with and create
parameters for the system design. The design will determine required purchases - the boiler, wood chipper and other components, and identify required integration work. The deployment
phase will manage the construction and commissioning of the system and equipment to integrate it with the existing system. The City of Cordova owns and operates the burn pile and has
endorsed this project. The Cordova School District is also very supportive of the project. See letters of support on pages 49 and 50.
The project is located at Camp Hill near Wireless Point, approximately seven miles south of Cordova, Alaska. Because of high electricity costs ($.50/kWh winter and $.22/kWh summer after
PCE credits), Cordova needs to develop other local energy sources to offset running diesel generators - especially in the winter months when hydro power disappears. The wind energy
program will 1) complete the Camp Hill wind farm project design and permits, 2) improve wind data maps through a mobile 10-meter anemometer tower project, 3) initiate a wind farm pilot
project and a marine-based pilot project, 4) drive community involvement and education, 5) adopt best-known methods from other successful wind projects, 6) determine whether the wind
farm will be built and operated by Native Village of Eyak or Cordova Electric Co-Op and 7) set the stage for construction and implementation. The project will provide low-cost electricity
for all members of the Cordova Electric Co-Operative power grid.
The Little Port Walter (LPW) Marine Station is a research unit of Akune Bay Laboratories located 110 miles south of Juneau near the sourhern tip of Baranof island. LPW is the oldest
year-round biological research station in Alaska and has been the host of a wide variety of fisheries research projects since 1934. Electric power is currently provided for the site
by a diesel engine generator. Oil is used for building heating. An existing dam on the outlet of Lake Osprey on the north shore of Port Walter inlet could be utilized to provide electric
power for LPW through a small hydro turbine generator. Electrical service would require a transmission lind under the Port Walter Inlet and across a peninsula to the research center.
Ameresco would conduct the project evaluation proposed in this grant application to determine the viability of this hydroelectric project. Current electric consumption for LPW is
about 35 kW. The proposed hydroelectric project would include converstion of LPW to all electric energy systems to increase the average electrical consumption rate to 70 kW.
Terror Lake is KEA\'s primary generation source, and is located approximately 25 miles southwest of the City of Kodiak within the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge. This hydroelectric
facility is the cornerstone to KEA\'s Vision Statement: Endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost effective renewable power solutions by the year 2020, by providing base load
capacity to backup other forms of renewable energy. The power output of Terror Lake can be increased or decreased by dispatch to control the amount of total power on the grid. This
attribute of hydropower allows KEA to integrate the more variable sources of renewable energy, such as wind and tidal energy, onto its isolated grid. In addition to this stabilizing
capability, the Terror Lake reservoir itself acts like a battery for KEA\'s other renewable energy projects. This synergistic integration of wind and hydro power is an excellent renewable
energy solution for other communities in Alaska. The current capaity of Terror Lake has been surpassed by Kodiak\'s growing load demand. Without the additional hydropower capacity,
the synergistic relationship of more renewable variable energy sources and water cannot be fully realized. Expanding the capacity at Terror Lake will significantly enhance the stability
of KEA\'s isolated grid system, and reduce KEA\'s dependence on diesel fuel by providing ample backup capacity to cover peak loads, and outage backup for the other two hdyro turbine
generator units. The first step to bringing these benefits to the Kodiak community is to initiate a feasibility analysis and conceptual design for expanding Terror Lake\'s generating
capacity with the installation of a third turbine generator unit in the powerhouse. The results of this feasibility analysis and conceptual design will assist other Alaskan communities
in their efforts to optimize the renewable power of wind and water.
Baranof Island Housing Authority (BIHA) proposes to select up to three models of marketed air-source heat pumps and install them in up to 12 BIHA owned residential homes in Sitka, Alaska
that are presently heated with fuel oil boiler systems in order to evaluate their effectiveness in reducing household heating water costs. Additionally, heat pump domestic hot water
systems will be evaluated for cost effectiveness against conventional electric hot water tanks for determining most cost efective replacement of current fuel oil boiler domestic hot
water systems.
The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwells power system. Currently they obtain power from the line between MEA
and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). To accomplish this they propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River, a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this
plant will be in exccess of 1 MW. It will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
The Business Operating Plan provides a guideline fo the Akiachak Native Community Electric Company ("the Utility") Proposing a combinations for all three project descriptions, Reconnaissance;
Resource Assessment/ Feasibilty Analysis/Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; and/or Construction for the wind turbine for Akiachak Native Community Electric Company. The
ANCEC will be responsible to operate and sustain the newly installed Wind Turbine and associated electric power to save fuel and reduce fuel costs for the generators. The newly Akiachak
Electric Wind Turbine project will be located in Akiachak Alaska about 18 air mles east of Bethel, and Alaska Energy Authority will be involved in the grand project. Akiachak Native
Community Electric Company needs an alternative energy to determine its best and most sustainable energy here in village of Akiachak, and through this energy development project plan
the community feasibility of installing long term energy facility in order to reduce fuel costs and reduce over all cost of energy.
This project involves placing supplemental cord wood fired boilers at the school site. The supplemental heating system would be located at the Thorne Bay School in the City of Thorne
Bay on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska. The project would also serve the residents of the City of Thorne Bay. The entities involved in this project would be Southeast Island
School District, an engineering firm, local contractors, and the Alaska Energy Authority; We would rely on Alaska Energy Authority for guidance with the project.
This application addresses a first phase in implementing the AVCP Calista Regional Biennial Energy Plan 2008 - 2010 involving a feasibility level analysis to be conducted by the AVCP
Regional Housing Authority for Renewable Energy Deployment for the Kuskokwim Region involving Hydroelectric Power, Wind and Solar Energy, Biomass Heating, including Regional Utility
Consolidation Plan and Development for Bethel and villages along the Kuskokwim River. As a first effort, engineering, including geophysical and geotechnical analysis is proposed to
be undertaken to determine the feasibility and deployment requirements, including environmental permitting required to facilitate development of a Kiseralik River hydroelectric project
for the communities in the Kuskokwim River Region. The study will also review the technical merits of the Chikuminuk hydropower project in view of technological advances that may have
transpired in the transmission of electricity. This effort also includes the determination of power generation and distribution systems required to interconnect communities of the
Kuskokwim region with transmission interties from a regional hydroelectric utility. This project also proposes to outline the planning, organizational and development requirements
for consolidating the local utilities into a regional wholesale non-profit utility for the operation and management of a regional hydroelectric generation and transmission system.
This project proposes to bring together in a planning and development process the regional non-profit organizations, tribal governments and local utilities proposed to be affected by
a regional hydroelectric development project.
This proposed Biomass project will focus on conducting a feasibility analysis and the developing a conceptual design of two wood burners for the community of Kasaan. The project will
be located in the village of Kasaan on the Southeast side of Prince of Wales Island in southern Southeast Alaska. The Organized Village of Kasaan (OVK), a federally recognized Tribe
is the applicant organization. OVK will work closely with the City of Kasaan in the successful completion of this project.
One wood burner will be designed to heat all of the community buildings in Kasaan (school, city offices, medical clinic, Tribal offices, community library, and community hall). The
second wood burner will be constructed on a separate site in Kasaan to heat a cultural- and eco-tourism lodge that is in the design phase and will be owned and operated by the Tribe
as the primary economic development focal point for the community.
The wood fired supplemental heating system would be located at the Howard Valentine School
Site in the City of Coffman Cove on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska. The project
would also serve the residents of the City of Coffman Cove. The entities involved in this project
would be Southeast Island School District, a design engineering firm, local contractors, and the
Alaska Energy Authority. We would rely on Alaska Energy Authority for guidance with the
project. The use of wood biomass (cordwood) to heat the school will replace 85% of the fuel oil consumption. The project involves placing one thermal storage type wood-fired hydronic
heating unit adjacent to the school site and running underground insulated pipes from the woodfired heater to interface with the school?s heating system. Heat energy from biomass will
significantly decrease heating costs for the school. Wood is available from waste from local saw mills, USFS small sales, from wood left behind in landings, and from small local firewood
cutters.
The project, located in Valdez, Alaska, will take waste heat generated by the Petro Star Refinery. Waste heat will be collected by a shell and tube glycol medium recovery system. The
medium will drive two technologies operated in series.
Amonia absorption technology will create cooling for a 45 million pound -20 degree F cold storage. An Organic Rankine Cycle Generator will use the medium once it has exited the smmonia
absorption system to create 600 Kw\'s of power which will be used to operate the cold storage facility.
The final benefit will be to use the sold cycle on the generator to create a salmon rearing facility.
The proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 11841 (Project) is located near
the southeast end of Revillagigedo Island, approximately four miles east of the City of
Ketchikan, Alaska. KPU proposes to install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at
KPU?s existing Whitman Lake Dam to provide an additional source of clean renewable energy to
KPU?s customers, in the city of Ketchikan and the Ketchikan Gateway Borough area including
Saxman Village, while also enhancing the conversion of oil heat to electric heat and displacing
expensive and non-renewable diesel generation. The Project will be interconnected to KPU?s
existing distribution system and the grant project will involve KPU.
Use of Power
Power generated by the proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project would provide the city of
Ketchikan and the Ketchikan Gateway Borough area with increased system reliability; replace
current dependency on diesel generation; enable regional utilities to meet the increasing
demand for electricity as customers convert from oil to electric heat and new construction is
designed for electric heat; and reduce regional greenhouse gas emissions.
? Attachment E to this Grant Application includes two tables presenting estimated
greenhouse gas emissions in the region between 2007 and 2031 with and without
conversion of oil-fired heating furnaces.
The installation of this wind power project will provide a maximum output of 1,170 kW to the Nome Joint Utility electric grid in Nome, Alaska over a 20 year extendable project timeframe.
The owners of the project are committed to sell the energy at a price below the avoided cost calculations, even without any grant funding. Grant funding will allow further reduction
in the price of approximately $0.03 per kWH for every one million in grant funds. Selling the energy at a rate below avoided costs will provide savings to the utility to help to lower
the energy costs in the Nome area and provide some energy produced locally that is not dependent on imported oil. Furthermore, this project helps enable future village installations
in the region by helping with a base of operations, spare parts location, local training facility and regional hub. Providing for renewable energy projects in villages should help
reduce the dependency on oil in those locations where oil must be flown or barged in and ultimately help reduce energy rates in those locations as well. Through implementing a power
sales agreement, this project is unique in that it takes advantage of federal tax credit incentives for wind energy projects which help offset the actual cost of energy. Overall, this
project provides a cash and tax credit based revenue stream, provides jobs and keeps money working in the community while increasing overall power generation reliability by producing
it locally. Banner Wind LLC (jointly owned by Bering Straits Native Corporation and Sitnasuak Native Corporation) owns the wind farm while the construction and initial operations are
managed by Western Community Energy LLC. The profits from the project which are ultimately distributed to the shareholders of BSNC and SNC will help provide income to an area where
many have very limited incomes. This is an excellent demonstration of a commercial opportunity that needs to be eagerly developed.
The Grant Lake site facility would be constructed with a dam at the upper falls and diversion tunnel to maximize the power potential at approximately 3.12 MW (397 feet-net head). However,
to minimize the impact on salmon resources in Grant River below the dam site the construction as proposed would consist of a canal from behind the dam to an intake structure located
in an adjacent dry channel.
The dam constructed at the upper falls will be a concrete dam with an uncontrolled spillway. With a maximum height at El 504 and a 225 foot wide spillway at El 500 the spillway
flows will be diverted away from the toe of the dam via a concrete apron onto bedrock nearby.
The @1 mile diversion canal, 20 foot deep (1/1 side slopes), with an invert 468 El will have a minimum drawdown of 23 feet to El 477. A dike in the canal will direct the
water flow into the low pressure 60 inch 6,600 foot long pipeline leading to the surge tank and penstock. The 3,100 foot 48 inch penstock will link the surge tank to the power house.
The powerhouse will contain two 1,350 kW generators driven by two 2,000 hp turbines under a rated net head of 233 feet (average 215 ) with 92cfs.
This project will necessitate the construction of approximately 45-65 miles (depending on routing) of new underground three phase transmission tie line from the project
site to a new power substation constructed near the village of Aleknagik.
The Nushagak Area Hydropower Project will initially serve the communities of Aleknagik, Dillingham, and Kanakanak in the Nushagak and Wood River areas. This third phase with inter-tie
(phase four) is estimated to cost $38 million together and replace 700,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually, for a yearly savings of $2,947,000 at today?s fuel prices. Currently all
power in the area is generated with diesel by Nushagak Cooperative (NETC), with a current residential rate at $0.463 cents per kilowatt hour. Nushagak Cooperative would develop, maintain,
and operate the Lake Elva facility and associated infrastructure.
The proposed project would be located in an unincorporated area, northeast of the City of
Petersburg, Alaska. Development of hydroelectric power at the site would include construction
of a lake tap, arch dam, unlined tunnel, power penstock, power plant, tailrace, and transmission
line segments.
Attachment F to this Grant Application provides:
? Exhibit F.1 ? Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project ? Location Map
? Exhibit F.2 ? Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project ? Southern SE Alaska Transmission
System
? Exhibit F-3 ? Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project ? Photo depicting location of proposed
dam
Proposed Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project Features:
? Reservoir. Ruth Lake is fed primarily by rainfall and snowmelt, with some smaller firn or
hanging glaciers that contribute melt water during the summer months. The Project
would include a dam to provide a potential usable stored capacity of 17,000 acre-feet.
(See photo of proposed dam site at Attachment F ? Exhibit F.3
? Lake Tap / Power Conduit. The inlet works would consist of an arch dam and lake tap.
As presently planned water would initially flow through a 10-foot diameter tunnel for
approximately 3,500 feet. The remaining 7,800 feet of the conduit system would consist
of a 6-foot diameter buried or surface steel penstock.
? Powerhouse. The powerhouse would be located within 2,000 ft. of the confluence of
Delta Creek and would house three impulse turbines, each with a total rated head of
1,300 ft. The rated installed capacity of the powerhouse would be 20 MW and the energy
output would be roughly 70 GWh.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 26
City of Petersburg d/b/a Petersburg Municipal Power & Light
Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project
Phase II ? Application for License and FERC Licensing Proceeding
November 3, 2008
? Site Access. The Project is separated from the nearest town of Petersburg by Frederick
Sound. The only access for either construction or long-term operation and maintenance
of the Project would be via boat or aircraft.
A dock would be located on Thomas Bay for loading and unloading people and supplies
from a boat. A road would be constructed between the powerhouse and dock.
Construction access would also be provided by helicopter in association with a limited
local temporary access road system to transfer equipment within the construction area.
During operation, the Project would be fully automated and access would be provided
via boat or aircraft.
? Transmission Lines. Power generated by the Project would be transmitted by a new
overhead / submarine, 138 kilovolt (KV) transmission segment roughly 20-miles long
running generally southwest from the powerhouse to Petersburg. (See Map at
Attachment F) The transmission segment would integrate the project to the Southern
Southeast Intertie System which currently connects Petersburg and Wrangell to the
Tyee Lake Hydroelectric Project on Bradfield Canal. Completion of construction of the
Swan Tyee Intertie will interconnect the Swan Lake and Tyee Lake hydroelectric
projects; proposed new transmission intertie segments would add Kake and Metlakatla.
(See Map at Attachment F ? Exhibit F.2)
? Other Structures. An intake structure housing controls would be constructed at Ruth
Lake. Housing would be provided for power plant operators, staging areas for
construction and substation facilities
Use of Power
Power generated by the proposed Ruth Lake Project would provide the interconnected
Southern Southeast Alaska regional utilities with increased system reliability; replace current
dependency on diesel generation; enable regional utilities to meet the increasing demand for
electricity as customers convert from oil to electric heat and new construction is designed for
electric heat; and reduce regional greenhouse gas emissions.
? Attachment G to this Grant Application includes excerpts from the ?AK-BC Intertie
Feasibility Study ? Southeast Alaska Final Report?, September 2007, prepared by Hatch
Acres for AEA, describing the loads and resources of the Southern Southeast Alaska
regional utilities that will be interconnected following completion of the Swan-Tyee
Intertie under construction; and the future proposed new transmission intertie segments
that would add Kake and Metlakatla.
? Attachment H to this Grant Application includes two tables presenting estimated
greenhouse gas emissions in the region between 2007 and 2031 with & without
conversion of oil-fired heating furnaces.
Bethel Wind Power Project Times 4 calls for the purchase and installation of four 100kW wind turbines, tubular towers, foundations, and related appurtenances on land owned by the city
of Bethel. The City of Bethel will own, operate, and maintain all four wind turbines and act as an independent power producer by selling 100% of the electricity generated to the privately
owned utility in Bethel. The regulated electric utility is Bethel Utilities Corporation.
The community of Bethel, with a population of 5,650, will be the community and boundary area served. The City of Bethel, the City\'s volunteer Alternative Energy Committee, the city\'s
public Works Committee, the City\'s Planning Commission, and Bethel Utilities Corporation will be involved with the project.
Project consists of a combination of Solar and Wind power to offset the high cost of electricity to run City Hall, the washeteria and the Water Plant. The equipment providing this power
would be adjacent and/or attached to the City Hall. The project manager and other needed project employees would be hired from the community. This project would serve the community
of Ambler by way of a more efficiently run City Government.
To lower the cost of running our City government and Water-sewer-plant is the most important work we have in front of us.
Without this to offset the cost, the plant may have to be closed down.
Current cost for water and sewer in Ambler is $ 120.00/houshold and actual cost to balance the budget would be about 400.00/houshold.
Wind Energy! Wind turbine system at vacinity community location Napaskiak, AK about 7 miles below Bethel, Alaska which service over 100 customers to commercial to residence. Wasteheat
from generators to heat nearby facility-church, garage.
The Delta/Greely School District proposes a Wood Chip Boiler Heating System to heat 77,000 sq. ft. of educational space in the sub-arctic. The legal description of the Delta High School
complex is 64 degrees 02\' 35.66" N 145 degrees 42\' 57.10"W. The building would be located 50 feet away from the Delta High School new mechanical room. This Wood Chip Boiler Heating
System constructs and installs the following: Cement building to house wood chip boiler, chip storage room, 4 chip storage trailers, and a chip feeding and chip drying process. The
direct impact of this Wood Chip Boiler Heating System will be the Delta High School complex staff and students as well as the community groups that use this facility on a weekly basis.
The following communities are served by this facility: Delta Junction, Fort Greely Garrison and its contractors, Gerstle River, and the greater Deltana area. The businesses, non-profit
agencies, Farm Forum, Relay for Life, Fish and Game, Department of Motor Vehicles, Delta Chamber of Commerce, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts to name a few groups. All use the Delta High
School complex during the year. Finally, the following groups will be involved in this project: Delta/Greely School District (DGSD), the Delta/Greely School Board, DGSD Facilities
Committee, Alaska Department of Natural Resources Forestry, CTA, CE2 Engineers, T.R. Miles Technical Consultants, Delta Logging and Milling Associates, and USKH (an architecture, engineering,
land surveying and planning company).
The proposed hybrid ground source heat pump system at the new Dimond Park Aquatic Center is
to be located in Juneau?s Mendenhall Valley, adjacent the new Thunder Mountain High School
and Riverbend Elementary on the Dimond Park site. The facility will primarily serve Juneau
residents, but will also serve visitors from nearby southeast Alaska communities and other
visitors to Juneau. The City & Borough of Juneau Engineering and Parks and Recreation
Departments are directly involved with the design and construction of the facility, as is the
Juneau School District. A professional design team led by local architectural firm Jensen Yorba
Lott, Inc. is responsible for the project design and construction administration. The City &
Borough of Juneau Engineering Department is responsible for design and construction
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 18 9/3/2008
management and progress reports to grant agencies as required. The City & Borough of Juneau
Finance Department is responsible for project funding and financial reporting to grant agencies
as required. A ?Pool Advisory Task Force? consisting of twelve community representatives is
also participating in the oversight of the project design. The project?s construction contractor
will be selected by competitive bid per the City & Borough of Juneau ordinances and is not
known at this time. The use of a hybrid ground source heat pump system in lieu of conventional
oil or electric heat systems at the Dimond Park Aquatic Center is supported by the Pool Advisory
Task Force, the City & Borough of Juneau Engineering and Parks Departments, the Juneau
School District, and the City & Borough of Juneau Assembly and Administration.
The work plan constitutes of the installation, control and integration of five major components:
1. Five Wind Matic 17-S Wind turbines on 80 foot lattice towers.
2. Diesel Station upgrade
3. Dnergy recovery boiler at the washeteria for frequency control
4. Smart metering system
5. 20 Thermal Stoves in residents of village elders
The wind turbines will be installed 300 foot apart on pile foundations, and connected via individual three phase transformers to the existing power lines with buried armored cable.
Connections between the turbines will be via above ground armored cable. A fiber optic cable will be buried along side the power cable to provide a communications link with the powerplant.
The US FWS has expressed an interest in keeping overhead transmission to a minimum, to reduce any potential hazards to passing migrating birds.
The energy from the turbines will be integrated into the diesel power systems. Three methods will be used:
1. power electronics connected with a heat recovery boiler for frequency control
2. adaptations to diesel generators to enable low load operation
3. an integrated control system that operates both the wind turbine and diesel generators in a coordinated manner with ceramic thermal storage located in the residents of village elders.
Two existing gensets will be modified to operate at low loads and low fuel consumption for extended periods of time. The mail features of the conversion will consist of the addition
of a boiler and boiler grid interface to provide reverse power protection to absorb wind gusts when operating at near zero kW, and to increase operating temperatures to eliminate cylinder
glazing and wet stacking.
The Smart Grid consists of a network of advanced meters, which receive information about the availability of green, or excess wind energy and make this energy available to the community
at reduced rates ,and enable devices to capture this energy. The meters communicate wirelessly, provide a user interface for customers, and account for energy sold at different rates.
The devices that are located in the homes of 20 village elders, and these stoves capture and store excess wind energy for later use. The Smart Metering and the stoves create a system
that allows wind energy to be sold as heat for 1/2 the cost of diesel heating.
GVEA has been monitoring the wind resource at the Eva Creek Site since 2003 or for five years and has found a resource with approximately a 33% to 36% capacity factor. The Eva Creek
Wind Project?s proximity to the Northern Intertie is key to its value, making the interconnection viable. The site is located on the east side of the Nenana River near Ferry, Alaska,
in the GVEA service territory in the Interior. The area could support up to 150 MW of wind generation but GVEA would like to start by installing a 24 MW wind project.
The proposed site is on a dirt road system that was developed to provide access to numerous mining claims in the area which would need some improvements,. The dirt road system
is not connected to the highway system. Currently, access is gained by walking across a Railroad bridge. Some infrastructure improvements will need to be made including road improvements
for access to the site, a substation, and a way to get equipment across the Nenana River.
Eva Creek is located near Ferry, Alaska, near Healy off the Parks Highway. The entire GVEA service area will be served by this renewable energy project and the entire Railbelt
potentially could be served by future expansion. GVEA has had an alternative energy team in place for the past decade. Wind has been a focal point of interest and investment. In 2002
GVEA contracted with Sterling Management Services to begin a series of studies evaluating the potential capacity of several sites within the service area after which it became clear
Eva Creek had the best potential for success.
Communities to be served: GVEA service 3,893 square miles extending 130 miles south including communities from Cantwell on the Parks Highway north through Healy, Anderson, Nenana,
Ester, Fairbanks and 100 miles south on the Richardson through North Pole and Salcha to Delta Junction. More than 100,000 residents are in the area with 33,000 members and 43,000 meters.
The members of the team who will be involved in the grant project will combine the talents and experience of existing GVEA staff and wind expert consultants and at the appropriate
time the contractor for construction. GVEA personnel and contracted consultants will be working on this project. The GVEA team includes:
? Kathryn K. Lamal, Vice President of Power Supply, GVEA
? Mike Wright, PE, Vice President of Transmission and Distribution, GVEA
? Tim DeVries, PE, Manager of Engineering Services, GVEA
? Paul Morgan, Wind Specialist and Alternative Energy Team member, GVEA
? Daniel R. Bishop, PE, Senior Engineer, GVEA
? Henri Dale, PE, GVEA Power System Manager
? Paul Parks, PE, Power Supply Engineer, GVEA
Sterling Energy Management, LLC of California is the contractor wind consulting firm, naming senior consultants Ron Fawcett, Jake Drews and Jon Lantz to this project.
Golden Valley Electric Association proposes the construction of a solar water heating system to be used by the Denali Education Center (DEC). This proposed solar water heating system
would be used to displace fossil fuel energy (specifically, electricity) that is currently used to heat water and space for these end-users. DEC is located just south of the 64th northern
latitude, about eight miles south of the Denali NAtional Park entrance at mile post 231.1 on the east side of the Parks Highway bridge that crosses over the Nenana River. It is a non-profit
research, education and communication organization with cooperative interaction to Denali National Park and all its summer-time visitors. The DEC\'s campus serves people who visit
and stay there during the summer tourist season. There are 13 cabins on the campus, a campus center and other outbuildings. Currently, the peak number who lodge and work at the Center
during the summer in about 75 people, with an anticipated near-future growth up to 100 people. GVEA also plans to work ABS Alaskan and Jim Norman, principal and owner.
The work plan consists of the installation, control and intergration of five major components:
1. Five Wind Matic 17-S Wind turbines on 80 foot lattice towers
2. Diesel Station upgrade
3. Energy recovery boiler at the washerteria for frequency control
4. Smart metering system
5. 20 Thermal Stoves in residents of village elders
The wind turbines will be installed 300 foot apart on pile foundations, and connected via individual three phase transformers to the existing power lines with 15kV metal clad buried
armored cable. Connections between the turbines will be via above ground armored cable. A fiber optic cable will be buried along side the power cable to provide a communications
link with the powerplant. The US FWS has expressed an interest in keeping overhead transmission to a minimum, to reduce any petential hazards to passing migrating birds.
The energy from the turbines will be intregrated into the diesel power systems. Three methods will be used:
1. power electronics connected with a heat recovery boiler for frequency control.
2. adaptations to diesel generators to enable low load operation
3. an integrated control system that operates both the wind turbine and diesel generators in a coordinated manner with ceramic thermal storage located in the residents of village elders.
Two existing gensets will be modified to operate at low loads and low fuel consumption for extended periods of time. The main features of the conversion will consist of the addition
of a boiler and boiler grid interface to provide reverse power protection to absorb wind gusts when operating aat neat zero kW, and to increase operating temperatures to eliminate cylinder
glazing and wet stacking.
The Smart Grid consists of a network of advanced meters, which receive information about the availability of green, or excess wind energy and make this energy available to the community
at reduced rates, and enable devices to capture this energy. The meters communicate wirelessly, provide a user interface for customers and account for energy sold at different rates.
The meters can be programmed for prepayment. The Smart Grid enables 20 thermal storage devices that are located in the homes of 20 village elders and these stoves capture and store
excess wind energy for later use. The Smart Metering and the stoves create a system that allows wind energy to be sold as heat for 1/2 the cost of diesel heating.
The installation of this wind power project will provide a maximum output of 1,170 kW to the Nome Joint Utility electric grid in Nome, Alaska over a 20 year extendable project timeframe.
The owners of the project are committed to sell the energy at a price below the avoided cost calculations, even without any grant funding. Grant funding will allow further reduction
in the price of approximately $0.03 per kWH for every one million in grant funds. Selling the energy at a rate below avoided costs will provide savings to the utility to help to lower
the energy costs in the Nome area and provide some energy produced locally that is not dependent on imported oil. Furthermore, this project helps enable future village installations
in the region by helping with a base of operations, spare parts location, local training facility and regional hub. Providing for renewable energy projects in villages should help
reduce the dependency on oil in those locations where oil must be flown or barged in and ultimately help reduce energy rates in those locations as well. Through implementing a power
sales agreement, this project is unique in that it takes advantage of federal tax credit incentives for wind energy projects which help offset the actual cost of energy. Overall, this
project provides a cash and tax credit based revenue stream, provides jobs and keeps money working in the community while increasing overall power generation reliability by producing
it locally. Banner Wind LLC (jointly owned by Bering Straits Native Corporation and Sitnasuak Native Corporation) owns the wind farm while the construction and initial operations are
managed by Western Community Energy LLC. The profits from the project which are ultimately distributed to the shareholders of BSNC and SNC will help provide income to an area where
many have very limited incomes. This is an excellent demonstration of a commercial opportunity that needs to be eagerly developed.
The NPEP Waste Heat Recovery Project consists of installing 520\' of underground supply and return piping, a glycol distribution piping system inside NPPP, installing 12 glycol unit
heaters with VFDs, and HVAC controls. GVEA will manage and administrate the project, perform the electrical/control installation, commissioning, and startup of the system. The mechanical
portion of the work will be performed by a mechanical contractor. Electric power conservation/fuel savings will benefit all of GVEA\'s 33,000 members from Cantwell to Delta Junction.
The Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (?Reynolds Creek? or the ?Project?) is a 5.0 MW
hydroelectric resource to be constructed on Prince of Wales Island approximately ten miles east
of Hydaburg. The Project will interconnect with the existing transmission grid on the island and
will be used by the residents and businesses of Craig, Klawock, Hollis, Hydaburg, Thorne Bay,
and Kasaan. In addition, once the interconnected grid is expanded to Coffman Cove and
Naukati, those two communities will also directly benefit from Reynolds Creek. The Project will
be constructed and owned by the Haida Power, Inc., a joint venture between the Haida
Corporation and Alaska Power & Telephone.
The Pillar Mountain Wind project is KEA\'s next step to achieve its Vision Statement "Endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost effective renewable power solutions by the year
2020. This renewable energy project will consist of three 1.5 MW General Electric (GE) SLE wind turbines. it is estimated that ths project will produce 15.6 million kWh\'s annually
and thereby eliminate over 1.2 million gallons of diesel each year. The wind project will utilize the 20MW Terror Lake Hydroelectric facility as an energy storage system to mitigate
the fluctuations of wind power. Wind and water will work in concert together to produce an estimated 91% of our current power generation needs. This renewable energy project will benefit
the Cityof Kodiak; United States Coast Guard Intergrated Support Command Kodiak, Bells Flats and Russian Creek areas, as well as the villages of Chiniak, Pasagshak and Port Lions.
There are numerous people involved in making this project a reality. These groups of individuals are mainly Alaskans, primary from Kodiak. KEA is proud to be helping our community
lower is dependence on diesel and very thankful for the overwhelming community support for this project.
Pillar Mountain is located directly southwest fo the City of Kodiak. Attached is a survey map depiciting the land ownership of the area and the portion of land where the wind turbines
will be located. The topographical map illustrating the six (6) turbine sites is also attached. This phase of the wind project KEA will be developing three of the six sites depicted
on the map. These maps are found in the Appendix-Exhibit G.
The many different contractors involved in this project have been listed in Section 3.4.
This project will consist of twenty (20) wind turbines to make a collective 2MW "wind farm" in Delta Junction and will be the first project of its kind to integrate into the Railbelt
Grid using an "experimental" program by Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA), by using "proven" cold-weather technology (Northwind 100 turbines with direct-drive motors) which
have already been successfully used in Alaska\'s cold weather, as well as a proven "test" turbine (the first of twenty 100kW turbines) at the same location just erected and successfully
tested by GVEA. This will serve all the communities that are on the Railbelt Grid and can produce enough electricity to power 600 homes each year without any emissions or environmental
harm of any kind. Mike Craft, Managing Partner for Alaska Environmental Power, LLC (AEP) will be spearheading this project as its P.M. (Project Manager), in conjunction with Golden
Valley Electric Association (GVEA), and a team of well qualified individuals and businesses necessary for the construction and erection of the wind turbines for final connection to
GVEA\'s power source connecting it to the Railbelt Grid and all those consumers who receive power from the Grid. We are ready to install at 2009 break-up. We have secured a contract
with the manufacturer-Northern Power Systems (Exhibit C), the crane company-Precision Crane (Exhibit D), the bold manufacturer-Williams Form Engineering (Exhibit E), the PVC supplier-Crescent
Electric (Exhibit F), embedment rings and concrete forms-Greer Tank and Welding (Exhibit T), concrete and pump truck-University Redi-Mix (Exhibit U) and a twenty-year experimental power
purchase agreement (PPA) with Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) (Exhibit G), at a 5.59 meters per second wind regime as determined by our meteorological data.
The proposed project is to convert bio-mass (forest products residuals) to liquid fuels, specifically heating fuels and diesel, and electricity through gasification of the bio-mass and
converting the resulting synthesis gas (SynGas) to #1 heating fuel and diesel for transportation applications. Electricity is a by-product of the proposed process and will be produced
to meet facility electrical needs with any excess electricity made available to the local utilities. The technologies used in the process are, for the most part, well known and proven
technologies in use since the mid-1930?s. The gasses produced will be converted to liquids fuel using a catalytic conversion process called Fischer-Tropsch, and the electricity will
be produced and generated by capturing the waste heat and making steam through heat exchangers and standard turbines and generators. The preferred site for this facility is Ketchikan,
AK, specifically at the industrial park located adjacent to the airport and co-located with one of the mills in the area. Ketchikan has a large volume of woody bio-mass available from
both the National Forest and the local wood products industries. Long term supply appears to be available and transportation of the raw material and the finished product is limited
to very short distances. It is envisioned that the majority of the finished product will be consumed in the local area, off-setting high transportation costs for heating oil and diesel
and providing a nominal amount of electricity to the industrial park, local area and community as needed.
The Kenai Winds project is a 15-18MW wind energy generation facility located in the Nikiski
Industrial Area, in Nikiski, on the Kenai peninsula. The project will consist of 10 wind turbines
disbursed throughout the site, electrically interconnected to the Tesoro Alaska Refinery. A
discussion of the refinery and its direct benefits to the community is included in Appendix O. At
times when the Kenai Winds generation exceeds the needs of the refinery, power will be sold to
others. Electric energy will be delivered and sold to the oil refinery, providing low-cost power,
and helping ensure the economic viability of the refinery.
The proposed project will take place on the Tanana River adjacent to the community of Nenana.
Nenana was chosen due to a combination of strong local support for the project, available
technical assistance and infrastructure, and location on the road system within close proximity to
the University of Alaska Fairbanks. These factors increase the likelihood of project success
while minimizing costs. This project will be administered by the Alaska Center for Energy and
Power (ACEP) at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, with significant contributions from the
University of Maine, Yukon River Intertribal Watershed Council, the Tribal and City Councils of
Nenana, and Ocean Renewable Power Corporation (ORPC). The primary purpose of the project
is to successfully address the numerous challenges associated with installing hydrokinetic
devices in Alaska?s riverine environments. This will be accomplished through a comprehensive
resource assessment (biological and physical), followed by the installation of a ?dummy? open
architecture turbine to assess operations in challenging environments (including interactions with
ice and debris) without damaging expensive real turbine equipment. Finally, this project will
involve the design, construction, deployment and initial testing of a first commercial
hydrokinetic device at the site. It is hoped that beyond the scope of this project, the University of
Alaska will continue to operate the Nenana site as a test center to assess other devices and work
with manufacturers to improve designs. It is also hoped that ORPC, as the holder of the FERC
permit for the site, will continue to manage their operation in conjunction with the testing center
and supply electric power to the local grid.
The community of Crooked Creek, Ak along the Kuskokwim River, have long been interested in renewable power and have already researched a variety of possibilities, this year?s project
initially will be to develop a finale list of potentially feasible methods, to explore feasibility studies and cost evaluation. We\'ll collect the necessary data by testing the feasibility
of these considerations; by building prototypes that will supply us with the solid data to base our decisions on, to aid us in reduce our dependency on Fossil Fuels. This may require
the combination of available technologies, some we\'re considering are Thermopile technology, Hydro power (four sources available here), Solar power, Wind, Residential producers, Wood
gas and heat power production, We\'ll be verifying permitting requirements, Land right of ways and environmental, permitting obstacles identified. A Full study of Village Creek flow,
explore methods to increase and extend its annual usage. As much as this is a fact finding mission, it is also a call to arms by the population of Crooked Creek. Our IGAP program will,
with this grant, will ready us for all consideration.
Geothermal energy remains an underdeveloped renewable and sustainable energy resource
within the State of Alaska. Aside from Chena Hot Springs, which currently has an installed
capacity of 400 kW of power from a low temperature (about 73?C) geothermal source, there are
presently no other geothermal-electric energy producers in the State. The Makushin project?s
primary goal is to produce a minimum of 40 MW of power from the geothermal resource and
supply that power to the City of Unalaska, independent power producers and other energy users
in the vicinity. The current generating capacity within Unalaska consists of UniSea (Fairbanks-
Morris (12? MW)), Westward Seafood (9? MW Wartsila), Alyeska Seafood (5.5? MW), and the
City of Unalaska (currently 7.5 MW; in addition the City has purchased, but not installed, 10 MW
capacity Wartsila diesel gensets (and perhaps an additional 10 MW of diesel generation) for the
potential of 44+ MW, in the future which is contemplated to be utilized as emergency back-up
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 29 10/8/2008
generation. The base load of all Unalaska to be supplied by the Geothermal-electric Project is
estimated near 10 mW/hr. The combined base and peak loads are estimated to be near
32 mW/hr. The project could supply more than 50 percent of the electrical load for the City and
other power producers in Unalaska. Any unutilized electric energy available above any total
load requirements, and the Project?s installed electric capacity will be utilized in four ways:
1. For electric resistive heating within Unalaska to displace expensive fuel oil now used for
domestic space heat and man-camp heat systems or to augment or replace thermal
energy heat exchanged from some present diesel generation jacket heating loops.
2. To supply electric fuel/energy for Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) to displace
higher and unstable priced gasoline and diesel, as an imported fuel. The PHEV
technology has the additional ability to feed electricity back in the grid for emergencies
from the PHEV batteries. This project will retrofit two local F-150 pickup fleet trucks to
PHEV to increase the fuel economy of these vehicles from 16 mpg to 41 mpg on roads
within the City of Unalaska. This will be an important step to demonstrate how
sustainable green transportation at reduced and stable costs for ?fuel? will work in
Unalaska.
3. Electric energy conversion into other ?manufactured and transportable? fuels, like
ammonia, methane, and hydrogen which could augment or displace costly diesel fuel
now used by the local fishing fleet. This utilization or transporting ?stranded renewable
energy? could create new local business opportunities for diversification of local business
infrastructure.
4. Lower temperature ?waste heat? from the geothermal-electric facility could be used for
heating greenhouses and other industries requiring stable energy values.
KSLC is the fee simple, surface and subsurface land owner of 7,200? acres known as the
Makushin geothermal resource area, and as such will be the lead grant recipient. KSLC anticipates working closely with the City of Unalaska, the Ounalashka Village Corporation, the Native
Village Tribe and the group of noted civil and electrical engineers, geologists and other scientists identified in this proposal to complete 16 tasks that include further assessing
the
resource, developing facility siting plans, evaluating the electrical integration of the geothermal
power with the local power, evaluating the transmission lines required (including new and
reconducting), and developing 35 percent level cost estimates for each of three alternatives for
facility locations. The team members include Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell (HDL), RSA
Engineering (RSA), TDX Power, University of Manitoba, University of California Santa Cruz, Alaska Volcano Observatory, and specialty contractors to assist in select areas of the project.
As part of the assessment of the resource we will develop a searchable database for the substantial existing literature and data gathered since 1978, and conduct geochemical studies
and spectral imaging in order to refine the existing model of the geothermal resource system. Seismic data gathered from previous studies will be inputted into the refined model. In
order to develop 35 percent project cost estimates, a number of factors will have to be evaluated including: conceptual design of facilities including a dock and other needed infrastructure,
power plant size and type, power transmission and electrical integration with existing electrical system, and evaluation of permitting issues.
Wind Energy Alaska (WEA), plans to construct a 6 megawatt (MW) wind generation facility on
CIRI-owned land near the village of Nikolaevsk, located on the southern Kenai Peninsula
(Figure 1 of Section 7). The electricity generated by the project will be interconnected to the
Anchor Point Substation, which is owned and operated by the Homer Electric Association
(HEA). The project includes the construction of the wind generation plant, with four 1.5 MW GE
wind turbines, a new 1.9 mile access road, and a distribution line approximately 10 miles in
length from the plant to the Anchor Point Substation in Nikolaevsk. See Appendix J
photographs representative of the GE wind turbines and the distribution line proposed for the
project. HEA is one of the six prime electric cooperatives, or utilities, that serves the Alaska
Railbelt transmission grid. This grid includes Anchorage, Fairbanks, Matanuska?Susitna, and
the Kenai Peninsula and serves about 75 percent of Alaska?s population. This portion of the
population consumes more than 85 percent of the State?s electrical power. HEA is a memberowned
electric cooperative that serves most of Alaska?s Kenai Peninsula. HEA serves
approximately 20,153 members at 28,547 metered locations, 2,200 miles of energized line,
within a service area of 3,166 square miles. WEA, CIRI, and enXco are project proponents.
WEA is investigating other prospective wind sites on the Kenai Peninsula in the Caribou Hills
area. HEA and Chugach Electric Association, Inc. (Chugach) are potential power customers.
WEA has contracted URS/Tryck, Nyman and Hayes to provide design engineering, permitting,
and construction management of the project.
Wind Energy Alaska (WEA) wishes to construct a 3.2 megawatt (MW) Landfill Gas (LFG) to
Energy Generation Facility at the Anchorage Regional Landfill, located east of the Glenn
Highway near Eagle River, Alaska. The Anchorage Regional Landfill is owned and operated by
the Municipality of Anchorage (MOA), Solid Waste Service (SWS). With an in-service date of
April, 2010, this project is designed for incremental growth beginning with 3.2 MW and up to 6.4
MW within the next 15 years with additional capacity as needed. Landfill gas flow records and
projected fill rates at the landfill over the next 20 years support the potential for this level of
electric power production. MOA would receive royalty payments to compensate for use of land
and LFG for the project. This revenue could be used to offset tipping fees at the landfill to
benefit the public. In addition to power generation, the proposed project will include a heat
recovery system that will recover waste heat from the LFG engines to be used in nearby office
and storage building presently heated with a natural gas. The natural gas fuel cost savings will
reduce landfill operating costs. The landfill is located near the existing power lines that feed into
the electric system and the Railbelt grid. The U.S. Army Fort Richardson, Elmendorf Air Force
Base, ML&P, Chugach Electric Association (CEA), Matanuska Electric Association (MEA),
MOA?s Anchorage Regional Landfill and SWS are potential power customers. WEA has
contracted HDR Alaska, Inc. to provide design engineering, permitting, and construction
management of the project. HDR has LFG design experience and has assisted in the
development of cost estimates for this project.
The Applicant owns and operates Motherload Lodge located near the Little Susitna River. The 4.9 acre plot of land is privately owned but segments of the proposed project will be locataed
on land owned by the State of Alaska Park Service. The Motherload Lodge currently utilizes 3 diesel fuel generators to power the facility and accounts for a significant percentage
of annual operating expenses. The company plans to construct a 50kW run of river project on Delia Creek. The proposed project, The Delia Creek Alternative Energy Project (DCAEP),
will utilize water flow from the Delia Creek to power electricity to the Motherload Lodge. The project will include an intake site, underground penstock and powerhouse. The hydroelectric
system will be intergrated with the current fuel generator system. Out of the 3 gensets, 2 gensets will be removed immediately and the third genset, replaced with a smaller genset.
DCAEP will be headed by Project Manager, Jill Reese, Owner and sole member of HPML LLC.
The Native Village of Napaimute, governed by its Traditional Council, is deliberately focused on the goal of its elders: to resettle the village. Using a combination of local resources,
local labor, unwavering vision and hard work coupled with a think-outside-the-box approach the tribe has successfully leveraged in-kind, State or Federal funding to create its Community
Plan; construct a village offices and a community building using local material; log and mill local wood to construct rental cabins and kits for sale; site, clear, survey and construct
a pioneer airstrip; and to build a landfill. Since Napaimute received its land base through unusual means, it was through Administration for Native American funding that survey of
its community lands was completed. This enabled the tribe to open a Home Site Program; people are resettling, the village growing. Napaimute Enterprises sells fuel; operates a small
package store; rents cabins and the community center; operates a sawmill; has a coin-op washer and dryer; and offer showers. Commerce and our economic base are slowly growing, in accordance
to our Community Plan. The cost of providing linked energy to rural Alaskan villages is staggering; individual energy systems must smartly utilize energy by reducing use of petroleum
products. Our village, located on the Kuskokwim River, about 30 miles from Aniak works to be a model village where refuse is contained, development is planned and residents demonstrate
their care and respect for the environment by minimizing their dependence on diesel; this is also a demonstration of the harsh economic environment. Our proposal will serve current
and future members of the community (25 or so residential homes) along with a couple of families that live across the river and the countless river commuters who come to wash clothes
and take a shower. NVN?s Director Development & Operations Mark Leary and Environmental Coordinator Mitchell Dammeyer will be directly involved in the management of this project.
Both men are highly respected in the Kuskokwim and Mr. Leary has overseen most of Napaimute\'s development, literally from the brush up.
The City of St. George operates a traditional diesel power plant which currently uses
multiple diesel fueled engine generators to supply all required electric power to the
community of St. George Island. With fuel and fuel handling cost now at historically high
levels, the community, through their partner APICDA, seeks technology alternatives to
provide long term fuel-savings impact. As wind/diesel technology has been proven viable
in a variety of remote applications in Alaska and internationally, APICDA has allocated
resources to determine if a wind retrofit at St. George can provide a meaningful, cost
effective benefit. The City of St. George, APICDA and TDX Power are all involved in
delivering a high penetration wind diesel hybrid project for the community.
This medium penetration wind-diesel and jacket heat recovery project is located on
Umnak Island, approximately 100 miles west of Unalaska/Dutch Harbor. The community
of Nikolski will be directly served by this project. In addition, the community of pilots
and passengers who make international flights over this area will benefit greatly. A
communications gap, long a problem for international flights, was recently remedied by
the installation of communications equipment in Nikolski by the FAA.
The Nikolski IRA Council, Chaluka Corporation, the management of Umnak Power, TDX
Power and the Aleutian Pribilof Island Community Development Association/APICDA will
be involved in ensuring this project succeeds.
We propose a 2 year project to estimate in-line (hydrokinetic) renewable energy potential for rural Alaska. We will begin creating a list of about 24 sites/communities which appear to
have the greatest potential. We plan to study 8 sites in year 1 and 16 sites in year 2. At this point, Alaska?s larger rivers (i.e., the Yukon, Koyukuk, Kuskokwim and Susitna Rivers)
are obvious places to look for in-stream energy. We will examine available data, and work with project partners (including Re vision, AEA and ANSEP) to come up with a list of river
stretches and community partners. The UAA-SOE Alaska Native Science and Engineering Program (ANSEP) has well established relationships with many communities throughout Alaska and has
agreed to assist the faculty in establishing working relationships with the communities. Following site selection, we will select student research assistants (3 in year 1 and 5 in year
2) who will be trained in hydrographic surveying and velocity measurement. Then, working in cooperation with the communities, we will survey the selected river stretches during the
summer of 2009 and 2010 to obtain bathymetric and current distribution data. Next, using data from United States Geological Survey (USGS) gauging stations, we will estimate the long
term hydrologic (i.e, velocity/depth) conditions at the selected rural sites. The USGS provides discharge rates at nearly 400 sites around the state, covering most river systems. The
long-term velocity/depth distribution data obtained will be used to determine the hydrokinetic energy available for power generation.
The Fishhook Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in Hatcher
Pass, Alaska. The project will be located on a combination of mostly state land and some
borough land off Hatcher Pass Road. Energy from the project would be provided into the
Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid.
Fishhook Renewable Energy, LLC (FRE) is the project proponent, and would contribute
funding, own, and operate the project. FRE has already completed reconnaissance, feasibility,
and conceptual design efforts, and is currently in the permitting and contract negotiation
processes for the project. With timely completion of permitting, contract negotiations, and
financing, construction will occur in 2009. Final design would be completed by members of
FRE. Construction would be completed by qualified contractors and subcontractors selected
through a competitive bidding process.
The Fourth of July Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located near
Seward, Alaska. The project would be located east of the Spring Creek Correctional Facility,
across Resurrection Bay from the city of Seward. Energy from the project would be provided
into the Seward Electric System grid.
Independence Power, LLC (IP) is the project developer, and would contribute funding and own
and operate the project. IP would manage the pre-construction study process, completing some
efforts internally, and contracting out other activities to qualified consultants as appropriate.
Construction would be completed by qualified contractors selected through a competitive
bidding process.
Rural residents in NW Alaska are facing some of the highest costs anywhere in the nation. In
order to proactively address the region?s energy crisis, KEA is working to implement long term
energy options. While there are a variety of alternative energy options available to the
Kotzebue region, such as wind, solar, and geothermal; wind energy has a proven track
record of success in this community.
The goals of the proposed project are:
? To increase the wind capacity of KEA from 1.14 MW to 4.39 MW using 5 Fuhrlander
650kWs.
? To integrate the increased wind capacity with a 600 kW / 1800 kWh Vanadium Red-
Ox Flow Battery.
? To utilize the excess electricity in a distributed heating system.
This is a two year project. Year one involves performing all pre-construction and foundation
construction tasks. Year two involves the wind turbine erection and commissioning.
We are proposing to enhance and expand the first in-stream hydrokinetic energy conversion
device successfully deployed in the United States in Ruby, Alaska. In the summer of 2008, the
Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council (YRITWC), along with the Tribe and City of Ruby,
the local electric utility (owned and operated by the City of Ruby), and ABS Alaskan, deployed,
tested, and removed a 5 kW Encurrent vertical axis hydrokinetic turbine in the Yukon River at
Ruby, Alaska, before winter ice formation. This proposal is for a two-year project that will begin
in 2009 with a revised resource assessment, re-design certain aspects of the turbine deployment
such as anchoring and debris diversion, finalize permit acquisition, and re-deploy the 5 kW
device. Based on the performance of the 5 kW turbine, and modeling feasibility for a larger
system with a turbine re-designed to optimally perform at a lower current speed, in 2010 we will
install a 25 kW version of the hydrokinetic turbine. All project partners will remain in place,
along with Terrasond and re vision LLC, who will assist with resource assessment and feasibility
analysis.
Kotzebue Electric Association?s Cost of Energy Reduction Program will achieve a 25%
reduction is diesel based power by installing, in part, a Vanadium Red-Ox Flow Battery
Energy Storage System (VRFB) which will be able to provide 600 kW of power for three
hours. This battery bank will increase voltage stability, increase the efficiencies of
operating diesel generators, and capture excess wind energy during off-peak hours.
While this installation will serve Kotzebue, the demonstrated technology could offer
significant benefits to other villages as more wind energy is harnessed.
The VRFB will benefit the KEA existing system in three specific ways. Diesel turbines run
most efficiently when operating to the fullest capacity. Charging the battery, when the
generator would otherwise operate below ideal conditions, will increase overall system
efficiency. Secondly, KEA runs one EMD year round and supplements this with a second
CAT generator when the load demands it. Instead of starting the second generator, the
VRFB will supply the electricity. Normally, the CAT gen set is run approximately 3,200 hrs
per year. This will be reduced less than 350 hrs per year with the VRFB online. This results
to a direct reduction in diesel consumption. Thirdly, in order to realize the benefits of
increasing the level of wind penetration in Kotzebue, energy storage MUST be utilized.
The simple payback for the VRFB is under three years.
High-efficiency solid state ammonia synthesis (SSAS) will be advanced from laboratory to proof of-concept and pre-commercialization pilot-plant stage. An SSAS module will be built, capable
of synthesizing anhydrous ammonia (NH3) at ~10 kWe input from renewable-source electric
energy, fresh water, and atmospheric nitrogen. The NH3 will be stored in a pressurized steel
tank, and will fuel an internal-combustion-engine (ICE) generating set delivering to the utility
electricity grid or isolated load. A complete system will be located in Juneau at the Alaska
Electric Light & Power (AEL&P) site. Hydroelectric energy will be converted, at ~ 10 kW scale,
to NH3, stored as a liquid at 250 psi in steel tanks, and regenerated to electric energy in an
ammonia-fueled internal combustion energy (ICE) generating set and returned to the electricity
grid or isolated load. This system will model a village-scale system that could store enough
surplus renewable-source energy, as liquid NH3 in surface tanks, to supply the village?s total
year-round energy needs as firm energy, assuming enough local renewable energy production
capacity is in place to generate this total energy. The goal is village and other ?energy island?
energy independence via renewable-source energy and annual-scale firming storage, replacing
all diesel electricity generation and oil heating. Deploying the project initially at AEL&P allows
hydro energy input and lower project technical risk via Juneau?s benign climate and favorable
transportation access; the project may later be relocated to a smaller community for further
evaluation and test.
The project will be located at a site yet to be determined within the Alaska state boundaries. Once the exact site location is determined, then an evaluation of the communities to be
served can be provided. Also involved in this project will be contractors and subcontractors to be hired for various engineering, design, construction and supply aspects related to
the project activities. Specifically, Ormat will be working with Precision Power LLC who will be the construction contractor for this project to perform the construction of the project
on site.
AGE?s management and engineering team in collaboration with the UAA School of Engineering is
proposing this PROJECT that when proven will provide rural communities with CBM resources an
inexpensive energy source that will provide sustainable heat and power 24/7 365 days a year. This
PROJECT will develop an Arctic Ready Combined Heat and Power Unit powered by CBM gas that will
have direct application to rural communities with viable CBM resources. The PROJECT has three
parallel components with appropriate milestones.
? Component 1 will construct and complete Fowler Oil and Gas?s (FOG) Kircher CBM Well located
at the corner of Trunk and Bogard Roads, Palmer, Alaska (see Exhibit A). . This well is located
near the Colony Middle/High School Complex (Colony Schools). FOG?s Kircher Well is permitted,
bonded and construction can be initiated as soon as grant funding is available.
? Component 2 will pipe CBM gas from the Kircher well to a prototype skid mounted Arctic Ready
Combined Heat and Power Unit at the Colony Schools. AGE will be the IPP that will own and
operate this CHP system.
? Component 3 will assess the CBM resources at 7 communities located through out rural Alaska.
The seven communities will be selected from the 38 villages identified by the State of Alaska as
having potential CBM resources (see Exhibit B). AGE has completed the initial reconnaissance
assessment of these communities with the results summarized in Exhibit C These 38
communities are within the boundaries of 7 of the 13 Regional Native Corporations. AGE
recommends selecting one community from within each Native Corporation boundary to ensure
that the test projects will cover a broad geographic area. The final selection of the seven
communities will be a public process with input from a proposed Project Assessment Team made
up of AGE and our sub-consultants, USGS, BLM, DNR-DGGS, local power producers such as
AVEC and Regional Corporations.
All PROJECT Components are related but can stand alone if required. For example, if the Kircher Well
does not produce CBM, then the Colony Schools Prototype CHP can be operated using available natural
gas. Confirming FOG?s CBM technology will address the critical environmental and social concerns
associated with CBM well spacing and produced water management that have plagued Lower 48 CBM
developments. FOG?s process uses directional/horizontal drilling that allows well spacing on one well per
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 18 2008-Oct-08
Z:\\AEA Grant 2008\\Artic Ready CHP CBM\\AR AEA Grant Application-final.doc
640 acres compared to one vertical well per 10 acres used in standard CBM development. FOG?s
technology uses in-ground dewatering compared to above ground management and disposal of
produced water. FOG?s technology will revolutionize CBM development within the state and nationally.
Most importantly, FOG?s process will result in a sustainable technology that can be easily managed and
operated in rural Alaska communities with minimum social and environmental impacts.
This project is located in Girdwood (See Exhibit A). AGE proposes to install a natural gas
powered CHP plant with its efficiency enhanced by the TEG unit that will provide heat and
power to Girdwood Elementary and the Girdwood public by feeding power into the local
electrical grid. Thermal energy will be provided to Girdwood Elementary for space heating, snow
melt, and heated pedestrian walkways as well as the research center itself.
Two micro-hydro projects located at California and Virgin Creeks will provide hydro power
generation to supplement the CHP/TPG plant during periods of sufficient flow estimated at 8
months per year. Again, many rural communities have micro-hydro potential.
Small scale solar and wind energy will be developed at the proposed CHP/TPG site adjacent to
Girdwood Elementary near California Creek again to demonstrate how alternative sources can
supplement an efficient power plant in rural settings.
This Construction Project is based on the following reconnaissance level findings:
? CHP and TEG power generation systems are proven technologies that,
together, are more than twice as efficient as current power generation systems
in Girdwood and will reduce the schools carbon footprint by more than half.
? Several steep, rapid-flow streams are located in Girdwood.
? Solar and wind levels are adequate for demonstration and research purposes.
? Available Geo-thermal and tidal energy will provide future research and
educational opportunities for UAA staff and students.
Finally, other public and private grant funds will be sought to construct a Renewable Energy
Research and Discovery Center for UAA. The center is proposed to be constructed on donated
Municipality of Anchorage land adjacent to the Girdwood Elementary School. This center will
house and showcase the CHP/TEG, and have a small wind generator and solar panels. The
micro-hydro projects will be tied into the CHP/TEG. In the same building will be classroom and
research space for UAA researchers and students. The public Renewable Energy Discovery
Center will be in the front of this building and will be staffed by UAA students. This center will
facilitate the study of other renewable sources of energy such as tidal and fuel cells.
Shungnak is a village that can benefit from solar energy. it is proposed that a grid tied,batteryless 50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power
plant and tank farm. it consists of 225ea 224-watt solar panels on an adjustable 6300 ft2 rack that is supported on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation. Multiple 7000 watt inverters
provide 277 VAC power.
Noatak is a village that can benefit from solar energy. It is proposed that a grid tied, batteryless
50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power plant and
tank farm in Noatak . It consists of 225ea 224-watt panels on adjustable 6,300 ft2 racking
mounted on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation. Each adjustable array utilizes one 7000 watt
inverter providing 277 VAC power.
Ambler is a village that can benefit from solar energy. It is proposed that a grid tied, batteryless
50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power plant and
tank farm in Ambler . It consists of 225 ea 224-watt panels on adjustable 6300 ft2 racking
mounted directly on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation system. Each adjustable array utilizes one
7000 watt inverter providing 277 VAC power.
AVEC proposes a resource assessment/feasibility analysis/conceptual design project of hydropower sites
in the Upper Kobuk region. We will evaluate at least twelve sites regarding their hydroelectric potential
and will create conceptual designs for the most promising sites. The project will potentially serve the
communities Kobuk, Ambler, Shungnak, and Kiana, as well as possible future industrial developments,
which for the purposes of this application will be referred to collectively as the Upper Kobuk region. Key
partners in the project will include NANA Pacific/NANA Regional Corporation, NovaGold/Mantra
Mining and additional engineering consultants. NANA Pacific/NANA Regional Corporation will be
responsible for coordination of all activities, developing and managing sub-contracts with appropriate
sub-contractors and consultants, providing technical assistance, and completing the final report.
The Project is a 300 kW run of the river hydroelectric plant with a diversion structure, pipeline,
powerhouse, and electric line. The project involves collecting up to 7 cfs of water year round
from a tributary (Mountain Creek) of Barling Bay Creek and transporting it across a basin
boundary to Big Creek. The Project will be developed by Alaska Village Electric Cooperative,
Inc. (AVEC) and it will provide for most of the electrical needs of Old Harbor. AVEC will employ
consultants and contractors as needed to complete the Project. AVEC may utilize local or other
personnel for project maintenance.
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and
commissioning of two wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and
distribution system for the community of Mekoryuk. Participants in the project include AVEC,
STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management and electrical system
engineering for the project. STG will be the general contractor, responsible for the design and
installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary
electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100 wind turbines and startup &
commissioning services. Site control has already been completed. The foundation design is
completed. Permitting is underway, having already relocated the turbines in response to input
from Fish & Wildlife.
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and
commissioning of one additional wind turbine to supplement the existing power generation and
distribution system for the community of Toksook Bay. Participants in the project include AVEC,
STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management and electrical system
engineering for the project. STG will be the general contractor, responsible for the design and
installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbine, and installation of all ancillary electrical
systems. Northern Power will provide the Northwind 100 wind turbine and startup &
commissioning services. The site is already under control and already contains three Northwind
100 wind turbines. Existing permits are in place and can be extended to cover the additional
wind turbine.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative is proposing to complete design, permitting and installation of three Northern 100B Wind Turbines, and new control modules, to provide wind power
to the community of Quinhagak, which is located on the coast of the Bering Sea, west of Bethel in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta area.
According to the "Quinhagak, ALaska Wind Resource Update Report" by V3 Energy LLC, Quinhagak has good wind power development potential. It classifies Quinhagak as a Class 4 wind resource
with a projected 400 Watts per square meter wind power density at 50 meters.
Project management is a collaborative approach. AVEC will provide overall project management, and electrical system engineering for the project. AVEC is in the process of hiring a construction
management firm, who will be responsible for the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. The
supplier of the Northwind 100B wind turbines will also provide start-up training and commissioning services. Site control has been secured and permitting for installation of the wind
turbines to the US Fish and Wildlife resulted in a no adverse impact determination.
The Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) Solid Waste Services Department (SWS) intends to develop an
electric power generating plant to be located at the Anchorage Regional Landfill (ARL). The plant
will use landfill gas (LFG), a byproduct of anaerobic waste decomposition, as its primary fuel.
Electricity generated by the project will be sold and delivered to the Matanuska Electric Association
(MEA) distribution system to provide power to Eagle River and Southcentral Alaska. SWS will
negotiate a power sales agreement with the end power user, likely MEA, and select of a development
partner to design, build and operate the plant.
The Bethel Wind Project is designed to contribute clean, renewable wind power to the Bethel energy grid. The project area is about 1.5 miles northwest of the Bethel Airport on hilltop
land owned by Bethel Native Corporation. Our power will be sold wholesale to BUC for distribution to its customers as normal. The size of our project is dependent on our ability to
sell power, not on the wind resource, but we expect that a two MW project will be viable. The communities served could include Napakiak and Bethel.
The grant participants will be Village Wind Power LLC (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Alaska Wind Power LLC). Alaska Wind Power LLC is owned by Alaska Power & Telephone Company, a certificated
Alaska public utility, and LAPP Resources, Inc., a private Alaskan natural resource developer. We have invited both Bethel Native Corporation (BNC), whose land we are proposing to use
for the wind farm site, and BUC who will distribute the electricity, to join us in this project as partners. Nether has made a decision on this yet. BNC entered into an exclusive use
agreement with us for our evaluation of their site several months ago. We recently supplied a draft land lease to them and are currently negotiating its terns. We expect that the land
lease will be in place by the end of the year, and equipment orders can be placed for delivery and construction in 2009.
The Delta Wind Project is designed to contribute clean, renewable wind power to the railbelt energy grid. The project area is about 25 miles south of Delta Junction on Coal Mine Road.
We are currently funding an Interconnection Study with Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) to identify costs associated with putting wind power on their transmission system near
Delta Junction. The results of the interconnection study will be used to formulate a power tariff for sale of our power to GVEA. The size of our project is dependent on our ability
to sell power, not on the wind resource, but we expect that a 40 to 50 MW project could be achievable. The communities served will include all communities within the GVEA?s service
area that purchase power from GVEA, including Delta Junction, North Pole, Fairbanks, Fox, College, Nenana, and Healy, as well as two major gold mines, Fort Knox and Pogo.
The grant participants will include Alaska Wind Power LLC (the project owner) and an environmental contactor, yet to be selected, to conduct the field work and report the results. The
federal Bureau of Land Management has not identified any threatened or endangered species of wildlife in the project area. However, the area does include ?potential? habitat for at
least four species of birds currently listed on BLM-Alaska?s Sensitive Status Species List. Pre-development surveys should be conducted within the project area to locate any sensitive
species of concern. The avian surveys that are the subject of this grant application are described below.
Task 1?Raptor Survey
To locate eagle nests in the vicinity of the wind farm, we would conduct a fixed-wing aerial survey to search for active Bald or Golden eagle nests within 10 miles of all proposed wind
farm facilities. A raptor biologist will accompany a pilot (Piper Supercub) for 1 day of surveys.
Task 2?Spring Migration Surveys (Diurnal)
Spring migration occurs in the area from about early April to mid May, with peak periods for species varying during that time span, thus prolonged sampling would be cost-prohibitive.
Instead, we suggest a targeted approach to sample periods when the most birds and species would be moving through the area. A biological technician will collect daily observations during
two 10-day windows (20 days total) to help characterize the species, relative abundance, and distributional use (geographic and altitudinal) of birds using the proposed wind farm.
Task 3?Summer Bird Use at the Wind farm Site
Summer bird use of the wind farm area is primarily associated with the local breeding populations, and the objective of this task is to characterize use of the area by breeding birds.
A biological technician will collect bird observations during six 1-day visits to the wind farm site in summer. Two visits will occur in each month during June, July, and August.
Task 4?Fall Migration Surveys (Diurnal)
Fall migration in the area is more prolonged than spring migration, but most larger migratory birds (waterfowl and cranes) move through the area in late August to early October. To characterize
fall migration, a biological technician will collect daily observations during three 9-day periods and record species, relative abundance, and distribution (geographic and altitudinal)
of birds using the proposed wind farm site.
Task 5?Fall Migration Surveys (Nocturnal)
Because many species groups (e.g., waterfowl, passerines) migrate during the night, nocturnal techniques (such as radar) are required to assess migration. We propose to measure nocturnal
migration rates and characteristics (e.g., altitude and direction) with a mobile radar lab, concurrent with diurnal investigations for three 9-day periods. We are recommending radar
monitoring only for fall migration because 1) the nocturnal period then is longer than during spring, 2) more birds, including young-of-the-year (i.e., less experienced flyers) travel
through the Tanana Valley in fall, and 3) we believe some nocturnal studies will occur in spring 2009 close to Delta Junction .
Replace diesel generation of electricity for the community of Tenakee Springs with renewable hydroelectric power. The City of Tenakee Springs proposes to construct a hydroelectric project
on Indian River. This will be a low head, run-of-river plant displacing the use of at least
33,000 gallons of diesel fuel. Design, engineering, and construction will involve the City of Tenakee Springs, multiple state and federal agencies, private contractors, and the Alaska
Energy Authority.
This project is a regional Resource Assessment/Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual design of Wind Power opportunities around the Lake & Peninsula Borough. It is designed to build upon existing
wind resource assessment efforts, including wind met tower data in some communities, as well as data from existing micro-scale (10kW) wind turbines that are in operation.
The communities included in this package are:
Pedro Bay
Port Alsworth
Egegik
Iliamna-Newhalen-Nondalton
Port Heiden
Pilot Point
In addition to the Borough Management and staff working closely with the local utilities, the Borough intends to hire HDR as their lead engineering consulting firm for these assessments.
The intended outcome of this work is a set of bid documents for a regional Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) contract.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough seeks funding for design and permitting to install High Efficiency Low Emissions (HELE) wood boilers in five communities in the Lake and Peninsula Borough
providing heat to the local school and adjacent teacher housing. The communities to be considered are Pedro Bay, Newhalen/Iliamna, Nondalton, Kokhanok and Port Alsworth. The schools
in these communities served 225 children in the 07-08 school year.
All of these communities are in heavily wooded areas and with the exception of Port Alsworth they are have few or no land use issue that need to be resolved. The wood resource near Port
Alsworth resides in Federal Park land and ANCSA land, the Borough will utilize area experts to resolve any impediments to sustainable wood harvest.
An initial feasibility indicates that these communities could displace tens of thousands of gallons of diesel currently used to heat the facilities. Actual fuel consumption for school
year 07/08 was used in the analysis. A simple payback analysis offered periods of 1.6 to 2.9 years.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough will work with the school district and a HELE unit vendor to complete the project. Contract employee, Bob Loeffler will work with local authorities to
ensure that any land issues related to a sustainable wood fuel harvest are resolved.
The proposed project is a wind/hydro hybrid intertie feasibility study for Chignik Bay, Chignik Lagoon and Chignik Lake (hereafter ?Chigniks?.) The Chigniks have a combined population
of 277 people - the largest community is Chignik Lake with 128 people. The cost of fuel to create electricity is becoming beyond reach in the area, the purpose of the proposed project
is to provide affordable and stable-price energy to create sustainable communities.
Wind: There is existing wind data confirming class 5 wind in the area, strong enough to be a good energy source. However, at the sites where data was collected the wind was ?too turbulent?
to be utilized for wind energy generation. Part of the feasibility study will involve determining the most advantageous site for wind turbines by collecting supplemental met data.
Hydro: The Chignik Alaska Draft Small Hydropower Feasibility Report and EIS, by the Army Corps of Engineers, July 1984, evaluated hydro resources at Packers Creek, Mud Bay Lake and Indian
Creek. The study found that Indian Creek had the best potential for economical development with a potential head of 409 ft and modest flows on the order of 22cfs. See Hydro Screening
Attachment G for details
The Lake and Peninsula Borough will provide management for the project, overseeing the work of HDR Alaska who will act as the owner representative in developing the feasibility study
for a wind/hydro intertie project.
McGrath Light and Po er is located in McGrath, Alaska. McGrath has a population of 315, and is located 221 miles northwest of Anchorage and 269 miles southwest of Fairbanks in Interior
Alaska. It borders the Kuskokwim River directly south of its confluence with the Takotna River. The remote location of McGrath and frequently difficult river conditions lead to some
of the highest barge-delivered fuel costs in the state. Direct beneficiaries of this project include the Iditarod Area School District (IASD) McGrath complex, and three commercial facilities
adjacent to the ML&P power plant. Indirect beneficiaries include all ML&P electric customers, as the project will provide increased revenues from the sale of recovered heat, as well
as improved electric generating efficiency and reduced operations and maintenance costs. ML&P will be the Grantee under the Renewable Energy Fund. ML&P has teamed up with the engineering
firm of Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E). AE&E has a long history of successful energy related projects throughout Alaska, and has worked with both ML&P and IASD on numerous
projects dating back to 1995.
Yakutat Power is located in Yakutat, Alaska. The City and Borough of Yakutat has a population of 631, and is located at the mouth of Yakutat Bay along the Gulf of Alaska, 225 miles northwest
of Juneau and 220 miles southeast of Cordova. Yakutat receives monthly barge service during the winter and more frequent service during summer. Yakutat is equipped with two jet-certified
runways and receives jet service daily. The U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service have offices in Yakutat. This project will convert readily available biomass to a producer
gas (wood gasification) that will be used to reduce diesel fuel consumption at the Yakutat Power plant. The Biomax 75 is based on proven technology with recent additional improvements
for use in cold weather climates. Direct beneficiaries of this project include all Yakutat Power electric service customers. Participants in the project include Yakutat Power, the City
and Borough of Yakutat, the U.S. Forestry Service, National Park Service, and Community Power Corp - the Biomax 75 developer,
Yakutat Power ill be the Grantee under the Renewable Energy Fund grant. Yakutat Power has teamed up with the engineering firm of Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E) to provide
design, permitting, and system integration and construction management. AE&E has a long history of successful energy-related projects throughout Alaska, and has worked with Yakutat
Power on several energy-related projects dating back to 1991.
This project will be located in the upper Kobuk River Valley and will serve the villages of Kobuk, Shungnak, and Ambler. The applicant is Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority; other cooperating
organizations include NANA Regional Corporation, Maniilaq Association, NANAPacific, WHPacific Inc., and Kobuk, Shungnak and Ambler Village Councils. An initial woody biomass site assessment
was sponsored by NANAPacific in August, 2008 under a Department of Energy Tribal Energy Grant. Bill Wall, PhD conducted an initial reconnaissance study to determine the viability of
a wood energy project. Dr. Wall also held presentations in each of the three villages to acquaint them with the scope and components of a wood energy program. The study determined
that a wood energy program is viable and that all three of the villages are very interested in proceeding. In conjunction with the site visit a report completed in 1981 was reviewed
which determined that woody biomass use was sustainable for region (citation attached). The proposed project will develop following analysis and fully complete each of the outline
of tasks for a reconnaissance and feasibility study:
1. Resource Assessment will determine the sustainable level of biomass harvest in the Upper Kobuk; utilize Geographic Information Systems for future harvest planning;
2. Harvest System Assessment will assess a harvest cost delivery model based on two different scales: small individual village scale or a regional harvest scale to service all three
villages;
3. Wood yard conceptual design that links production of wood products chips or cord wood with appropriate boiler configuration and a wood processing cost model;
4. Boiler feasibility and conceptual design to determine the most cost effective and best fit for chip or round wood boilers and the amount of annual wood usage, determination with a
level one feasibility cost summary, the type of boiler locations and potential for district heating major buildings or houses.
5. Preliminary Business Models to determine the initial appropriate organization and ownership of harvest systems, wood yards, and wood energy utilities and basic costs and cash flows
for each village. Many sources will be utilized including the Cold Climate Research Center in Fairbanks, Alaska.
6. Communication process to fully involve the communities in supporting, empowering, and making the decisions on appropriate structure for sustainable wood utilization in the region.
7. Final Presentation to inform project partners and especially villages of the wood energy feasibility, business model, and key pros and cons of moving forward with program construction
and implementation.
A small, 271-kW, cross-flow turbine, generation system with a darn and power house (approximately latitude 52? 11\' 28" N and longitude 174? 11\' 37" W) which utilizes hydro-electric
stored kinetic energy in a reservoir dam on Chuniisax Creek approximately 3/4-mile southwest of the old Atka village site (approximately T92S, R176W, Seward Meridian) and replacement
electrical distribution system. The project will displace use of high cost fossil fuels with a renewable energy resource using proven technology. Energy costs to all users in Atka will
be significantly reduced while providing the current and future energy requirements. The village has secured additional funding from EDA to complete the most of the remaining 55%. (45%
was previously completed using RUS, AEA, and city funding.) This grant plus our cash and in-kind contribution will complete the balance.
The South Fork hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in Eagle River,
Alaska. The project will be located on a private homestead off Hiland Road in Eagle River.
Energy from the project would be provided into the Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid.
South Fork Hydro, LLC (SFH) is the project proponent, and would contribute funding, own, and
operate the project. SFH has already completed reconnaissance, feasibility, and permitting
efforts. Final design is currently in progress, and construction is planned for 2009. Final design
would be completed by members of South Fork Hydro, LLC. Construction would be completed
by South Fork Construction, Inc., with some construction tasks subcontracted as appropriate.
Subcontractors for significant budget items would be selected through a competitive bidding
process.
Rural Alaskans in the Northwest Arctic Borough, NWAB, are facing some of the highest costs
anywhere in the nation. In order to proactively address the region?s Energy Crisis, declared
by the NWAB in September 2008, the NWAB is working to implement long term energy
options. While there are a variety of alternative energy options available in NW Alaska, such
as wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass; wind energy has a proven track record of success
in our communities. Installing and integrating wind turbines in three villages is a big step
toward securing the future of rural Alaska.
The goals of the proposed project are:
? To develop the wind energy potential in the communities of Buckland, Deering, and
Noorvik,
? To develop appropriate wind generation engineering plans and designs, and
? To construct the necessary wind generation facilities (fully integrated with diesel
power systems).
This is a two year project. Year one involves performing both pre-construction and
construction tasks in Deering and Noorvik as well as pre-construction tasks in Buckland. Year
two involves construction tasks in Buckland.
This project focuses on the development of 1 megawatt of wind power located in an area AEA suspects to be have a Class 7 resource. The location is approximately 14 miles Northwest of
the City of Dillingham, less than 5 miles Northeast of Manakotak, and approximately 8 miles South of Alegnagik near Snake Mountain. Due to the specific need of the development of this
resource for the Healthcare organization, this project will benefit all the communities that rely on the Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation to remain ?the only? critical access medical
facility in the Bristol Bay Region. Although the project is being proposed by a Tribal Organization, it has the support of the local electrical cooperative [Nushagak] as well as many
of the residents of Dillingham. Our project development team has tapped into the resources of TDX, Power Corp., MAP Consulting, STG Inc, and Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation.
IRHA proposes to install a biomass heat source for the Yukon-Koyukuk Assisted Living Center, a NAHSDA, Denali Commission, ICDBG, FHLB, and AHFC funded project that will provide a 9 unit
housing complex for the elderly of the Yukon Koyukuk Region. The design includes a multi-purpose area, office space, and dormitory-type housing for transient village health care workers.
Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) is designated by the owner, Louden Tribal Council, to be the Construction/Contractor of the Galena Assisted Living Facility. In addition Interior
Regional Housing Authority functions as the Construction Manager for the project, and is directed to act with full authority of the Owner, in all matters of coordination of design work
performance of the A&E Consultant, Construction Scheduling and Implementation, Management of funding dollars, in accordance with the Payment Schedule, and Management of any and all
Subcontractor entities required to produce satisfactory work completion.
On behalf of the Louden Tribal Council and the Y-K Senior Living Center Consortium, Interior Regional Housing Authority is proposing to install an energy efficient biomass and solar
system to the project.
The project site is bordered by the Yukon River and Campion Road within seciton 4, T9S, T10E, Kateel River Meridian, Nulato Recording District, and contains 3.42 acres. The Biomass
Center would be located within 100 feet of the Center building site, a 8,000 SF building under construction.
Selecting the System
The biomass Center wood system costs include the initial capital costs of purchasing and installing the equipment, non capital costs (engineering, permitting, etc.) the costs of the
fuel storage building and boiler building, the fuel costs, and the other costs associated for operating with operating and maintaining the heating system, including labor.
Comparative Costs of Fuels
The selection of fuel system for the Galena Assisted Living Facility has been based in part on the success of the Energy Center recently built in Tanana, Alaska. Comparative Costs of
Fuels for the Tanana Energy Center were derived from the Preliminary Feasibility Assessment for High Efficiency, Low Emission Wood HEating in Tanana, Alaska, May 8, 2007 by Daniel Parrent,
Juneau Economic Development Council. According to the study, at high efficiency, heat from white spruce cordwood (MC30) at $353.30 per cord is equal t the cost of oil at $3.50 per
gallon, before considering the costs of equipment and operation, and maintenance and repair. It is interesting to note since this study was completed, the cost of oil per gallon has
increased and is currently $7.00 per gallon and expected to rise. Current estimates from suppliers in Galena place a cord of wood at $250.00 per cord.
Initial Investment Cost Estimates
The Biomass System would provide a sustainable resource energy source for heat to the facility. The oil system designed for the building will remain in place as a back-up system to the
Biomass System. If the Biomass System can be installed during the construction phase, installation costs for the Biomass System will be reduced because the plumbing and piping system,
the most significant costs besides the boiler, can be installed during the installation of the oil system. The payback period for the Biomass Heating Units and the fuel storage building
are expected to be recovered within a year three year span.
The Solar Panel System is an additional source of renewable heat, hot water, and electricity for the Center.
This project is designed to demonstrate power generation using combusted biomass as a heat
source to drive an Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) power plant module designed and developed
by United Technologies Corporation. The module is based on the award-winning geothermal
power plant installed at Chena Hot Springs Resort; however the biomass version will operate at
significantly higher efficiency. These efficiency improvements are necessary because unlike the
geothermal fluid, biomass material is not a ?free? fuel. In addition to being designed for
maximum thermal efficiency, the power plant includes load following capability, and
independent, simple, remotely monitored operation at low pressures that do not require special
training to operate. This is important because while the project will be located in North Pole,
Alaska, the power plant is specifically designed for rural Alaskan applications. The project will
be constructed and managed by Chena Power, LLC and will be located at the K&K Recycling
Facility located at Mile 9 on the Richardson Highway. Design work and assembly of the power
plant will be completed by United Technologies Corporation through their Research Center
(UTRC).
The NJUS Renewable Energy Fund Wind Project involves the installation of five 600 kW wind
turbines on Newton Peak located approximately one mile north of Nome. The completed
project, with a total size of three MW, will be owned and operated by NJUS. The wind turbines
will be connected into NJUS?s electrical distribution system through a constructed transmission
line. The project will offer benefits to the community of Nome and its electric customers
through a system-wide reduction and stabilization of energy prices. NJUS has assembled a
project team, headed by STG Incorporated, that is prepared to immediately begin work on an
accelerated schedule. The project team includes members from Intelligent Energy Systems LLC,
DNV Global Energy Concepts Inc, Electrical Power Systems, Duane Miller Associates LLC,
Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell LLC, BBFM Engineers and Aurora Consulting. All aspects of the
Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, detailed in the following pages of this
application, can be completed by fall 2010.
Mt. Alice Harbor Development project is in and around Seward at mile 2 Nash Rd. the service road to the NE side of Ressurection bay 1.5 miles across from the municipal boat harbor on
the NW side, serving the needs of the local population as a community and destination resort, boating access and public access to the Fishing resources of the area. Also serving the
needs of the international community supporting Seward,s role as a burgeoning Summertime international tourism hub and promoting the sustainability of year round tourism. Local Engineers,
Surveyors, Municipal department heads etc. have expressed positive input and eagerness to work on the project. The Architects, Project managers are ready to proceed.
The Unalakleet Renewable Energy Fund Wind Project involves the installation of two 600 kW wind
turbines on a project site located approximately one and a half miles northeast of Unalakleet. The
completed project, with a total size of 1.2 MW, will be owned and operated by UVEC. The wind
turbines will be connected into UVEC?s electrical distribution system through a constructed
transmission line. The project will offer benefits to the village of Unalakleet and its electric
customers through a system-wide reduction and stabilization of energy prices. UVEC has
assembled a project team, headed by STG Incorporated, that is prepared to immediately begin work
on an accelerated schedule. The project team includes members from Intelligent Energy Systems
LLC, DNV Global Energy Concepts Inc., Electrical Power Systems, Duane Miller Associates LLC,
Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell LLC, BBFM Engineers and Aurora Consulting. All aspects of the
Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, which are detailed in the following pages of this
application, can be completed by fall 2010.
The proposed biomass heating system will take place at Tok School, in Tok, Alaska, and will serve to initiate the beginnings of a systemic regional conversion from fossil heating fuel
to clean, renewable biomass heating systems. An outbuilding to house the boilers will be constructed behind the school, in a central location where access to the outbuildings can also
be had. The building will have 3 bays for fiber wagons that will to feed into the a feeder bin inside the boiler room. The boiler will be able to be fed from the inside or the outside
of the building, to accommodate for downtime on the biomass feed systems. The biomass boiler will fed into the current boiler infrastructure, which will serve as a back up system,
and will heat the outbuildings. The project has the advantage of being designed by firms having extensive experience with biomass systems, and is heavily supported by the community.
It was written in partnership with the Tok Area Forestry, CTA Engineering, and by Alaska Gateway School District staff.
The City of Whittier proposes conducting a renewable energy project consisting of a reconnaissance level effort to examine the viability of hydropower on Whittier Creek in Whittier,
Alaska. The work will include engineering analysis, an economic study, and two years of stream guage data gathering. The final product will include an estimated generation capacity,
a preliminary cost estimate for a hydropower facility, and a preliminary analysis of the potential benefits (i.e. power cost savings over time). This effort will be performed by the
Alaska District Corps of Engineers with assistance from the Corps of Engineers Hydroelectric Design Center based out of Portland, Oregon, with stream guaging to be performed by the
USGS. The City of Whittier proposes conducting a renewable energy project consisting of a reconnaissance level effort to examine the viability of hydropower on Whittier Creek in Whittier,
Alaska. Although Chugach Electric currently provides electricity to Whittier, frequent and prolonged outages, particularly during the winter months, necessitates the need to develop
alternate energy sources for a local generation system that could also supply the Railbelt when not needed as a primary provider to the community. The project would assess the potential
for the development of Whittier into a sustainable community that utilizes renewable energy systems.
Located in Nome, this project will install a 2-mile transmission line and a 8-mile fiber control
cable to connect a 1MW wind farm to be operated by Banner Wind LLC, an independent power
producer, to the City of Nome/Nome Joint Utility System (NJUS) power distribution grid. The
project will place an underground 25kv distribution line adjacent to a new road, and include a
fiber control cable run from the wind generators to the utility power plant. Banner Wind LLC is
an IPP formed in partnership between Bering Straits Native Corporation & Sitnasuak Native
Corporation. NJUS will be primarily responsible for the project construction activities, as well
as the reporting and financial control of the intertie project.
The final design work will build upon the feasibility study and preliminary design work completed as of October, 2008. A bulk fuel wood boiler will be built at the Kenny Lake K-12 school
to displace 18,035 gallons of fuel oil. The current boilers will be used for backup and low load periods. This project will involve school district personnel, local contractors, design
engineers and Alaska Energy Authority. This project will employee local residents in project management, construction and chip material delivery.
EarthRun Energy will provide a sustainable source of high grade wood chips for biomass heating in the city of Anchorage, Alaska while strengthening and beautifying the urban forests.
In Anchorage, urban forests are currently overgrown presenting fire and disease problems. It is the right time to make a sick forest a productive and healthy forest. EarthRun has worked
hard to come up with the cleanest, quietest and least interruptive way of harvesting the dead and unhealthy trees from our urban forests, chipping them, and heating one municipal building,
the Russian Jack greenhouse. EarthRun Energy will work closely with the municipality to return the forests to a healthy state.
5 MW natural gas fired Combined Heat & Power Project (?CHP? or ?Cogeneration?), sited near the Begich Tower, to provide the energy needs of the Begich Tower and thermal energy needs
of City of Whittier, Public School and commercial customers within economic reach of the Project, and provide firm power to help Chugach meet new generation needs and improve service
reliability to Whittier.
5 MW natural gas fired Combined Heat & Power Project (?CHP? or ?Cogeneration?), sited at the Alaska State Fair in Palmer (the ?Fair) as the centerpiece of an Alaska Energy Center, to
showcase renewable and alternative energy technologies, provide the energy needs of the Fair and operations sited at the Fair, provide the thermal energy needs of commercial, institutional
and agricultural customers within economic reach of the Project, and provide firm power to help MEA meet new generation needs.
Burro Creek, formerly the Burro Creek Farms Hatchery, is an existing, operational hydro system located on 121 acres of private land approximately one and a half miles south of Skagway
on the west side of upper Lynn Canal. A grant is requested to obtain expert analysis of the feasibility of upgrading the existing hydro system in order to wholesale power to Alaska
Power and Telephone or the City of Skagway. Existing AP&T hydro projects supply electricity to Haines and Skagway but the communities must still rely on diesel during certain times
of the year. Also, existing hydro projects do not generate enough power to supply the cruise lines who have expressed an interest in connecting to shore power as a means of reducing
air quality emissions.
The Haines Borough proposes to explore the potential for use of low-emission nontoxic wood biomass as
the source for wood-fired boilers to provide heat (through an insulated pipe distribution system) initially
to four buildings located within the Borough: the K-12 School, the Voc-Ed Building, the Municipal
Administration Building, and the Public Library. The Borough would begin to reduce our dependence on
costly fossil fuels, while employing cleaner, renewable, and locally available resources, through the use of
locally available wood biomass. The Haines Borough will contract qualified consultants to perform
reconnaissance and feasibility studies, and guide us through the 35% concept design. Contracting will be
in accordance with the Borough?s standard procurement policies.
The City of Chignik will partner with Trident Seafoods (holder of FERC License 620) to study
the engineering, electronics, and economics of restoring the antiquated hydropower system on
Indian Creek in Chignik, Alaska. (See attached Project Area maps.) The ?Chignik Hydro?
project would benefit the residents of Chignik by offsetting the cost of fuel currently used to
generate electricity for homes and community buildings such as the Subsistence Building and the
school. Electricity generated by the new hydropower system will also benefit the new small boat
harbor, the Trident Seafoods fish processing plant, and the Harris Sub-Regional Clinic, which
will serve residents of Chignik Lagoon, Chignik Lake, Perryville, and Port Heiden. In addition,
by re-building the dam and conveyor pipeline, the project would also be reinforcing the
infrastructure that supports the city?s water system, as well as the fish plant water supply.
The Division of Forestry at Milepost 267.5 Richardson Highway, Delta Junction, Alaska is proposing a pilot project using barley/wood pellets for heating a governmental building. The
boiler system will combine two heating systems, a 3840 square foot (sf) main office building, proposed 3000 sf addition, and a 1792 sf warehouse. The boiler will be located in a separate
building which will house a heating system and barley/wood pellet storage.
The grant will involve local contractors for construction and maintenance. The agricultural industry will provide barley as a biomass fuel. Excess barley not currently used for animal
or human consumption is available from the local farming community. Two pellet facilities are being constructed in Delta Junction. End of the Alcan is in the final stages of completing
a commercial pellet manufacturing facility. Logging and Milling Associates (LMA) has purchased wood pellet manufacturing equipment and is in the process of installation of the equipment.
The proposed project would be located in an unincorporated area, northeast of the City of
Petersburg, Alaska. Development of hydroelectric power at the site will include construction of
a lake tap, arch dam, unlined tunnel, power penstock, power plant, tailrace, and transmission
line segments.
Project features would include:
? Reservoir. Ruth Lake is fed primarily by rainfall and snowmelt, with some smaller firn or
hanging glaciers that contribute melt water during the summer months. . The Project
would include a dam to provide a potential usable stored capacity of 17,000 acre-feet.
? Lake Tap / Power Conduit. The inlet works would consist of an arch dam and lake tap.
As presently planned water would initially flow through a 10-foot diameter tunnel for
approximately 3,500 feet. The remaining 7,800 feet of the conduit system would consist
of a 6-foot diameter buried or surface steel penstock.
? Powerhouse. The powerhouse would be located within 2,000 ft. of the confluence of
Delta Creek and would house three impulse turbines, each with a total rated head of
1,300 ft. The rated installed capacity of the powerhouse would be 20 MW and the energy
output would be roughly 70 GWh.
? Access Roads. The Project is separated from the nearest town of Petersburg by
Frederick Sound. The only access for either construction or long-term operation and
maintenance of the Project will be via boat or aircraft. A dock would be located on
Thomas Bay for loading and unloading people and supplies from a boat. A road would
be constructed between the powerhouse and dock. Construction access would also be
provided by helicopter in association with a limited local temporary access road system
to transfer equipment within the construction area. During operation, the Project would
be fully automated and access would be provided via boat or aircraft.
? Transmission Lines. Power generated by the Project would be transmitted by a new
overhead / submarine, 138 kilovolt (KV) transmission segment roughly 20-miles long
running generally southwest from the powerhouse to Petersburg. The transmission
segment would integrate the project to the Southeast Intertie which currently connects
Petersburg to Wrangell to the Tyee Lake Hydroelectric Project on Bradfield Canal.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 21 9/3/2008
? Other Structures. An intake structure housing controls would be constructed at Ruth
Lake. Housing would be provided for power plant operators, staging areas for
construction and substation facilities
Power generated by the Project would provide the interconnected Southern Southeast Alaska
regional utilities with increased system reliability; replace current dependency on diesel
generation; and enable regional utilities to meet the increasing demand for electricity as
customers convert from oil to electric heat and new construction is designed for electric heat.
interconnected southern southeast Alaska regional utilities.
The proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 11841 (Project) is located near
the southeast end of Revillagigedo Island, approximately four miles east of the City of
Ketchikan, Alaska. KPU proposes to install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at
KPU?s existing Whitman Lake Dam to provide an additional source of clean renewable energy to
KPU?s customers, in the city of Ketchikan and the Borough area including Saxman Village, while
also enhancing the conversion of oil heat to electric heat and displacing expensive and nonrenewable
diesel generation. The Project will be interconnected to KPU?s existing distribution
system and the grant project will involve KPU.
This proposal seeks to design and make commercially available a system that utilizes renewable energy as an option to the basic rural Alaska electrical power generating system. This
is multi part concept that utilizes advanced technology to improve the over-all efficiency of prime power diesel generating systems. The elements of the new system are divided into
three separate parts each bringing their own value contribution. They include waste heat recovery, conversion of waste heat using the Organic Rankine Cycle in combination with Controlled
Environment Agriculture, and biomass incineration. At this time Precision Power LLC is the singular participant in the project.
The project involves the installation of two wind turbines near the water treatment plant (WTP) in
Hooper Bay, Alaska (see attached Project Area Maps, and Figure 1 for WTP Site Map). The
two Northwind 100B 100kW wind turbines will provide a dedicated energy source for the WTP?s
water heating system, providing approximately 539,000 kWh per year dedicated to an electric
boiler inside the WTP. Wind-powered energy will offset the use of 15,995 gallons of fuel
currently used in the three fuel oil-burning boilers. Northern will provide the wind towers and
turbine technology, and STG will perform the installation of the towers and turbines. HDL will
provide the geotechnical survey expertise and conduct environmental permitting. BBFM will do
the structural design of the tower foundations. CE2 Engineers, the firm that designed and built
the WTP, will supervise the engineering and wiring of the new boiler system.
The proposed 5 to 7-MW Grant Lake/Falls Creek hydro project is located near Moose Pass,
Alaska (see map in HDR?s attached site assessment). Kenai Hydro seeks to develop the project
in compliance with current low impact hydro guidelines and practices. The scope of this project
will also involve looking at the feasibility of a design that includes diverting flows from Falls
Creek into Grant Lake. Kenai Hydro has secured a Preliminary Permit for this project, issued by
FERC on October 7, 2008. A copy of the Preliminary Permit is attached in the Section 7
appendices. Power from the project would be available to customers of Homer Electric
Association and other areas served by the existing Railbelt transmission grid. Kenai Hydro, LLC
is a partnership among Homer Electric Association (HEA), enXco and Cook Inlet Region, Inc.
(CIRI) that was formed for the purpose of evaluating and developing this site as a low impact
hydroelectric facility.
Additional information on this project may be found in the attached initial site assessment
reported by HDR Alaska, Inc.
Haines, within Southeast Alaska, will benefit from reasonably-priced housing. The Chilkoot
Indian Association is proposing to construct and operate four-plex housing (four buildings with
sixteen units) incorporating a cordwood-fired boiler system. The project is initiated by our
Housing Department, who will manage the subsidized, low-income housing project. A separate
boiler/fuel storage building will be built on one lot and recirculate hot water to be used in each
four-plex for building heat and domestic hot water. Architectural, civil, mechanical, and
electrical design is complete except for an engineering refit to accommodate the wood boiler
system. Our proposal will be for heating system redesign and construction.
The project addresses the availability, quality andfeasibility ofsustainable, economic use of
agricultural and forestry biomass in Alaska. This must be considered before the myriad of
biofuel projects proposed & envisioned can move forward, and before existing, commercially
available technologies that use biomass to produce energy for heat, fuel, & power can be most
effectively, and most successfully, deployed. The goal ofthe project is to 1) assimilate all
existing information on the total forest and crop biomass available in Alaska into one data base,
2) determine the gaps in the data base and the information needed to fill the gaps, and 3)
determine the biological, physical, and economic feasibility ofusing Alaskan biomass as
biofuels. The impetus for the Study is the biomasslcoal-to-liquids plant proposed for the
Fairbanks area ofinterior Alaska, and its needfor commercial/industrial-scale volumes of
biomass fuel stocks. However, the Study will have major statewide application as it will serve as
the basisfor all agricultural andforestry biomass-based energy projects; the greatest number of
which are being proposedfor rural and village communities. Work will take place in Fairbanks
and Palmer, Alaska. Project cooperators are the School ofNatural Resources and Agricultural
Sciences(SNRAS) and the Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station(AFES) at the University
ofAlaska Fairbanks(UAF) (project primary/agricultural energy crops andforest biomass),
Fairbanks Economic Development Corporation(FEDC) (logistics, data support, and information
dissemination), and the Alaska Division ofForestry (forest biomass, and harvest, transport, and
storage technologies),
Gwitchyaa Zhee Corporation Board is the authorizing Board for Gwitchyaa Zhee Utility the Applicant. This application supports a wood heating project in Fort Yukon, Alaska. Local partners
include the Council of Athabascan Tribal Governments (DOE recipient of biomass grant support $1.2 million), Gwitchyaa Zhee Native Corporation & Utility Company and Gwitchyaa Gwichin
Tribal Government, Yukon Flats School District and City of Fort Yukon. A wood energy supply analysis, and a feasibility and conceptual design analysis has been completed for a district
heating loop for downtown Fort Yukon to include the School, Gym, AC Store, School District Office, Water Plant, Post Office and two stand alone boilers; one at the new CATG Clinic and
the other heating the Voc Ed Complex. A side by side analysis of both chip boilers (K?b) and stick fired boilers (Garn) with estimated cost analysis and net simple payback for
individual buildings was conducted in the feasibility assessment. In each case the chip boilers made more economic sense in an integrated model with forest management and harvest operations.
The three chip fired boilers will require approximately 2000-2500 tons of chips depending on moisture content to displace up to 135,347 gallons of fuel or 90% of oil used in these commercial
buildings at a cost of approximately $20/MMBTU ($200/ton) for chips
compared to $46.93/MMBTU for fuel oil ($6.50/gal). This project is being conducted in concert but as a separate project with a project funded by Denali Commission, US DOE through an
Alaska Village Initiatives earmark, and GZ Corporation to develop a wood harvesting system, wood yard and a wood energy utility to supply and maintain the boilers. Both projects have
been developed through technical support from Alaska Village Initiatives, and CATG Resource
Department and e-Four Engineering. Principle personnel to date include Bill Wall, PhD, Peter Olsen, Bruce Thomas, and Greg Koontz, ME.
This application supports a wood heating project in McGrath, Alaska. Local partners include the
City of McGrath, Village Safe Water, MTNT Corporation, and McGrath Light & Power
(ML&P) (applicant). A wood energy supply analysis, and a Level 2 Feasibility (in writing
phase) and conceptual design analysis has been completed for a district heating loop for
downtown McGrath to include in addition to residences, larger consumers; , School District
Office Building (offices, Museum, Library), Captain Snow Center, (including Water Treatment
Plant, Southcentral Foundation offices and current Health Center, Alaska State Troopers,
Washeteria & Showers, District Court, city offices and meeting hall), Post Office, new Health
Center, (to be built), DNR Forestry & Wildfire Center, new Tribal Center (Village Council
offices and Community Hall), and KSKO Public Radio Station. This Level 2 study has not yet
been coordinated with an analysis for a heat recovery project being proposed by ML:&P and
AE&E. The biomass project will link and integrate with the heat recovery project in future
iterations of design and cost analysis in order to capture the synergies from both to create an
optimum design. A side by side analysis of both chip boilers (K?b) and stick fired boilers (Garn)
with estimated cost analysis and net simple payback for individual buildings was conducted in
the feasibility assessment (calculations attached). In most cases the chip boilers made more
economic sense in an integrated model with forest management and harvest operations. The chip
fired boilers will require approximately 2000 tons of chips annually modeled at 40% moisture
content to displace up to 125,000 gallons of fuel or 98% of oil used in these commercial
buildings at a cost of between $28.88 ? $36.10/MMBTUs or between $4-$5 on a per gallon
equivalent compared to $50.54/MMBTU for fuel oil ($7.00/gal). This project is planned to be
conducted in concert with the Village Safe Water project to replace the entire water main system
in McGrath in 2009-2011. The integration of these two projects has the potential to produce
significant cost savings for installation of piping, the most expensive portion of the project. Both
projects have been developed through technical support from Alaska Village Initiatives, and
McGrath Light & Power and e-Four Engineering. Principle personnel to date include Bill Wall,
PhD, Peter Olsen, Ernie Baumgartner, and Greg Koontz, ME, George Wilson, ME of Village
Safe Water. Linkages are planned with Steven J. Stassel, P.E., president AE&E.
The applicant, along with the State Department of Transportation (ADOT), proposes to build a road and 69-kV transmission line to connect the community of Kake with Petersburg. The road/intertie
will allow the delivery of surplus hydropower available from the Tyee project to Kake and eliminate its total reliance upon diesel generation. The community of Kake will continue to
be served by the Inside Passage Electric Cooperative (IPEC). The transmission line infrastructure will be owned and operated by the Kwaan Electric Intertie Cooperative, Inc. (KWETICO,
the applicant), who will charge IPEC for wheeling power to Kake. The road project will allow Kake citizens access to Petersburg\'s infrastructure including major air transportation,
medical facilities, more frequent ferry service, engine repair facilities, and various services and industries not available in Kake. The Intertie will also provide broadband telecommunications
to the community of Kake, and savings to the State\'s Power Cost Equalization Program. The project is part of the overall Southeast Intertie plan commissioned and supported by Southeast
Conference and regional leaders. The road/Intertie dual construction will save money for both ADOT and KWETICO, and will facilitate access to the transmission line for repairs and maintenance.
The project will begin at the Hawk Inlet submarine cable termination yard on Admiralty Island as a continuation of the 69-kV line from Juneau. The cable termination yard will be located
on the eastern shore approximately 2.75 miles up Hawk Inlet just inland from the shoreline and the submarine cable will be buried as it leaves the yard and proceeds offshore. The total
length of the submarine cable is approximately 25 miles. Kwaan Electric Intertie Cooperative, Inc. (KWETICO) will own and operate the transmission line however Inside Passage Electric
Cooperative (IPEC) will continue as the utility providing electrical service to the Hoonah area. IPEC will purchase power from Alaska Electric Light & Power (AEL&P) and KWETICO will
charge IPEC a wheeling rate for providing power to Hoonah who will be the primary community served along with the old Whitestone Logging Camp. The project is part of the overall Southeast
Intertie plan commissioned and supported by Southeast Conference and regional leaders.
The Southeast Alaska Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) 2008 Update lists the intertie as the number one priority for the City of Hoonah. Jodi Mitchell the CEO/General
Manager of IPEC will be the contact person on the project. Additional personnel from AEL&P that will be involved are Tim McLeod President and General Manager and, Eric Eriksen Vice
President Transmission and Distribution Engineer.
The Allison Lake Hydroelectric Project is located adjacent to the Prince William Sound, immediately south of Valdez, Alaska. CVEA is a member-owned electric cooperative providing central
station electrical service to a relatively large geographical area of Eastern Interior and Gulf Coast Alaska. CVEA is a stand-alone (not interconnected to another power system) electric
utility. The service territory is divided into two districts, the Valdez district and the Copper River Basin district. The Valdez district is comprised of the organized area of the
City of Valdez. The Copper Basin district incorporates many outstretched communities including: Glennallen, Gakona, Gulkana, Tazlina, Copper Center, Kluti-Kaah, Copperville, Kenny Lake,
Tolsona,
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 15 9/3/2008
Mendeltna, Nelchina, Eureka, and Sheep Mountain. CVEA?s corporate office is located in Glennallen while the engineering and power production functions are managed from the Valdez district
office. CVEA?s personnel are extensively involved with the Allison Lake Project. CVEA has hired Hatch Acres to assist in coordinating the work and field studies and license application.
The project is located in Cordova, Alaska. Because of astronomical home heating costs, we need to provide an affordable form of energy this winter. Affordable fuel wood is available
to the community, from donated lots at an old sort yard and from an airport clearing project. We need assistance with purchasing a processing mill, yarding the logs, and cutting the
logs into split firewood. The Eyak Corporation owns several log sort yards which they have generously donated to the village for firewood use. The State of Alaska has offered down
logs from the airport clearing project. To efficiently process this wood, we will purchase a firewood processing mill, set it up and train the operators. The mill will enable us to
process firewood in a timely manner to be able to distribute an abundant amount of firewood to the community. We will mill approximately 3,421 cords of firewood. The supply for this
will come from existing log decks and the airport clearing project. The firewood will be distributed to our elders at no cost and the rest of the community will be asked to contribute
$50 per cord to sustain the program. The money generated will help pay for labor costs of processing the firewood in future years. This project will provide 37.2 billion BTU\'s of
low cost energy for home heating and will offset 312.6 thousand gallons of fuel oil and save $1.58 million this winter in home heating costs for Cordova.
In July 2008, Haines Assisted Living, Inc.(HAL) began construction on a senior assisted living/ residential complex comprising a total of 26,000 SF. The building site is on lots fronting
Third St. from Dalton to Union. Residents of Haines and Southeast Alaska will utilize the senior assisted living and senior affordable housing being built in 2008?2010. The project
is a collaboration seven years in development and funded by the Denali Commission, the Community Development Block Grant Program, the Rasmuson Foundation and the community of Haines.
The first phase of the project will be completed in the fall of 2009 at a cost of over $4 million. Key to the long term sustainability of the facility is the installation of a Ground
Source Heat Pump to extract geothermal energy from the earth and circulate it through a radiant in-floor heating system. The initial feasibility and design has been completed as the
follow-up to an extensive energy life-cycle cost analysis performed in 2007and updated in October 2008.The designed system estimate of 210% efficiency will eliminate fossil fuel consumption
in favor of renewable geo-thermal heat source and local hydro-electric power and result in significant operational savings for the life of the facility. Haines Assisted Living, Inc.,
Dan Austin, Project Manager and Jim Rehfeldt, Alaska Energy Engineering LLC are the principals involved in this grant project. Resumes attached.
AP&T proposes to construct the 2.0 MW Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located
on Yerrick Creek, approximately 20 miles west of Tok. The Project would off-set diesel
generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Tetlin, Tanacross, Dot Lake,
and Tok. The Project will consist of a small diversion structure, approximately 15,000 feet of
penstock, powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and transmission
line. The Project operation will be run-of-river; annual generation is expected to be
approximately 4,900 MWh/yr (approximately 40% of the interconnected load). The Project will
provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost to maintain a hydro
project is also significantly lower than diesel generation.
This project is called the North Prince of Wales Island Intertie Project (Project). AP&T
proposes to construct a line extension to the communities of Coffman Cove and Naukati Bay,
placing these communities on the Prince of Wales Island (POW) electric grid which is supplied
with renewable energy from two hydroelectric projects. Both of these communities currently rely
on 100% diesel generation for electricity. The total line is to be 48 miles (Coffman Cove = 37
miles; Naukati Bay = 11 miles) of overhead 4/0 ACSR three-phase 34.5 kV line with a 1/0 ACSR
neutral conductor on single pole wood structures. This line extension will come off the existing
34.5 kV line from between Klawock and Thorne Bay, near Control Lake. The route is shown on
enclosed diagrams in Section 7 ? Appendices. Naukati Bay is 11 miles off the main road to
Coffman Cove.
Phase I: Reconnaissance
This phase is already completed with previous reconnaissance along the highway to determine
how many poles, etc. will be needed to complete project.
Phase II: Resource Assessment/Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual Design
A feasibility assessment based on the condition of the new highway and right-of-way (ROW) to
access the proposed pole locations, including anchoring and corner structure and transformers,
to develop the conceptual design of project components will need to occur. AP&T is presently in
discussion with SHPO as to whether an archaeological survey is necessary for this project. No
other environmental surveys are anticipated due to the project being in or adjacent to the
highway ROW which passes through some clear-cut\'s as well.
Phase III: Final Design & Permitting
In this phase permits will be acquired, acquiring legal access to lands, and final design for the
construction phase including a final survey of the route. Permits needed: COE permit, Forest
Service Special-Use Permit, Alaska Dept. of Transportation easement, and SHPO review.
Phase IV: Construction
Construction phase would include mobilization (acquiring materials, i.e. wood poles, conductor,
cross-arms, transformers, etc., contracting with local companies to provide materials and
equipment, and preparing ROW, i.e. brushing, etc. and installing the transmission line;
and interconnecting with AP&T\'s existing infrastructure in both Coffman Cove and Naukati Bay.
A monthly report can be made during construction to AEA of progress and expenditures (or
AEA Renewable Energy Fund
NORTH POW INTERTIE PROJECT Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 18 10/7/2008
quarterly on expenditures to reduce paperwork).
CEC proposes to serve as a model for rural Alaska utilities by installing an ORC heat recovery unit that will capture waste heat and increase diesel generator electrical production by
an additional four to six percent. The average electric production efficiency of CEC?s Orca Power Plant is 13.65 kWh/gallon of diesel. CEC has placed a deposit on a new, 3.6 MW rated,
EMD 710 series, 20 cylinder diesel generator. The efficiency of the new generator is expected to peak at 15 kWh/gallon. Cordova Electric Cooperative desires fit the EMD with an organic
Rankine Cycle (ORC) heat recovery system that will capture additional BTUs that would otherwise be wasted energy. Cordova Electric Cooperative is the sole provider of power to the City
of Cordova, Alaska. We are a member-owned cooperative with 17 full time employees. CEC?s CEO Clay Koplin, Manager of Power Production Danny Ackmann, Manager of Finance Valerie Covel
and the engineering firm of Marsh Creek make up the project team for implementing this renewable energy project.
After a decade of declining performance and three years of no operation (2005 ? 2008), due to unstable site geology and flooding, CEC has focused intense efforts on re?designing its
Humpback Creek hydro?electric facility. Humpback Creek, named for the pink salmon that spawn in its mouth, is located five miles north of Cordova and is accessible only by boat. Sub?marine
cable from the plant to Cordova City limits, and buried transmission lines to the CEC plant, connect the facility to Cordova. Because of its steep grade, fish are not able to migrate
upstream and thus no fish populations will be affected by this project. From the original in?take structure to tidewater, Humpback Creek flows about 0.7 miles and drops from an elevation
of 276 feet to where it enters saltwater Orca Inlet. Site visits by the project team to other small hydro?electric projects with a variety of in?take arrangements and a project workshop
held in December, 2007 culminated in a new design with an intake/diversion that includes a tunnel, conventional side intake with provisions for sluicing sediment and a diversion dam
with a sluice gate that will allow removal of stream bed material that may collect outside the intake. The new location facilitates much?improved access, a location with shallower bedrock
substrate, and a better hydrological analysis. This project has been CEC?s and the community of Cordova?s top priority for the past three years, ever since October, 2006?s 3,500?year
return period flood event destroyed the intake/diversion facility. Project partners include the City of Cordova, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the Eyak Corporation
(for access).
The proposed Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie is a 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect
the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan Public Utilities (KPU).
The Intertie will include 16 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line to be constructed on
Annette Island between Metlakatla and Race Point and an approximate one mile submarine cable
crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Race Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation.
The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for the integrated operation of the
interconnected systems? generating plants. The Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie will provide
benefits to both Ketchikan and Metlakatla, allowing for significantly improved utilization of
Metlakatla?s existing hydroelectric generating resources while reducing diesel generation in
Ketchikan.
The proposed project is a combination of selective reconnaissance, prototype testing, conflict assessment and comprehensive feasibility assessment to establish the feasibility of prospective
pilot tidal energy development projects at four sites where Preliminary Permits have been issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The four sites and respective communities
served are:
? Icy Passage Icy Straits, serving the community of Gustavus;
? Angoon, serving the local Kootznoowoo community;
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 8 of 59 9/3/2008
? Wrangell Narrows, potentially serving the community of Petersburg; and
? Central Cook Inlet near Nikiski, potentially supplying the communities in the service area of the
Homer Electric Association.
The map locations of the sites are provided in figures included in the Section 2 Overview above. The
proposed grant recipients are two prospective IPPs, AKTidal Energy Company (developer of the Icy
Passage, Wrangell Narrows and Central Cook sites) and Natural Currents Alaska, LLC. (developer of the
Angoon site), in partnership with the City of Gustavus and the Tlingit ? Haida Tribal Council as the
umbrella organization representing the local Kootznoowoo at Angoon.
The Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project is a long-term energy solution to rising and unpredictable costs of energy in rural and remote regions with geothermal energy
potential. The next phase of the project and the subject of this application is geothermal energy resource confirmation and qualification. Phase III includes design, engineering and
construction of a deep well preceded by funding and permit acquisition, road and well site improvements and drilling and drill management contracts. Subsequent to resource confirmation
and qualification, NEA proposes constructing a 25 MW geothermal plant and interconnection infrastructure that will supply 25+ communities in the Bristol Bay and Lake Region with low-cost
electricity that effectively decreases the cost of power 70% by displacing 5.4 million gallons of diesel fuel currently used to meet regional electrical and heating energy requirements.
The project will be the first utility grade geothermal development in Alaska establishing long-term firm, reliable and cost effective alternative energy that will enhance rural sustainability
and the development of renewable and strategic natural resources. Although the project focuses on the production of electricity the identification and development phases will bring
geothermal technology transfer and demonstration that is applicable to other geothermal sites in the region.
The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwells power system. Currently they obtain power from the line between MEA
and GVEA. To accomplish this they propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this plant will be in exccess
of 1 MW. It will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
We are proposing the first 10 MW Utility-Grade Geothermal Development in Alaska. This 10 MW project would be able to extract geothermal power from the base of either Redoubt or Spur
by 2105. The reference Project would begin with the Remote Construction...
The project will be located at the mile 33 of the Tok Cutoff Highway in Chistochina, Alaska and will be managed and owned by the Cheesh?na Tribal Council (CTC). The project provides
a (cordwood) biomass system to provide heat and hot water for all community facilities located in a ?campus? area. Existing facilities that will be served by the project are owned
and operated by CTC and include the CTC Tribal Office Building, Chistochina Community Hall and the Education/Library facility. Two new facilities that will be served by the project
are scheduled to be constructed in the coming year; Mt Sanford Tribal Consortium multiuse facility with health clinic and CTC?s Washateria.
The Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project is located on Packers Creek in Chignik
Lagoon. The 190 kW project can provide for most of the communities current power
needs, which peak at about 125 kW. The plant would eliminate about 85% of 50,000
gallons of diesel consumed by the generators annually. There will also be excess
energy that could be used for heating the school and other local structures. The project
would also enable the community to add a freezer/processing facility to further improve
the local economy.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a reconnaissance study prior to pursuing a Resource Assessment, Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design for the development
of a state of the art clean waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Ketchikan and the communities of the Southeast Conference. The proposed plant project location must
be determined but initial consideration is being given to a site at Ward Cove, site of the old Ketchikan Pulp Mill. The project will serve Ketchikan and those communities that the
proposed study shows can be reasonably served. This study will provide the information about present patterns for disposal of municipal solid waste and other types of waste in the
general area, logistics considerations, feedstock sources that can be identified and evaluated that would be available to support the proposed plant and such other information that
can lead to a feasibility analysis, how such a proposed plant would supplement, integrate into or supplant existing energy resources, potential markets for such a plant and its products,
possible site and cost analysis for future studies addressing the preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating
costs, by product markets and operating information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to meet future grant applications
for such a study and project.
The proposed plant project will convert the waste, landfill and the Ketchikan Pulp Mill superfund site into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management
Company, Robert Loescher, Richard Smith and Alaska Recycling Energy in conjunction with Ketchikan City and Borough staff and the Southeast Conference. If needed, additional consultants
will be retained.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a reconnaissance study prior to pursuing a Resource Assessment, Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design for the development
of a state of the art clean waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Juneau and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project location is at the Juneau Landfill
currently owned and operated by Waste Management. The project will principally serve Juneau and those communities that the proposed study shows can be reasonably served. This study
will provide the information about present patterns for disposal of municipal solid waste and other types of waste in the general area, logistics considerations, feedstock sources
that can be identified and evaluated that would be available to support the proposed plant and such other information that can lead to a feasibility analysis, how such a proposed plant
would supplement, integrate into or supplant existing energy resources, potential markets for such a plant and its products, possible site and cost analysis for future studies addressing
the preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product markets and operating information necessary
to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to meet future grant applications for such a study and project. The proposed plant project
will convert the Juneau waste, landfill and sanitary sludge into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Robert Loescher, and Alaska Recycling
Energy in conjunction with Juneau City and Borough staff and the Southeast Conference. If needed, additional consultants will be retained.
The Aleutians East Borough (AEB) stretches from the tip of the Alaska Peninsula to the easternmost Aleutian Islands. This isolated region is bordered on one side by the North Pacific
Ocean and the other by the Bering Sea. It has been home to generations of Aleut families since the Second Ice Age in Akutan, False Pass, King Cove, Nelson Lagoon, and Sand Point. Cold
Bay was developed during World War II. In this region, called ?the birthplace of the winds?, renewable energy resources abound -- not only wind power, but also hydro, geo-thermal,
current and tidal. Some waste heat recovery opportunities also exist. The larger AEB communities of Akutan, King Cove and Sand Point, which have personnel resources and comparatively
healthy city budgets, have alternative energy projects operating or on the drawing board. This project requests funding to conduct a renewable energy reconnaissance report for the
smaller (populations less than 100) communities of Cold Bay, False Pass and Nelson Lagoon which require assistance to decrease their energy costs and reduce their dependence on diesel
fuel. A reconnaissance report will summarize the assessment and findings. This project will be administered and managed by the AEB and will be conducted by a consultant chosen by
the AEB.
The Falls Creek Hydro Electric Project is an 800 kW run-of-river hydroelectric facility, located in Gustavus Alaska, which will provide electric power to the community of Gustavus.
The project is being built by Gustavus Electric Company to displace existing diesel generation. Construction of the project is approximately 90% complete and will provide 90% of the
communities electric needs..
The City and Borough of Wrangell (City), through Wrangell Municipal Light and
Power (WMLP), has established a fuel displacement rate of $.08/KWH for all heat and
hot water. There is a possibility of an interruptible rate of $.05/KWH from the Four
Dam Pool Power Agency. This special rate is due to Tyee Lake Hydroelectric facilities
spilling of excess water (water not used in power production). A feasibility study has
been conducted by Electric Power Systems, Inc. to determine what the savings would
be per year if the city buildings were converted from diesel fired boilers to electric
boilers, develop a rough order magnitude cost estimate (ROM), and provide estimated
engineering design fees for replacing the boilers. The study was conducted on 11 public
buildings in Wrangell and the study found significant savings to progress this project to
the design, permitting and construction phase. WMLP would like funding to convert
these 11 public facilities from diesel fired boilers to electric boilers. The community
served by this project is Wrangell, Alaska. Directly involved in this project is the City
and Borough of Wrangell and Wrangell Municipal Light and Power.
The reconnaissance study, followed by a more detailed feasibility study will analyze the
feasibility of supplying the town of Anchorage, Alaska with heat from geothermal energy
sources. IAE has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Municipality of
Anchorage to facilitate such a study. The Municipality of Anchorage has agreed to support the
feasibility study efforts by providing information about the potential for geothermal energy use
in Anchorage as well as right of way information. If the results of the feasibility study prove to
be positive for development, IAE will work towards developing the project.
Power to the People ? from fish!
It Isn?t Easy To Be Green; But It Is Entirely possible.
Feasibility Study
This study examines the opportunity, analyzes the possibility, and determines the feasibility of providing a stand-alone fish waste-processing facility that produces and uses clean energy
from renewable resources. It serves the commercial fishery and processing plants (7 land based processing facilities, 3 floating processing facilities and several smaller independent
seller/operators) and the community of Naknek, King Salmon, and South Naknek, Alaska. It is a model plant that, when proven successful, will be recreated throughout the fisheries of
the State and the nation, and the world.
This facility serves the ecology and the economy as it provides supplemental clean energy from renewable sources to the locally owned cooperative energy association. This energy counteracts
the drain on the power grid during the fish processing season ? which is what creates the drain. In short, this model plant and its subsequent generations are usage neutral.
A wonderful and significant side-benefit of this proposed facility is that it utilizes the approximately 30-40% waste of fish products currently being dumped into the environment as
waste. While this waste is generally bio-degradable and may not always be environmentally unfriendly, it represents a huge waste of resources; resources that required energy to obtain;
resources that could be (and, now, will be) transformed into fuel (and other useful and healthy value added products) instead of simply being dumped back into the environment as garbage.
This type of facility need not be a ?highly profitable? business in the traditional sense in order to be highly beneficial to the local economy and, eventually, the world economy,. While
providing supplemental clean energy fuel, it reduces unnecessary waste with its inherent potential harm to the environment. Even though it may be argued that such potential harm is
negligible, such waste and potential harm, no matter how slight offends the sensibilities, especially when it is unnecessary waste of environmental products (fish) which, in this case,
also happen to be living creatures ? and particularly when the alternative is transforming such waste into useful by products including clean, supplemental energy.
Bristol Bay Borough and Naknek Electric Association have joined in this responsible and cooperative scientific effort in the largest sockeye salmon fishery in the world to perform this
study and assess the initial, as well as its ultimate, practicality and profitability of such a facility.
The creation of this facility carries with it an opportunity for the local population, including the indigent native population, to operate a model business that produces clean energy
and healthy, useful products as it achieves an ideal of Native American traditionalists and Green Planet idealists: Self sustaining, environmentally friendly production ? with no waste.
1) Market Issues ? This study will prove that there is a huge future need as well as adequate demand currently for the energy (and the value added products) produced and conserved by
this facility. This facility will serve as a model of a clean renewable energy production and conservation and the reduction of waste of environmental products (fish) which, as stated
are also living creatures.
2) Organizational Issues ? This project combines the skills and talents ? and idealistic objectives ? of technical and scientific communities with the local workforce and values. This
facility can and will be staffed and managed to a significant extent by qualified locals. The feasibility study will demonstrate how that will be done effectively and profitably.
3) Technical issues ? The equipment and technology needed ? where it can be obtained ? cost of technology and equipment ? when it can be operational ? etc. will be determined by the
feasibility study. There will be extensive study into best practices to deal with the amount of possible waste to be processed and disposed of according to regulatory, practical, and
ideal (e.g. ecological) requirements.
4) Financial issues ? Start up costs ? operating costs ? revenue and energy projections ? sources of financing ? profitability analysis ? etc. are impossible to determine until the feasibility
study is complete. The feasibility study is what will determine and propose the processes, resources and equipment necessary to create the final products and services to be produced.
The ideal objective of our facility is to produce clean energy from fish waste to reduce to zero the waste produced in processing fish ? and operate from its own clean energy produced
from such waste (which will then no longer be considered ?waste?). We collect undesired fish processing waste from cooperating commercial processors and render it into value added products
and resources. In so doing, we use as much as possible only renewable sources of energy particularly those created or released in commercial fish processing.
That ideal objective achieves the high standard of Native American traditionalists and Green Planet idealists: No waste ? and no harm to the environment.
In reaching that ideal objective, we produce and utilize only clean energy from renewable sources such as fish oil biofuel rendered from fish processing and energy obtained by harnessing
wind and solar power in a cogeneration situation.
1-100% of the fish processing waste is cost-effectively or profitably converted to fish oil and fish pellets and other value added products and
2-100% of the fuel is cost effectively produced from renewable energy sources (specifically fish oil, biofuel, wind and solar)
Our practical objective is to approach the ideal objective ever closer until the ideal is achieved ? however long that takes.
The practical objective in its first phase ? that justifies the initial human effort and financial cost of creating and operating the facility is considered successfully accomplished
as?
1-[?]% of the fish processing waste is cost-effectively or profitably converted to alternative or supplemental fuels and value-added products. and
2-[?]% of the fuel used is from renewable energy sources (specifically fish oil, bio-fuel, wind and solar).
What are the percentages [?]. That will be determined by the feasibility study.
The study will also determine where this facility should be located and how.
This facility is created and developed with the end in mind of organizing techniques and technologies and proceeding with processes that smaller fish processing plants can share and
larger plants can share or build.
Further, the physical, financial and human resources management systems that are created and established can and will be duplicated and promoted through written and spoken mediums, convention
and association presentations, study publishing, consulting, etc.
This is a first-cut look at these issues. We have examined carefully the relevant facts and related experiments, both successful and unsuccessful, already available to us. We have discovered
that nearly every significant technology and resource has been discovered and utilized to some extent. This is an effort to bring all such techniques and technologies together into
an operating facility. The Bristol Bay fishery is reknown throughout the world and would be the best location for a leading trend to be set as a model.
It is clear that this feasibility study is an excellent investment and is likely to achieve a profitable, earth friendly, payoff within the first year of operation ? and will move ever
closer to its ideal goal until it is at least 99% achieved ? likely within the decade, perhaps sooner.
The Lake Elva facility will consist of a dam constructed 8,500 feet downstream from the existing outlet of the lake. A rock fill structure with a projected height of 120 feet above
the estimated base; the dam crest will be 625 feet long and 20 feet wide with a 2.5:1 upstream and a 2.1:1 downstream slope. This dam will increase the existing lake from its? initial
surface area of 300 acres at 325 El. The reservoir formed by the dam will provide 26,800 acre feet of active storage above the minimum operational pool at 320 El. The lake surface
area will be 820 acres at normal pool El 370. A 50 foot wide spillway with 10 feet of freeboard to the dam crest will discharge over natural terrain into the existing creek channel.
Cresting at El 370 the spillway is designed to discharge the probable maximum flood of 3,790 cfs. A buried concrete pipe will provide the power conduit from the power intake to the
power house. A 60 inch diameter vertical shaft power intake will be set at El 310, ten feet below minimum operation pool. The intake will be protected with a steel trash-rack. The
60 concrete encased steel water conduit will be used to divert flows during construction. Upon completion this conduit will transition to an electrically controlled 36 inch butterfly
valve downstream for inspection and emergency closure operations. The control valve will transition to a 48 inch steel pipe and then into concrete sections following the terrain where
it will be connected to a 24 inch steel bifurcation 100 feet above the power house. The powerhouse will contain two 750 kW turbines. Under a rated net head of 280 feet each unit will
drive a 900 kVa, 0.9 pf, 2.4 kV generator. This steel framed structure will be located approximately 1,800 feet upstream from the Elva Creek confluence with Lake Nerka. It is planned
to be on a 20 by 80 foot concrete foundation with a height of 20 feet above the generator floor. The average discharge head from the power house will be 60 cfs.
This project will necessitate the construction of approximately 33 miles of new three phase transmission tie line from the project site to close proximity of the village of Aleknagik.
The Nushagak Area Hydropower Project will initially serve the communities of Aleknagik, Dillingham, and Kanakanak in the Nushagak and Wood River areas (future interties to Manokotak
and Ekwok - New Stuyahok - Koliganek are under consideration). This first phase with inter-tie is estimated to cost $22 million and replace 500,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually,
for a yearly savings of $2,105,700 at today?s fuel prices. Currently all power in the area is generated with diesel by Nushagak Cooperative (NETC), with a current residential rate
at $0.463 cents per kilowatt hour. Nushagak Cooperative would develop, maintain, and operate the Lake Elva facility and associated infrastructure.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of the art clean
waste gasification plant that will generate energy for FNSB and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the FNSB Municipal Landfill in Fairbanks.
The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the FNSB Solid Waste Division. This study will provide the information required to develop the feedstock
sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product markets and operating
information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize a legal relationship with the Solid Waste Division for
FNSB. The proposed plant project will convert the FNSB waste and landfill into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Plasma Waste Recycling,
CH2MHill, Economic Research Associates, and Alaska Recycling Energy staff in conjunction with FNSB Solid Waste Services and Borough staff. If needed, additional consultants will be
retained.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of the art clean
waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Mat-Su and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the Mat-Su Municipal Landfill in Palmer.
The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the Mat-Su Solid Waste Division. This study will provide the information required to develop the feedstock
sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product markets and operating
information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize a legal relationship with the Solid Waste Division for
Mat-Su. The proposed plant project will convert the Mat-Su waste and landfill into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Plasma Waste
Recycling, CH2MHill, Economic Research Associates, and Alaska Recycling Energy staff in conjunction with Mat-Su Solid Waste Services and Borough staff. If needed, additional consultants
will be retained.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of the art clean
waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Anchorage and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the Anchorage Municipal Landfill adjacent
to Route 1 on the Glenn Highway just east of town. The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the Anchorage Solid Waste Services. This study will provide
the information required to develop the feedstock sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up
and operating costs, by product markets and operating information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize
a legal relationship with the Solid Waste Services Sector for the Municipality of Anchorage. The proposed plant project will convert the Anchorage waste and landfill into electricity
or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Plasma Waste Recycling, CH2MHill, Economic Research Associates, and Alaska Recycling Energy staff in conjunction
with Anchorage Solid Waste Services and City staff. If needed, additional consultants will be retained.
We will be integrating a wood fired hydronic heating system with existing boiler system in some of the buildings and retrofitting hot water heat to other buildings. The project will
require a greater initial investment and higher annual OM&R costs than for an equivalent oil or gas system alone; however, the savings in fuel costs (wood vs. fossil fuel) will pay
for the initial investment and cover the additional OM&R costs in a relatively short period of time. After the initial investment is paid off, the project will continues to save money
(avoided fuel cost) for the life of the heating system. Since inflation rates for fossil fuels are typically higher than inflation rates for wood fuel, increasing inflation rates result
in greater fuel savings and thus greater project viability.
The potential financial viability of this project depends not only on the relative costs and cost savings, but also on the financial objectives and expectations of the Gulkana Village,
which will be getting free firewood from another program.
The existing oil-fired furnaces, which would remain in place for back up purposes, and the installation of two Garn WHS 32000 wood fired hydronic heaters will supply heat to four
duplexes, teen center, community hall administration, fitness center, shop, new offices, clinic, and the new bus garage. It will also feed into the water system through the water
distribution made.
The initial investment would be $898,000 which would include the cost a combined heat building and wood storage, pex insulated pipe, adapting buildings to hot water heat that do not
already have it.
Takatz Lake Project ? Alaska, a hydroelectric project of about 27.7 MW in size capable of
producing an average of about 106,900 MWH per year to serve the City of Sitka and other
communities in Southeast Alaska as the communities become electrically interconnected. See
the attached application to FERC dated June, 2008 for a more detailed description.
Short Project Description
This project will raise the normal reservoir height 15' (5% head increase) at the existing Swan Lake hydro project, FERC No. P-2911, creating an additional 21,600 acre-ft of storage
resulting in an average annual energy generation of 7,500 MWh's at a total cost of $13 million.
Design of the FERC licensed (P-11393) project that will create 9.6 MW of new hydroelectric capacity on Mahoney Lake with a storage capacity of 4,000 acre-ft and 41,700 MWh of energy
at a cost of $45 million to serve Ketchikan and sourrounding communities.
Combined with application #517 / only this one (#523) scored
Combined with application #523 / this one not scored
This new department will be responsible for 1. energy assessment 2. seek and secure funds related to energy 3. assist tribal members with : a. weathrization application and b. heating
assistant applications (to help with the high cost of fuel we pay in Noatak) 4. long term goals will be to look into alternative energy for Noatak.
There are many types of wood-fired boiler systems available on the market but they are very costly and the freight to bring them to the villages would likely triple the cost of the boiler
system. We are proposing to build a wood stove from local scrap metal, e.g., old fuel tanks that are no longer used, but the water containers must be shipped to the village because
we do not have the capabilities or the resources to manufacture them. The project will be located in the village of Marshall and the Ohogamiut Traditional Council EPA Department will
oversee the project.
Wood biomass for the production of bulk commercial wood pellets and briquettes, bulk and/or bagged residential wood pellets, wood chips for commercial use and cordwood. Facility will
be located at milepost 112 Richardson Highway, 190 miles from Anchorage and 250 miles from Fairbanks. Communities served will include all villages and cities in Alaska. The grant project
will incorporate varying degrees of assistance from Ahtna, Incorporated and its subsidiaries, State agencies, Federal agencies, local borough, city and village government bodies and
various contractors and consulting firms.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough, the Lake and Peninsula School District and the Bristol Bay Native Corporation have indicated written or verbal support for this project (see attached
letters of support). The Lake and Peninsula School District supplies power to the school and Chignik Lake community with their diesel generators. They used over 65,000 gallons of diesel
in the 2007/2008 school year which must transported 5000 gallons at time in a tanker truck from Chignik via a small vessel that can navigate the Chignik River. Diesel cost $3.87 a gallon
delivered to Chignik plus a $1.10 per gallon surcharge to transport it from Chignik to Chignik Lake for a total of $323,050 for the 2007/2008 school year. The State of Alaska Department
of Natural Resources February 2000 report titled Coalbed Methane and Exploration Targets for Rural Alaska Communities identifies the Chignik Bay Basin within the Alaska Peninsula Province
as having potential CBM resources. The Chignik Basin is underlain by bituminous coal. This project will confirm this potential resource by drilling, coring and testing CBM resources
in the Chignik Lake area. A specific drilling plan will be prepared during the Reconnaissance Phase. Once the final location is determined, the drilling, coring and testing will take
place during the Resource Assessment/Feasibility phases.
AWE is requesting additional funds for Phase 1 to add two Vestas V39 turbines to the existing power generation system to dramatically decrease the total consumption of diesel fuel and
stove oil in Sand Point, Alaska. The harbor community of Sand Point is located several hundred miles southwest of Anchorage on the Shumagin Islands, just south of the Aleutian chain.
This commercial fishing village of nearly 1,000 residents serves as a regional hub for crab and salmon fisheries, as well as other fisheries, and has generally enjoyed a healthy economy
over the past ten years. TDX Sand Point Generating (TSPG), a wholly owned subsidiary of TDX Power, owns and operaqtes the Sand Point electric utility. AWE will design, construct,
operate, and maintain the entire project.
Tatitlek, located in northeastern Prince William Sound, is about 30 miles south of Valdez on the eastern side of the Tatitlek Narrows. The community of Tatitlek will be served by this
project. With the "upwardly mobile" price of diesel these days, we can afford to leave no stone unturned in our quest to exploit an alternative energy resource. We are aware that
a good hydro resouce exists nearby. But, is it too far from our community to be economically developed? Local anecdotal information, the Renewable Energy Atlask of Alaska, and AEA\'s
Draft Regional Wind Study suspect that Tatitlek has an excellent wind resource. But we also have a mountain directly behind the village. Will the winds be too turbulent? Site specific
monitoring and feasibility studies can answer these questions and provide direction for further design, permitting, and construction. TDX Power has a Teaming Agreement with Tatitlek
Corporation and the Tatitlek Village IRA ouncil to manage this project with active participation from the IRA Council, Corporation, and Tatitlek School.
Adak is a former military base now owned by the Aleut Corporation (TAC). It is located on Adak Island near the end of Alaska Aleutian Island Chain. Presently there are approximately
75 residents at a base where a population of 6,000 military personnel and their families were once housed. The site was turned over to TAC by the US Navy in 1999. TAC aspires to re-populate
the island with shareholders and employees of the fishing industry. The location is in good fishing grounds and has an established processing plant. The US Navy houses and Missile
Defense Agency house an enormous radar facility in the harbor there for part of the year. This expensive piece of equipment requires reliable shore-based power.
The RCA recently ruled that the City of Adak was not capable of managing nor operating the utility electric utility. TDX Power agreed to take over the utility while the people of Adak
were under emergency conditions. TDX Adak Generating, LLC will complete the project using personnel from its parent company, TDX Power.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource assessment and analysis at the community of McGrath, Alaska. The model would compile the
best available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and proposed
energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and where is it? ? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of McGrath, although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local
conditions. While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for McGrath, the model produced by this project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template,
or framework, for data processing and compilation.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource assessment and analysis at the community of Nenana, Alaska. The model would compile the best
available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and proposed
energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and where is it? ? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of Nenana, although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local conditions.
While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for Nenana, the model produced by this project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template, or framework,
for data processing and compilation.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource assessment and analysis at the community of Tanacross, Alaska. The model would compile the
best available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and proposed
energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and where is it? ? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of Tanacross, although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local
conditions. While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for Tanacross, the model produced by this project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template,
or framework, for data processing and compilation.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource assessment and analysis at the community of Tanana, Alaska. The model would compile the best
available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and proposed
energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and where is it?
? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of Tanana, although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local conditions.
While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for Tanana, the model produced by this project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template, or framework,
for data processing and compilation.
ORPC has obtained a FERC Preliminary Permit for a tidal energy site in a portion of Cook Inlet and Knik Arm adjacent to the waterfront of Anchorage for the purpose of deploying a commercial
scale tidal energy project. The project will involve the deployment of ORPC\'s proprietary ocean current generation (OCGen?) modules consisting of four turbine-generator units (TGUs).
Each TGU consists of a proprietary underwater permanent magnet generator with four (2 per side) advanced design cross flow (ADCF) turbines attached to and rotating on a common shaft.
OCGen? technology is deployed well below the water surface and held in place with a deep sea mooring system so as to be operable beneath the winter ice and avoid any conflicts with
marine navigation. It will be licensed under the FERC hydrokinetic Pilot Project License program and initially installed at a capacity of 1MW (a single OCGen? module) for testing and
monitoring of its operation, including any potential environmental impacts. After the initial OCGen? module has been operated for a year, additional OCGen? modules will be installed
to bring the generating capacity of the project up to the limit of 5 MW allowed under the Pilot Project License. Full build out of the project will occur after a long term FERC Operating
License has been obtained, estimated to be in 2012 or 2013. The project will be interconnected to the railbelt power grid through either Chugach Electric or ML&P and the electricity
generated will be sold to the railbelt utilities.
Phase I of the project will involve assessment of the current diesel and fuel oil users within the ONC controlled assets in Bethel; to estimate the volume of CNG to be supplied, the
extent of modification required to accommodate the switchover7 to natural gas, and of course the willingness of the village residents to be involved. Phase II will build on the inventory
data from the first stage, and will entail development of conceptual design elements sufficient to support the economic analysis noted above, in 2.3. The second stage will also emphasize
a firm supply of pipeline quality natural gas or LNG, as well as identifying critical path schedule constraints such as environmental or transport permits.
This project will convert Biomass waste (municipal wastes, and sawmill/wood wastes) to renewable electric power. Possible site locations include Eielson Air Force base near Fairbanks
and landfill locations near Anchorage, Kodiak and Juneau. Our plant will provide electricity to local communities (local/military schools, residential, Air Force base and civilian airports).
The project will involve Solena Group and its partners (GE, MPR Associates, Ford Bacon & Davis and Deutsche Bank).
This project will construct buried piping, pumps, heat exchangers, and other system components required to recover waste heat from the existing AVEC power plant and confer this energy
to the new City water plant and washeteria in Ambler. This project will involve coordination between the City of Ambler, Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC), the Northwest
Arctic Borough, and the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC).
The proposed project will benefit every electric utility ratepayer in Sand Point and also the public radio station in Sand Point. As such, one hundred (100) percent of the electricity
generated by the wind turbine will benefit the public. KSDP Radio / Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting, Inc. is an AM public radio station licensed to Sand Point, Alaska. The station?s
listening audience consists of approximately 3,000 year-round residents and an additional 2,000 seasonal residents in Sand Point, Chignik, Perryville, Port Moller, Nelson Lagoon, King
Cove, Cold Bay and False Pass. Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting, Inc.?s General Manager Kells Hetherington will oversee the project with his five member Board of Directors. Members of
the radio station?s Board are elected from within the station?s listening area. The wind turbine and associated equipment will be installed at the station?s transmitter site. The work
will be done by ABS Alaska, an alternative energy contractor with offices in Fairbanks, Anchorage and Washington State.
The Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project (Project) will be located in Southeast Alaska, approximately 14 miles northeast of the City of Haines and 10 miles southwest of the City of Skagway.
Connelly Lake (formerly known as Upper Chilkoot Lake) is an 85 acre alpine lake, and drains into the Chilkoot River. The project will be on state and private land, including the Haines
State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve. The project facilities will include a dam at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW powerhouse with two generating
units, a 14-mile-long 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Final dimensions and capacities of these facilities will be determined by optimization studies to be
conducted during Phase II. The Project will be developed by AP&T to provide additional generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems.
AVEC proposes a resource assessment/feasibility analysis/conceptual design project of geothermal sites on the Seward Peninsula region, simultaneously involving the NANA/NW Arctic Borough
Regions and the Kawerak/Bering Straights Native Corporation Regions.
Goal: The SGAP goal is to ascertain the feasibility of geothermal power generation for regional communities and develop conceptual design documents/reports for geothermal generation
on the Seward Peninsula. The SGAP strategic objectives are as follows:
SO 1: Identify potential geothermal sites in the Seward Peninsula Region.
SO 2: Undertake a geological, geochemistry, and geophysical assessment of targeted sites for geothermal power generation potential.
SO3: Undertake a geothermal drilling program to promote regional geothermal interests
SO4: Develop conceptual design and business plan for follow?on phases of the projects.
SO5: Conduct an optimization phase in the conceptual design wherein how to supply power either from one centrally located geothermal plant or from many smaller geothermal plants, to
the communities involved can be evaluated. Included will be evaluating the use of transmission lines for power versus supplying hot water via a pipeline to one or several geothermal
power plant(s).
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of two wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Shaktoolik. Participants in the project include AVEC, STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management and electrical system engineering
for the project. STG will be the general contractor, responsible for the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary
electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100 wind turbines and startup and commissioning services.
The project involves the final design, permitting, and construction of an electrical distribution tie line between the villages of Emmonak and Alakanuk and the final design, permitting,
construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of eight wind turbines to supplement a new power generation system for the communities of Emmonak and Alakanuk. Participants in the
project include AVEC, STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management and electrical system engineering for the project. STG will be the general contractor, responsible
for the design and installation of all civil works, installation of the electrical distribution lines, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems.
Northern Power will provide Northwind 100 wind turbines and startup and commissioning services. Site control is under final review and is expected within a week of submission of this
application. Permitting was completed for the met tower currently at the site of the wind turbines; we expect no unusual permitting requirements for the site.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Stebbins. The work will involve obtaining
a letter of non?objection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location, studying the wind resource
for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome
of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
A meterological (met) tower installed in New Stuyahok between 2003 and 2005 found that winds were class 3 (fair to good); however, placement of the met tower was hindered by the active
runway at the time (location new airport has now been constructed out of town), and it is expected that the wind resource could be better. Before going forward with the final design
and construction of wind turbines, AVEC would like to better determine the wind potential in the community. The work would involve obtaining a letter of non?objection for placement
of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical
investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical
investigation. Wind generators placed at the old airport could reduce the annual fuel consumption of the diesel generators, thus reducing the cost of electricity within New Stuyahok,
as well as reducing the overall volume of fuel that is handled within the community and risks associated with handling fuel.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Scammon Bay. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of nonobjection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource
for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome
of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
A meteorological (met) tower installed near Pitka?s Point (Saint Mary?s and Pitka?s Point are connected by a road and an electrical intertie) in October 2007 has revealed an outstanding
Class 6 wind resource with highly directional winds. A second met tower was installed in August 2008 at lower elevation and closer to Saint Mary?s. This second site was chosen to evaluate
possible trade?offs of wind resource and rime icing risk. The Pitka?s Point met tower data has indicated that rime icing conditions appear to possibly be a significant issue at that
location. While rime icing is presumed to also occur at the lower elevation Saint Mary?s met tower site, the desire is to contrast and compare the two sites with respect to wind power
and predicted power loss due to rime icing. A third met tower is presently stored in Saint Mary?s and available for installation at a third site should early winter data collection
at the Saint Mary?s (the second site) indicate significant rime icing. AVEC proposes to continue the wind resource assessment for an additional one to two years to include evaluation
and comparison of the two existing met towers and possible installation of the third met tower at a site further from back from the Yukon River. The primary focus of continuation of
the wind study will be to further evaluate the icing problem at the met tower sites and to estimate as accurately as possible turbine downtime during icing conditions.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Teller. The work will involve obtaining
a letter of non-objection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for
1 year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of
the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
The Archangel Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in Hatcher Pass, Alaska. The project will be located on state land in the Archangel Valley. Energy
from the project would be provided into the Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid.
Archangel Green Power, LLC (AGP) is the project proponent, and would contribute funding, own, and operate the project. AGP has already completed reconnaissance studies of the Archangel
Creek resource, and finds that the project warrants further study. Construction would be completed by qualified contractors and subcontractors selected through a competitive bidding
process.
The Applicant owns and operates Motherlode Lodge located near Delia Creek. The 4.9 acre plot of land is privately owned but segments of the proposed project will be located on land owned
by the State of Alaska Park Service. The Motherlode Lodge currently utilizes 2 diesel fuel generators, 1 boiler and 2 wood stoves to power the facility and accounts for a significant
percentage of annual operating expenses. The company plans to construct a 50 kWh run of river project with a flow of 3.5 cfs through a 10? pipeline from Delia Creek to the Powerhouse.
Peak production is estimated to be 140 kWh with a minimum of 16 kWh. The proposed project, The Delia Creek Alternative Energy Project (DCAEP), will utilize water flow from the Delia
Creek to power electricity to the Motherlode Lodge. The project will include an intake site, underground penstock and powerhouse. The hydroelectric system will be integrated with the
new MEA power line extension. The existing energy system will be removed immediately and a 2.75 mile MEA power line extension developed to displace all fuel costs. The first phase of
development was estimated by MEA to cost $150,000. All three phases of development are estimated at $750,000 by MEA. DCAEP will be headed by Project Manager, Jill Reese, Owner and sole
member of HPML LLC and Polarconsult Engineering Firm. HPML LLC will match funds of $50,000 to the total cost of development. This does not include HPML?s initial investment in the lodge
(paid, free and clear) plus an additional $850,000 in upgrades, permits and licensing.
This application seeks funding to conduct a feasibility study on using high efficiency, low emissions (HELE) biomass heat and power systems for the Sitka Community Hospital and the proposed
adjacent Sitka Community Greenhouse. Specifically, we are following the example of the system being used in the city of Craig, which is a wood chip fired gasifier burner that transfers
heat via a low pressure hydronic system. This study will be accomplished by contracting with mechanical engineers who will determine the specific equipment necessary, the fuel requirements
and availability, and the costs and payback period of the project. If this project is selected by the AEA and approved by the Alaska Legislature, the award recipient will be the City
and Borough of Sitka. The City will contract with the engineers to do the study. Sitka Community Hospital will provide the engineers with all the data and access to their facilities
necessary for the study. Direct technical assistance regarding the community greenhouse requirements will be provided by the Sitka Community Greenhouse Committee and other members
of the Sitka Health Summit. The City will be responsible for reporting to the Authority and providing AEA with the final report.
The project is a wood energy district heating project located in Venetie for three buildings: the school, school housing and washeteria/water system. The applicant is the Venetie Village
Council. The project will be a two year project with completion of project development Phases 2-3 to occur in 2009 and construction Phase 4 to occur in 2010. A level one feasibility
boilers and a reconnaissance of forest wood resources has been performed in the summer of 2008 under a DOE Tribal energy grant for Yukon Flats. A table comparing round wood boiler and
chip fed boilers is attached to demonstrate initial analysis and initial potential designs. It is anticipated that round wood fired boilers will be used for simplicity of the harvest
system. This will require installation of 3 stick-fired boilers which will require firing up to 4 times per day on peak heat days and will require approximately 300-350 cords of wood
annually to displace 33,390 gallons of fuel oil for heat.
The project is a wood energy district heating project located in Chalkyitsik for two groups of buildings: District Heat 1: the school, school housing and water system; District Heat
2: the washeteria/water plant and Village/Tribal Office. The applicant is the Chalkyitsik Village Council. The project will be a two year project with completion of project development
Phases 2-3 to occur in 2009 and construction Phase 4 to occur in 2010. A level one feasibility boilers and a reconnaissance of forest wood resources has been performed in the summer
of 2008 under a DOE Tribal energy grant for Yukon Flats through CATG. A table comparing round wood boiler and chip fed boilers is attached to demonstrate initial analysis and initial
potential designs. It is anticipated that round wood fired boilers will be used for simplicity of the harvest system. This will require installation of 2 district heating systems one
at the school with 3 stickfired boilers and the second at the Chalkyitsik Village Council office which will require 2 boilers.
This application specifically develops the capacity to harvest and deliver 2000+ tons of wood annually to the Village of McGrath, Alaska and to process the wood into usable form and
store the wood for later use. The biomass project will link and integrate with the heat recovery project in future iterations of design and cost analysis in order to capture the synergies
from both to create an optimum design. A side by side analysis of both chip boilers (K?b) and stick fired boilers (Garn) with estimated cost analysis and net simple payback for individual
buildings was conducted in the feasibility assessment (calculations attached). This application supports a district wood heating project already in development in a previous application.
The funding will be used to purchase harvest and processing equipment and develop a wood processing, storage and delivery system and storage yard. Matching funding will be used for
development of a forest harvest plan, training and technical support.
The Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project is located on Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon. The 190 kW project can provide for most of the communities current power needs, which peak at
about 125 kW. The plant would eliminate about 85% of 50,000 gallons of diesel consumed by the generators annually. There will also be excess energy that could be used for heating the
school and other local structures. The project would also enable the community to add a freezer/processing facility to further improve the local economy.
The Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project is an approximately 75 MW storage project proposed for the Glacier Fork of the Knik River near the mouth of Metal Creek, located approximately
20 miles east of the Eklutna Hydroelectric Project powerhouse and 25 miles southeast of Palmer, Alaska. Electricity from the project would be delivered into the railbelt transmission
grid via a new approximately 20-mile transmission line to existing transmission infrastructure in the vicinity of the Old Glenn Highway bridge over the Knik River. A map of the project
is included at the end of the application before Attachment A. Glacier Fork Hydropower, LLC (GFH) would be the project owner, and would contribute funding, develop, own, and operate
the project. GFH is currently owned by the five engineers of Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., an engineering consulting firm based in Anchorage, Alaska that specializes in hydroelectric project
development throughout Alaska. GFH is currently in discussions with Chugach Electric Association (CEA) regarding the project. GFH, jointly with CEA, intends to work with other Railbelt
utilities and the State to develop the project.
The project would be constructed at the City landfill in Ataqan Subdivision on Saint Paul Island, the existing utility power plant, and within existing utility easements. The new turbines
would be tied into the existing City electric utility grid and control cables installed to tie into the existing power plant switchgear. A new low fuel consumption diesel 4,160v generator
would be installed in the existing power plant to replace an older unused 480v generator. Wind generated electricity would benefit all existing electric customers through lower power
generation costs. The City would administer the project and contract out to qualified consultants for the final design, and contract with a qualified contractor to supply, install
and maintain the wind turbines for the first 5 years and train local wind turbine maintenance personnel.
The Tok Wind Project is located approximately 12 miles south of Tok near the 5,000 foot level of Seven Mile Ridge and will contribute 2 MW of clean, renewable wind power to the Alaska
Power Company Tok distribution system.
The communities served will include all communities within the Alaska Power Company (APC, an Alaska Power & Telephone Company public utility subsidiary) service area including Tok (2007
population 1,353), Tanacross (173), Tetlin (165), and Dot Lake (15). The total population of the served area is 1,706.
The project will include construction of a 12 mile long transmission line, and a five mile-long construction access road across state-owned land from the old Eagle Trail west to the
proposed wind power generation facility. The power generation facility will include approximately two MW of wind turbines, the size and type subject to final design. These turbines
will be founded in shallow bedrock prevalent on the ridge crest. Power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation. Overhead transmission
lines (distribution voltage) from the transformer substation will follow the access road and Eagle Trail approximately 12 miles to the existing APC distribution line on the Tok Cutoff.
The grant participants are Village Wind Power LLC who have three Alaska wind projects under development (Slana, Tok, and Bethel). There will be a number of contractors involved in completing
the project. In addition to our own in-house efforts, other experienced contractors will be chosen to carry out selected components of the project.
The Slana Wind Project is located approximately seven miles west of Slana near the 4,000 foot level at VABM Cobb, and will contribute up to 2 MW of clean, renewable wind power to the
Alaska Power Company Slana distribution system. The communities served will include all communities within the Alaska Power Company (APC, an Alaska Power & Telephone Company public
utility subsidiary) service area including Slana (2007 population 108), Chistochena (93) and when it is connected, Mentasta (1,404). The total population of the served area will be
1,605. The project will include construction of a 1.5 mile long transmission line and construction access road across Ahtna Corporation and state-owned land from the Tok Cutoff to the
proposed wind power generation facility on the ridgetop. The power generation facility will include approximately two MW of wind turbines, the size and type subject to final design.
These turbines will be founded in shallow bedrock prevalent on the ridge crest. Power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation.
Overhead transmission lines (distribution voltage) from the transformer substation will follow the access road 1.5 miles to the existing APC distribution line on the Tok Cutoff. The
grant participant is Village Wind Power LLC who have three Alaska wind projects under development (Tok, Slana, and Bethel). There will be a number of contractors involved in completing
the project. In addition to our own in-house efforts, other experienced contractors will be chosen to carry out selected components of the project.
The Delta Wind Project is located approximately 25 miles south of Delta Junction near the end of Coal Mine Road and is designed to contribute 50 MW of clean, renewable wind power to
the Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) railbelt energy grid. The communities served will include all communities within the GVEA?s service area including Delta Junction, North
Pole, Fairbanks, Fox, College, Nenana, and Healy. In addition to local communities, a number of large facilities are currently served by GVEA?s transmission system including. Alyeska
Trans Alaska Pipeline Pump Station 9, Fort Knox Gold Mine, and Pogo Gold Mine. More distant utilities could also benefit through the railbelt electric grid. An Interconnection Study
with GVEA is currently being conducted by Power Engineers, Inc. to identify costs associated with integrating Delta Project wind power and GVEA?s existing transmission system. The
results of the interconnection study will be used to help formulate a power purchase agreement between GVEA and the project sponsors.
The project will include construction of a 20 mile-long transmission line, and a ten mile-long construction access road across state-owned land from the Richardson Highway south to the
proposed wind power generation facility. The power generation facility will include thirty 1.65 MW AAER wind turbines or equivalent, mounted on 65 meter high towers (subject to final
design and site suitability) set on buried concrete foundations. Underground power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation. A
five-acre lay down yard with a control building/service facility/warehouse will be installed within the wind farm area. Overhead transmission lines from the transformer substation will
follow the access road and Richardson Highway approximately 20 miles to the existing GVEA power transmission grid near Alyeska Pump Station #9.
Using the existing seven (7) ton per day municipal solid waste stream, renewable resource biomass and digester gas, we will evaluate the Tactical Garbage-to-Energy (TGER) self-contained
bio-refinery technology and other viable low-volume alternatives. The waste-to energy project will be co-located with the existing baler source separation facility located on municipally-owned
land known as the Public Works Compound in Kotzebue. The City of Kotzebue will work with Decision Sciences and Maniilaq Services to perform the reconnaissance study to determine the
feasibility of deploying the TGER technology to produce fuel for heating and electricity at the Public Works Compound. The fuel from the TGER can produce enough energy to power 60 Kwh
for every ton of municipal solid waste. The heat and power savings, if reconnaissance proves feasible, is $2,900,000 over cost today for ten years not including the substantial landfill
costs found in the project benefit.
The project addresses the availability, quality and feasilbility of sustainable, economic use of agricultural and forestry biomass for bioenergy in Alaska. This must be considered before
the myriad of biofuel projects proposed & envisioned can move forward, and before existing, commercially available technologies that use biomass to produce energy for heat, fuel, &
power can be most effectively, and most successfully, deployed. The goal of the project is to 1) assimilate existing information on standing forest and agricultural biomass in ALaska,
2) conduct research and demonstration projects addressing agricultural bioenergy crop varities and crop management and addressing harvest methods in preperation for natural and managed
regenertation in mixed, single-aged forest stands, and, 3) determine the biological, physical, and economic feasibility of using Alaska agricultural energy crops and existing forest
stands for biomass as biofuels. The impetus for the study is the biomass/coal-to-liquids plant proposed for the Fairbanks area of interior Alaska, and its need for commercial/industrial-scale
volumes of biomass fuel stocks.. However, the study will have major statewide application as it will serve as the basis for all agricultural and forestry biomass-based energy projects;
the greatest number of which are being proposed for rural and village comminities. Work will take place in Fairbanks and Palmer, Alaska. Project cooperators are the School of Natural
Resources and Agricultural Sciences (SNRAS) and the Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station (AFES) at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) (project primary/agricultural energy
crops and forest biomass), Fairbanks Economic Development Corporation (FEDC) (logistics, data support, and information dissemination) and the Alaska Division of Forestry (forest biomass,
and harvest, transport, and storage technologies).
The City of Homer, with participation from Seldovia Village Tribe and the Port Graham Village Council, proposes to assess the tidal energy potential and development feasibility of four
sites within Kachemak Bay. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) will be the lead technology provider through the Center for Operational Oceanographic Products
and Services (CO- OPS) and the Kasitsna Bay Laboratory, which is the Coastal Marine Ecosystem Research Laboratory for NOAA in Kachemak Bay. NOAA will deploy both stationary and roving
Acoustic Doppler Current Profiling (ADCP) devices, conduct bathymetric mapping, and integrate other existing and new data to construct a comprehensive tidal, energetic, and circulation
flow model of the entire Kachemak Bay region. This model will be focused on providing the necessary outputs to determine power densities and to conduct detailed and site specific tidal
energy feasibility studies, but it will also have multiple public benefits beyond assessing tidal energy, such as improved spill response, mariculture siting, and impact assessment
of local development projects. Terrasond, an industry leading terrestrial and marine floor mapping consultancy firm, will provide additional technical assistance on data collection
and spatial data analysis to contribute to the circulation model and generate power density values.An assumed project start date of July 1, 2009 will result in project completion in
12 months, i.e., July 1, 2010. The total project budget is $1,154,341, of which $482,387 is requested via this proposal, and the remainder, $671,954, is provided as matching contributions,
for a 58% cost- share. Of the $482,287 requested from AEA, Phase 1 (reconnaissance) would require $79,910 of AEA funds and phase 2 (feasibility and conceptual design) would require
$403,387 of AEA funds.
The Tanana area is blessed with a multitude of possible alternative energy resources including:
1) Wind Energy at is T. 5 N., R. 21 W. Sec. 10 located approximately 10 miles from downtown Tanana proper.
2) Wind Energy at T. 4 N., R 20 W. This resource was eliminated as a possible because of transmission line costs from the site to Tanana. The transmission line would have to cross the
Yukon River.
3) Wind and Kinetic Hydro at T. 6 N., R 17 W. commonly referred to as ?The Rapids?. This has both wind and water energy available however transmission line costs from The Rapids to Tanana,
given the terrain, would be very costly.
4) Geothermal at Little Melozitna Hot Springs (65.459, 153.312). There has been cursory analysis done on this resource using chalcedony geo-thermometer methods by Kolker. These results
are encouraging. However, the magnitude of the resource needs to be defined better to determine if it would be economically prudent to develop.
5) Traditional Hydro at Jackson Creek located at T. 5 N., R. 21 W. and T. 6 N., R 21 W. The project has been studied before by the APA in the 1980s. Information regarding the study can
be found in ?Reconnaissance Study of Energy Requirements and Alternatives for Tanana? Report Summary.
6) Kinetic Hydro Energy production using the Yukon River at Tanana using drag turbines. Grant funds would be used to do engineering assessments of resources 4 and 5 with the contributed
funds and in kind resources of Tanana Power and the community of Tanana devoted to quantifying the resources 1 and 6.
The ultimate goal being to determine ?the best? resource to develop of the community to meet the community of Tanana?s long term energy needs most cost effectively.
The location of the project is Perryville, Alaska. Perryville is located on the south coast of the Alaska Peninsula, 275 miles southwest of Kodiak and 500 miles southwest of Anchorage.
It lies at approximately 55.912780? North Latitude and 159.145560? West Longitude. (Sec. 27, T049S, R064W, Seward Meridian.) Perryville is located in the Aleutian Islands Recording
District. The area encompasses 9.2 sq. miles of land and 0.1 sq. miles of water. As can be seen in this image, the village benefits from southern exposure to the sun and longer days
due to its southerly latitude.Community To Be Served The community was founded in 1912 as a refuge for Alutiiq people driven away from their villages by the eruption of Mt. Katmai.
Many villagers from Douglas and Katmai survived the eruption because they were out fishing at the time. Captain Perry of the ship "Manning" transported people from the Katmai area to
Ivanof Bay, and later, to the new village site. The village was originally called "Perry," but the "ville" was added to conform to the post office name, established in 1930. The population
is approximately 110. Project Team Project management is a collaborative approach. The Native Village of Perryville is the applicant will be responsible for the overall management of
AEA funds. George Sikat III of Mat-Su Energy will serve as the Project Manager. Mr. Anthony Caole will be the grants administrator and will be assisted by Ms. Charlene Yagie. Mr. Tom
Humphrey, P.E. will serve as the project\'s consulting electrical engineer and assist with data analysis and economic/feasibility calculations.
The Port Alsworth Improvement Corporation, the Tanalian Electric Cooperative, Tanalian Incorporated, Lake Clark National Park and Preserve, and the Lake and Peninsula Borough support
AGE?s proposal to conduct all pre-construction activities related to the construction of a hydroelectric facility on the Tanalian River. The project will reduce the community?s dependence
on expensive diesel fuel that must be flown into Port Alsworth to provide heat and power. The Reconnaissance Phase will be multi-faceted and will include initial engineering, environmental
and hydrological studies on the Tanalian River to confirm its hydroelectric potential. The reconnaissance phase will include scoping meetings with the community and agencies to identify
issues and study needs that will need to be addressed during the feasibility phase.
A selection process, that will include public and agency input, will be developed to recommend the most feasible alternative. A recommendation and analysis report will be developed that
will include a preferred alternative for the continuation for the project. This alternative will become the final design option. The Final Design and Permitting Phase will prepare the
detailed design and bid documents for the preferred alternative and secure all the remaining permits to allow construction. The final design will include the services of a landscape
architect to ensure that construction and visual impacts are minimized and mitigated. The Construction Phase will install the preferred alternative.
Rising energy prices and demand for renewable systems could create demand for solar for hot water heating throughout the nation- even in the Arctic. Solar is often dismissed as a non-starter
in the Arctic- it should not be. Some of the world?s most successful solar projects have been in places where the solar fraction is about 50%. By strategically targeting entities
and institutions with solar technology, this could be an effective demand-side management option.
This project focuses on the installation of solar hot water heaters on residential, commercial, and public buildings in the Northwest Arctic Borough. If the technology proves to be economically
feasible, the eventual goal would be to install many solar water heaters on buildings and residences throughout the region. Before solar water heaters are installed on many buildings
throughout the region, a solar hot water heating demonstration project would be installed as a test case. Presumably, this demonstration solar water heater would be installed on commercial
and housing interests where the NIHA has a strategic influence, in Kotzebue or the surrounding communities. Key partners in the project include NANA Pacific/NANA Regional Corporation,
the Northwest Arctic Borough School District and additional engineering and building maintenance consultants. It is the team?s desire to develop monitoring and evaluation parameters
that can prove/disprove the technology in an Arctic setting.
The strategic objectives of this project are as follows:
? SO1: Develop monitoring and evaluation criteria and test methodology to evaluate the effectiveness of solar thermal hot water heating in the Arctic;
? SO2: Identify up to 5 commercial entities and 25 residential entities that are viable candidates for a solar hot water heating program in the NW Arctic/NANA Region;
? SO3: Design, procure, and install an appropriate solar hot water heating system;
? SO4: Evaluate the effectiveness of solar thermal hot water heating in NW Alaska.
The proposed project is located in Angoon, Alaska which is a remote native community with a population of approximately 400 residents. Electricity is generated locally by diesel-electric
generation. Most homes and larger buildings, including the schools, use diesel as a heating fuel. The heat recovery project will provide heat to the local schools and reduce their
annual heating fuel requirement. IPEC is working closely with the engineering firm, Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. to make this project successful.
objectives that have been established by stakeholders of the IRP process. The resource portfolio is a set of supply-side and/or demand-side improvements that eliminate any identified
energy or capacity deficits. Supply side improvements would be new generation construction, or modifications to existing generation assets such that energy production or available capacity
is increased. Demand side improvements are system efficiency improvements or peak load modification measures. Stakeholders include concerned citizen groups, commercial and industrial
customers, utility or city government officials, and representatives of state agencies. The stakeholders and the IRP issuing body (The Four Dam Pool Power Agency, FDPPA) establish the
objectives that govern how the resource portfolio is established. Most IRP objectives are governed by the 3 major categories of cost, risk, and environmental impact. The IRP process
includes stakeholder input with final content decisions made by the issuing body (FDPPA).
The FDPPA is also undergoing a restructuring whereby two of the Agency?s four projects are being transferred or sold back to the member utilities. The FDPPA is a Joint Action Agency
organized under State Statute and will remain the same although the name will be changed to the Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA). This planned restructuring is scheduled to close
in January, 2009. SEAPA will remain the owner of the Swan Lake and Tyee Lake hydroelectric facilities as well as associated transmission lines providing Agency power to Ketchikan, Wrangell
and Petersburg including the Swan-Tyee Intertie.
Developing an IRP requires an analysis of the regions generation and transmission system, and an estimation of the regions load growth. Generation and load forecasts are modeled to determine
when and to what extent future energy and/or capacity deficits occur. Energy and capacity deficits are resolved by a combination of constructing new generation facilities, and through
load growth rate or peak hour value reduction via demand side management. The IRP then documents a short term and long term plan to address the energy and capacity deficits.
This project involves constructing a powerhouse, diversion structure with penstock, and substation for a new hydroelectric facility located on the Nenana River upstream of the Healy
Creek confluence. The new substation would connect the hydroelectric power generation facility to GVEA\'s existing high voltage transmission infrastructure in Healy. Electricity from
the new power generation source would be distributed to GVEA\'s 33,000 members from Cantwell to Delta Junction.
The Project is a Reconnaissance Project to investigate the possibilities of installing supplemental or replacement renewable energy for the lighting needs for the public docks and harbors
operated by NPRHA in Tatitlek and Chenega Bay, Alaska. It will include quantifying the renewable energy resource available by erecting a monitoring tower, completing other items of
the reconnaissance phase including consolidating our data into this process, completing environmental screening, reviewing system benefits, proposing a system design, other phase requirements
and lastly the analysis and recommendations.
This is a request for funding to construct a high-penetration wind-diesel system for the community of Tuntutuliak. The wind diesel system will displace 30% of the diesel fuel currently
being used to generate electricity and used to provide residential home heating. The work plan consists of the installation, control and integration of five major components:
1. Five (5) Windmatic 17-S Wind turbines on 80 feet-tall lattice towers
2. Diesel power system control and integration upgrades
3. Energy recovery boiler at the school
4. Smart metering system
5. 40 Residential electric thermal room heating units
The wind turbines will be installed 250 feet apart on pile foundations on the abandoned runway. Construction will take place during the Summer and Fall of 2009. Each turbine will be
connected to the electrical distribution system via a buried armored cable. A fiber optic cable will be buried alongside the power cable to provide a communications link with the powerplant.
Three hierarchical methods of integrating the wind into the diesel grid include:
1. Heat recovery with frequency control
2. Adaptations to diesel generators to enable low-load operation
3. An integrated control system that operates both the wind turbines and diesel generators in a coordinated manner with ceramic thermal storage.
This purpose of this work is to provide a conceptual design and construction cost estimate for to use wind power to displace diesel fuel for power generation and heating. The scope of
work will include conducting energy use baseline studies, energy resource monitoring and the development of conceptual designs and cost estimates for construction. This work would also
explore the management and financial feasibility of a wind project. This project would be in conjunction with other efforts such as those of the Chaninik Wind Group, which is working
in the Bethel region. The average consistent power in the wind across our region is some of the best to be found in Alaska, however, this general data must be supplemented with simultaneous
electric load data in each location to better integrate the available wind with the energy needs. Village energy system and wind monitoring stations will be purchased in Fall of 2009
and installed this winter, and monitored for one year. This work is needed in order to move forward with a renewable energy project and obtain future funding.
Waste Heat Recovery Project: This project will tap off of the excess heat from existing generators at the Dutch Harbor Powerhouse to run a new generator designed to convert the waste
heat to electrical energy. When the NEw Powerhouse is constructed, the waste heat recovery system will be expanded to include excess heat from increased power demands. The Dutch Harbor
Powerhouse serves the residents and various industrial processes in the City of Unalaska and the International Port of Dutch Harbor, which is the number one fishing port in the United
States.
This project will provide a 20-kilowatt solar photovoltaic array of the roof of the Student Recreation Center on the University of Alaska Fairbanks campus. This array will generate
electric power to the University of Alaska Fairbanks electric power grid. All power produced by this project will offset power that the University will not have to purchase or generate.
WCA proposes a hydrokinetic renewable energy project to be implemented on the nearby Tanana River, approximately 2000-3000 feet downriver from the Richardson Highway crossing near Big
Delta, Alaska. This proposed project encompasses Phases III and IV of a four-phase program. Reconnaissance and feasibility studies were performed by Electric Power Research Institute,
Inc. (EPRI) in 2007 and 2008. The purpose was to assess technical, economic, financial, and operational viability of a project and to narrow the focus of final design and construction.
The reconnaissance and feasibility studies have shown that this proposed project is warranted. Electronic copies of the reconnaissance and feasibility reports are available on EPRI?s
website at http://oceanenergy.epri.com/risec.html#reports.
Building on information gathered in Phases I and II, WCA shall establish the project configuration and specifications that will be used to guide construction, further refine project
cost estimates, finalize business plans, and obtain land use and resource authorizations required for construction. This proposed project encompasses the final design and permitting
and construction/operation phases for a pilot RISEC plant and subsequent expanded generating plant serving the Whitestone Community on the Tanana River. The electricity produced by
the pilot generating plant will be operated in two modes; first, exclusively connected to the remote Whitestone power distribution grid, and then, when deemed successful, connected
to the GVEA power transmission / distribution grid. This project will be managed by WCA, with technical support provided by EPRI; system integration and construction management support
from CE2 Engineers, Inc. (CE2); a RISEC technology developer to be selected; and other necessary Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 16 9/3/2008
support contractors to be identified and selected. This phased project will be progressively conducted with a gated decision process allowing for data evaluation prior to proceeding
with construction.
This project will provide a central chilled water system for the West Ridge area of the University of Alaska Fairbanks campus. This central chilled water system will meet the cooling
needs of the buildings on the West Ridge and the needs of the computer center. This project will replace the electrically-driven chillers that are in each building with a central absorption
chilling facility. This cooling system will utilize steam heat that is currently being wasted as its energy source.
Tlingit Haida Central Council (CCTHIA) will construct two containerized mobile biodiesel processing plants to be operated in tandem to take advantage of available feedstock, while also
servicing distinct geographical regions in Alaska. As the relative isolation of the Southeast and Southcentral regions of the state make prices of feedstock and finished biodiesel dependent
upon transportation, we expect to use lower-cost local production and local feedstocks, in addition to imported feedstocks, to bring down the overall costs of the final wholesale and
retail costs of Bioheat, a blended Home Heating Oil that can be used in virtually any existing fuel oil stove for residential and public space heating. The operations will be conducted
by AlaskaSmart Eco-fuels as per a memorandum of agreement.
Birch Creek Village Council is seeking funds to install a solar array in conjunction with a 35kw generator in the community of Birch Creek. The Tribal Council operates the electric
utility and like many others, is experiencing the negative affects of the high cost of diesel. With the solar panels, we anticipate we can generate enough electricity six months of
the year to utilize a 35kw gen set, thereby replacing the need to run the larger 65kw diesel powered generator for a significant portion of the year. The project and the utility serve
the village of Birch Creek. The tribal council and the village corporation (project management/personnel) will be involved in the project.
The Village of Igiugig is located at the outlet of Lake Iliamna, 240 air miles southwest of Anchorage, on the southern shore of the Kvichak River. Igiugig has a year-round population
of 56 (predominantly Yupik, Aleut, and Athabascan) rising in summer to about 75. Igiugig also provides goods and services to six area tourism lodges and their respective clients and
workforce of 90 additional persons per week. This lake outlet location provides an ideal site for the study, testing and implementation of river in-stream energy conversion that will
also benefit other Alaska communities considering this form of renewable energy. A RISEC plant will convert available river kinetic energy into electric power, and feed into the existing
Igiugig electric grid to reduce diesel fuel consumption at the Igiugig power plant. Direct beneficiaries include the Lake and Peninsula School District (LPSD) and Igiugig electric service
customers.
Yakutat Power is located in Yakutat, Alaska. The City and Borough of Yakutat has a population of 631, and is located at the mouth of Yakutat Bay along the Gulf of Alaska, 225 miles northwest
of Juneau and 220 miles southeast of Cordova. Yakutat receives monthly barge service during the winter and more frequent service during summer. Yakutat is equipped with two jet-certified
runways and receives jet service daily. The U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service have offices in Yakutat. This project will investigate the conversion of readily available
wave energy with the long term goal of integrating the resource into the Yakutat Power electric grid. Direct beneficiaries of this project include all Yakutat Power electric service
customers.
This proposal is to conduct a reconnaissance and feasibility study for alternative energy use for the school facilities in the communities of Whittier, Chenega Bay, and Tatitlek operated
by Chugach School District. Development of sustainable alternative energy is a School Board objective in Chugach School District where fuel costs consume an escalating proportion of
the annual budget, detracting from the primary mission of education. Chugach School District has been an education leader and model for other rural Alaska school districts for over
15 years and now wants to be one of the first to create a solution to a problem plaguing rural Alaska.
The Municipality of Skagway (Municipality) proposes to construct the West Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on West Creek, approximately 7 miles west of Skagway and adjacent
to the small community of Dyea. The primary purpose of the Project would be offsetting diesel generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway from May through September each year. Up
to five cruise ships per day dock in Skagway for 12-15 hours and continuously operate their diesel plants to provide for on-board electricity consumption. The continuous stack emissions
spread a blue haze at about the 1,500 foot elevation where vegetation has been noticeably affected. The Project will improve air quality and save vegetation in the area (there may be
other unknown environmental benefits). To emphasize how serious the air quality of the area is being taken, the National Park Service, Municipality of Skagway, and Alaska Power & Telephone
Company (AP&T) have a cooperative agreement to place and maintain equipment at AP&T?s Dewey Lakes Hydro project site to monitor this pollution.
This project is to conduct an assessment of potential sources of alternative energy for the schools and communities served by the Yukon Koyukuk School District. These communities are
Alakaket, Hughes, Huslia, Kaltag, Koyukuk, Manley Hot Springs, Minto, Nulato and Ruby. Potential alternative energy sources in the District include hydrokinetic, geothermal, biomass
(wood ), waste heat and wind. There is a high degree of interest in developing alternative energy in the Interior. The District plans to coordinate with other agencies working in this
area. The Gwitchyaa Zhee Corporation in Fort Yukon is developing a much larger wood fuel project than would be required by YKSD communities but they provide a model to follow. The
District will contract with the consultants assisting in the development of that project, Dr. William Wall, Ph.D. and Peter Olsen. The biomass potential community of Kaltag will be
address in a separate grant application. The Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council (YRITWC) has an experimental hydrokinetic project in Ruby that might have application to our
other river based communities. Dr. Brian Hirsch of the Council will assist in the evaluation of harnessing river power. River conditions in the Region will be reviewed and the two
most promising site will be selected for evaluation. Gwen Holdmann of the Alaska Center for Energy and Power at the University of Alaska Fairbanks will complete a basic reconnaissance
of the geothermal potential in the District for direct use and power generation applications. The District will review waste heat options with local utilities. Manley may have good
waste heat potential.From initial review it appears wind generation opportunities are limited. This will be confirmed with AEA. Kathy Christy will serve as the District?s project manager
responsible for coordinating the work of the consultants and the compilation of the Phase I report and recommendations.
This project is to develop a wood energy project for the Kaltag school and community. The school is the largest consumer of power in the community so that it is appropriate for the District
to take the lead role in the development of this project, but for biomass utilization to be sustainable in the community and to possibly expand to other nearby communities a cooperative
effort is required. This project will be developed in phases. The first phase will be to identify the energy requirements and to confirm the availability of the resource. A preliminary
cost benefit analysis will be conducted to verify that the project and fuel supply has the potential to be sustainable and that the projected cost will justify the development costs.
Environmental issues will be identified and community meetings held to confirm support for the project. Potential business partners will be identified. If the first phase of development
yields favorable results the project will proceed to Phase II and a more detailed business plan and project concept design will be developed. The District plans to contract with William
Wall, PhD. who is developing the Ft. Yukon Bio mass project, to perform the reconnaissance, feasibility studies and harvest management plan. To proceed to final design, Phase III
the commitment of a wood supplier is required. The existing heating system at the Kaltag School is in very poor condition and the District has designed a replacement system and is
waiting for approval of a Department of Education grant for construction. The design of a conventional hydronic heating system for the Kaltag School heating has been completed to the
design development level by WH Pacific. The engineer effort to date will be coordinated with wood heat engineering. Kathy Christy, an experienced project manager, will serve as the
District?s project manager responsible for coordinating the work of the consultants and the compilation of the reports and recommendations.
The project will be located in Mountain Village. The tribe with cooperation from the city will be the main entities involved in the project. We request to purchase and utilize small
wind turbines for the municipal and tribal government buildings, in all approximately seven buildings.
The Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal system was extensively studied in the late 1970s and early 1980s with a variety of geological, geochemical, and geophysical studies. Unfortunately
the execution of these surveys and interpretation of the data from these earlier studies did not result in a thorough understanding of the area. By example, 6 very closely spaced holes
were drilled ranging from depths of 150 ft to 1001ft, passing through a very shallow plume of thermal water that may be flowing in a southerly direction. Chemical analyses from this
earlier work are incomplete. It is proposed that the existing Pilgrim wellheads will be reconditioned so that static and flowing temperature logs can be rerun in the existing wells
and new water samples collected. Additionally, a Controlled Source Audio Magnetotellurics (CSMAT) survey will be combined with new shallow (+ 200?) temperature-gradient holes drilled
away from the cluster of existing wells to try to identify the location of the hotter upflow zone supplying thermal fluid to the shallow aquifer.
The goal of this project will ultimately be to drill a deeper hole into the upflow zone to determine its temperature and water chemistry. The deeper hole, and perhaps some of the other
holes will also be flowed to obtain water samples for chemical analysis and possibly collect some pressure interference data between the wells. These data, combined with an airborne
thermal imaging survey to determine total heat flow to the surface should be adequate to determine total potential output of the system for sustainable long term development.
The Mount Spurr area represents one of the best opportunities in Alaska for to develop a utility-scale geothermal power plant. Phase 1 exploration efforts must be performed before moving
forward to project development. The target site is located 70 miles west of Anchorage on state land. Field work was performed at the site in 1985. It is likely that the project would
serve communities along the Railbelt and the power purchased by one of the Railbelt electric utilities.
The grant request is for initial resource studies and assessment. The plan assumes a timeline of three years with the bulk of the field work done in the summer months. The plan calls
for an initial geological scouting, mapping and sampling work, with progression to aerial and ground geophysics work, culminating in a gradient and slim holes drilling program. Field
surveys and surface studies during the Summer of 2009, which Ormat would finance 100% from its own funds. The grant would cover additional field surveys and geophysical studies and
shallow temperature gradient wells during the summer of 2010. A slim hole drilling program would occur during the Summer of 2011, if justified.
There are about 13 miles between the nearest road and the southeast flank of Crater Peak to our leases. The objective of this field survey aspect of the potential geothermal area should
be an early focus as to cost for infrastructure and project development, including access roads and transmission. The primary obstacle for this phase is the short time window (May through
September) for exploration to avoid extreme weather.
This project will assess the practicality of using heat pumps in different regions of Alaska. Several technologies and unique configurations will be examined, including ground-source
heat pumps, air-source heat pumps, solar thermal storage, and diurnal thermal storage. In the case of ground-source heat pumps, the ground temperature resource will be assessed by region.
Additionally, low-temperature heat applications will be explored. This project will be a joint effort between UAF\'s Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) and the Cold Climate Housing
Research Center (CCHRC). The project will culminate with a final published report of the findings.
The geothermal plant at Chena Hot Springs has been in continual operation since 2006 and is the only operating geothermal plant in the State of Alaska. Since startup, there has been
a decline in geothermal fluid temperature and pressure. This may be due to either engineering or reservoir issues. In order to operate the plant in a sustainable manner and develop
other similar and possibly more marginal projects sustainably, it is critical that we understand the underlying mechanisms driving this production decline. Following this analysis,
a suitable production scheme and monitoring schedule should be developed. The proposed project is a cooperative program between the University of Alaska and Chena Hot Springs Resort.
A numerical reservoir model of the Chena geothermal system will be created and its performance matched to the historical production data. This model can then be used to assist in the
making of development strategy decisions.
The information that will be obtained from drilling this well will prove invaluable for the understanding of geothermal potential in Interior Alaska as well as providing crucial input
data for the Chena Hot Springs reservoir model. A resource assessment achieved through the testing of multiple production scenarios will be integrated with a conceptual design of the
power plant production system. A generic feasibility analysis will generate recommendations for the final design of the Chena Hot Springs geothermal project. The outcomes of the modeling
effort may be transferred to other geothermal systems such as Circle, Manley and Pilgrim Hot Springs and to other sites within the Central Alaska Hot Springs Belt.
The proposed Victor Creek hydro project could produce up to 5-MW and would be located near Lawing, Alaska just south of Moose Pass, Alaska (see the map below produced by HDR Alaska,
Inc.). Kenai Hydro seeks to develop the project in compliance with current low impact hydro guidelines and practices. The scope of this project will look at the Victor Creek project
as a stand-alone hydroelectric facility. Power from the project would be available to customers of Homer Electric Association and other areas served by the existing Railbelt transmission
grid. Kenai Hydro, LLC (KHL) is a partnership among Homer Electric Association, Inc. (HEA), enXco and Cook Inlet Region, Inc. (CIRI) that was formed for the purpose of evaluating and
developing low impact hydroelectric facilities.
Along with many communities in Alaska, Chena Power is not located directly in one of Alaska?s larger cities making it heavily reliant on diesel and other fossil fuels. In order to offset
the rising cost of fuel, Chena Power has undertaken well known steps to greatly reduce the amount of fuel that it requires by means of renewable energy sources. By taking these steps,
Chena Power is providing cost effective solutions for many Alaskan communities (large and small) to become less reliant on non renewable sources of energy. Chena Power is proposing
to use excess electricity that is produced by its geothermal power plant towards the production of hydrogen gas at Chena Hot Springs Resort. Chena Power plans to install a 60 kg/day
hydrogen generation module, a 6667 psi compression module, a 76.5 kg hydrogen storage module, and a hydrogen dispenser module all of which will be purchased from Hydrogenics. Also in
this proposal is a plan to convert three 12 passenger vans to run off of hydrogen. This will allow Chena Power to produce hydrogen to reduce the use of diesel in transportation and
to reduce the propane in the operation of appliances on site.
The Manley Village Council is applying for a Planning, Feasibility, and Coordination grant to develop the geothermal resources available in and around Manley Hot Springs for the purposes
of providing economical, stable, reliable, and environmentally friendly power generation and home heating options to its tribal members and other comunity members. Pending partners
include the Bean Ridge Corporation, Doyon, Ltd., the Alaska Energy authority, UAF\'s Alaska Center for Energy and Power, Chena Hot Springs, and private landowners in the Manley area.
AEB proposes a resource assessment/feasibility analysis/conceptual design project of geothermal sites in the targeted service area.
Goal: The AGDAP goal is to ascertain the feasibility of geothermal power generation for regional communities and develop conceptual design documents/reports for geothermal generation
on the eastern Alaska Peninsula and associated Aleutian Islands. The AGDAP strategic objectives are as follows:
SO1: Identify potential geothermal sites in the Aleutian Island Service Area.
SO2: Undertake a geological, geochemistry, and geophysical assessment of targeted sites for geothermal power generation potential.
SO3: Undertake a geothermal drilling program to promote regional geothermal interests.
SO4: Develop conceptual design and business plan for follow-on phases of the projects.
SO5: Conduct an optimization phase in the conceptual design to determine how to supply power either from one centrally located geothermal plant or from many smaller geothermal plants,
so the communities involved can be evaluated. Included will be evaluating the use of transmission lines for power versus supplying hot water via a pipeline to one or several geothermal
power plant(s).
This project is for a reconnaissance study to investigate using hydrokinetic power to supply approximately 1.0 MW of renewable electricity to the City of Galena. Hydrokinetic power
extracts power from the velocity of water using turbines lowered into a river, and is benign compared to hydropower since no dams are required. Aerial photos suggest that the Yukon
River is narrow and straight at Galena, suggesting an ideal location for hydrokinetic power. However, to understand the most advantageous location (where the highest velocity exists)
for deploying hydrokinetic turbines to produce power, a thorough scientific study of the site needs to be completed. The project will perform a quality investigation of river bathymetry,
ice thickness and current vector (velocity and direction) survey.
This grant request identifies the repairs and upgrades required to bring the system back on line and to improve its long term efficiency and output. Since the Akutan hydroelectric generation
system has been in place for nearly 15 years, many requirements such as site assessment, reconnaissance, conceptual design and site control do not apply. Therefore, this grant application
is requesting funds for:
? Phase III Final Design and Permitting
? Phase IV Construction, Commissioning, Operation and Reporting
The tasks for this project are defined in Sections 2.5 and 2.6 of the grant application instructions.
AEA renewable energy grant guidelines require a multi-phase approach to project development. A feasibility assessment of the Loud Creek resource was previously completed at the direction
of AEA. The assessment found Loud Creek to be ?an obvious choice? for development. Therefore, the City of Akutan is requesting funds for:
? Phase II Feasibility Analysis, Conceptual Design
The tasks for this project are defined in Section 2.4 of the grant application instructions.
The City of Akutan intends to evaluate the feasibility of developing the Hot Springs Bay Valley into an active geothermal resource for power generation and related applications. The
purposes and anticipated results of this effort are those set forth in Section 2.3 Phase I ? Reconnaissance Requirements of the renewable energy grant application instructions. The
project will involve four primary tasks:
1. Prospecting: Analysis of existing data and previous scientific studies. Geological, geophysical and geochemical field work sufficient to support exploratory drilling.
2. Exploratory Drilling and Well Testing: Includes mobilization, drilling of test wells, flow testing and demobilization based on the results of prospecting.
3. Preliminary Feasibility Study: A comprehensive assessment of the proposed geothermal development project, including technical alternatives, land issues, environmental screening, financial
and operational viability.
4. Economic Assessment: Examines Akutan?s growing infrastructure, including airport construction, port expansion and growth of Trident Seafoods. Assesses potential for cooperative development
among the City, Akutan Corporation, Aleut Corporation, Trident Seafoods and other stakeholders. Identifies public and private financing alternatives. Defines the key elements of the
business plan for development and operation of the resulting power system.
Completion of the Phase I Reconnaissance project will allow all potential stakeholders, including the State of Alaska, to determine the potential technical and economic viability of
the proposed geothermal development before proceeding with feasibility and conceptual design tasks (Phase II).
The NSB recently commissioned a preliminary feasibility study entitled "Energy Options for the City of Atqasuk"(Attachment A, disk copy). The recently completed study assessed the alternative
energy options that could reduce or replace Atqasuk\'s dependence on diesel fuel for its power and heating needs. Natural gas from the Barrow gas fields proved to be the most viable
energy source.
This application requests funds to:
*Evaluate and select the power transmission option (HVDC vs. 3 phase AC) via comparative lifecycle cost analysis, technical viability and system reliability.
* Evaluate the use of composite poles in the Arctic. The poles are 1/3 the weight and 4 to 5 times the strength of wood poles. They can also be shipped in 25 foot sections.
*Evaluate the capacity of the Barrow Utilities & Electric Cooperative Inc. power plant for the additional demand.
*Determine business structure, rates and O&M responsibilities
*Evaluate and select the optimum 70 mile long route from Barrow to Atqasuk.
*Evaluate the impace of the added demand on the Barrow natural gas reserves.
*Evaluate land ownership issues.
*Evaluate environmental issues.
*Identify permit requirements
*Determine design parameters for wind and ice loads in arctic conditions.
*Develop the design and cost estimate of a power transmission system that will serve Atqasuk, Walakpa Gas Field and also facilitate a future expansion to Wainwright.
The NSB recently commission ed an update of the Project Analysis Report (feasibility study) entitled "Village Heat Recovery" dated February 2006. The prior study assessed the previously
constructed waste lines and costs associated with waste heat utilization in Arctic and/or permafrost conditions in six NSB villages. The study verified that use of waste heat could
reduce or replace dependence on diesel fuel for its heating needs in NSB area wide villages. With rising fuel costs, it is now feasible to install waste heat lines in Point Lay.
This application requests funds to cover the following expenses:
* Design and construction administration services
* Construction cost estimates
* Construction costs
* NSB employeed training in operating and maintaining waste heat systems.
The North Slope Borough will be the primary participant and will utilize internal expertise and retain external consultants and contractors that have special expertise in designing waste
heat pipe lines, connecting building heating plants to the pipe lines, and recommending operations and maintenance schedules.
The NSB recently commissioned an update of the Project Analysis Report (feasibility study) entitled ?Village Heat Recovery? and dated February 2006. The prior study assessed the previously
constructed waste lines and costs associated with waste heat utilization in Arctic and/or permafrost conditions in six NSB villages. The study verified that use of waste heat could
reduce or replace dependence on diesel fuel for its heating needs in NSB area wide villages. With rising fuel costs, it is now feasible to install waste heat lines in Wainwright.
This application requests funds to:
? Provide schematic design services
? Identify and mitigate environmental issues
? Provide construction cost estimates
? Finalize land, routing and site control issues
? Complete design and bid documents
? Provide construction costs
? Provide for construction administration services
? Provide NSB employee training in operating and maintaining waste heat systems
The North Slope Borough will be the primary participant and will utilize internal expertise and retain external consultants and contractors that have special expertise in designing waste
heat pipe lines, connecting building heating plants to the pipe lines, and recommending operations and maintenance schedules.
Phase III of the Wainwright Coal Bed Methane is in the vicinity of Wainwright, Alaska. The parties that will be involved in this will be the North Slope Borough, United States Geological
Survey and Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. This phase will consist of drilling delineation wells at the landfill and the Wainwright Lagoon.
The Alaska Gasline Port Authority (AGPA) will prepare a feasibility analysis for a new natural gas distribution system to provide service to the 3300 potential customers ofNorth Pole,
Moose Creek, and Salcha, areas. Residents currently heat with home heating oil, coal, and/or wood. Natural gas service from Fairbanks Natural Gas is not available outside ofthe city
ofFairbanks. The feasibility analysis would include but not be limited to preparing a conceptual design ofthe high pressure and distribution system, preparing a base computer model
ofthe proposed system, preparing various design scenarios using the base model as a foundation, developing and reviewing various design scenarios including location ofgate stations,
district regulators, and high pressure main routing, preparing conceptual rate schedule, preparing conceptual construction costs estimates, preparing a cost/revenue comparisons between
the various scenarios, recommending a mostfeasible/practical conceptual design, and recommending construction phasing.
Project will be located in the fishing ports of coastal Alaska. From Ketchikan to Dutch Harbor we will be surveying the 20 larger communities involved in the fishing industry to catalog
their waste oil production, and where resources are presently used. That information will be shared with state and local authorities to show potential as recyclable fuel and waste disposal.
This oil could be utilized as fuel in school buses, generators, garbage trucks, or as any #2 fuel.
EarthRun Energy will provide a sustainable source of high grade wood chips for biomass heating in the city of Anchorage, Alaska while strengthening and beautifying the urban forests.
In Anchorage, urban forests are currently overgrown presenting fire and disease problems. It is the right time to make a sick forest a productive and healthy forest. EarthRun has worked
hard to come up with the cleanest, quietest and least interruptive way of harvesting the dead and unhealthy trees from our urban forests, chipping them, and heating one municipal building,
the Russian Jack greenhouse. EarthRun Energy will work closely with the municipality to return the forests to a healthy state.
This funding request is for a three phased high penetration wind/diesel power and heating system that will eventually be capable of providing over half of Pilot Point\'s heating and
energy needs without a battery storage system. The project will serve Pilot Point and be located at the designated City owned wind park site which now has two small 10kWh wind turbines
and towers with one producing power for over five years and the second ready for installation in November. The site is located away from the coast, residential areas, and avian flight
and feeding routes. The project will produce excess power during cold, predominately north wind winter periods and provide heating for residential homes through electric thermal impact
stoves as well as a boiler grid interface system to heat centrally located public buildings. Our steadiest winds are from the north tend to occur in the winter, are very cold and are
strongest at the time when heating relief is the most needed. The project is also needed to stabilize kWh rates and allow for economic development. Pilot Point is rich in natural
renewable resources that cannot be developed without sustainable energy.
Pellet stoves utilized in homes will alleviate the high costs of heating homes. A self contained pellet plant can process pellets from willows found in all the myriad rivers of the
Yukon Delta. The use of biomass pellets will reduce consumption of fossil fuels and create needed jobs for residents. Kotlik has an estimated population of 670 and 130 households.
The success of a project as this can be expanded to other villatges in rural Alaska.
This project is located on the outskirts of Chitina, Alaska, to serve the City of Chitina, the Chitina Airport, and the Chitina community. Generating low cost, sustainable renewable
energy and extending the existing power distribution utility to the hydro-electric facility are the two main goals of this project. The existing 25 year old diesel generator plant provides
expensive environmentally dirty power of limited reliability. The options for hydro-electric generation facilities have been previously studied for several waterways in the area. (reference
appendix) Development of the most affordable, permittable, and sustainable option, Fivemile Creek near the Chitina Airport, with a line extension connection to the existing utility
distribution system would provide reliable, low cost, local renewable energy source for a community dependent on high operation cost fossil fuel-powered diesel generators.
In order to effectively reduce the amount of diesel consumption in KEA?s power plant, thermal energy must be utilized to the fullest. In order to do so, heat from both the jacket water
system and the exhaust heat should be captured. KEA currently utilizes roughly one third of the available thermal energy which originates from the jacket water system. The exhaust will
be captured via HRSR stack heat exchangers, manufactured by Cain Industries. Waste heat absorbed into the existing 50/50 glycol loop can generate net 162 kW electricity from an Ammonia
Power Cycle, designed by Energy Concepts. The recovered heat will also be utilized in an updated ammonia absorption ice maker and an extended district heating system.
5 MW Biomass Combined Heat & Power Project ("CHP" or "Cogeneration") as the first phase of the repowering of KAPP to provide the thermal energy needs of the ARRC, ADF&G and other commercial
customers within economic reach of the Project and provide power to help ML&P and Chugach meet new generation needs.
Kuskokwim kinetic energy can be measured in the billions. At present the indication is to use the technology born from recent success in tidal and wave kinetic projects in our state.
These were born from the successes of low revolving generators used in wind generating systems. Together they paint a pretty picture wind, oceans producing cheap renewable energy. Unfortunately
this isn?t the reality, they are any thing but cheap, the wind farms are plagued by rising maintenance cost, imagine what ours will be out here, with the damn thing under water and
ice. The price of a watt to install is staggering, close to 25 dollars a watt. The Prototype under our consideration will reduce the install cost to 1.50 to 3.00 dollars per watt, a
85% reduction. We are able to accomplish this by eliminating the generator from the kinetic hydro turbine and placing it on shore and transferring captured river kinetic energy in
the form of slowly revolving torque through a drive line configuration encased in line pipe or drilling casing. By eliminating the marriage of the generator to the turbine allows us
to develop torque farms by tying several turbines output to one line, thus eliminating the expensive slow RPM generator and replacing it with a more durable and inexpensive unit. At
present none of the Hydro-kinetic being consider are suitable for our shallow river, 20? deep channels exist but are rare. It is part of our efforts will be to design low profile turbines
to accommodate the rivers profile without dredging.
This study examines the opportunity, analyzes the possibility, and determines the feasibility of providing a stand-alone fish waste-processing facility that produces and uses clean energy
from renewable resources. It serves the commercial fishery and processing plants (7 land-based processing facilities, 3 floating processing facilities and several smaller independent
seller/operators) and the community of Naknek, King Salmon, and South Naknek, Alaska. It is a model plant that, when proven successful, will be recreated throughout the fisheries of
the State and the nation, and the world.
This facility serves the ecology and the economy as it provides supplemental clean energy from renewable sources to the locally owned cooperative energy association. This energy counteracts
the drain on the power grid during the fish processing season ? which is what creates the drain. In short, this model plant and its subsequent generations are usage neutral.
The project, when it is completed, will include a hydroelectric power plant, and associated infrastructure for access and connection, to serve the community of Elfin Cove. The power
plant will be located at the mouth of Crooked Creek, a tributary of Port Althorp in Cross Sound. Upon completion, the hydroelectric facility will include: a diversion structure on Crooked
Creek; a 1,000-foot long diversion conduit from Crooked Creek to Jim\'s Lake; a 1,300-foot long penstock from Jim\'s Lake to tidewater; a hydro power house with Turgo type turbine and
programmable automatic paralleling switchgear at tidewater; an onground transmission line to the newly renovated diesel power plant; fiber optic communication cable between the hydroelectric
powerhouse and the town site diesel power plant control room; and access trails to the power house and diversion structure. This project will be carried out by local project administrators,
with technical and engineering support subcontracted to a consulting engineering firm. At the end of Phase 3 (proposed here) we should be prepared to begin final construction on the
hydroelectric power project.
The ultimate goal of this project is to produce electricity and employment both sustainably and locally. Thus the name ?Keep It Sustainable, and Keep It Local (KISKIL) Energy project.?
The project will be located thirty miles east of Delta Junction. The KISKIL Energy project will serve much of the Interior by providing electricity for Golden Valley Electric Association
(GVEA) via the grid. Additionally the project will serve Delta Junction, Healy Lake, Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tok and the surrounding areas by hiring regionally, and purchasing wood for
fuel locally. The model will be applicable to all small communities and/or mines or other industrial type operations with significant biomass resources nearby. KISKIL Energy is a
subsidiary of Delta Mine Training Center (DMTC) organized specifically for this project. DMTC is a 501 (c) 3 nonprofit corporation. DMTC has policies and procedures in place to comply
with ISO 9000 standards. KISKIL will be managed by DMTC. With assistance from the Alaska Energy Authority and the resources and capabilities of DMTC, this project will be a success.
The AVTEC Renewable Energy Fund Wind Project involves the installation of one (1) 100 kW wind turbine on the AVTEC campus located in Seward, Alaska. The completed project will be owned
and operated by AVTEC and connected into the electrical distribution system at the school?s industrial electricity facility located on the northern edge of town. The project will offer
benefits to AVTEC/State of Alaska through a reduction of operating costs at the state owned facility (electricity) and will be used primarily to support the creation of a world class
winddiesel training program that will provide opportunities for rural power plant operators to gain hands on operational experience with wind energy technology. Essentially, the completed
project will support the alternative energy investments the state of Alaska is making through its HB 152 legislation by providing a training center and program for wind-diesel system
operators. AVTEC has assembled a project team, headed by STG Incorporated, that is prepared to immediately begin work on an accelerated schedule. The project team includes members from
Duane Miller Associates LLC, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell LLC and BBFM Engineers. All aspects of the Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, detailed in the following pages
of this application can be completed by fall of 2009.
The City and Borough of Wrangell (City) has a need for an economical alternative power source during the annual maintenance shutdown of the Tyee Lake Hydroelectric facility and as an
alternative power source in the event of a catastrophic failure similar to the one experienced in Juneau in the summer of 2008. An additional need is another source of water for the
City reservoir, which periodically runs very low on water and has an eminent risk of running out of water for the City?s use. Since there is a pertinent need for the additional water
source that Sunrise Lake can provide, it is economical and feasible that the two projects be constructed simultaneously. Hence, by utilizing the outflow from the hydroelectric project
turbines, the City will have an additional water source. These two projects are mutually exclusive to each other. In 1997, The Bentley Company performed a reconnaissance study to determine
the feasibility of developing hydroelectric power at Sunrise Lake. Sunrise Lake is a 70 acre, 100 foot deep, perched lake on Woronkofski Island, an uninhabited island approximately
five miles from the City of Wrangell.
The AK?BC Intertie would provide a further opportunity to secure the energy future for Southeast Alaska. The AK?BC Intertie is a 26.5 mile transmission line from the existing Tyee Lake
Project to the AK?BC border. A feasibility study was conducted by Hatch Energy in 2005. This phase of the project would continue the project from the feasibility stage into the permitting
engineering phase. The purpose of this project is to export surplus power for sale in British Columbia/Pacific Northwest which would encourage development of new projects and provide
additional reliability benefits. The ability to export power would encourage early development of new hydro generation, as well as provide revenue from exports, which will help ensure
future maintenance of the current overall status of a clean hydro?powered region, offer operating flexibility for the southeast Alaska power system, and provide future benefits to the
region under the proposed marketing oversight proposal.
AP&T proposes to construct the 300 kW Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project), which will be located approximately 8 miles north of Slana on the Glenn Highway (Tok Cutoff). The
Project would offset diesel generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Slana and Chistochina. The Project will consist of two small diversion structures, approximately
13,200 feet of penstock, a powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and a very short length of transmission line. For about half the year, the Project operation
will be run-of-river, but during the colder months the Project will draw water from Carlson Lake. The potential annual generation is estimated to be approximately 1,200 MWh/yr, which
is greater than the current annual requirements of the two communities. Therefore, the Project has the potential to offset 100% of the current diesel generation. The Project will provide
clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation.
The proposed Triangle Lake hydroelectric project will be located on the west side of Annette Island near the route of the proposed Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie. The project as presently
envisioned will be comprised of a small embankment dam at the outlet of Triangle Lake, a 1.3 mile long penstock and a powerhouse containing a single horizontal Francis turbine generating
unit with a capacity of 4.0 MW. The Triangle Lake project will provide additional hydroelectric power to Metlakatla and, with construction of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie, to
the interconnected electric systems of Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg. MIC will develop and own the Triangle Lake project.
In July 2008, Haines Assisted Living, Inc.(HAL) began construction on a senior assisted living/ residential complex comprising a total of 26,000 SF. The building site is on lots fronting
Third St. from Dalton to Union. Residents of Haines and Southeast Alaska will utilize the senior assisted living and senior affordable housing complex being built in 2008?2010. The
project is a collaboration seven years in development and funded by the Denali Commission, the Community Development Block Grant Program, the Rasmuson Foundation and the community of
Haines. The first phase of the project will be completed in the fall of 2009 at a cost of over $4 million. Key to the long term sustainability of the facility is the installation of
a Ground Source Heat Pump to extract geothermal energy from the earth and circulate it through a radiant in-floor heating system. The initial feasibility and design has been completed
as the follow-up to an extensive energy life-cycle cost analysis performed in 2007and updated in October 2008.
AP&T proposes to construct a small run-of-river hydroelectric project at Neck Lake, a 1,000 acre lake located 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island.
The Project would supply power to the community of Whale Pass, and would offset diesel generation, which is currently the sole source of electricity. The relatively high and modulated
flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end of the outlet stream provide a good opportunity for a small run-of-river hydroelectric development. Facilities would
include an access road, intake structure, 400 feet of penstock, a containerized power plant, a tailrace channel, and upgrade of 4 miles of transmission line. The hydroelectric facilities
will be designed to avoid interference with the existing salmon rearing and collection facilities operated at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA).
AP&T conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2008, and determined that there is sufficient potential to almost always provide enough generation for Whale Pass loads (see Section
7- Appendices for a copy of the reconnaissance report). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for AP&T?s Whale Pass customers.
The Kenai Winds project is a 9MW wind energy generation facility located in the Nikiski Industrial Area, in Nikiski, on the Kenai peninsula. The project will consist of 5-6 wind turbines
disbursed throughout the site.
The project will be located in the City of Kake, and will serve the entire Kake community. The City of Kake, the Organized Village of Kake and Kake Tribal Corporation have committed
to a joint effort, sponsored by the City Council of Tlingit and Haida, the Applicant for this Grant, to implement this project. The project involves the installation of commercially
viable, modular technology consisting of a biomass gasifier combustor system (in use for 10+ years) integrated with hot water electrical generating equipment (in use for 20+ years)
to provide lower cost electric power generation to remote villages in Alaska that presently rely on high cost diesel fuel to meet their energy needs, for both heating and power. This
system is easily replicated in any village or for a particular business operation, the equipment is available within 16 weeks of order, can be installed in less than 12 months and the
system can be immediately operational once installed.
The project will be co-located with a planned parking garage on University land, adjacent to and west of Providence Hospital. The project will contain two gas turbine generators each
with a heat recovery boiler and a thermal distribution system that will connect Providence Hospital and UAA buildings to the plant. It will serve the UMED district with thermal energy
and the exclusive service territory of ML&P with electricity. ML&P, UAA and Providence are involved in the grant project. Other institutions may become involved as thermal customers
to the project based upon their own schedule and requirements.
$8,588,000 in construction funding is being requested by the Kipnuk Light and Power Utility Board to build a wind-diesel- heat and power system. This system will reduce diesel fuel consumption
used for both power generation and heating for 180-residences by 40%. The wind system will generate 4,000,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity. The wind energy will displace (save)
200,000 gallons of diesel fuel, 75,000 gallons of which is now being used to generate power, and 125,000 gallons of which will be captured and stored for use as heat.
Astronomical heating costs are inspiring new creativity in planning for sustainable and affordable energy sources for our community in Cordova, Alaska. Affordable fuel sources have
been identified: waste cardboard that is currently taken to the landfill and wood waste generated at the community burn pile. Historically, the community has squandered these potential
energy sources. The burn pile will better serve the community when transitioned from a community dump into local-source heating fuel. The community will also save valuable landfill
space by diverting waste cardboard into a fuel source. The purpose of this project is to 1) quantify 2) design and 3) deploy a system that will re-use these valuable resources currently
being wasted. The wood and cardboard waste will become fuel for a biomass boiler to heat our community through a district heating network. Potential buildings include the city hall,
pool, hospital and schools. We need financial assistance to fully develop this project, which can then become self-sustaining. The feasibility study will quantify the avaliable BTUs
that can be generated by our waste stream, and the potential methods of fuel treatment and system equipment.
The project is located at Camp Hill near Wireless Point, approximately seven miles south of Cordova, Alaska. Because of high electricity costs ($.50/kWh winter and $.22/kWh summer after
PCE credits), Cordova needs to develop other local energy sources to offset running diesel generators - especially in the winter months when hydro power disappears. The wind energy
program will 1) complete the Camp Hill wind farm project design and permits, 2) improve wind data maps through a mobile 10-meter anemometer tower project, 3) initiate a wind farm pilot
project and a marine-based pilot project, 4) drive community involvement and education, 5) adopt best-known methods from other successful wind projects, 6) determine whether the wind
farm will be built and operated by Native Village of Eyak or Cordova Electric Co-Op and 7) set the stage for construction and implementation. The project will provide low-cost electricity
for all members of the Cordova Electric Co-Operative power grid.
The Little Port Walter (LPW) Marine Station is a research unit of Akune Bay Laboratories located 110 miles south of Juneau near the sourhern tip of Baranof island. LPW is the oldest
year-round biological research station in Alaska and has been the host of a wide variety of fisheries research projects since 1934. Electric power is currently provided for the site
by a diesel engine generator. Oil is used for building heating. An existing dam on the outlet of Lake Osprey on the north shore of Port Walter inlet could be utilized to provide electric
power for LPW through a small hydro turbine generator. Electrical service would require a transmission lind under the Port Walter Inlet and across a peninsula to the research center.
Ameresco would conduct the project evaluation proposed in this grant application to determine the viability of this hydroelectric project. Current electric consumption for LPW is
about 35 kW. The proposed hydroelectric project would include converstion of LPW to all electric energy systems to increase the average electrical consumption rate to 70 kW.
Terror Lake is KEA\'s primary generation source, and is located approximately 25 miles southwest of the City of Kodiak within the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge. This hydroelectric
facility is the cornerstone to KEA\'s Vision Statement: Endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost effective renewable power solutions by the year 2020, by providing base load
capacity to backup other forms of renewable energy. The power output of Terror Lake can be increased or decreased by dispatch to control the amount of total power on the grid. This
attribute of hydropower allows KEA to integrate the more variable sources of renewable energy, such as wind and tidal energy, onto its isolated grid. In addition to this stabilizing
capability, the Terror Lake reservoir itself acts like a battery for KEA\'s other renewable energy projects. This synergistic integration of wind and hydro power is an excellent renewable
energy solution for other communities in Alaska. The current capaity of Terror Lake has been surpassed by Kodiak\'s growing load demand. Without the additional hydropower capacity,
the synergistic relationship of more renewable variable energy sources and water cannot be fully realized.
Baranof Island Housing Authority (BIHA) proposes to select up to three models of marketed air-source heat pumps and install them in up to 12 BIHA owned residential homes in Sitka, Alaska
that are presently heated with fuel oil boiler systems in order to evaluate their effectiveness in reducing household heating water costs. Additionally, heat pump domestic hot water
systems will be evaluated for cost effectiveness against conventional electric hot water tanks for determining most cost efective replacement of current fuel oil boiler domestic hot
water systems.
The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwells power system. Currently they obtain power from the line between MEA
and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). To accomplish this they propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River, a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this
plant will be in exccess of 1 MW. It will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
The Business Operating Plan provides a guideline fo the Akiachak Native Community Electric Company ("the Utility") Proposing a combinations for all three project descriptions, Reconnaissance;
Resource Assessment/ Feasibilty Analysis/Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; and/or Construction for the wind turbine for Akiachak Native Community Electric Company. The
ANCEC will be responsible to operate and sustain the newly installed Wind Turbine and associated electric power to save fuel and reduce fuel costs for the generators. The newly Akiachak
Electric Wind Turbine project will be located in Akiachak Alaska about 18 air mles east of Bethel, and Alaska Energy Authority will be involved in the grand project. Akiachak Native
Community Electric Company needs an alternative energy to determine its best and most sustainable energy here in village of Akiachak, and through this energy development project plan
the community feasibility of installing long term energy facility in order to reduce fuel costs and reduce over all cost of energy.
This project involves placing supplemental cord wood fired boilers at the school site. The supplemental heating system would be located at the Thorne Bay School in the City of Thorne
Bay on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska. The project would also serve the residents of the City of Thorne Bay. The entities involved in this project would be Southeast Island
School District, an engineering firm, local contractors, and the Alaska Energy Authority; We would rely on Alaska Energy Authority for guidance with the project.
This application addresses a first phase in implementing the AVCP Calista Regional Biennial Energy Plan 2008 - 2010 involving a feasibility level analysis to be conducted by the AVCP
Regional Housing Authority for Renewable Energy Deployment for the Kuskokwim Region involving Hydroelectric Power, Wind and Solar Energy, Biomass Heating, including Regional Utility
Consolidation Plan and Development for Bethel and villages along the Kuskokwim River. As a first effort, engineering, including geophysical and geotechnical analysis is proposed to
be undertaken to determine the feasibility and deployment requirements, including environmental permitting required to facilitate development of a Kiseralik River hydroelectric project
for the communities in the Kuskokwim River Region. The study will also review the technical merits of the Chikuminuk hydropower project in view of technological advances that may have
transpired in the transmission of electricity. This effort also includes the determination of power generation and distribution systems required to interconnect communities of the
Kuskokwim region with transmission interties from a regional hydroelectric utility. This project also proposes to outline the planning, organizational and development requirements
for consolidating the local utilities into a regional wholesale non-profit utility for the operation and management of a regional hydroelectric generation and transmission system.
This project proposes to bring together in a planning and development process the regional non-profit organizations, tribal governments and local utilities proposed to be affected by
a regional hydroelectric development project.
This proposed Biomass project will focus on conducting a feasibility analysis and the developing a conceptual design of two wood burners for the community of Kasaan. The project will
be located in the village of Kasaan on the Southeast side of Prince of Wales Island in southern Southeast Alaska. The Organized Village of Kasaan (OVK), a federally recognized Tribe
is the applicant organization. OVK will work closely with the City of Kasaan in the successful completion of this project.
One wood burner will be designed to heat all of the community buildings in Kasaan (school, city offices, medical clinic, Tribal offices, community library, and community hall). The
second wood burner will be constructed on a separate site in Kasaan to heat a cultural- and eco-tourism lodge that is in the design phase and will be owned and operated by the Tribe
as the primary economic development focal point for the community.
The wood fired supplemental heating system would be located at the Howard Valentine School Site in the City of Coffman Cove on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska. The project
would also serve the residents of the City of Coffman Cove. The entities involved in this project would be Southeast Island School District, a design engineering firm, local contractors,
and the Alaska Energy Authority. We would rely on Alaska Energy Authority for guidance with the project. The use of wood biomass (cordwood) to heat the school will replace 85% of the
fuel oil consumption. The project involves placing one thermal storage type wood-fired hydronic heating unit adjacent to the school site and running underground insulated pipes from
the woodfired heater to interface with the school?s heating system. Heat energy from biomass will significantly decrease heating costs for the school. Wood is available from waste from
local saw mills, USFS small sales, from wood left behind in landings, and from small local firewood cutters.
The project, located in Valdez, Alaska, will take waste heat generated by the Petro Star Refinery. Waste heat will be collected by a shell and tube glycol medium recovery system. The
medium will drive two technologies operated in series.
Amonia absorption technology will create cooling for a 45 million pound -20 degree F cold storage. An Organic Rankine Cycle Generator will use the medium once it has exited the smmonia
absorption system to create 600 Kw\'s of power which will be used to operate the cold storage facility. The final benefit will be to use the sold cycle on the generator to create a
salmon rearing facility.
The proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 11841 (Project) is located near the southeast end of Revillagigedo Island, approximately four miles east of the City of Ketchikan,
Alaska. KPU proposes to install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at KPU?s existing Whitman Lake Dam to provide an additional source of clean renewable energy to KPU?s customers,
in the city of Ketchikan and the Ketchikan Gateway Borough area including Saxman Village, while also enhancing the conversion of oil heat to electric heat and displacing expensive and
non-renewable diesel generation. The Project will be interconnected to KPU?s existing distribution system and the grant project will involve KPU.
The installation of this wind power project will provide a maximum output of 1,170 kW to the Nome Joint Utility electric grid in Nome, Alaska over a 20 year extendable project timeframe.
The owners of the project are committed to sell the energy at a price below the avoided cost calculations, even without any grant funding. Grant funding will allow further reduction
in the price of approximately $0.03 per kWH for every one million in grant funds. Selling the energy at a rate below avoided costs will provide savings to the utility to help to lower
the energy costs in the Nome area and provide some energy produced locally that is not dependent on imported oil. Furthermore, this project helps enable future village installations
in the region by helping with a base of operations, spare parts location, local training facility and regional hub. Providing for renewable energy projects in villages should help
reduce the dependency on oil in those locations where oil must be flown or barged in and ultimately help reduce energy rates in those locations as well.
The Grant Lake site facility would be constructed with a dam at the upper falls and diversion tunnel to maximize the power potential at approximately 3.12 MW (397 feet-net head). However,
to minimize the impact on salmon resources in Grant River below the dam site the construction as proposed would consist of a canal from behind the dam to an intake structure located
in an adjacent dry channel.
The Nushagak Area Hydropower Project will initially serve the communities of Aleknagik, Dillingham, and Kanakanak in the Nushagak and Wood River areas. This third phase with inter-tie
(phase four) is estimated to cost $38 million together and replace 700,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually, for a yearly savings of $2,947,000 at today?s fuel prices. Currently all
power in the area is generated with diesel by Nushagak Cooperative (NETC), with a current residential rate at $0.463 cents per kilowatt hour. Nushagak Cooperative would develop, maintain,
and operate the Lake Elva facility and associated infrastructure.
The proposed project would be located in an unincorporated area, northeast of the City of Petersburg, Alaska. Development of hydroelectric power at the site would include construction
of a lake tap, arch dam, unlined tunnel, power penstock, power plant, tailrace, and transmission line segments.
Bethel Wind Power Project Times 4 calls for the purchase and installation of four 100kW wind turbines, tubular towers, foundations, and related appurtenances on land owned by the city
of Bethel. The City of Bethel will own, operate, and maintain all four wind turbines and act as an independent power producer by selling 100% of the electricity generated to the privately
owned utility in Bethel. The regulated electric utility is Bethel Utilities Corporation.
Project consists of a combination of Solar and Wind power to offset the high cost of electricity to run City Hall, the washeteria and the Water Plant. The equipment providing this power
would be adjacent and/or attached to the City Hall. The project manager and other needed project employees would be hired from the community. This project would serve the community
of Ambler by way of a more efficiently run City Government. To lower the cost of running our City government and Water-sewer-plant is the most important work we have in front of us.
Without this to offset the cost, the plant may have to be closed down. Current cost for water and sewer in Ambler is $ 120.00/household and actual cost to balance the budget would
be about 400.00/household.
Wind Energy! Wind turbine system at vacinity community location Napaskiak, AK about 7 miles below Bethel, Alaska which service over 100 customers to commercial to residence. Wasteheat
from generators to heat nearby facility-church, garage.
The Delta/Greely School District proposes a Wood Chip Boiler Heating System to heat 77,000 sq. ft. of educational space in the sub-arctic. The building would be located 50 feet away
from the Delta High School new mechanical room. This Wood Chip Boiler Heating System constructs and installs the following: Cement building to house wood chip boiler, chip storage
room, 4 chip storage trailers, and a chip feeding and chip drying process. The direct impact of this Wood Chip Boiler Heating System will be the Delta High School complex staff and
students as well as the community groups that use this facility on a weekly basis. The following communities are served by this facility: Delta Junction, Fort Greely Garrison and
its contractors, Gerstle River, and the greater Deltana area. The businesses, non-profit agencies, Farm Forum, Relay for Life, Fish and Game, Department of Motor Vehicles, Delta Chamber
of Commerce, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts to name a few groups. All use the Delta High School complex during the year. Finally, the following groups will be involved in this project:
Delta/Greely School District (DGSD), the Delta/Greely School Board, DGSD Facilities Committee, Alaska Department of Natural Resources Forestry, CTA, CE2 Engineers, T.R. Miles Technical
Consultants, Delta Logging and Milling Associates, and USKH (an architecture, engineering, land surveying and planning company).
The proposed hybrid ground source heat pump system at the new Dimond Park Aquatic Center is to be located in Juneau?s Mendenhall Valley, adjacent the new Thunder Mountain High School
and Riverbend Elementary on the Dimond Park site. The facility will primarily serve Juneau residents, but will also serve visitors from nearby southeast Alaska communities and other
visitors to Juneau. The City & Borough of Juneau Engineering and Parks and Recreation Departments are directly involved with the design and construction of the facility, as is the Juneau
School District. A professional design team led by local architectural firm Jensen Yorba Lott, Inc. is responsible for the project design and construction administration. The City &
Borough of Juneau Engineering Department is responsible for design and construction management and progress reports to grant agencies as required. The City & Borough of Juneau Finance
Department is responsible for project funding and financial reporting to grant agencies as required.
The Smart Grid consists of a network of advanced meters, which receive information about the availability of green, or excess wind energy and make this energy available to the community
at reduced rates ,and enable devices to capture this energy. The meters communicate wirelessly, provide a user interface for customers, and account for energy sold at different rates.
The devices that are located in the homes of 20 village elders, and these stoves capture and store excess wind energy for later use. The Smart Metering and the stoves create a system
that allows wind energy to be sold as heat for 1/2 the cost of diesel heating.
GVEA has been monitoring the wind resource at the Eva Creek Site since 2003 or five years and has found a resource with approximately a 33% to 36% capacity factor. The Eva Creek Wind
Project?s proximity to the Northern Intertie is key to its value, making the interconnection viable. The site is located on the east side of the Nenana River near Ferry, Alaska, in
the GVEA service territory in the Interior. The area could support up to 150 MW of wind generation but GVEA would like to start by installing a 24 MW wind project.
Golden Valley Electric Association proposes the construction of a solar water heating system to be used by the Denali Education Center (DEC). This proposed solar water heating system
would be used to displace fossil fuel energy (specifically, electricity) that is currently used to heat water and space for these end-users. DEC is a non-profit research, education
and communication organization with cooperative interaction to Denali National Park and all its summer-time visitors. The DEC\'s campus serves people who visit and stay there during
the summer tourist season. There are 13 cabins on the campus, a campus center and other outbuildings. Currently, the peak number who lodge and work at the Center during the summer
in about 75 people, with an anticipated near-future growth up to 100 people. GVEA also plans to work ABS Alaskan and Jim Norman, principal and owner.
The Smart Grid consists of a network of advanced meters, which receive information about the availability of green, or excess wind energy and make this energy available to the community
at reduced rates, and enable devices to capture this energy. The meters communicate wirelessly, provide a user interface for customers and account for energy sold at different rates.
The meters can be programmed for prepayment. The Smart Grid enables 20 thermal storage devices that are located in the homes of 20 village elders and these stoves capture and store
excess wind energy for later use. The Smart Metering and the stoves create a system that allows wind energy to be sold as heat for 1/2 the cost of diesel heating.
The installation of this wind power project will provide a maximum output of 1,170 kW to the Nome Joint Utility electric grid in Nome, Alaska over a 20 year extendable project timeframe.
The owners of the project are committed to sell the energy at a price below the avoided cost calculations, even without any grant funding. Grant funding will allow further reduction
in the price of approximately $0.03 per kWH for every one million in grant funds. Selling the energy at a rate below avoided costs will provide savings to the utility to help to lower
the energy costs in the Nome area and provide some energy produced locally that is not dependent on imported oil. Furthermore, this project helps enable future village installations
in the region by helping with a base of operations, spare parts location, local training facility and regional hub. Overall, this project provides a cash and tax credit based revenue
stream, provides jobs and keeps money working in the community while increasing overall power generation reliability by producing it locally. Banner Wind LLC (jointly owned by Bering
Straits Native Corporation and Sitnasuak Native Corporation) owns the wind farm while the construction and initial operations are managed by Western Community Energy LLC. The profits
from the project which are ultimately distributed to the shareholders of BSNC and SNC will help provide income to an area where many have very limited incomes.
The NPEP Waste Heat Recovery Project consists of installing 520\' of underground supply and return piping, a glycol distribution piping system inside NPPP, installing 12 glycol unit
heaters with VFDs, and VAC controls. GVEA will manage and administrate the project, perform the electrical/control installation, commissioning, and startup of the system. The mechanical
portion of the work will be performed by a mechanical contractor. Electric power conservation/fuel savings will benefit all of GVEA\'s 33,000 members from Cantwell to Delta Junction.
The Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (?Reynolds Creek? or the ?Project?) is a 5.0 MW hydroelectric resource to be constructed on Prince of Wales Island approximately ten miles east
of Hydaburg. The Project will interconnect with the existing transmission grid on the island and will be used by the residents and businesses of Craig, Klawock, Hollis, Hydaburg, Thorne
Bay, and Kasaan. In addition, once the interconnected grid is expanded to Coffman Cove and Naukati, those two communities will also directly benefit from Reynolds Creek. The Project
will be constructed and owned by the Haida Power, Inc., a joint venture between the Haida Corporation and Alaska Power & Telephone.
The Pillar Mountain Wind project is KEA\'s next step to achieve its Vision Statement "Endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost effective renewable power solutions by the year
2020. This renewable energy project will consist of three 1.5 MW General Electric (GE) SLE wind turbines. It is estimated that this project will produce 15.6 million kWh\'s annually
and thereby eliminate over 1.2 million gallons of diesel each year. The wind project will utilize the 20MW Terror Lake Hydroelectric facility as an energy storage system to mitigate
the fluctuations of wind power. Wind and water will work in concert together to produce an estimated 91% of our current power generation needs. This renewable energy project will benefit
the City of Kodiak; United States Coast Guard Integrated Support Command Kodiak, Bells Flats and Russian Creek areas, as well as the villages of Chiniak, Pasagshak and Port Lions.
This project will consist of twenty (20) wind turbines to make a collective 2MW "wind farm" in Delta Junction and will be the first project of its kind to integrate into the Railbelt
Grid using an "experimental" program by Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA), by using "proven" cold-weather technology (Northwind 100 turbines with direct-drive motors) which
have already been successfully used in Alaska\'s cold weather, as well as a proven "test" turbine (the first of twenty 100kW turbines) at the same location just erected and successfully
tested by GVEA. This will serve all the communities that are on the Railbelt Grid and can produce enough electricity to power 600 homes each year without any emissions or environmental
harm of any kind. Mike Craft, Managing Partner for Alaska Environmental Power, LLC (AEP) will be spearheading this project as its P.M. (Project Manager), in conjunction with Golden
Valley Electric Association (GVEA), and a team of well qualified individuals and businesses necessary for the construction and erection of the wind turbines for final connection to
GVEA\'s power source connecting it to the Railbelt Grid and all those consumers who receive power from the Grid.
The proposed project is to convert biomass (forest products residuals) to liquid fuels, specifically heating fuels and diesel, and electricity through gasification of the biomass and
converting the resulting synthesis gas (SynGas) to #1 heating fuel and diesel for transportation applications. Electricity is a by-product of the proposed process and will be produced
to meet facility electrical needs with any excess electricity made available to the local utilities. The gasses produced will be converted to liquids fuel using a catalytic conversion
process called Fischer-Tropsch, and the electricity will be produced and generated by capturing the waste heat and making steam through heat exchangers and standard turbines and generators.
The Kenai Winds project is a 15-18MW wind energy generation facility located in the Nikiski Industrial Area, in Nikiski, on the Kenai Peninsula. The project will consist of 10 wind turbines
disbursed throughout the site, electrically interconnected to the Tesoro Alaska Refinery. At times when the Kenai Winds generation exceeds the needs of the refinery, power will be
sold to others. Electric energy will be delivered and sold to the oil refinery, providing low-cost power, and helping ensure the economic viability of the refinery.
The proposed project will take place on the Tanana River adjacent to the community of Nenana. Nenana was chosen due to a combination of strong local support for the project, available
technical assistance and infrastructure, and location on the road system within close proximity to the University of Alaska Fairbanks. This project will be administered by the Alaska
Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, with significant contributions from the University of Maine, Yukon River Intertribal Watershed Council, the
Tribal and City Councils of Nenana, and Ocean Renewable Power Corporation (ORPC). The primary purpose of the project is to successfully address the numerous challenges associated with
installing hydrokinetic devices in Alaska?s riverine environments. This will be accomplished through a comprehensive resource assessment (biological and physical), followed by the installation
of a ?dummy? open architecture turbine to assess operations in challenging environments (including interactions with ice and debris) without damaging expensive real turbine equipment.
Finally, this project will involve the design, construction, deployment and initial testing of a first commercial hydrokinetic device at the site.
The community of Crooked Creek along the Kuskokwim River, have long been interested in renewable power and have already researched a variety of possibilities, this year?s project initially
will be to develop a finale list of potentially feasible methods, to explore feasibility studies and cost evaluation. We\'ll collect the necessary data by testing the feasibility of
these considerations; by building prototypes that will supply us with the solid data to base our decisions on, to aid us in reduce our dependency on Fossil Fuels. This may require the
combination of available technologies, some we\'re considering are Thermopile technology, Hydro power (four sources available here), Solar power, Wind, Residential producers, Wood
gas and heat power production, We\'ll be verifying permitting requirements, Land right of ways and environmental, permitting obstacles identified. A Full study of Village Creek flow,
explore methods to increase and extend its annual usage. As much as this is a fact finding mission, it is also a call to arms by the population of Crooked Creek. Our IGAP program will,
with this grant, will ready us for all consideration.
The Makushin project?s primary goal is to produce a minimum of 40 MW of power from the geothermal resource and supply that power to the City of Unalaska, independent power producers
and other energy users in the vicinity. The current generating capacity within Unalaska consists of UniSea (Fairbanks- Morris (12? MW)), Westward Seafood (9? MW Wartsila), Alyeska Seafood
(5.5? MW), and the City of Unalaska (currently 7.5 MW; in addition the City has purchased, but not installed, 10 MW capacity Wartsila diesel gensets (and perhaps an additional 10 MW
of diesel generation) for the potential of 44+ MW, in the future which is contemplated to be utilized as emergency back-up generation. The base load of all Unalaska to be supplied by
the Geothermal-electric Project is estimated near 10 mW/hr. The combined base and peak loads are estimated to be near 32 mW/hr. The project could supply more than 50 percent of the
electrical load for the City and other power producers in Unalaska.
Wind Energy Alaska (WEA), plans to construct a 6 megawatt (MW) wind generation facility on CIRI-owned land near the village of Nikolaevsk, located on the southern Kenai Peninsula. The
electricity generated by the project will be interconnected to the Anchor Point Substation, which is owned and operated by the Homer Electric Association (HEA). The project includes
the construction of the wind generation plant, with four 1.5 MW GE wind turbines, a new 1.9 mile access road, and a distribution line approximately 10 miles in length from the plant
to the Anchor Point Substation in Nikolaevsk. HEA is one of the six prime electric cooperatives, or utilities, that serves the Alaska Railbelt transmission grid. HEA is a member owned
electric cooperative that serves most of Alaska?s Kenai Peninsula. HEA serves approximately 20,153 members at 28,547 metered locations, 2,200 miles of energized line, within a service
area of 3,166 square miles. WEA, CIRI, and enXco are project proponents.
Wind Energy Alaska (WEA) wishes to construct a 3.2 megawatt (MW) Landfill Gas (LFG) to Energy Generation Facility at the Anchorage Regional Landfill, located east of the Glenn Highway
near Eagle River, Alaska. The Anchorage Regional Landfill is owned and operated by the Municipality of Anchorage (MOA), Solid Waste Service (SWS). With an in-service date of April,
2010, this project is designed for incremental growth beginning with 3.2 MW and up to 6.4 MW within the next 15 years with additional capacity as needed. Landfill gas flow records and
projected fill rates at the landfill over the next 20 years support the potential for this level of electric power production. MOA would receive royalty payments to compensate for use
of land and LFG for the project. This revenue could be used to offset tipping fees at the landfill to benefit the public. In addition to power generation, the proposed project will
include a heat recovery system that will recover waste heat from the LFG engines to be used in nearby office and storage building presently heated with a natural gas. The natural gas
fuel cost savings will reduce landfill operating costs. The landfill is located near the existing power lines that feed into the electric system and the Railbelt grid. The U.S. Army
Fort Richardson, Elmendorf Air Force Base, ML&P, Chugach Electric Association (CEA), Matanuska Electric Association (MEA), MOA?s Anchorage Regional Landfill and SWS are potential power
customers. WEA has contracted HDR Alaska, Inc. to provide design engineering, permitting, and construction management of the project. HDR has LFG design experience and has assisted
in the development of cost estimates for this project.
The Applicant owns and operates Motherload Lodge located near the Little Susitna River. The 4.9 acre plot of land is privately owned but segments of the proposed project will be located
on land owned by the State of Alaska Park Service. The Motherload Lodge currently utilizes 3 diesel fuel generators to power the facility and accounts for a significant percentage
of annual operating expenses. The company plans to construct a 50kW run of river project on Delia Creek. The proposed project, The Delia Creek Alternative Energy Project (DCAEP),
will utilize water flow from the Delia Creek to power electricity to the Motherload Lodge. The project will include an intake site, underground penstock and powerhouse. The hydroelectric
system will be integrated with the current fuel generator system. Out of the 3 gensets, 2 gensets will be removed immediately and the third genset, replaced with a smaller genset.
DCAEP will be headed by Project Manager, Jill Reese, Owner and sole member of HPML LLC.
Since Napaimute received its land base through unusual means, it was through Administration for Native American funding that survey of its community lands was completed. This enabled
the tribe to open a Home Site Program; people are resettling, the village growing. Napaimute Enterprises sells fuel; operates a small package store; rents cabins and the community
center; operates a sawmill; has a coin-op washer and dryer; and offer showers. Commerce and our economic base are slowly growing, in accordance to our Community Plan. The cost of
providing linked energy to rural Alaskan villages is staggering; individual energy systems must smartly utilize energy by reducing use of petroleum products. Our village, located on
the Kuskokwim River, about 30 miles from Aniak works to be a model village where refuse is contained, development is planned and residents demonstrate their care and respect for the
environment by minimizing their dependence on diesel; this is also a demonstration of the harsh economic environment. Our proposal will serve current and future members of the community
(25 or so residential homes) along with a couple of families that live across the river and the countless river commuters who come to wash clothes and take a shower. NVN?s Director
Development & Operations Mark Leary and Environmental Coordinator Mitchell Dammeyer will be directly involved in the management of this project. Both men are highly respected in the
Kuskokwim and Mr. Leary has overseen most of Napaimute\'s development, literally from the brush up.
The City of St. George operates a traditional diesel power plant which currently uses multiple diesel fueled engine generators to supply all required electric power to the community
of St. George Island. With fuel and fuel handling cost now at historically high levels, the community, through their partner APICDA, seeks technology alternatives to provide long term
fuel-savings impact. As wind/diesel technology has been proven viable in a variety of remote applications in Alaska and internationally, APICDA has allocated resources to determine
if a wind retrofit at St. George can provide a meaningful, cost effective benefit. The City of St. George, APICDA and TDX Power are all involved in delivering a high penetration wind
diesel hybrid project for the community.
This medium penetration wind-diesel and jacket heat recovery project is located on Umnak Island, approximately 100 miles west of Unalaska/Dutch Harbor. The community of Nikolski will
be directly served by this project. In addition, the community of pilots and passengers who make international flights over this area will benefit greatly. A communications gap, long
a problem for international flights, was recently remedied by the installation of communications equipment in Nikolski by the FAA. The Nikolski IRA Council, Chaluka Corporation, the
management of Umnak Power, TDX Power and the Aleutian Pribilof Island Community Development Association/APICDA will be involved in ensuring this project succeeds.
We propose a 2 year project to estimate in-line (hydrokinetic) renewable energy potential for rural Alaska. We will begin creating a list of about 24 sites/communities which appear to
have the greatest potential. We plan to study 8 sites in year 1 and 16 sites in year 2. At this point, Alaska?s larger rivers (i.e., the Yukon, Koyukuk, Kuskokwim and Susitna Rivers)
are obvious places to look for in-stream energy. We will examine available data, and work with project partners (including Re vision, AEA and ANSEP) to come up with a list of river
stretches and community partners. The UAA-SOE Alaska Native Science and Engineering Program (ANSEP) has well established relationships with many communities throughout Alaska and has
agreed to assist the faculty in establishing working relationships with the communities. Following site selection, we will select student research assistants (3 in year 1 and 5 in year
2) who will be trained in hydrographic surveying and velocity measurement. Then, working in cooperation with the communities, we will survey the selected river stretches during the
summer of 2009 and 2010 to obtain bathymetric and current distribution data. Next, using data from United States Geological Survey (USGS) gauging stations, we will estimate the long
term hydrologic (i.e, elocity/depth) conditions at the selected rural sites. The USGS provides discharge rates at nearly 400 sites around the state, covering most river systems. The
long-term velocity/depth distribution data obtained will be used to determine the hydrokinetic energy available for power generation.
The Fishhook Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in Hatcher Pass, Alaska. The project will be located on a combination of mostly state land and some
borough land off Hatcher Pass Road. Energy from the project would be provided into the Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid. Fishhook Renewable Energy, LLC (FRE) is the project
proponent, and would contribute funding, own, and operate the project. FRE has already completed reconnaissance, feasibility, and conceptual design efforts, and is currently in the
permitting and contract negotiation processes for the project. With timely completion of permitting, contract negotiations, and financing, construction will occur in 2009. Final design
would be completed by members of FRE. Construction would be completed by qualified contractors and subcontractors selected through a competitive bidding process.
The Fourth of July Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located near Seward, Alaska. The project would be located east of the Spring Creek Correctional Facility,
across Resurrection Bay from the city of Seward. Energy from the project would be provided into the Seward Electric System grid. Independence Power, LLC (IP) is the project developer,
and would contribute funding and own and operate the project. IP would manage the pre-construction study process, completing some efforts internally, and contracting out other activities
to qualified consultants as appropriate. Construction would be completed by qualified contractors selected through a competitive bidding process.
Rural residents in NW Alaska are facing some of the highest costs anywhere in the nation. In order to proactively address the region?s energy crisis, Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA)
is working to implement long term energy options. While there are a variety of alternative energy options available to the Kotzebue region, such as wind, solar, and geothermal; wind
energy has a proven track record of success in this community. The goals of the proposed project are: To increase the wind capacity of KEA from 1.14 MW to 4.39 MW using 5 Fuhrlander
650kWs; To integrate the increased wind capacity with a 600 kW / 1800 kWh Vanadium Red- Ox Flow Battery; To utilize the excess electricity in a distributed heating system. This is
a two year project. Year one involves performing all pre-construction and foundation construction tasks. Year two involves the wind turbine erection and commissioning.
This proposal is to enhance and expand the first in-stream hydrokinetic energy conversion device successfully deployed in the United States in Ruby, Alaska. In the summer of 2008, the
Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council (YRITWC), along with the Tribe and City of Ruby, the local electric utility (owned and operated by the City of Ruby), and ABS Alaskan, deployed,
tested, and removed a 5 kW Encurrent vertical axis hydrokinetic turbine in the Yukon River at Ruby, Alaska, before winter ice formation. Based on the performance of the 5 kW turbine,
and modeling feasibility for a larger system with a turbine re-designed to optimally perform at a lower current speed, in 2010 we will install a 25 kW version of the hydrokinetic turbine.
All project partners will remain in place, along with Terrasond and re vision LLC, who will assist with resource assessment and feasibility analysis.
Kotzebue Electric Association?s Cost of Energy Reduction Program will achieve a 25% reduction is diesel based power by installing, in part, a Vanadium Red-Ox Flow Battery Energy Storage
System (VRFB) which will be able to provide 600 kW of power for three hours. This battery bank will increase voltage stability, increase the efficiencies of operating diesel generators,
and capture excess wind energy during off-peak hours. While this installation will serve Kotzebue, the demonstrated technology could offer significant benefits to other villages as
more wind energy is harnessed. The VRFB will benefit the KEA existing system in three specific ways. Diesel turbines run most efficiently when operating to the fullest capacity. Charging
the battery, when the generator would otherwise operate below ideal conditions, will increase overall system efficiency. Secondly, KEA runs one EMD year round and supplements this with
a second CAT generator when the load demands it. Instead of starting the second generator, the VRFB will supply the electricity. Normally, the CAT gen set is run approximately 3,200
hrs per year. This will be reduced less than 350 hrs per year with the VRFB online. This results to a direct reduction in diesel consumption. Thirdly, in order to realize the benefits
of increasing the level of wind penetration in Kotzebue, energy storage MUST be utilized. The simple payback for the VRFB is under three years.
High-efficiency solid state ammonia synthesis (SSAS) will be advanced from laboratory to proof of- concept and pre-commercialization pilot-plant stage. An SSAS module will be built,
capable of synthesizing anhydrous ammonia (NH3) at ~10 kWe input from renewable-source electric energy, fresh water, and atmospheric nitrogen. The NH3 will be stored in a pressurized
steel tank, and will fuel an internal-combustion-engine (ICE) generating set delivering to the utility electricity grid or isolated load. A complete system will be located in Juneau
at the Alaska Electric Light & Power (AEL&P) site. The proposed system will model a village-scale system that could store enough surplus renewable-source energy, as liquid NH3 in surface
tanks, to supply the village?s total year-round energy needs as firm energy, assuming enough local renewable energy production capacity is in place to generate this total energy. The
goal is village and other ?energy island? energy independence via renewable-source energy and annual-scale firming storage, replacing all diesel electricity generation and oil heating.
Deploying the project initially at AEL&P allows hydro energy input and lower project technical risk via Juneau?s benign climate and favorable transportation access; the project may
later be relocated to a smaller community for further evaluation and test.
The project will be located at a site yet to be determined within the Alaska state boundaries. Once the exact site location is determined, then an evaluation of the communities to be
served can be provided. Also involved in this project will be contractors and subcontractors to be hired for various engineering, design, construction and supply aspects related to
the project activities. Specifically, Ormat will be working with Precision Power LLC who will be the construction contractor for this project to perform the construction of the project
on site.
AGE?s management and engineering team in collaboration with the UAA School of Engineering is proposing this PROJECT that when proven will provide rural communities with Coal Bed Methane
(CBM) resources an inexpensive energy source that will provide sustainable heat and power 24/7 365 days a year. This PROJECT will develop an Arctic Ready Combined Heat and Power Unit
powered by CBM gas that will have direct application to rural communities with viable CBM resources. The PROJECT has three parallel components with appropriate milestones.
This project is located in Girdwood. AGE proposes to install a natural gas powered CHP plant with its efficiency enhanced by the TEG unit that will provide heat and power to Girdwood
Elementary and the Girdwood public by feeding power into the local electrical grid. Thermal energy will be provided to Girdwood Elementary for space heating, snow melt, and heated pedestrian
walkways as well as the research center itself. Two micro-hydro projects located at California and Virgin Creeks will provide hydro power generation to supplement the CHP/TPG plant
during periods of sufficient flow estimated at 8 months per year. This Construction Project is based on reconnaissance level findings.
Noatak is a village that can benefit from solar energy. It is proposed that a grid tied, battery-less
50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power plant and tank farm in Noatak . It consists of 225ea 224-watt panels on adjustable 6,300 ft2 racking mounted
on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation. Each adjustable array utilizes one 7000 watt inverter providing 277 VAC power.
Shungnak is a village that can benefit from solar energy. It is proposed that a grid tied, battery-less 50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power
plant and tank farm. It consists of 225ea 224-watt solar panels on an adjustable 6300 ft2 rack that is supported on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation. Multiple 7000 watt inverters
provide 277 VAC power.
Noatak is a village that can benefit from solar energy. It is proposed that a grid tied, battery-less
50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power plant and tank farm in Noatak . It consists of 225ea 224-watt panels on adjustable 6,300 ft2 racking mounted
on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation. Each adjustable array utilizes one 7000 watt inverter providing 277 VAC power.
Ambler is a village that can benefit from solar energy. It is proposed that a grid tied, battery-less
50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power plant and tank farm in Ambler. It consists of 225 ea 224-watt panels on adjustable 6300 ft2 racking mounted
directly on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation system. Each adjustable array utilizes one 7000 watt inverter providing 277 VAC power.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) proposes a resource assessment/feasibility analysis/conceptual design project of hydropower sites in the Upper Kobuk region. We will evaluate
at least twelve sites regarding their hydroelectric potential and will create conceptual designs for the most promising sites. The project will potentially serve the communities Kobuk,
Ambler, Shungnak, and Kiana, as well as possible future industrial developments, which for the purposes of this application, will be referred to collectively as the Upper Kobuk region.
Key partners in the project will include NANA Pacific/NANA Regional Corporation, NovaGold/Mantra Mining and additional engineering consultants.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) proposes a 300 kW run of the river hydroelectric plant with a diversion structure, pipeline, powerhouse, and electric line in Old Harbor.
The project involves collecting up to 7 cfs of water year round from a tributary (Mountain Creek) of Barling Bay Creek and transporting it across a basin boundary to Big Creek. This
project will provide for most of the electrical needs of Old Harbor. AVEC will employ consultants and contractors as needed to complete the Project. AVEC may utilize local or other
personnel for project maintenance.
This project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of two wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Mekoryuk. Participants in the project include AVEC, STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management and electrical system engineering
for the project. STG will be the general contractor, responsible for the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary
electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100 wind turbines and startup and commissioning services. Site control has already been completed. The foundation design is
completed. Permitting is underway, having already relocated the turbines in response to input from Fish & Wildlife.
This project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of one additional wind turbine to supplement the existing power generation and
distribution system for the community of Toksook Bay. Participants in the project include AVEC, STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management and electrical
system engineering for the project. STG will be the general contractor, responsible for the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbine, and installation
of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide the Northwind 100 wind turbine and startup & commissioning services. The site is already under control and already contains
three Northwind 100 wind turbines. Existing permits are in place and can be extended to cover the additional turbines.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative is proposing to complete design, permitting and installation of three Northern 100B Wind Turbines, and new control modules, to provide wind power
to the community of Quinhagak, which is located on the coast of the Bering Sea, west of Bethel in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta area.
The Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) Solid Waste Services Department (SWS) intends to develop an electric power generating plant to be located at the Anchorage Regional Landfill (ARL).
The plant will use landfill gas (LFG), a byproduct of anaerobic waste decomposition, as its primary fuel. Electricity generated by the project will be sold and delivered to the Matanuska
Electric Association (MEA) distribution system to provide power to Eagle River and Southcentral Alaska. SWS will negotiate a power sales agreement with the end power user, likely MEA,
and select of a development partner to design, build and operate the plant.
The Bethel Wind Project is designed to contribute clean, renewable wind power to the Bethel energy grid. The project area is about 1.5 miles northwest of the Bethel Airport on hilltop
land owned by Bethel Native Corporation. Our power will be sold wholesale to BUC for distribution to its customers as normal. The size of our project is dependent on our ability to
sell power, not on the wind resource, but we expect that a two MW project will be viable. The communities served could include Napakiak and Bethel.
The Delta Wind Project is designed to contribute clean, renewable wind power to the railbelt energy grid. The project area is about 25 miles south of Delta Junction on Coal Mine Road.
We are currently funding an Interconnection Study with Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) to identify costs associated with putting wind power on their transmission system near
Delta Junction. The results of the interconnection study will be used to formulate a power tariff for sale of our power to GVEA. The size of our project is dependent on our ability
to sell power, not on the wind resource, but we expect that a 40 to 50 MW project could be achievable. The communities served will include all communities within the GVEA?s service
area that purchase power from GVEA, including Delta Junction, North Pole, Fairbanks, Fox, College, Nenana, and Healy, as well as two major gold mines, Fort Knox and Pogo.
Replace diesel generation of electricity for the community of Tenakee Springs with renewable hydroelectric power. The City of Tenakee Springs proposes to construct a hydroelectric project
on Indian River. This will be a low head, run-of-river plant displacing the use of at least 33,000 gallons of diesel fuel. Design, engineering, and construction will involve the City
of Tenakee Springs, multiple state and federal agencies, private contractors, and the Alaska Energy Authority.
This project is a regional Resource Assessment/Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual design of Wind Power opportunities around the Lake & Peninsula Borough. It is designed to build upon existing
wind resource assessment efforts, including wind met tower data in some communities, as well as data from existing micro-scale (10kW) wind turbines that are in operation.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough seeks funding for design and permitting to install High Efficiency Low Emissions (HELE) wood boilers in five communities in the Lake and Peninsula Borough
providing heat to the local school and adjacent teacher housing. The communities to be considered are Pedro Bay, Newhalen/Iliamna, Nondalton, Kokhanok and Port Alsworth. The schools
in these communities served 225 children in the 07-08 school year.
The proposed project is a wind/hydro hybrid intertie feasibility study for Chignik Bay, Chignik Lagoon and Chignik Lake (hereafter ?Chigniks?.) There is existing wind data confirming
class 5 wind in the area, strong enough to be a good energy source. Part of the feasibility study will involve determining the most advantageous site for wind turbines by collecting
supplemental met data. The Chignik Alaska Draft Small Hydropower Feasibility Report and EIS, by the Army Corps of Engineers, July 1984, evaluated hydro resources at Packers Creek,
Mud Bay Lake and Indian Creek. The study found that Indian Creek had the best potential for economical development. The Lake and Peninsula Borough will provide management for the
project, overseeing the work of HDR Alaska who will act as the owner representative in developing the feasibility study for a wind/hydro intertie project.
McGrath Light and Power (ML &P) is proposing a heat recovery project. Direct beneficiaries of this project include the Iditarod Area School District (IASD) McGrath complex, and three
commercial facilities adjacent to the ML&P power plant. Indirect beneficiaries include all ML&P electric customers, as the project will provide increased revenues from the sale of recovered
heat, as well as improved electric generating efficiency and reduced operations and maintenance costs. ML&P will be the Grantee under the Renewable Energy Fund. ML&P has teamed up with
the engineering firm of Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E). AE&E has a long history of successful energy related projects throughout Alaska, and has worked with both ML&P and
IASD on numerous projects dating back to 1995.
This project will convert readily available biomass to a producer gas (wood gasification) that will be used to reduce diesel fuel consumption at the Yakutat Power plant. The Biomax 75
is based on proven technology with recent additional improvements for use in cold weather climates. Direct beneficiaries of this project include all Yakutat Power electric service customers.
Participants in the project include Yakutat Power, the City and Borough of Yakutat, the U.S. Forestry Service, National Park Service, and Community Power Corp - the Biomax 75 developer.
This project will be located in the upper Kobuk River Valley and will serve the villages of Kobuk, Shungnak, and Ambler. The applicant is Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority; other cooperating
organizations include NANA Regional Corporation, Maniilaq Association, NANAPacific, WHPacific Inc., and Kobuk, Shungnak and Ambler Village Councils. An initial woody biomass site assessment
was sponsored by NANAPacific in August, 2008 under a Department of Energy Tribal Energy Grant. Bill Wall, PhD conducted an initial reconnaissance study to determine the viability of
a wood energy project. The study determined that a wood energy program is viable and that all three of the villages are very interested in proceeding. The proposed project will develop
following analysis and fully complete a reconnaissance and feasibility study.
The project proposed is a small, 271-kW, cross-flow turbine, generation system with a darn and power which utilizes hydro-electric stored kinetic energy in a reservoir dam on Chuniisax
Creek approximately 3/4-mile southwest of the old Atka village site and replacement electrical distribution system. The project will displace use of high cost fossil fuels with a renewable
energy resource using proven technology. Energy costs to all users in Atka will be significantly reduced while providing the current and future energy requirements. The village has
secured additional funding from EDA to complete the most of the remaining 55%. (45% was previously completed using RUS, AEA, and city funding.) This grant plus our cash and in-kind
contribution will complete the balance.
The South Fork hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in Eagle River,
Alaska. The project will be located on a private homestead off Hiland Road in Eagle River. Energy from the project would be provided into the Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid.
South Fork Hydro, LLC (SFH) is the project proponent, and would contribute funding, own, and operate the project. SFH has already completed reconnaissance, feasibility, and permitting
efforts. Final design is currently in progress, and construction is planned for 2009. Final design would be completed by members of South Fork Hydro, LLC. Construction would be completed
by South Fork Construction, Inc., with some construction tasks subcontracted as appropriate.
Rural Alaskans in the Northwest Arctic Borough (NWAB) are facing some of the highest costs anywhere in the nation. This project proposes to: develop the wind energy potential in the
communities of Buckland, Deering, and Noorvik; develop appropriate wind generation engineering plans and designs, and; construct the necessary wind generation facilities (fully integrated
with diesel power systems). This is a two year project. Year one involves performing both pre-construction and construction tasks in Deering and Noorvik as well as pre-construction
tasks in Buckland. Year two involves construction tasks in Buckland.
This project focuses on the development of 1 megawatt of wind power located in an area AEA suspects to be have a Class 7 resource. The location is approximately 14 miles Northwest of
the City of Dillingham, less than 5 miles Northeast of Manakotak, and approximately 8 miles South of Alegnagik near Snake Mountain. Due to the specific need of the development of this
resource for the Healthcare organization, this project will benefit all the communities that rely on the Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation to remain ?the only? critical access medical
facility in the Bristol Bay Region. Although the project is being proposed by a Tribal Organization, it has the support of the local electrical cooperative [Nushagak] as well as many
of the residents of Dillingham. Our project development team has tapped into the resources of TDX, Power Corp., MAP Consulting, STG Inc, and Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation.
Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) proposes to install a biomass heat source for the Yukon-Koyukuk Assisted Living Center, a NAHSDA, Denali Commission, ICDBG, FHLB, and AHFC
funded project that will provide a 9 unit housing complex for the elderly of the Yukon Koyukuk Region. The design includes a multi-purpose area, office space, and dormitory-type housing
for transient village health care workers.
This project is designed to demonstrate power generation using combusted biomass as a heat source to drive an Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) power plant module designed and developed by
United Technologies Corporation. The module is based on the award-winning geothermal power plant installed at Chena Hot Springs Resort; however the biomass version will operate at significantly
higher efficiency. These efficiency improvements are necessary because unlike the geothermal fluid, biomass material is not a ?free? fuel. In addition to being designed for maximum
thermal efficiency, the power plant includes load following capability, and independent, simple, remotely monitored operation at low pressures that do not require special training to
operate. This is important because while the project will be located in North Pole, Alaska, the power plant is specifically designed for rural Alaskan applications. The project will
be constructed and managed by Chena Power, LLC and will be located at the K&K Recycling Facility located at Mile 9 on the Richardson Highway. Design work and assembly of the power plant
will be completed by United Technologies Corporation through their Research Center (UTRC).
The Nome Joint Utilities System (NJUS) Renewable Energy Fund Wind Project involves the installation of five 600 kW wind turbines on Newton Peak located approximately one mile north of
Nome. The completed project, with a total size of three MW, will be owned and operated by NJUS. The wind turbines will be connected into NJUS?s electrical distribution system through
a constructed transmission line. The project will offer benefits to the community of Nome and its electric customers through a system-wide reduction and stabilization of energy prices.
NJUS has assembled a project team, headed by STG Incorporated which is prepared to immediately begin work on an accelerated schedule. The project team includes members from Intelligent
Energy Systems LLC, DNV Global Energy Concepts Inc, Electrical Power Systems, Duane Miller Associates LLC, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell LLC, BBFM Engineers and Aurora Consulting. All
aspects of the Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, detailed in the following pages of this application, can be completed by fall 2010.
Mt. Alice Harbor Development project is in and around Seward at mile 2 Nash Rd. the service road to the NE side of Ressurection bay 1.5 miles across from the municipal boat harbor on
the NW side, serving the needs of the local population as a community and destination resort, boating access and public access to the Fishing resources of the area. Local Engineers,
Surveyors, Municipal department heads etc. have expressed positive input and eagerness to work on the project. The Architects, Project managers are ready to proceed.
The Unalakleet Renewable Energy Fund Wind Project involves the installation of two 600 kW wind turbines on a project site located approximately one and a half miles northeast of Unalakleet.
The completed project, with a total size of 1.2 MW, will be owned and operated by Unalakleet Valley Electric Cooperative (UVEC). The wind turbines will be connected into UVEC?s electrical
distribution system through a constructed transmission line. The project will offer benefits to the village of Unalakleet and its electric customers through a system-wide reduction
and stabilization of energy prices. UVEC has assembled a project team, headed by STG Incorporated which is prepared to immediately begin work on an accelerated schedule. The project
team includes members from Intelligent Energy Systems LLC, DNV Global Energy Concepts Inc., Electrical Power Systems, Duane Miller Associates LLC, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell LLC, BBFM
Engineers and Aurora Consulting. All aspects of the Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, can be completed by fall 2010.
The proposed biomass heating system will take place at Tok School, in Tok, Alaska, and will serve to initiate the beginnings of a systemic regional conversion from fossil heating fuel
to clean, renewable biomass heating systems. An outbuilding to house the boilers will be constructed behind the school, in a central location where access to the outbuildings can also
be had. The building will have 3 bays for fiber wagons that will to feed into the feeder bin inside the boiler room. The boiler will be able to be fed from the inside or the outside
of the building, to accommodate for downtime on the biomass feed systems. The biomass boiler will fed into the current boiler infrastructure, which will serve as a back-up system,
and will heat the outbuildings. The project has the advantage of being designed by firms having extensive experience with biomass systems, and is heavily supported by the community.
It was written in partnership with the Tok Area Forestry, CTA Engineering, and by Alaska Gateway School District staff.
The City of Whittier proposes conducting a renewable energy project consisting of a reconnaissance level effort to examine the viability of hydropower on Whittier Creek in Whittier,
Alaska. The work will include engineering analysis, an economic study, and two years of stream gauge data gathering. The final product will include an estimated generation capacity,
a preliminary cost estimate for a hydropower facility, and a preliminary analysis of the potential benefits (i.e. power cost savings over time). This effort will be performed by the
Alaska District Corps of Engineers with assistance from the Corps of Engineers Hydroelectric Design Center based out of Portland, Oregon, with stream gauging to be performed by the
USGS.
Located in Nome, this project will install a 2-mile transmission line and a 8-mile fiber control cable to connect a 1MW wind farm to be operated by Banner Wind LLC, an independent power
producer, to the City of Nome/Nome Joint Utility System (NJUS) power distribution grid. The project will place an underground 25kv distribution line adjacent to a new road, and include
a fiber control cable run from the wind generators to the utility power plant. Banner Wind LLC is an IPP formed in partnership between Bering Straits Native Corporation & Sitnasuak
Native Corporation. NJUS will be primarily responsible for the project construction activities, as well as the reporting and financial control of the intertie project.
The final design work will build upon the feasibility study and preliminary design work completed as of October, 2008. A bulk fuel wood boiler will be built at the Kenny Lake K-12 school
to displace 18,035 gallons of fuel oil. The current boilers will be used for backup and low load periods. This project will involve school district personnel, local contractors, design
engineers and Alaska Energy Authority. This project will employee local residents in project management, construction and chip material delivery.
EarthRun Energy will provide a sustainable source of high grade wood chips for biomass heating in the city of Anchorage while strengthening and beautifying the urban forests. In Anchorage,
urban forests are currently overgrown presenting fire and disease problems. It is the right time to make a sick forest a productive and healthy forest. EarthRun has worked hard to come
up with the cleanest, quietest and least interruptive way of harvesting the dead and unhealthy trees from our urban forests, chipping them, and heating one municipal building, the Russian
Jack greenhouse. EarthRun Energy will work closely with the municipality to return the forests to a healthy state.
The proposal is for a 5 MW natural gas fired Combined Heat & Power Project (?CHP? or ?Cogeneration?), sited near the Begich Tower, to provide the energy needs of the Begich Tower and
thermal energy needs of City of Whittier, Public School and commercial customers within economic reach of the Project, and provide firm power to help Chugach meet new generation needs
and improve service reliability to Whittier.
The proposal is for a 5 MW natural gas fired Combined Heat & Power Project (?CHP? or ?Cogeneration?), sited at the Alaska State Fair in Palmer (the ?Fair) as the centerpiece of an Alaska
Energy Center, to showcase renewable and alternative energy technologies, provide the energy needs of the Fair and operations sited at the Fair, provide the thermal energy needs of
commercial, institutional and agricultural customers within economic reach of the Project, and provide firm power to help Matanuska Electric Association meet new generation needs.
Burro Creek, formerly the Burro Creek Farms Hatchery, is an existing, operational hydro system located on 121 acres of private land approximately one and a half miles south of Skagway
on the west side of upper Lynn Canal. A grant is requested to obtain expert analysis of the feasibility of upgrading the existing hydro system in order to wholesale power to Alaska
Power and Telephone or the City of Skagway. Existing AP&T hydro projects supply electricity to Haines and Skagway but the communities must still rely on diesel during certain times
of the year. Also, existing hydro projects do not generate enough power to supply the cruise lines who have expressed an interest in connecting to shore power as a means of reducing
air quality emissions.
The Haines Borough proposes to explore the potential for use of low-emission nontoxic wood biomass as the source for wood-fired boilers to provide heat (through an insulated pipe distribution
system) initially to four buildings located within the Borough: the K-12 School, the Voc-Ed Building, the Municipal Administration Building, and the Public Library. The Borough would
begin to reduce our dependence on costly fossil fuels, while employing cleaner, renewable, and locally available resources, through the use of locally available wood biomass. The Haines
Borough will contract qualified consultants to perform reconnaissance and feasibility studies, and guide us through the 35% concept design.
The City of Chignik will partner with Trident Seafoods (holder of FERC License 620) to study the engineering, electronics, and economics of restoring the antiquated hydropower system
on Indian Creek in Chignik, Alaska. (See attached Project Area maps.) The ?Chignik Hydro? project would benefit the residents of Chignik by offsetting the cost of fuel currently used
to generate electricity for homes and community buildings such as the Subsistence Building and the school. Electricity generated by the new hydropower system will also benefit the new
small boat harbor, the Trident Seafoods fish processing plant, and the Harris Sub-Regional Clinic, which will serve residents of Chignik Lagoon, Chignik Lake, Perryville, and Port Heiden.
In addition, by re-building the dam and conveyor pipeline, the project would also be reinforcing the infrastructure that supports the city?s water system, as well as the fish plant
water supply.
The Division of Forestry at Milepost 267.5 Richardson Highway, Delta Junction is proposing a pilot project using barley/wood pellets for heating a governmental building. The boiler system
will combine two heating systems, a 3840 square foot (sf) main office building, proposed 3000 sf addition, and a 1792 sf warehouse. The boiler will be located in a separate building
which will house a heating system and barley/wood pellet storage.
The proposed project would be located in an unincorporated area, northeast of the City of Petersburg, Alaska. Development of hydroelectric power at the site will include construction
of a lake tap, arch dam, unlined tunnel, power penstock, power plant, tailrace, and transmission line segments. The powerhouse would be located within 2,000 ft. of the confluence of
Delta Creek and would house three impulse turbines. The rated installed capacity of the powerhouse would be 20 MW and the energy output would be roughly 70 GWh. Power generated by
the Project would be transmitted by a new overhead / submarine, 138 kilovolt (KV) transmission segment roughly 20-miles long running generally southwest from the powerhouse to Petersburg.
The transmission segment would integrate the project to the Southeast Intertie which currently connects Petersburg to Wrangell to the Tyee Lake Hydroelectric Project on Bradfield Canal.
Project would provide the interconnected Southern Southeast Alaska regional utilities with increased system reliability; replace current dependency on diesel generation; and enable
regional utilities to meet the increasing demand for electricity as customers convert from oil to electric heat and new construction is designed for electric heat.
The proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 11841 (Project) is located near the southeast end of Revillagigedo Island, approximately four miles east of the City of Ketchikan,
Alaska. KPU proposes to install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at KPU?s existing Whitman Lake Dam to provide an additional source of clean renewable energy to KPU?s customers,
in the city of Ketchikan and the Borough area including Saxman Village, while also enhancing the conversion of oil heat to electric heat and displacing expensive and nonrenewable diesel
generation. The Project will be interconnected to KPU?s existing distribution system and the grant project will involve KPU.
This proposal seeks to design and make commercially available a system that utilizes renewable energy as an option to the basic rural Alaska electrical power generating system. This
is multi part concept that utilizes advanced technology to improve the over-all efficiency of prime power diesel generating systems. The elements of the new system are divided into
three separate parts each bringing their own value contribution. They include waste heat recovery, conversion of waste heat using the Organic Rankine Cycle in combination with Controlled
Environment Agriculture, and biomass incineration.
The project involves the installation of two wind turbines near the water treatment plant (WTP) in Hooper Bay, Alaska. The two Northwind 100B; 100kW wind turbines will provide a dedicated
energy source for the WTP?s water heating system, providing approximately 539,000 kWh per year dedicated to an electric boiler inside the WTP. Wind-powered energy will offset the use
of 15,995 gallons of fuel currently used in the three fuel oil-burning boilers. Northern will provide the wind towers and turbine technology, and STG will perform the installation of
the towers and turbines. CE2 Engineers, the firm that designed and built the WTP, will supervise the engineering and wiring of the new boiler system.
The proposed 5 to 7-MW Grant Lake/Falls Creek hydro project is located near Moose Pass, Alaska. Kenai Hydro seeks to develop the project in compliance with current low impact hydro guidelines
and practices. The scope of this project will also involve looking at the feasibility of a design that includes diverting flows from Falls Creek into Grant Lake. Kenai Hydro has secured
a Preliminary Permit for this project, issued by FERC on October 7, 2008. Power from the project would be available to customers of Homer Electric Association and other areas served
by the existing Railbelt transmission grid. Kenai Hydro, LLC is a partnership among Homer Electric Association (HEA), enXco, and Cook Inlet Region, Inc. (CIRI) that was formed for the
purpose of evaluating and developing this site as a low impact hydroelectric facility.
The Chilkoot Indian Association is proposing to construct and operate four-plex housing (four buildings with sixteen units) incorporating a cordwood-fired boiler system. The project
is initiated by our Housing Department, who will manage the subsidized, low-income housing project. A separate boiler/fuel storage building will be built on one lot and recirculate
hot water to be used in each four-plex for building heat and domestic hot water. Architectural, civil, mechanical, and electrical design is complete except for an engineering refit
to accommodate the wood boiler system. Our proposal will be for heating system redesign and construction.
The project addresses the availability, quality and feasibility of sustainable, economic use of
agricultural and forestry biomass in Alaska. The goal of the project is to 1) assimilate all existing information on the total forest and crop biomass available in Alaska into one
data base, 2) determine the gaps in the data base and the information needed to fill the gaps, and 3) determine the biological, physical, and economic feasibility of using Alaskan biomass
as biofuels. The impetus for the Study is the biomass/coal-to-liquids plant proposed for the Fairbanks area and its need for commercial/industrial-scale volumes of biomass fuel stocks.
Work will take place in Fairbanks and Palmer, Alaska.
This application supports a wood heating project in Fort Yukon, Alaska. A wood energy supply analysis, and a feasibility and conceptual design analysis has been completed for a district
heating loop for downtown Fort Yukon to include the School, Gym, AC Store, School District Office, Water Plant, Post Office and two stand alone boilers; one at the new CATG Clinic and
the other heating the Voc Ed Complex. The three chip fired boilers will require approximately 2000-2500 tons of chips depending on moisture content to displace up to 135,347 gallons
of fuel or 90% of oil used in these commercial buildings at a cost of approximately $20/MMBTU ($200/ton) for chips compared to $46.93/MMBTU for fuel oil ($6.50/gal). This project is
being conducted in concert but as a separate project with a project funded by Denali Commission, US DOE through an Alaska Village Initiatives earmark, and GZ Corporation to develop
a wood harvesting system, wood yard and a wood energy utility to supply and maintain the boilers
This application supports a wood heating project in McGrath, Alaska. A wood energy supply analysis, and a Level 2 Feasibility (in writing phase) and conceptual design analysis has
been completed for a district heating loop for downtown McGrath to include in addition to residences, larger consumers; School District Office Building (offices, Museum, Library),
Captain Snow Center, (including Water Treatment Plant, Southcentral Foundation offices and current Health Center, Alaska State Troopers, Washeteria & Showers, District Court, city offices
and meeting hall), Post Office, new Health Center, (to be built), DNR Forestry & Wildfire Center, new Tribal Center (Village Council offices and Community Hall), and KSKO Public Radio
Station. This Level 2 study has not yet been coordinated with an analysis for a heat recovery project being proposed by ML&P and Alaska Energy and Engineering (AE&E). The biomass project
will link and integrate with the heat recovery project in future iterations of design and cost analysis in order to capture the synergies from both to create an optimum design. A side
by side analysis of both chip boilers (K?b) and stick fired boilers (Garn) with estimated cost analysis and net simple payback for individual buildings was conducted in the feasibility
assessment (calculations attached). The chip fired boilers will require approximately 2000 tons of chips annually modeled at 40% moisture content to displace up to 125,000 gallons of
fuel or 98% of oil used in these commercial buildings at a cost of between $28.88 ? $36.10/MMBTUs or between $4-$5 on a per gallon equivalent compared to $50.54/MMBTU for fuel oil ($7.00/gal).
This project is planned to be conducted in concert with the Village Safe Water project to replace the entire water main system in McGrath in 2009-2011. The integration of these two
projects has the potential to produce significant cost savings for installation of piping, the most expensive portion of the project. Both projects have been developed through technical
support from Alaska Village Initiatives, and McGrath Light & Power and e-Four Engineering. Principle personnel to date include Bill Wall, PhD, Peter Olsen, Ernie Baumgartner, and Greg
Koontz, ME, George Wilson, ME of Village Safe Water. Linkages are planned with Steven J. Stassel, P.E., President AE&E.
The applicant, along with the State Department of Transportation (ADOT), proposes to build a road and 69-kV transmission line to connect the community of Kake with Petersburg. The road/intertie
will allow the delivery of surplus hydropower available from the Tyee project to Kake and eliminate its total reliance upon diesel generation. The community of Kake will continue to
be served by the Inside Passage Electric Cooperative (IPEC). The transmission line infrastructure will be owned and operated by the Kwaan Electric Intertie Cooperative, Inc. (KWETICO,
the applicant), who will charge IPEC for wheeling power to Kake. The road project will allow Kake citizens access to Petersburg\'s infrastructure including major air transportation,
medical facilities, more frequent ferry service, engine repair facilities, and various services and industries not available in Kake. The Intertie will also provide broadband telecommunications
to the community of Kake, and savings to the State\'s Power Cost Equalization Program. The project is part of the overall Southeast Intertie plan commissioned and supported by Southeast
Conference and regional leaders. The road/Intertie dual construction will save money for both ADOT and KWETICO, and will facilitate access to the transmission line for repairs and maintenance.
Hoonah-Hawk Intertie will begin at the Hawk Inlet submarine cable termination yard on Admiralty Island as a continuation of the 69-kV line from Juneau. The cable termination yard will
be located on the eastern shore approximately 2.75 miles up Hawk Inlet just inland from the shoreline and the submarine cable will be buried as it leaves the yard and proceeds offshore.
The total length of the submarine cable is approximately 25 miles. Kwaan Electric Intertie Cooperative, Inc. (KWETICO) will own and operate the transmission line however Inside Passage
Electric Cooperative (IPEC) will continue as the utility providing electrical service to the Hoonah area. IPEC will purchase power from Alaska Electric Light & Power (AEL&P), KWETICO
will charge IPEC a wheeling rate for providing power to Hoonah who will be the primary community served along with the old Whitestone Logging Camp. This project is part of the overall
Southeast Intertie plan commissioned and supported by Southeast Conference and regional leaders.
The Allison Lake Hydroelectric Project is located adjacent to the Prince William Sound, immediately south of Valdez, Alaska. Copper Valley Electric Association (CVEA) is a member-owned
electric cooperative providing central station electrical service to a relatively large geographical area of Eastern Interior and Gulf Coast Alaska. CVEA is a stand-alone (not interconnected
to another power system) electric utility. The service territory is divided into two districts, the Valdez district and the Copper River Basin district. The Valdez district is comprised
of the organized area of the City of Valdez. The Copper Basin district incorporates many outstretched communities including: Glennallen, Gakona, Gulkana, Tazlina, Copper Center, Kluti-Kaah,
Copperville, Kenny Lake, Tolsona, Mendeltna, Nelchina, Eureka, and Sheep Mountain. CVEA?s personnel are extensively involved with the Allison Lake Project. CVEA has hired Hatch Acres
to assist in coordinating the work and field studies and license application.
The project is located in Cordova, Alaska. Affordable fuel wood is available to the community, from donated lots at an old sort yard and from an airport clearing project. We are asking
for assistance with purchasing a processing mill, yarding the logs, and cutting the logs into split firewood. The Eyak Corporation owns several log sort yards which they have generously
donated to the village for firewood use. The State of Alaska has offered down logs from the airport clearing project. To efficiently process this wood, we will purchase a firewood
processing mill, set it up and train the operators. The mill will enable us to process firewood in a timely manner to be able to distribute an abundant amount of firewood to the community.
We will mill approximately 3,421 cords of firewood. The supply for this will come from existing log decks and the airport clearing project. The firewood will be distributed to our
elders at no cost and the rest of the community will be asked to contribute $50 per cord to sustain the program. The money generated will help pay for labor costs of processing the
firewood in future years. This project will provide 37.2 billion BTU\'s of low cost energy for home heating and will offset 312.6 thousand gallons of fuel oil and save $1.58 million
this winter in home heating costs for Cordova.
In July 2008, Haines Assisted Living, Inc. (HAL) began construction on a senior assisted living/ residential complex comprising a total of 26,000 SF. Residents of Haines and Southeast
Alaska will utilize the senior assisted living and senior affordable housing being built in 2008?2010. The first phase of the project will be completed in the fall of 2009 at a cost
of over $4 million. Key to the long term sustainability of the facility is the installation of a Ground Source Heat Pump to extract geothermal energy from the earth and circulate it
through a radiant in-floor heating system. The initial feasibility and design has been completed as the follow-up to an extensive energy life-cycle cost analysis performed in 2007and
updated in October 2008.The designed system estimate of 210% efficiency will eliminate fossil fuel consumption in favor of renewable geo-thermal heat source and local hydro-electric
power and result in significant operational savings for the life of the facility. Haines Assisted Living, Inc., Dan Austin, Project Manager and Jim Rehfeldt, Alaska Energy Engineering
LLC are the principals involved in this grant project.
Alaska Power and Telephone (AP&T) proposes to construct the 2.0 MW Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on Yerrick Creek, approximately 20 miles west of Tok. The Project
would off-set diesel generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Tetlin, Tanacross, Dot Lake, and Tok. The Project will consist of a small diversion structure, approximately
15,000 feet of penstock, powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and transmission line. The Project operation will be run-of-river; annual generation is
expected to be approximately 4,900 MWh/yr (approximately 40% of the interconnected load). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost
to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation.
This proposal is for the North Prince of Wales Island Intertie Project (Project). Alaska Power and Telephone (AP&T) proposes to construct a line extension to the communities of Coffman
Cove and Naukati Bay, placing these communities on the Prince of Wales Island (POW) electric grid which is supplied with renewable energy from two hydroelectric projects. Both of these
communities currently rely on 100% diesel generation for electricity. The total line is to be 48 miles (Coffman Cove = 37 miles; Naukati Bay = 11 miles) of overhead 4/0 ACSR three-phase
34.5 kV line with a 1/0 ACSR neutral conductor on single pole wood structures. This line extension will come off the existing 34.5 kV line from between Klawock and Thorne Bay, near
Control Lake. Naukati Bay is 11 miles off the main road to Coffman Cove.
Cordova Electric Cooperative (CEC) proposes to serve as a model for rural Alaska utilities by installing an ORC heat recovery unit that will capture waste heat and increase diesel generator
electrical production by an additional four to six percent. The average electric production efficiency of CEC?s Orca Power Plant is 13.65 kWh/gallon of diesel. CEC has placed a deposit
on a new, 3.6 MW rated, EMD 710 series, 20 cylinder diesel generator. The efficiency of the new generator is expected to peak at 15 kWh/gallon. Cordova Electric Cooperative desires
fit the EMD with an organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) heat recovery system that will capture additional BTUs that would otherwise be wasted energy. CEC is the sole provider of power to the
City of Cordova, Alaska.
After a decade of declining performance and three years of no operation (2005 ? 2008), due to unstable site geology and flooding, Cordova Electric Cooperative (CEC) has focused intense
efforts on re?designing its Humpback Creek hydro?electric facility. Humpback Creek, named for the pink salmon that spawn in its mouth, is located five miles north of Cordova and is
accessible only by boat. Sub?marine cable from the plant to Cordova City limits, and buried transmission lines to the CEC plant, connect the facility to Cordova. Because of its steep
grade, fish are not able to migrate upstream and thus no fish populations will be affected by this project. From the original in?take structure to tidewater, Humpback Creek flows about
0.7 miles and drops from an elevation of 276 feet to where it enters saltwater Orca Inlet. Site visits by the project team to other small hydro?electric projects with a variety of in?take
arrangements and a project workshop held in December, 2007 culminated in a new design with an intake/diversion that includes a tunnel, conventional side intake with provisions for sluicing
sediment and a diversion dam with a sluice gate that will allow removal of stream bed material that may collect outside the intake. The new location facilitates much?improved access,
a location with shallower bedrock substrate, and a better hydrological analysis. This project has been CEC?s and the community of Cordova?s top priority for the past three years, ever
since October, 2006?s 3,500?year return period flood event destroyed the intake/diversion facility. Project partners include the City of Cordova, the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), and the Eyak Corporation (for access).
This application proposes a Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie with 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan
Public Utilities (KPU). The Intertie will include 16 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line to be constructed on Annette Island between Metlakatla and Race Point and an approximate
one mile submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Race Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation. The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for
the integrated operation of the interconnected systems? generating plants. The Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie will provide benefits to both Ketchikan and Metlakatla, allowing for significantly
improved utilization of Metlakatla?s existing hydroelectric generating resources while reducing diesel generation in Ketchikan.
This project is a combination of selective reconnaissance, prototype testing, conflict assessment and comprehensive feasibility assessment to establish the feasibility of prospective
pilot tidal energy development projects at four sites where Preliminary Permits have been issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The four sites and respective communities
served are: Icy Passage Icy Straits, serving the community of Gustavus; Angoon, serving the local Kootznoowoo community; Wrangell Narrows, potentially serving the community of Petersburg;
and Central Cook Inlet near Nikiski, potentially supplying the communities in the service area of the Homer Electric Association.
The Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project is a long-term energy solution to rising and unpredictable costs of energy in rural and remote regions with geothermal energy
potential. The next phase of the project and the subject of this application is geothermal energy resource confirmation and qualification. Phase III includes design, engineering and
construction of a deep well preceded by funding and permit acquisition, road and well site improvements and drilling and drill management contracts. Subsequent to resource confirmation
and qualification, NEA proposes constructing a 25 MW geothermal plant and interconnection infrastructure that will supply 25+ communities in the Bristol Bay and Lake Region with low-cost
electricity that effectively decreases the cost of power 70% by displacing 5.4 million gallons of diesel fuel currently used to meet regional electrical and heating energy requirements.
The project will be the first utility grade geothermal development in Alaska establishing long-term firm, reliable and cost effective alternative energy that will enhance rural sustainability
and the development of renewable and strategic natural resources.
The Native Village of Cantwell proposes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwell?s power system. Currently Cantwell obtains power from the line between
MEA and GVEA. To accomplish improved reliability, we propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this plant
will be in excess of 1 MW. This project will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
This project proposes the first 10 MW Utility-Grade Geothermal Development in Alaska. This 10 MW project would be able to extract geothermal power from the base of either Mt. Redoubt
or Spurr by 2105.
The project will be located at the mile 33 of the Tok Cutoff Highway in Chistochina, Alaska and will be managed and owned by the Cheesh?na Tribal Council (CTC). The project provides
a (cordwood) biomass system to provide heat and hot water for all community facilities located in a ?campus? area. Existing facilities that will be served by the project are owned
and operated by CTC and include the CTC Tribal Office Building, Chistochina Community Hall and the Education/Library facility. Two new facilities that will be served by the project
are scheduled to be constructed in the coming year; Mt Sanford Tribal Consortium multiuse facility with health clinic and CTC?s Washateria.
The Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project is located on Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon. The 190 kW project can provide for most of the communities current power needs, which peak at
about 125 kW. The plant would eliminate about 85% of 50,000 gallons of diesel consumed by the generators annually. There will also be excess energy that could be used for heating the
school and other local structures. The project would also enable the community to add a freezer/processing facility to further improve the local economy.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a reconnaissance study prior to pursuing a Resource Assessment, Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design for the development
of a state of the art clean waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Ketchikan and the communities of the Southeast Conference. The proposed plant project location must
be determined but initial consideration is being given to a site at Ward Cove, site of the old Ketchikan Pulp Mill. The project will serve Ketchikan and those communities that the
proposed study shows can be reasonably served. This study will provide the information about present patterns for disposal of municipal solid waste and other types of waste in the
general area, logistics considerations, feedstock sources that can be identified and evaluated that would be available to support the proposed plant and such other information that
can lead to a feasibility analysis, how such a proposed plant would supplement, integrate into or supplant existing energy resources, potential markets for such a plant and its products,
possible site and cost analysis for future studies addressing the preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating
costs, by product markets and operating information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to meet future grant applications
for such a study and project.
The proposed plant project will convert the waste, landfill and the Ketchikan Pulp Mill superfund site into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management
Company, Robert Loescher, Richard Smith and Alaska Recycling Energy in conjunction with Ketchikan City and Borough staff and the Southeast Conference. If needed, additional consultants
will be retained.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a reconnaissance study prior to pursuing a Resource Assessment, Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design for the development
of a state of the art clean waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Juneau and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project location is at the Juneau Landfill
currently owned and operated by Waste Management. The project will principally serve Juneau and those communities that the proposed study shows can be reasonably served. This study
will provide the information about present patterns for disposal of municipal solid waste and other types of waste in the general area, logistics considerations, feedstock sources
that can be identified and evaluated that would be available to support the proposed plant and such other information that can lead to a feasibility analysis, how such a proposed plant
would supplement, integrate into or supplant existing energy resources, potential markets for such a plant and its products, possible site and cost analysis for future studies addressing
the preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product markets and operating information necessary
to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to meet future grant applications for such a study and project. The proposed plant project
will convert the Juneau waste, landfill and sanitary sludge into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Robert Loescher, and Alaska Recycling
Energy in conjunction with Juneau City and Borough staff and the Southeast Conference. If needed, additional consultants will be retained.
This project requests funding to conduct a renewable energy reconnaissance report for the smaller (populations less than 100) communities of Cold Bay, False Pass and Nelson Lagoon which
require assistance to decrease their energy costs and reduce their dependence on diesel fuel. This region, called ?the birthplace of the winds?, renewable energy resources abound --
not only wind power, but also hydro, geo-thermal, current and tidal. Some waste heat recovery opportunities also exist. A reconnaissance report will summarize the assessment and findings.
This project will be administered and managed by the Aleutians East Borough (AEB) and will be conducted by a consultant chosen by the AEB.
The Falls Creek Hydro Electric Project is an 800 kW run-of-river hydroelectric facility, located in Gustavus Alaska, which will provide electric power to the community of Gustavus. The
project is being built by Gustavus Electric Company to displace existing diesel generation. Construction of the project is approximately 90% complete and will provide 90% of the community
electric needs.
The City and Borough of Wrangell (City), through Wrangell Municipal Light and Power (WMLP), has established a fuel displacement rate of $.08/KWH for all heat and hot water. There is
a possibility of an interruptible rate of $.05/KWH from the Four Dam Pool Power Agency. This special rate is due to Tyee Lake Hydroelectric facilities spilling of excess water (water
not used in power production). A feasibility study has been conducted by Electric Power Systems, Inc. to determine what the savings would be per year if the city buildings were converted
from diesel fired boilers to electric boilers, develop a rough order magnitude cost estimate (ROM), and provide estimated engineering design fees for replacing the boilers. The study
was conducted on 11 public buildings in Wrangell and the study found significant savings to progress this project to the design, permitting and construction phase. WMLP would like funding
to convert these 11 public facilities from diesel fired boilers to electric boilers. Directly involved in this project is the City and Borough of Wrangell and Wrangell Municipal Light
and Power.
This is a request for reconnaissance study, followed by a more detailed feasibility study that will analyze the feasibility of supplying Anchorage with heat from geothermal energy sources.
IAE has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Municipality of Anchorage to facilitate such a study. The Municipality of Anchorage has agreed to support the feasibility
study efforts by providing information about the potential for geothermal energy use in Anchorage as well as right of way information. If the results of the feasibility study prove
to be positive for development, IAE will work towards developing the project. Specific focus on the market available, what type of organization will be needed for the project, technical,
and financial issues.
This proposal will examine the opportunity, analyzes the possibility, and determines the feasibility of providing a stand-alone fish waste-processing facility that produces and uses
clean energy from renewable resources. It will serve the commercial fishery and processing plants (7 land based processing facilities, 3 floating processing facilities and several
smaller independent seller/operators) and the community of Naknek, King Salmon, and South Naknek, Alaska. The study produced will look at a model plant that, when proven successful,
will be recreated throughout the fisheries of the State and the nation, and the world.
Bristol Bay Borough and Naknek Electric Association have joined in this responsible and cooperative scientific effort in the largest sockeye salmon fishery in the world to perform this
study and assess the initial, as well as its ultimate, practicality and profitability of such a facility.
This project proposes a facility at Lake Elva that will consist of a dam constructed 8,500 feet downstream from the existing outlet of the lake. The powerhouse will contain two 750
kW turbines. The steel framed structure will be located approximately 1,800 feet upstream from the Elva Creek confluence with Lake Nerka. It is planned to be on a 20 by 80 foot concrete
foundation with a height of 20 feet above the generator floor. This proposed project will necessitate the construction of approximately 33 miles of new three phase transmission tie
line from the project site to close proximity of the village of Aleknagik.
The Nushagak Area Hydropower Project will initially serve the communities of Aleknagik, Dillingham, and Kanakanak in the Nushagak and Wood River areas (future interties to Manokotak
and Ekwok - New Stuyahok - Koliganek are under consideration). This first phase with inter-tie is estimated to cost $22 million and replace 500,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually,
for a yearly savings of $2,105,700 at today?s fuel prices. Currently all power in the area is generated with diesel by Nushagak Cooperative (NETC), with a current residential rate
at $0.463 cents per kilowatt hour. Nushagak Cooperative would develop, maintain, and operate the Lake Elva facility and associated infrastructure.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of the art clean
waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the FNSB Municipal
Landfill in Fairbanks. The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the FNSB Solid Waste Division. This study will provide the information required to
develop the feedstock sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product
markets and operating information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize a legal relationship with the Solid
Waste Division for FNSB. The proposed plant project will convert the FNSB waste and landfill into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company,
Plasma Waste Recycling, CH2MHill, Economic Research Associates, and Alaska Recycling Energy staff in conjunction with FNSB Solid Waste Services and Borough staff. If needed, additional
consultants will be retained.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of the art clean
waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Mat-Su and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the Mat-Su Municipal Landfill in Palmer.
The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the Mat-Su Solid Waste Division. This study will provide the information required to develop the feedstock
sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product markets and operating
information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize a legal relationship with the Solid Waste Division for
Mat-Su. The proposed plant project will convert the Mat-Su waste and landfill into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Plasma Waste
Recycling, CH2MHill, Economic Research Associates, and Alaska Recycling Energy staff in conjunction with Mat-Su Solid Waste Services and Borough staff. If needed, additional consultants
will be retained.aska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of
the art clean waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Mat-Su and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the Mat-Su Municipal Landfill
in Palmer. The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the Mat-Su Solid Waste Division. This study will provide the information required to develop the
feedstock sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product markets
and operating information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize a legal relationship with the Solid Waste
Division for Mat-Su. The proposed plant project will convert the Mat-Su waste and landfill into electricity or fuel.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of the art clean
waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Anchorage and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the Anchorage Municipal Landfill adjacent
to Route 1 on the Glenn Highway just east of town. The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the Anchorage Solid Waste Services. This study will provide
the information required to develop the feedstock sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up
and operating costs, by product markets and operating information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize
a legal relationship with the Solid Waste Services Sector for the Municipality of Anchorage. The proposed plant project will convert the Anchorage waste and landfill into electricity
or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Plasma Waste Recycling, CH2MHill, Economic Research Associates, and Alaska Recycling Energy staff in conjunction
with Anchorage Solid Waste Services and City staff. If needed, additional consultants will be retained.
This project looks at the integration of a wood fired hydronic heating system with existing boiler system in some of the buildings and retrofit hot water heat to other buildings. The
project will require a greater initial investment and higher annual OM&R costs than for an equivalent oil or gas system alone; however, the savings in fuel costs (wood vs. fossil fuel)
will pay for the initial investment and cover the additional OM&R costs in a relatively short period of time. After the initial investment is paid off, the project will continue to
save money (avoided fuel cost) for the life of the heating system. Inflation rates for fossil fuels are typically higher than inflation rates for wood fuel, increasing inflation rates
result in greater fuel savings and thus greater project viability.
Takatz Lake Project ? Alaska, a hydroelectric project approximetily 27.7 MW in size capable of producing an average of about 106,900 MWH per year to serve the City of Sitka and other
communities in Southeast Alaska as the communities become electrically interconnected. See the attached application to FERC dated June, 2008 for a more detailed description.
Application BC Ratio
0.22
1.3
1.45
2.18
3.36
8.24
3.13
1.41
3.17
1.32
10.87
1.19
3.05
1.57
1.36
1.38
3.21
1.05
1.57
2.58
0.49
0.12
2.04
1.23
1.12
0.92
4.52
2.43
1.43
2.66
0.99
0.63
1.1
0.72
1.18
1.43
1.48
4.27
1.38
1.42
2.09
1.75
1.86
0.47
5.57
1.34
1.45
1.47
0.49
3.22
8.49
1.67
1.22
0.99
1.32
1.64
0.68
0.9
0.83
2.37
0.94
1.66
1.39
2.8
1.27
0.63
1.26
1.77
2.09
0.63
1.46
1.54
2.19
2.7
1.07
1.15
3.22
1.04
0.8
1.96
0.8
0.69
0.35
0.11
0.67
1.17
1.16
1.13
1.01
2.3
0.97
5
1.19
2.2
1.16
1.07
1.92
1.62
2.12
1.36
1.22
1.44
4.87
7.81
1.84
1.92
1.75
6.44
1.16
1.18
2.32
3.49
1.87
0.89
1.34
0.61
1.6
0.79
9.84
3.14
3.46
0.96
2.55
1.4
1.73
1.01
1.47
5
1.23
1.6
1.79
1.02
0.4
0.22
4.02
0.74
1.05
1.22
0.27
4.41
2.31
2.33
1.45
1.28
3.55
1.37
3.96
2.02
2.45
2.21
1.35
2.44
2.01
1.16
0.24
3.85
1.24
1.28
0.52
1.37
0.94
1.02
1.21
1.88
6.9
0
4.07
1.79
3.93
1.37
1.6
2.32
2.45
3.68
1.84
1.87
1.06
3.58
1.54
1.11
0.98
0.74
6.44
2.32
1.83
6.91
0.16
0.83
1.53
0.6
2.08
0.92
1.06
1.48
1.7
4.59
2.14
1.55
0.88
0.39
1.24
0
1.49
0.56
0.3
1.58
9.77
2.17
1.86
3.13
0.66
0.01
1.8
1.3
1.05
0.86
0.69
0.63
0.65
1.76
0.89
0.99
1.33
0.85
0.63
1.15
4.04
2.15
1.57
2.25
4.61
4.28
1.06
2.48
0.92
1.49
2.21
1.05
1.47
2.79
4.1
2.11
1.04
4.71
1.05
1.49
6.01
3.22
1.61
0.65
0.01
1.94
1.53
2.02
3.93
1.52
0.11
0.58
1.26
1.21
8.67
13.07
34.74
0.6
0.86
2.43
0.48
0.99
9.09
0.76
0.35
2.22
0.86
1.31
1.86
0.79
0.98
0.69
0.86
2.88
2.5
1.31
1.3
0.9
3.58
2.68
1.22
1.92
0.31
2.6
1.95
2.23
0
0
0
0
0
1.42
1.32
0
1.79
1.25
0.9
3.66
0.77
4.03
0.38
1.78
6.2
2.59
1.1
1.9
0.89
0.89
2.37
0.48
0.9
1.05
2.2
3.46
0.39
1.88
0
1.42
1.42
1.12
1.14
2.62
0.27
2.01
2.25
1.47
1.09
2.05
0.38
3.5
4.82
3.94
1.71
0.96
0.19
1.18
0.8
1
0.96
0.6
1.03
1.94
0.29
1.4
3.14
1.65
0.83
4.23
1.49
4.5
1.15
0.43
4.3
-0.18
2
1.56
3.6
3.6
1.87
6.56
0.67
1.66
0.62
1.2
0.97
0.87
0.99
1.07
1.47
0.85
0.73
0.56
0.82
0.93
1.12
2.26
1.32
1.79
0.99
0.56
9.84
1.64
0.84
2.11
1.38
0.27
0.79
2.03
3.3
2.86
0.69
1.6
10.74
0.44
0.88
0.83
0.84
0.78
3.57
3.27
1.82
4.33
3.25
0.57
1.78
1.87
3.99
1.65
0.82
0.47
0.96
0.54
2.42
0.94
2.54
0.61
1.61
0.63
3.15
0.37
0.91
0.15
1.26
0.98
0.82
2.43
1.44
0.27
0.99
0.45
16.16
1
1.46
4.14
1.7
1.47
2.23
0.86
1.19
1.46
1.47
4
2.21
0
0.47
0.63
3.33
0.36
1.05
0
2.92
3.32
4.56
0.98
7.05
11.24
2.29
1.78
1.45
1.08
2.32
0.5
2.16
1.45
2.45
4.9
1.79
0.56
1.23
0.92
0.81
10.46
3.61
1.26
8.41
0.61
2.45
27.98
0.85
2.44
0.88
1.07
0.87
0
1.11
1.58
2.73
0.81
4.67
2.82
0.22
4.93
1.8
4.75
1.31
0.32
1.57
1.72
1.94
1.84
0.91
0.93
0.59
1.3
1.44
1.56
3.45
0.8
0.78
3.26
3.22
3.36
4.83
2.3
0.24
0.91
1.03
3
3.93
1.94
4.77
0.19
0.43
19.73
0.4
0.39
0.6
1.22
1.3
2.94
1.84
5.61
3.19
3.43
1.64
1.14
0.2
1.2
2.41
9.12
1.96
-0.15
0.74
0.99
6.03
0.58
1.1
0.98
0.46
7.52
1.54
6.53
3.75
5.37
1.23
9.15
1.88
0.64
1.78
0.88
0.77
4.93
1.46
1.87
0.7
1.35
1.88
4.19
3.29
4.59
1.17
2.5
1.25
0.26
8.07
1.13
3.35
1.93
2.81
4.13
3.29
1.57
1.84
1.78
1.52
0.57
0.69
0.49
0.01
1.59
0.71
0.65
0.71
3.54
4.25
2.82
3.99
1.45
0.65
1.07
1.84
2.81
1.39
5.89
5.41
0.85
2.9
2.45
1.28
1.13
0.82
1
2.17
0.67
2.4
0.59
4.4
0.097
3.97
8.26
0.5
2.95
4.23
0.92
0.06
0.84
1.15
4.81
19.92
2.76
3.08
2.33
4.54
6.19
15.8
0.44
3.13
22.06
1.91
1.83
0.63
1.09
AEA BC Ratio
0.2
0.44
1.22
0.94
0.91
1.86
1.66
1.75
2.23
1.15
1.97
0.37
0.73
1.06
2.19
0.47
1.25
1.44
0.98
2.02
0.79
0.43
0.42
0.29
0.54
1.71
1.1
1
0.93
2.16
1.38
0.72
1.87
0.93
1.38
1.04
0.72
1.01
1.06
1.08
1.13
0.36
0
1.33
1.23
0.13
1.21
0.74
1.07
4.24
1.24
1.03
0.82
0.36
2.94
1.52
1.67
0.96
0.99
1.25
0
0.4
0.69
0.59
0.77
1.06
1.66
1.71
2.33
1.28
0.97
0.42
1.26
1.97
0.46
1.46
0.71
0.62
2.19
1.02
1.8
0.18
1.14
0.58
1.95
0.5
0.71
0.34
0.09
0.67
1.12
0.75
0.95
0.7
1.21
0.69
3.63
1.17
1.36
1
1.09
1.79
1.3
2.3
1.06
1.98
0.94
3.21
1.28
1.23
1.79
1.41
3.03
0.87
1.62
1.54
2.45
1.37
7.11
1.31
0.67
1.05
0.74
4.23
1.48
1.3
1
1.7
0.86
1.53
1.08
1.19
3
1.7
0.98
1.11
1.14
0.01
0.22
2.56
0.55
0.71
1.24
1.14
0.47
1.13
1.45
2.2
0.97
0.96
3.3
1.03
4.31
1.52
1.47
1.68
1.61
1.01
1.83
1.51
1.12
2.15
1.66
0.44
1.77
0.5
1.02
1.12
0.51
0.79
1.9
2.55
3.18
4.28
1.05
4.07
1.84
1.72
0.09
1.48
1.02
1.47
1.91
3.96
1.19
0.91
0.73
1.69
1.12
0.66
0.97
0.86
1.39
1.54
0.76
1.79
0.16
0.68
0.98
0.6
1.76
0.53
1.45
1.48
1.57
0.94
2.04
1.48
0.74
0.28
0.58
0.68
0.81
0.93
0.64
1.58
5.68
1.77
1.09
0.49
0.99
-0.01
1.8
0.87
0.88
0.92
0.78
0.56
0.64
1.64
0.52
1.09
1.04
0.79
0.66
1.19
4.04
2.15
1.22
1.65
3.64
3.38
0.38
1.96
0.71
1.1
1.62
1.43
1.9
2.02
4.1
2.16
1.04
3.41
0.72
1.12
5.54
3.47
2.26
0.67
0.01
1.94
1.45
2.02
2.85
1.58
2.24
5.23
1.42
1.17
0.52
3.08
10.97
1.59
3.52
0.15
1.68
0.83
2.43
0.43
0.78
1.03
0.27
3.46
1
1.14
1.54
0.58
0.65
0.47
0.78
2.07
2.5
0.76
1.18
0.6
3.58
1.54
0.9
0.85
0.14
2.6
1.95
2.23
0
0
0.88
0
0
1.42
2.12
0
1.78
1.25
0.89
2.06
0.89
3.6
0.81
1.78
6.2
1.88
0.82
1.9
0.91
0.91
1.25
0.62
0.9
0.59
0.55
3.74
0.31
1.49
0.76
0.8
1.52
1.07
1.02
1.24
0.55
1.39
0.22
1.84
2.14
1.16
1.07
1.47
0.3
1.42
3.55
1.41
1.48
0.94
0.03
1.37
0.9
1.89
0.89
0.75
1.34
1.94
0.29
1
2.56
1.77
0.83
3.01
1.49
3.1
1.11
0.53
0.87
0.01
2.21
2.15
0.13
0.13
1.91
2.21
1.08
0.99
0.53
0.91
0.89
0.52
0.91
0.95
1.52
0.74
0.67
0.67
0.76
0.79
1.12
1.34
1.4
1.37
0.8
0.32
4.23
0.25
1.09
0.81
0.05
0.39
0.75
1.59
3.53
0.47
1.25
10.21
0.54
0.78
0.6
0.75
0.67
2.33
2.97
0.82
1.04
2.26
0.61
1.78
0.43
1.74
1.48
0.59
0.58
0.85
0.4
1.17
0.89
0.58
-0.05
0.92
0.45
3.41
0.23
0.47
0.12
0.97
0.46
0.57
0.37
2.25
1.4
-0.74
0.46
0.4
0.8
0.48
1
1.35
1.2
1.39
2.07
1
1.07
1.19
1.99
2.02
1.79
2.1
0.44
1.27
0.12
0.47
0.64
3.18
-0.07
0.83
0
3.34
2.21
3.5
0.98
6.07
1.54
1.09
1.07
1.02
0.32
1.13
1.3
2.64
2.58
1.18
0.73
1.9
0.15
0.14
0.14
0.47
0
0.47
1.18
27.98
1.35
1.25
0.75
0.97
0.78
0
1.11
1.32
2.5
0.92
3.92
2.63
0.2
2.83
0.82
4.55
1.16
0.18
1.34
1.66
1.88
1.51
0.99
0.93
0.59
1.3
1.44
1.56
2.92
1
0.92
2.7
3.49
3.11
-0.63
1.92
0.1
0.89
1.03
2.26
-0.58
1.56
4.62
0.19
0.43
-0.72
0.59
0.36
0.48
1.26
1.78
2.94
1.61
3.78
3.19
2.55
1.37
1.14
0.13
1.28
1.83
7.66
1.66
-0.16
1.43
1.04
5.49
0.58
1.36
1.09
2.11
2.07
1.89
7.31
3.18
2.51
1.41
7.9
1.63
0.6
1.83
0.13
1.36
0.77
5.12
1.13
2.68
0.44
1.63
1.63
3.44
3.29
3.89
0.92
0.79
1.43
0.06
8.02
1.34
3.38
1.73
1.19
4.13
3.29
1.25
0.33
0.69
1.47
0.26
0.37
0.22
0.01
1.59
0.66
1
0.83
3.54
3.86
3.58
0.98
1.71
0.65
1.58
2.13
1.94
0.57
4.09
5.41
0.95
2.62
1.64
2.38
2.06
0.94
1
1.86
0.67
2.4
0.59
4.4
0.084
3.97
8.26
0.45
2.51
3.5
1.14
0.01
0.56
1.1
4.81
20.31
2.76
3.08
2.33
4.54
2.26
0.45
3.13
22.06
1.91
1.83
0.61
1.09
Cost of Electricity
0.813
0.71
0.7537
0.7
0.3375
0.494
0.47
1.0308
0.5916
0.3375
0.180838
0.5922
0.5916
0.36
0.95
0.62
0.2649
0.6339
0.7077
0.6162
0.15
0.15
0.4271
0.175587846
0.174450818
0.5916
0.71
0.227392
0.6002
0.6589
0.4465
0.6068
0.3
0.42
0.741754312
0.2544
0.7616
0.6121
0.6549
0.7173
0.745062943
0.163
0.160756465
0.0958
0.0958
0.3698
0.42
0.6057
0.3698
0.2544
0.138
0.3911
0.1807
0.549
0.665
0.18069
0.4854
1.2
0.6824
0.74
0.796
0.3
0.17414
0.632528
0.6455
0.6272
0.4166
0.731
0.53
1.2
0.13293
0.6408
0.42
0.18069
0.18498
0.6824
0.6408
0.1158
0.6175
0.1158
0.9
0.3678
0.15
0.15
0.092
0.61
0.4007
0.6895
0.2597
0.5994
0.9
0.813
0.42
0.6012
0.6186
0.63
0.71
0.5998
0.6
0.4955
0.6792
0.5958
0.6293
0.629
0.585
0.2597
0.6824
0.4007
0.3887
0.1827
0.2597
0.5854
0.119933
0.119933
0.4955
0.119933
0.11155
0.1609
0.55
0.62041667
0.65
0.1511
0.280125
0.1549233
0.154923333
0.5131916
0.505
0.1511
0.4904166
0.6337289
0.2844
0.65
0.5584416
0.803
0.5975
0.5840916
0.4936416
0.558275
0.543991
0.504025
0.576225
0.435
0.594025
0.5131916
0.550975
0.5332666
0.7429777
0.7399833
0.8
0.81163
0.105
0.5030583
0.53
0.4904083
0.5045583
0.15
0.15
0.5633
0.682725
0.55513333
0.9
0.4936416
0.603575
0.4844083
0.5357666
0.4175666
0.10201
0.69175
0.6539083
0.0966584
0.09468
0.589375
0.1972607
0.19027
0.22416
0.22416
0.490416665
0.70166667
0.62041667
0.62185
0.102205207
0.1022052
0.22019167
0.47556667
0.4081916
0.2402333
0.2844
0.2844
0.09468
0.09468
0.09468
0.285503
0.22416
0.849475
0.12099
0.50455833
0.65
0.6
0.1022052
0.22416
0.4175666
0.743992
0.61737
0.671486
0.713907
0.50572
0.14231
0.689471
0.22416
0.91
0.14231
0.598121
0.58671
0.63
0.2844
0.575639
0.765748
0.51211
0.716304
0.9
0.217665
0.448904
0.55
0.704052
0.19726
0.22416
0.589547
0.581855
0.52
0.57
0.62
0.74
0.556574
0.545374
0.589165
0.642328
0.508924
0.8
0.5
0.62265
0.22416
0.65
0.617144
0.508924
0.556574
0.619203
0.540597
0.8537
0.7
0.490995
0.662
0.645
0.22416
0.2844
0.265123
0.414179
0.56
0.485761
0.485761
0.19223
0.19027
0.619203
0.508239
0.619899
0.10201
0.217665
0.09468
0.23642
0.590815
0.217665
0.14231
0.858268
0.7
0.8
0.10201
0.59457
0.10201
0.454433
0.10201
0.12099
0.417122
0.22416
0.6
0.17
0.17
0.52
0.55
0.8
0.82
0.6
0.18
0.26
0.58
0.5
0.2
0.13
0.62
0.37
0.67
0.54
0.52
0.51
0.53
0.55
0.47
0.6
0.51
0.55
0.59
0.58
0.17
0.8
0.39
0.54
0.53
0.55
0.47
0.58
0.44
0.6
0.53
0.21
0.72
0.57
0.51
0.51
0.59
0.92
0.55
0.51
0.58
0.5
0.7
0.57
0.55
0.87
0.36
0.14
0.4
0.39
0.17
0.13
0.55
0.22
0.38
0.1
0.55
0.11
0.55
0.15
0.55
0.58
0.52
0.63
0.13
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.1
0.17
0.28
0.1
0.1
0.28
0.39
0.56
0.28
0.13
0.18
0.1
0.2
0.22
0.092
0.092
0.092
0.5
0.531
0.5
0.169
0.653
0.63
0.55
1.08
0.151
0.295
0.126
0.523
0.157
0.169
0.201
0.434
0.422
0.57
0.6
0.5
0.151
0.53
0.725
0.644
0.74
0.52
0.63
0.169
0.198
0.151
0.774
0.111
0.422
0.422
0.63
0.799
0.464
0.198
0.531
0.52
0.198
0.198
0.151
0.151
0.198
0.563
0.126
0.092
0.092
0.368
0.153
0.151
0.416
0.65
0.198
0.609
0.655
0.621
0.594
0.624
0.625
0.631
0.63
0.598
0.702
0.643
0.693
0.594
0.176
0.198
0.463
0.384
0.531
0.212
0.321
0.435
0.212
0.522
0.212
0.132
0.169
0.331
0.323
0.096
0.197
0.331
0.531
0.168
0.151
0.696
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.563
1.17
0.168
0.197
0.537
0.092
0.713
0.198
0.537
0.422
0.365
0.169
0.422
0.767
0.464
0.422
0.611
0.63
0.621
0.734
0.725
0.609
0.522
0.168
0.151
0.713
0.76
0.151
0.204
0.46
0.151
0.422
0.198
0.6
0.531
0.198
0.422
0.126
0.169
0.169
0.151
0.459
0.201
0.55
0.5
0.422
0.55
0.653
0.151
0.531
0.198
0.389
0.153
0.151
0.664
0.169
0.5
0.151
0.169
0.151
0.323
0.323
0.447
0.168
0.368
0.98
0.537
0.347
0.422
0.126
0.464
0.198
0.168
0.168
0.435
0.416
0.126
0.198
0.169
0.092
0.092
0.46
0.295
0.523
0.536
0.491
0.422
0.212
0.435
0.197
0.389
0.212
0.638
0.463
0.198
0.201
0.169
0.176
0.422
0.168
0.351
0.563
0.772
0.096
0.65
0.168
0.168
0.168
0.132
0.132
0.132
0.132
0.132
0.168
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.151
0.197
0.111
0.331
0.331
0.464
0.092
0.563
0.168
0.168
0.153
0.168
0.7572
0.4818
0.1237
0.627
0.6091
0.76
0.77
0.6078
0.1729
0.4925
0.5693
0.0893
0.5972
0.1729
0.8259
0.6091
0.2302
0.0862
0.4709
0.4851
0.4995
0.5145
0.5392
0.482
0.5614
0.1271
0.1271
0.1047
0.75
0.95
0.6078
0.5159
0.1271
0.64
0.4925
0.7452
0.1729
0.3605
0.17
0.1387
0.5693
0.6
0.7022
0.49
0.6126
0.1172
0.1729
0.76
0.52
0.6
0.5433
0.1729
0.1729
0.1729
0.17
0.75
0.603
0.5318
0.435
0.2302
0.7805
0.5067
0.4666
0.3169
0.1271
0.17
0.1729
0.1387
0.1729
0.601
0.323
0.398
0.5214
0.5214
0.323
0.8237
0.572
0.47
0.47
0.1729
0.17
0.0893
0.5
0.5712
0.585
0.3605
0.1271
0.7749
0.2278
0.42
0.1729
0.1387
0.1052
0.1052
0.6552
0.1006
0.2302
0.6578
0.1387
0.6126
0.0893
0.32
0.3183
0.3183
0.1904
0.1047
0.1729
0.6
0.2581
0.5972
0.2581
0.6045
0.1237
0.1006
0.3169
0.2278
0.1172
0.5972
0.8259
0.6
0.2128
0.1083
0.55
0.2128
0.2128
0.5
0.3169
0.2128
0.2581
0.1904
0.2128
0.1006
0.1387
0.2128
0.7749
0.5433
0.1387
0.1025
0.7749
0.3675
0.6
0.4
0.1355
0.0905
0.3605
0.98
0.3605
0.1083
0.4
0.4
0.1239
0.7364
0.7572
0.8259
0.6177
0.4606
0.4821
0.3889
0.4989
0.1355
0.5972
0.2128
0.54
0.6819
0.6308
0.627
0.6078
0.5318
0.6431
0.552
0.1355
0.5195
0.2278
0.398
0.2128
0.3169
0.0905
0.3368
0.4925
0.1239
0.3169
0.1658
0.1132
0.1239
0.1355
0.2302
0.2302
0.627
0.2128
0.1231
0.1006
0.4
0.4761
0.1387
0.2302
0.4
0.4529
0.6078
0.6126
0.6126
0.1658
0.3183
0.2302
0.4925
0.602
0.3183
0.3183
0.1006
0.4098
0.3562
0.2128
0.1032
0.6856
0.5159
0.1006
0.1103
0.5724
0.7669
0.1105
0.1032
0.3562
0.2278
0.1729
0.1271
0.0893
0.1658
0.11
Price of Fuel
7.33
3.3
4.37
4.26
3.68
3.81
4.48
6.85
4.04657259
3.68
3.37
3.8
4.59
2.94
6.5
5.52
3.547483073
6.72
6.49
5.75
1.4
3
6.53
1.932041005
1.991759894
3.74
3.24
2.133544085
6.51
5.91
6.11
4.69
3.32
4.39
7.453711477
3.48
9.36
6.5
6.53
5
7.767629428
3.51
1.185588169
3.28
3.28
3.7
4.39
3.5
3.7
3.4
3.45
4.16
4.1809
4.462
7.0034
5.7424
4.9955
5.6074
4.2971
4.5978
5.0828
4.1613
4.365
5.609833
6.3632
6.3729
6.2565
6.03062
5.044
5.6074
4.12929
7.178
4.170515
4.180892
4.10892
5.0925
7.178
4.1031
7.6436
4.1031
6.5766
4.4814
1.358
1.455
4.656
5.8394
5.9655
6.2935
4.0643
6.9355
7.76
8.0801
4.0837
6.79
10.67
5.5775
3.9382
6.1983
6.7706
4.37955
8.9046
6.9937
5.2768
5.529
6.9549
4.1225
5.1992
5.9655
4.4814
3.8315
4.1031
4.0061
4.086933
4.086933
4.37955
4.086933
4.0837
4.4232
6.5766
5.85
6.8
3.71
6.345
6.8
6.21
5.95
5.77
7.15
5.05
4.38
3.79
6.02
5
8.5
4.6
3.89
4.3
5.29
6.07
3.59
3.59
5
5.19
7.65
4.09
6
3.8
3.8
4.2
4.17
3.59
3.59
3.59
3.8
4.06
6.82
4.12
3.5
6.8
Annual MWH Production
205
10
450
350
2000
988
1242
330
1293
11
476
596
10
756
3294
1473
99
2228
93
745
517
19500
927
532
1100
721
936
947
3832
451
3441
403
300
1704
32400
280
1000
2800
3441
2018
2000
450
Annual MMBtu Production
0
0
37.021
3566.33
14128.17
1440.25
2264
4947.46
1283
7094.67
1042
698
56238.33
13853.83
8737.52
5418.08
28464
0
7818.5
0
394
1737
7269.83
1136
504
376
41447.93
1524.33
11242
11242
32551.02
4418.55
0
0
685.83
356633.34
0
4389.33
548.67
4252.17
1508.83
28791.28
6446.83
3566.33
700921.68
651.54
1563.7
19203.33
832738.85
2537.58
4403.05
1783.17
Annual Diesel Displaced
34.539
76
0.27
26
103
10.5
20.02
36.069
11.971
51.723
9.726
6.518
410
101
63.7
39.5
207.514
96.33
57
43.2
3.52
16.2
53
8.474
4000
3.516
302.172
11.113
75
89.146
237.31
32.213
24
117.5
5
2592
22.4
32
4
31
11
209.9
108.72
47
26
3.5
4.75
11.4
140
6071
18.5
32.1
13
Generation Start Date
2018
2019
2020
2017
2020
2021
2020
2019
2018
2020
2017
2017
2018
2018
2017
2025
2020
2018
2018
2020
2019
2017
2019
2017
2017
2019
2019
2017
2020
2023
2019
2017
2021
2017
2019
2019
2018
2018
2018
2018
2018
2019
2017
2019
2021
2021
2019
9/1/2016
10/1/2017
10/1/2016
5/1/2017
9/1/2016
10/1/2016
10/1/2016
10/1/2016
10/1/2016
10/1/2016
10/1/2016
12/31/2016
Estimated Benefit
0
12530000
2170000
377800
1692000
715000
5726787
4360000
8600000
17556738
11676
15400
153418
1092480
157007
86126
14497040
0
82435
4474027
8496
3633684
6348805
171422
1440000
220000
203000
614685
3732080
44053
62532
20171
60765
1101123
1854871
34742
38676
27343
8378318
50270
915000
18200000
0
16656000
2274000
15600000
5360150
10290
21913
667996
527246
200000
2234466
15797235
2752000
324942365
6300000
51790
1049572336
3700000
0
431059
44880
5581052
225000
97305114
0
66399
7708
2000000
86750
6190000
0
688800
0
0
102000
350739
321084
326617
190273
455415
56600
0
4615664
75138
17000
44605623
27319
75000
167500000
51000
4753280
17624
78840
22625
22878
1440000
220000
6671039
10914652
33302
19550
72339
25280
54750
66267
0
184620
0
10539787
1229000
600000
12465
21463
22875
3436937
3210000
13270000
900000
25855
0
0
2752000
0
4156842
816000
5400000
0
83846
66320
2984999
620032
13295
48644
29282
2234466
167579
12958
1630000
10720000
44880
90000
6136221
2187846
5091.66
4993200
66000
5032
39500
5086000
18800000
4600000
5580000
8560000
16000000
3452900
360000
58999
58999
138477
129933
2700000
18994000
75000000
1087080
31000
3453876
114907
15063000
16050000
25000000
13052660
455000
82171
198874
111098
99554
24000
630000
119000
44365
85188
31035
240000
64085
9500
34325
102721
127810
4148571
350000
9000000
9842462
2827804
21560000
1717665
197625
3467771
43546
815000
268000000
2646000
50000
12000
398000000
16049776
6136221
12720
1020000
1630000
5132
13000000
90000
57600
9400000
42000000
2000
100050
715000
1720500
328489
325000
9896150
701360
30000
60600000
29800
74500
455000
137600
3125
73360
51618
72500
176000
231000
34785
28077
350000
-1087080
1700000
22625
8000
11279
84666
32168
39500
596829
60000
27952
26619
1704300
7766
44430000
2171256
5500000
146100
239579000
80000
1300000
41700000
165000
35580
41516
120000
136423100
771000
391712
1142857
1760000
184431
4000
10000
1000000
398000000
3450000
76381444
126000
268000000
23460
29044
5000
365570
187300
4045744
701360
113441
563000
190000
302863000
50380000
4023176
476700000
44430000
57646
225000
225000
1020000
65292
9510000
73368384
788000
125000
17400000
200000
300000
9907736
21560000
1638000
12600
359400000
1802829
4527320
198803
10000
1050000
3400000
76716446
5849474
10620
6627000
4000000
239579449
398000000
155000
4000000
97900000
642000000
0
7400000
1050000000
18300000
17500000
620986
673675
3000000
130000
2889867
39000000
10000000
207400
250000
230000
240000
220000
1800000
2340000
323559
0
2000000
0
50000000
0
23300000
181000
20700000
971510
482633
2578589
164716
164716
3795000
3500000
954000000
102832
570000
2625892
1317300
163127
113441
50380000
3786000000
11920000
4000000
113441
2900000
1752831605
113441
701360
359400000
126000
3964450
80980
50000000
2670000
47520000
9510000
7400000
2000000
19710
181000
3775000
32200000
36828
49785936
9907736
85210
2277600
6000000
145286
1759000
3400000
1600000
89110
262848
2828885
879755
150000
18300000
62300000
642000000
7400000
97900000
238000
150000000
23300000
25000
10000
40000
1752831605
30800
3000000
82000
24000
10000000
31113.17
120000
206530
272000
195000
37000
673675
744322
997425
63000000
551442
22275
9000000
720000
770000
172678
283824
56020
582241
172907000
100000000
160000
640000
255664
71076
108940
267120
329976
864850
3800000
310459934
228345
14120000
12100000
9670000
8500000
71613
230000
104000
150000
104937120
333850
4157757
385000
4000
500000
296000
30000
400350
231009000
29000000
89750
116000000
2000000
1800000
485476
306636
1000000
9000
100000
404000
3250000
950317
36000000
41000000
200000
2928640
7297
260000
40400000
4300000
1482000
15000000
25641495
4000000
2341500
1221862
248160
46877348
16800
915000
39450
23865
23300000
2880000
88410000
280000
496456
21600
2868000
3000000
11500000
193600
3000000
7000000
52000000
4190542.09
5000000
2505600
71194805
192000
500000000
4334600
25300000
54000
484309
94000
0
0
0
2210194
25673
907374
7500000
21500
4000000
160000
55000
216643
1400000
67000
930000
122151
400000
294000
584000
943480
251692
0
650166
1000000
71060
595383
1755238
2500000
770299
39000000
700000
27452
9000
30000000
30000000
60000
108717
192673
280000
2880000
74668
41000000
1103100
879755
864850
3053154
57786933
4830000
1578797
1482000
184300000
0
5260000
1199471
2000000
2500000
10000000
0
503500000
806007
3800000
3200000
0
63171000
1500000
1000000
1200000
1257766
50000000
Public Benefit
0
8440000
0
108000
9493534
48600
0
0
0
0
2091140
1
15000
0
380540
1652000
0
42400
0
0
0
8200000
0
0
0
812000
0
0
27837522
0
0
0
0
0
250000
771878
0
62000
7000
0
2752000
8000
1267419
0
45000
0
0
0
0
0
85000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
556672
0
17141
0
9000
0
8200000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10400
0
0
15000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
150000
0
0
55576
0
2596231
0
0
0
0
0
0
2752000
0
30000
9900
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
938608
0
27000
1260935
651499200
4194000
14805000
1440000
1125000
165000000
27000
25096
20000
25000
123000
8800000
14805000
1000000
2540000
838566
0
80000
28800000
847000
46000000
153896
3450000
85492575
165000000
500000
6360
29000000
1125000
4422385
4968796
7255696
103384500
128700
656
1000000
20000
51900000
0
0
3620000
8600000
0
0
100000
46000000
0
0
16000
14000
18000
15000
0
1000000
250000
0
0
0
19000000
0
14250000
66000
14400000
6954000
2578589
7341584
1395358
30301376.5
37950
1400000
2500000
2687000
66000
20000000
129760
29000000
1000000
4000000
133500
328000000
13410000
8600000
3620000
51900000
14250000
30301376.5
35160
6770
1312.2
255241
49000
100000
186000000
1336500
20046250
92000
2788774
1400000
788581
116835000
38000000
563499
6837061
375000
108940
4006500
4949640
12972750
2000000
198345
1050000
1050000
35740000
82900000
1330215
70000000
508148
314000
4000
500000
296000
119009000
2687000
5000000
29000000
2500000
1000000
735176
180000000
350000000
200000
97000
5200000
20200000
1350
7290000
15700000
26000
2341500
1221862
248160
71459366
16800
44500
23865
14500000
25000000
7200000
25000000
367969
135000
9400
7200000
7000000
52000000
4859211
5137439
29000000
1200000
96000000
484309
94000
960000
6837061
12677660
107326
2210194
1075656
1190571
1152593
2000000
5260000
27560000
25000
930000
122151
11423098
14152205
2.56
4106500
20000000
50000
94830
32280
3000000
30000000
30000000
0
4049524
0
20000000
25000000
1850000
13196325
12972750
3053154
32997044
0
1578797
105500000
516000
0
1000000
15000000
0
503500000
2000000
1634625
3200000
200000
0
0
0
2000000
1257766
19000000
Grant Fund Request
1490077
75000
88000
809000
1227000
1025175
265200
294102
3920000
95733
725000
140000
255000
397427
688386
649030
320000
305000
650047
427705
2017818
440000
384730
400000
140000
5282000
3400000
4000000
3196000
152000
2555489
1092500
675000
187000
296038
833556
135000
491610
308311
429892
341335
667000
100000
220000
1251000
4000000
440319
395200
386000
80000
750000
1100000
342600
1305000
1750000
341465
307120
85000
45000
977000
102300
1800000
4000000
230000
165000
296786
295775
247560
202696
85000
75000
305000
832635
4000000
50000
56000
756335
220000
198731
1288018
382400
2516385
2017818
440000
3445040
279562
2495189
699163
620977
390449
698904
2016509
428646
499000
379583
454277
7620000
729600
3000000
8000000
525000
645613
123500
1092500
4348540
102275
240592
384730
500000
270807
493100
391200
2797935
800000
413600
88742
627000
1250000
185000
208073
4308784
455642
35750
800000
3453920
150000
47050
306000
127065
6000000
456252
170000
250817
311456
80000
293737
1256403
4274575
342000
123500
353400
1092500
1400000
800000
428646
689251
497773
2922000
447800
375000
160000
225000
141000
286166
450000
625000
230000
2017818
440000
3096898
159000
322903
198474
735242
288745
558814
731372
1250000
2495189
1412889
2352653
3378500
9281615
373838
274750
318289
1900000
213750
54000
119000
114965
275000
700000
4000000
158771
1237403
213536
62272
1375000
940950
583900
5914491
267150
230200
849984
232620
492850
367965
225660
660000
1843379
455642
81000
4000000
1560558
76000
82000
181000
30700
460000
81700
45000
550000
2988000
66500
290000
127900
297600
527908
181000
695950
2567778
218195
185195
109765
185000
472000
213536
32464000
193000
140000
2000000
350000
117136
142500
142500
5581800
332500
207100
221350
332500
142500
142500
190000
332500
585000
5538592
486000
1629223
425811
985805
183200
1319088
3485000
668350
199863
350000
425701
168959
1314380
466890
6114000
2600000
356400
2787719
2753364
1990000
1367464
170974
6694000
3149387
640000
9570434
236000
4000000
20000
132600
1752000
3453920
80000
10000
205000
1000000
160000
41360
175000
244385
700000
75000
213750
81000
426833
100980
1521000
31350
2400000
7274277
314367
120000
331240
3900000
1900000
3325000
2686450
300000
4000000
400000
420000
359000
223250
2408646
90000
240260
240260
142500
142500
3795575
240260
264459
3998920
2000000
911400
625000
135825
3007750
415871
218900
40500
40000
45000
443030
301440
310841
46000
100000
27000
45000
30800
50000
40000
126682
399786
45000
96700
555000
298078
96700
150000
356424
6103500
127065
289710
1993496
467500
1436517
4000000
155294
4000000
132523
160000
8225000
74985
7000000
169960
265000
323696
398331
1215224
3453920
850000
687700
6114000
4885610
3244897
3300000
639050
66300
215130
72630
1200000
1452000
7636804
318000
1150000
8000000
186400
190000
236000
30000
20000
125000
708162
708162
2440000
1094695
3424041
142000
1395231
282395
2000000
203000
1375000
136500
347000
210000
84000
697475
1896836
475000
1700000
171275
105050
400000
3602000
369900
158625
158625
128625
350000
37000
500000
2000000
225000
3215680
4000000
4000000
110000
250000
85000
2000000
380000
145000
241623
955000
2000000
2000000
620811
472787
703800
9405200
500000
1330467
7000000
1999972
4000000
250000
565485
137750
85000
142500
4000000
237500
111150
142500
90000
142500
142500
1190876
154477
300000
1500000
2000000
3199400
2579200
4000000
160000
2000000
1844000
1040000
540000
317130
112500
750000
245065
2695000
2000000
158400
637500
754651
1463200
1700000
137209
400000
400000
400000
132000
210000
100000
69000
190000
350000
3961637.5
2000000
250050
1021287
3045000
8000000
650000
45000
4000000
297500
4000000
14954626
142500
142500
3501038
183350
142500
4000000
300000
400000
229500
903970
4000000
247360
1900000
1954000
2589200
547611
212942
144301
1495231
648284
140000
136500
420000
70000
1700000
267024
675185
3313920
1495231
1421240
1624240
1495231
3947236
4000000
67000
235523
4525605
187750
1993158
492642
84000
2350000
115000
70000
125000
2870000
1391000
293238
275142
1748343
219071
3744546
1200000
4000000
217170
260000
1600000
4000000
930750
3907500
252000
15000000
286580
125000
300000
500000
6332000
510941
203000
347200
2318255
252000
480000
400000
160000
1844000
2000000
4000000
988000
150000
20000000
1021287
508000
260000
200000
1610440
997500
578719
313280
551408
2000000
4000000
80000
95190
255000
5033414
313790
119263
1231113
90000
2000000
3506406
3506406
3506406
392520
350000
1000000
245065
4000000
549387
2000000
4000000
932250
194540
7500000
868000
50000
339452
8630000
1995000
639806
164358
800000
34740
29064.61
29643.58
30669
1787476
300000
435000
126750
988000
4301950
2465664
9670361
103256
117610
117610
110000
117610
100000
1550000
30000
88500
88500
822950
1750000
5000000
1600000
8100000
6940000
13000000
15000
454828
482387
303060
95581
4097000
986000
545934
252000
2200000
30500
1760000
200000
1300000
320000
3880660
10000000
1500000
89600
2302630
6900000
1380439
6864000
112000
288500
122100
2349751
4478345
80984
198168
88320
1241402
144107
4336950
223464
1795450
237772
2995000
400000
3995116
3300000
3300000
30000
116625
42000
910180
626400
4159500
915627
15000000
368000
75000
347200
2034216.9
634968
4367616
4433414
520000
500000
1432906
1952000
5850000
4750000
35000000
8588000
1850320
522633
50000
500000
121000
194540
4500000
178179
250000
30000
341056
6000000
12020000
4126000
20000000
2000000
2598320
150000
2868000
1450000
1700000
79340322
190000
1600000
4126000
840000
10500000
9650000
6269750
20500000
11700000
1854026
137543
3225500
4334600
2100000
50000
109471.29
1500000
409430
565439
2142961
7837500
12075535
446950
3144399
800000
495000
19401411
5231750
550000
550000
550000
1025000
225000
3155765
1037750
3882243
3700000
6960000
105000
2400000
184000
77000
375000
824815
3393600
249500
996000
1000000
10758928
10100000
382779
2000000
13951326
14673250
8774080
3245349
85000
801000
1200000
300000
7500000
7500000
48000
120500
207500
831203
160000
1300000
300000
2220141
816000
288222.3
286149
2945991
3052000
2990000
36709970
2288000
364225
1432906
11600000
3752181
1780000
5500000
7152000
1940000
5000000
194540
950000
827000
150000
105620
95000
25000
750000
3260000
4047230
80000
10000000
775000
650000
1100000
898000
2000000
Cash Match to be Provided
511038
0
5000
1100000
360000
50000
66300
49113
1545000
23680
85000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
168336
10554
64448
0
0
122500
100000
725528
3000000
8000
283943
57500
2925000
33000
164053
10000
0
0
0
0
0
113000
100000
0
0
15000000
0
98800
100000
10000
750000
240000
0
70000
0
0
61424
0
0
280
8900
1061000
10497695
0
0
0
0
61890
50673
17000
75000
0
40000
725528
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
201782
44000
0
0
30000
0
40000
49009
0
170000
0
0
0
0
0
0
50000
11000000
0
33980
6500
57500
537460
0
0
64448
250000
11000
10000
97800
6695934
0
100400
78386
113000
1250000
10000
0
50000
0
12000
1900000
13591226
100000
0
0
25802
11500000
0
14000
9000
9000
20000
9000
141000
474953
18000
6500
18600
57500
0
0
0
0
0
75000
0
0
0
0
20000
25000
0
4000
0
201782
44000
0
0
9687
5954
0
0
0
0
0
0
296936
905000
0
0
0
0
0
1900000
0
0
14000
20289
25000
0
8813869
8356
86448
10000
500
0
40000
4000
5914491
0
0
113000
1021393
165000
97000
4000000
5000
50000
50000
10000
150000
332000
3500
2500
44800
74400
1500000
5000
5000
5000
5000
45000
10000
540000
7000
50000
6696494
7500
7500
620200
17500
10900
11650
17500
7500
7500
10000
17500
65000
615399
62000
1629223
12774
29580
6000
21975
20050
5996
10500
11752
108313
19200
1300000
25000
82916
95575
60000
47770
15000
250000
50000
84000
4000000
5200
33150
438000
17343267
10000
1000
45000
100000
30000
10000
36000
5000
175000
11250
300
58995
19220
269000
1414756
5000
50080
2600000
1900000
500000
1000000
40000
25000000
170000
100000
11750
267627
10000
12645
12645
7500
7500
421731
12645
13919
444324
6696494
50000
4000
4000
106000
112037
78000
4500
8500
5000
43150
15865
16360
4000
12000
3000
5000
6200
14000
8500
6667
13833
5000
18300
32000
40500
18300
18000
45449
611500
34637.92
52190
523000
60000
39968
15725000
10840
10000
4500000
6988
2156402
16996
30800
80650
173771
17793920
0
687700
6114000
77355
0
20050000
11700
15570
8070
240000
363000
1909201
79500
110000
8000000
46600
10000
59000
9000
6000
40000
3200000
3200000
60000
250000
1200000
166137
20000
200000
26000
80000
61500
48000
40000
16000
148330
3624000
530000
448536
9550
7000
1960000
803000
123300
10000
10000
10000
7400
500000
21900000
25000
803920
978000
978000
15000
20000
9250
8000000
45000
16000
33000
99000
6050538
706424
16588
3320000
2000000
7459790
3882298
5624000
15000
7250
8500
7500
500000
12500
5850
7500
10000
7500
7500
60000
375000
500000
355488
0
8725000
40000
400000
596000
260000
60000
10000
12500
5500
3000
355000
14500000
39600
212500
560000
36329400
80000
12500
40000
40000
40000
13200
21000
49300
3000
10000
250000
699112.5
0
0
350000
750000
1679500
200000
2000000
52500
2755497
1661625
7500
7500
389004
9650
7500
100000
1960000
8030
30000
1700000
4547066
711324
166137
61500
80000
15000
80000
5449307
166137
150000
411060
166137
1400000
10000
33000
15474395
129440
2159647
95723
16000
150000
25000
15000
25000
250000
100000
407667
750000
400000
450000
15000
6000000
930750
3907500
38500
20506477
401000
46500
22283
1320000
104650
26000
48000
990000
60000
120000
100000
40000
488000
400000
8725000
247000
29500000
350000
150000
80000
40000
402610
278000
14500000
95000
21500
72000
45000
102602
42123
255744
2500000
350641
350641
350641
261680
250000
250000
3000
13031000
12500
231768
7187738
5460
8407950
2000000
17700
7130000
437900
8030
100000
9200
9200
9200
9200
640825
300000
65000
20000
247000
145000
262296
1062818
5435
6190
6190
5500
6190
60000
50000
2000
20000
20000
767142
160000
700000
5000
672125
90238.5
10000
72000
60000
550000
15000
1600000
619807
50000
85000
5000000
72050
22600
94200
44000
1716000
8500
17500
11155
20178927
15000
22080
1241402
43254
70000
55866
100000
262000
312000
312000
45280
50000
500000
300000
25000000
25000
48000
778003.8
73995
600000
130000
946101
488000
15150000
250000
20000000
1600000
27750
29440
10000
500000
21000
5460
600000
42000
150000
2000
14000
350000
3000000
1031000
18000000
520000
599666
0
500000
1500000
14001233
3600
1600000
1031000
210000
6645000
2000000
2094136
5125000
35100000
83046
58000
17588400
6157850
0
14023
1500000
41600
0
2412961
7837500
2800000
10555
786000
0
0
1422600
7000000
55000
55000
55000
50625
25000
350641
115306
431360
3700000
1750000
26250
100000
40000
18000
96000
167000
240000
248980
1344000
2087000
162500
2800000
4659760
2007900
1582983
222752
560000
115000
89000
7500000
7500000
12000
20000
0
0
45000
320000
60000
0
204000
28446.4
0
1200000
953000
2500000
750000
572000
264600
946101
2900000
2402838
3480000
6100000
500000
515000
5000000
5460
97200000
12000
15000
0
123000
4295580
20000
12000000
0
0
100000
0
Biomass Inventory Match
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20000
0
0
26000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10400
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20000
0
0
3000
0
0
0
0
0
0
EE Improvements Match
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
105000
0
17000
19338
0
0
103786
0
0
0
125000
0
25000
0
85000
0
22000
85000
0
0
314381
215000
8000
0
55278
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1993496
0
0
810000
250000
367319
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
41000
0
0
0
40000
0
0
8000
192891
0
0
0
0
0
Other In-Kind Match to be Provided
130625
10000
17000
15280
60680
10251
0
76931
0
38316
40000
210000
4014
6884
423275
25000
3050
6566
4277
33446
33446
0
2600000
210000
154500
2500000
150000
0
0
0
0
2600000
0
49140
15000
39000
4916
3083
54799
37200
0
0
0
0
0
62500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
79300
15356
0
10000
0
48000
0
0
0
1000
2968
29650
0
0
0
0
3050
41708
150000
0
4000
7563
0
1987
0
7500
25164
0
0
34450
5000
95000
7538
0
0
6989
126500
62500
4990
13796
4439
500000
7296
50000
0
27036
0
0
0
0
0
51592
0
100000
32000
176850
0
0
100000
3000
3456
0
0
5000
20000
0
13669
23750
0
0
5000
10000
0
0
11000
16000
0
0
10000
0
0
33000
0
0
0
0
0
120000
137820
20677
14933
75000
0
25000
0
25000
0
13890
153000
0
5000
0
0
47302
10000
9687
5954
22057
8663
16765
21941
0
95000
56286
138000
0
0
15000
28800
44516
0
11250
6000
15800
0
0
125000
0
3456
10000
0
3000
0
77825
40000
0
0
0
0
0
82550
25800
6770
0
13669
300
120000
1000
Total In-Kind Match
130625
10000
17000
15280
60680
10251
0
76931
0
38316
40000
210000
0
4014
6884
423275
25000
3050
6566
4277
33446
33446
0
2600000
210000
154500
2500000
150000
0
0
0
0
2600000
0
49140
15000
39000
4916
3083
54799
37200
0
0
0
0
0
62500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
79300
15356
0
30000
0
48000
0
0
0
1000
107968
29650
0
0
0
0
3050
84708
150000
19338
4000
7563
0
105773
0
7500
25164
0
0
34450
5000
220000
7538
0
25000
6989
126500
62500
89990
13796
26439
500000
92296
50000
0
27036
0
0
0
0
314381
266592
0
100000
43000
176850
0
0
100000
3000
3456
55278
0
5000
20000
0
13669
23750
0
0
5000
10000
0
0
11000
16000
0
0
10000
0
0
33000
0
0
0
0
0
120000
137820
20677
14933
75000
0
25000
0
25000
0
24290
153000
0
5000
0
0
47302
10000
9687
5954
22057
8663
16765
21941
0
95000
56286
2131496
0
0
825000
278800
411835
0
11250
6000
15800
0
0
125000
0
3456
51000
0
3000
0
137825
40000
0
11000
192891
0
0
82550
25800
6770
0
13669
300
120000
1000
Total Match
641663
10000
22000
1115280
420680
60251
66300
126044
1545000
61996
125000
210000
0
4014
6884
423275
25000
3050
6566
4277
201782
44000
64448
2600000
210000
277000
2600000
875528
3000000
8000
283943
57500
5525000
33000
213193
25000
39000
4916
3083
54799
37200
113000
100000
0
0
15000000
62500
98800
100000
10000
750000
240000
85000
70000
0
79300
76780
0
30000
280
56900
1061000
10497695
0
1000
107968
29650
61890
50673
17000
75000
3050
124708
875528
19338
4000
7563
0
105773
0
7500
25164
201782
44000
34450
5000
250000
7538
40000
74004
6989
296500
62500
89990
13796
26439
500000
92296
100000
11000000
27036
33980
6500
57500
537460
314381
266592
64448
350000
54000
186850
97800
6695934
100000
103400
81842
168278
1250000
15000
20000
50000
13669
35750
1900000
13591226
100000
5000
10000
25802
11500000
11000
30000
9000
9000
30000
9000
141000
507953
18000
6500
18600
57500
0
120000
137820
20677
14933
150000
0
25000
0
25000
20000
49290
153000
4000
5000
201782
44000
47302
10000
19374
11908
22057
8663
16765
21941
0
95000
353222
3036496
0
0
825000
278800
411835
1900000
11250
6000
29800
20289
25000
125000
8813869
11812
137448
10000
3500
0
177825
44000
5914491
11000
192891
113000
1021393
82550
25800
6770
165000
97000
13669
300
4000000
120000
1000
5000
50000
50000
10000
150000
332000
3500
2500
44800
74400
1500000
5000
5000
5000
5000
45000
10000
540000
7000
50000
6696494
7500
7500
620200
17500
10900
11650
17500
7500
7500
10000
17500
65000
615399
62000
1629223
12774
29580
6000
21975
20050
5996
10500
11752
108313
19200
1300000
25000
82916
95575
60000
47770
15000
250000
50000
84000
4000000
5200
33150
438000
17343267
10000
1000
45000
100000
30000
10000
36000
5000
175000
11250
300
58995
19220
269000
1414756
5000
50080
2600000
1900000
500000
1000000
40000
25000000
170000
100000
11750
267627
10000
12645
12645
7500
7500
421731
12645
13919
444324
6696494
50000
4000
4000
106000
112037
78000
4500
8500
5000
43150
15865
16360
4000
12000
3000
5000
6200
14000
8500
6667
13833
5000
18300
32000
40500
18300
18000
45449
611500
34637.92
52190
523000
60000
39968
15725000
10840
10000
4500000
6988
2156402
16996
30800
80650
173771
17793920
0
687700
6114000
77355
0
20050000
11700
15570
8070
240000
363000
1909201
79500
110000
8000000
46600
10000
59000
9000
6000
40000
3200000
3200000
60000
250000
1200000
166137
20000
200000
26000
80000
61500
48000
40000
16000
148330
3624000
530000
448536
9550
7000
1960000
803000
123300
10000
10000
10000
7400
500000
21900000
25000
803920
978000
978000
15000
20000
9250
8000000
45000
16000
33000
99000
6050538
706424
16588
3320000
2000000
7459790
3882298
5624000
15000
7250
8500
7500
500000
12500
5850
7500
10000
7500
7500
60000
375000
500000
355488
0
8725000
40000
400000
596000
260000
60000
10000
12500
5500
3000
355000
14500000
39600
212500
560000
36329400
80000
12500
40000
40000
40000
13200
21000
49300
3000
10000
250000
699112.5
0
0
350000
750000
1679500
200000
2000000
52500
2755497
1661625
7500
7500
389004
9650
7500
100000
1960000
8030
30000
1700000
4547066
711324
166137
61500
80000
15000
80000
5449307
166137
150000
411060
166137
1400000
10000
33000
15474395
129440
2159647
95723
16000
150000
25000
15000
25000
250000
100000
407667
750000
400000
450000
15000
6000000
930750
3907500
38500
20506477
401000
46500
22283
1320000
104650
26000
48000
990000
60000
120000
100000
40000
488000
400000
8725000
247000
29500000
350000
150000
80000
40000
402610
278000
14500000
95000
21500
72000
45000
102602
42123
255744
2500000
350641
350641
350641
261680
250000
250000
3000
13031000
12500
231768
7187738
5460
8407950
2000000
17700
7130000
437900
8030
100000
9200
9200
9200
9200
640825
300000
65000
20000
247000
145000
262296
1062818
5435
6190
6190
5500
6190
60000
50000
2000
20000
20000
767142
160000
700000
5000
672125
90238.5
10000
72000
60000
550000
15000
1600000
619807
50000
85000
5000000
72050
22600
94200
44000
1716000
8500
17500
11155
20178927
15000
22080
1241402
43254
70000
55866
100000
262000
312000
312000
45280
50000
500000
300000
25000000
25000
48000
778003.8
73995
600000
130000
946101
488000
15150000
250000
20000000
1600000
27750
29440
10000
500000
21000
5460
600000
42000
150000
2000
14000
350000
3000000
1031000
18000000
520000
599666
0
500000
1500000
14001233
3600
1600000
1031000
210000
6645000
2000000
2094136
5125000
35100000
83046
58000
17588400
6157850
0
14023
1500000
41600
0
2412961
7837500
2800000
10555
786000
0
0
1422600
7000000
55000
55000
55000
50625
25000
350641
115306
431360
3700000
1750000
26250
100000
40000
18000
96000
167000
240000
248980
1344000
2087000
162500
2800000
4659760
2007900
1582983
222752
560000
115000
89000
7500000
7500000
12000
20000
0
0
45000
320000
60000
0
204000
28446.4
0
1200000
953000
2500000
750000
572000
264600
946101
2900000
2402838
3480000
6100000
500000
515000
5000000
5460
97200000
12000
15000
0
123000
4295580
20000
12000000
0
0
100000
0
Other Grant Funds To Be Provided
1000000
1000000
801500
453071
1000000
Other Grant Funds Not Yet Approved
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1984500
0
0
0
0
0
0
2800000
0
0
0
0
1500000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
250000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Cost for Requested Phases
2131740
85000
110000
1924280
1647680
1085427
331500
420146
5465000
157729
850000
350000
255000
401441
695270
1072305
345000
308050
656613
431982
2219600
484000
449178
3000000
350000
5559000
6000000
4875528
6196000
160000
2839432
1150000
6200000
220000
509231
858556
174000
496526
311394
484691
378535
780000
200000
220000
1251000
19000000
502819
494000
486000
90000
1500000
1340000
0
1375000
1750000
420765
383900
85000
55000
4297280
506200
5461000
14497695
230000
164000
299754
325425
309450
253369
102000
150000
308050
932343
4875528
50000
60000
763898
220000
200718
1288018
389900
2541549
2219600
484000
3479490
284562
2620189
706701
660977
390449
705893
2313009
491146
503990
433379
454277
7620000
736896
3100000
19000000
552036
679592
130000
1150000
4886000
102275
292184
449178
1100000
313807
679950
489000
13391869
1100000
53000
170583
740000
2500000
200000
208073
4358784
455642
47750
2700000
17045146
250000
47050
306000
152867
17500000
456252
184000
259817
320456
100000
302737
1397403
4749528
360000
130000
372000
1150000
1400000
800000
428646
689251
497773
2997000
447800
375000
160000
225000
161000
311166
450000
629000
230000
2219600
484000
3096898
159000
332590
204428
735242
288745
558814
731372
1250000
2495189
1709825
3257653
3378500
9281615
373838
274750
318289
3800000
213750
54000
133000
135254
300000
700000
12813869
167127
1323851
223536
62772
1375000
980950
587900
11828982
267150
230200
962984
1254013
492850
367965
225660
825000
1940379
455642
81000
8000000
1560558
76000
82000
181000
35700
510000
131700
55000
700000
3320000
70000
292500
172700
372000
527908
181000
695950
4067778
223195
190195
114765
190000
517000
223536
33004000
200000
190000
8696494
350000
117136
150000
150000
6202000
350000
218000
233000
350000
150000
150000
200000
350000
650000
6153991
548000
3258446
438585
1015385
189200
1341063
3485000
688400
205859
360500
437453
168959
1422693
486090
6114000
3900000
381400
2870635
2848939
2050000
1415234
170974
6709000
3399387
690000
9570434
320000
8000000
25200
165750
2190000
20797187
90000
11000
250000
1100000
190000
51360
211000
249385
875000
75000
225000
81300
485828
120200
1790000
31350
2400000
8689033
314367
125000
381320
6500000
3800000
3825000
3686450
340000
29000000
400000
590000
459000
235000
2676273
100000
252905
252905
150000
150000
4217306
252905
278378
4443244
8696494
961400
629000
139825
3113750
527908
296900
45000
48500
50000
486180
317305
327201
50000
112000
30000
50000
37000
64000
48500
133349
413619
50000
115000
587000
338578
115000
168000
401873
6715000
161702.92
341900
2516496
527500
1476485
4000000
155294
19725000
143363
170000
12725000
81973
9156402
186956
295800
323696
478981
1388995
21247840
850000
1375400
12228000
4962965
3244897
23350000
639050
78000
230700
80700
1440000
1815000
9546005
397500
1260000
16000000
233000
200000
295000
39000
26000
165000
3908162
3908162
2500000
1344695
4624041
142000
1561368
302395
2200000
229000
1455000
198000
395000
250000
100000
845805
5520836
1005000
2148536
180825
112050
2360000
4405000
493200
168625
168625
138625
350000
44400
1000000
23900000
250000
4019600
4978000
4978000
125000
270000
94250
10000000
425000
161000
274623
1054000
2000000
8050538
1327235
472787
720388
12725200
500000
3330467
14459790
5882270
9624000
265000
565485
145000
93500
150000
4500000
250000
117000
150000
100000
150000
150000
1190876
154477
360000
1875000
2500000
3554888
2579200
12725000
200000
2400000
2440000
1300000
600000
327130
125000
755500
248065
3050000
16500000
198000
850000
1314651
37792600
1780000
149709
440000
440000
440000
145200
231000
149300
72000
200000
600000
4660750
2000000
250050
1371287
3795000
9679500
850000
45000
6000000
350000
6755497
16616251
150000
150000
3890042
193000
150000
4000000
400000
2360000
229500
912000
4000000
277360
3600000
6501066
2589200
1258935
212942
144301
1661368
648284
140000
198000
500000
85000
1780000
267024
675185
8763227
1661368
1571240
2035300
1661368
5347236
4000000
77000
268523
20000000
317190
4152805
588365
100000
2500000
140000
85000
150000
3120000
1491000
293238
275142
2156010
219071
4494546
1600000
4450000
232170
260000
1600000
10000000
1861500
7815000
290500
35506477
687580
171500
322283
500000
7652000
615591
229000
395200
3308255
312000
600000
500000
200000
2332000
2400000
12725000
1235000
150000
49500000
1371287
658000
340000
240000
2013050
1275500
578719
313280
551408
16500000
4095000
101500
167190
300000
5033414
416392
161386
1486857
90000
4500000
3857047
3857047
3857047
654200
600000
1250000
248065
17031000
561887
2231768
11187738
932250
200000
15907950
2868000
50000
357152
15760000
1995000
1077706
172388
900000
43940
38264.61
38843.58
39869
2428301
600000
500000
146750
1235000
4446950
2727960
10733179
108691
123800
123800
115500
123800
160000
1600000
32000
108500
108500
1590092
1750000
5000000
1760000
8100000
6940000
13700000
20000
454828
1154512
393298.5
95581
4097000
996000
617934
312000
2750000
45500
3360000
200000
1919807
370000
3965660
15000000
1572050
112200
2396830
6944000
1380439
8580000
120500
306000
133255
2349751
24657272
95984
198168
110400
2482804
187361
4406950
279330
1795450
237772
2995000
500000
4257116
3612000
3612000
30000
116625
42000
955460
676400
4659500
1215627
40000000
368000
100000
395200
2812220.7
708963
4367616
5033414
650000
500000
2379007
2440000
21000000
5000000
55000000
10188000
1878070
552073
60000
1000000
142000
200000
5100000
220179
400000
32000
355056
6350000
15020000
5157000
38000000
2520000
3197986
150000
2868000
1950000
3200000
93341555
193600
3200000
5157000
1050000
17145000
11650000
8363886
25625000
46800000
1937072
195543
3225500
21923000
8257850
50000
123494.29
3000000
451030
565439
4555922
15675000
14875535
457505
3930399
800000
495000
20824011
12231750
605000
605000
605000
1075625
250000
3506406
1153056
4313603
7400000
8710000
131250
2500000
224000
95000
471000
991815
3633600
498480
2340000
3087000
10921428
12900000
5042539
4007900
15534309
14673250
8996832
3805349
200000
890000
1200000
300000
15000000
15000000
60000
140500
207500
831203
205000
1620000
360000
2220141
1020000
316668.7
286149
4145991
4005000
5490000
37459970
2860000
628825
2379007
14500000
6155019
5260000
11600000
7652000
2455000
10000000
200000
98150000
839000
150000
105620
95000
40000
750000
3383000
8342810
100000
22000000
775000
650000
1200000
898000
2000000
Additional Monitoring Cost
8000
15000
3500
15000
400
11230
9091
15000
15000
15000
20000
0
Total Cost Through Construction
2131740
3835000
2298280
17306696
7200000
420146
5795000
922999
350000
255000
401441
703269
1072305
4114132
656613
439982
19772275
7751695
449178
3000000
350000
5559000
6580000
59067808
6400000
2689400
9000000
10317500
6950000
4621500
509231
858556
5485000
526108
319394
484691
37041535
795421
200000
220000
1409458
20675000
502819
3019975
15891000
297510
79992000
1340000
427600
6610000
1750000
236602
383900
1400000
4526280
3380000
5461000
13717479
25000000
165000
299754
309450
4283056
872635
59067808
50000
60000
763898
2200000
200718
1408908
4526458
5541549
26272407
4565200
3479490
284562
2692700
706701
660977
439453
705893
2458622
6870575
503990
433379
458716
7770000
729600
3100000
19000000
6000000
9000000
1634500
9200000
4886000
102275
292184
449178
10000000
200000
679950
3011475
13391869
45320707
15922000
170583
740000
50000000
2100000
1423292
4358784
469311
2350000
5500000
21772523
52050
2566000
152867
19000000
467252
2250000
259817
320456
110000
302737
1397403
4782528
3946050
4833000
3214875
8155000
1650000
2000000
5000000
689251
497773
38660000
447800
8000000
72400000
250000
2284000
335456
603000
629000
235000
17342837
4565200
3144200
7224213
332590
204428
757299
297408
558814
753313
1250000
2692700
1957261
5389149
49000000
14510599
388838
403550
362805
3800000
31500000
8340000
148800
135254
300000
825000
13391869
170583
1374892
14500000
3562772
1058775
627900
49000000
278150
230200
962984
232620
585450
3244225
225660
825000
1940379
455642
1300000
51000000
1940558
77000
82000
2000000
510000
81700
460000
3674000
7500000
3400000
4300000
2777885
10000000
2000000
0
4067778
190195
114765
190000
517000
15900000
311304000
1020000
8696494
350000
117136
2040000
1530000
6202000
7449000
23000000
233000
5000000
1530000
3060000
1020000
2509850
650000
6153991
548000
3258447
438585
985808
183200
1341063
27000000
668350
199863
360500
425701
168959
1314380
3006607
38804000
4300000
6129000
2870635
2848939
18000000
1415234
1633974
8009000
3399387
690000
14510599
140000000
145000000
463216
165750
46475000
23808913
90000
10000
250000
51100000
2600000
51360
175000
244385
875000
75000
10000000
1300000
485829
8000000
16700000
31350
2400000
9395283
7400000
1348032
6903000
3800000
4405000
3886450
340000
36795000
400000
590000
459000
8000000
2676273
100000
252905
252905
1200000
2500000
3795575
252905
278378
4443244
8696494
45000000
625000
139825
3113750
486180
317305
327201
133350
5936570
582000
338578
168000
401873
6736891
161702.92
25000000
2516496
5882000
1476485
35392921
255294
19725000
2012000
12725000
81973
30402216
2100000
295800
478892
1215224
23900000
1075000
2440000
38804000
4962965
3244897
27050000
723138
30000000
80700
3840000
46100000
9546005
3040000
61780000
23150000
264400
200000
140000000
39000
26000
165000
2500000
1344695
4624041
142000
1561368
302395
2200000
2711000
175000000
16700000
3100000
370000000
25000000
845805
5520836
1005000
2123536
1075000
662050
3600000
4405000
493200
2937068
1815480
1594320
5800000
34530000
23900000
1700000
4019600
15201108
15201108
4250000
2200000
2500000
10200000
18000000
1466813
274623
1054000
2500000000
8459989
6452000
472787
720388
12725200
18530700
3330467
15907950
300000000
160830500
4198905
565485
4000000
2500000
2000000
4500000
4100000
2000000
2000000
100000
2000000
750000
1190876
580179
27160000
85000000
3554889
27000000
14500000
40200000
3000000
2440000
33300000
6300000
15500000
125000
755500
1800000
45000000
19150000
198000
89560000
4560000
93300000
61780000
149709
4433000
4433000
4433000
4565200
14000000
11000000
72000
200000
600000
4660750
226000000
4000000
36016000
3795000
15201108
650000
45000
6000000
350000
10755497
16616252
4436800
4436800
3890042
22193000
5690800
4000000
160000000
3600000
1812000
5000000
2100000
6501066
27000000
2617585
212942
144301
1661368
807972
3652680
16700000
330000000
7785000
61780000
267024
675185
8763228
1661368
1571240
98626186
1661368
5347236
2500000000
77000
268523
20000000
492652
25000000
2500000
22670000
5800000
4200000
45000000
1491000
293238
275142
6356222
219071
4494546
10644000
8525000
232170
260000
1600000
10200000
1861500
7815000
950500
35506477
286580
86951000
322283
17772000
7652000
615591
2711000
2274746
3606255
312000
6300000
22000000
4020000
2440000
3000000
14500000
33235000
4300000
49500000
36016000
658000
340000
240000
100015360
1497500
578719
313280
551408
19150000
4598905
101500
167390
300000
31000000
416392
161386
1506857
4637616
4500000
3857047
3857047
3857047
1070000000
600000
1250000
1800000
17031000
561887
226000000
11187738
932250
200000
15907950
2868000
50000
357152
15760000
1995000
3104443
1672388
900000
43940
38264.61
38843.58
39869
7858177
100000000
500000
146750
33235000
4600000
2727960
10733179
5750000
4436800
4436800
6310000
4436800
6420000
1550000
32000
1308500
1540023
1590092
1900000
330000000
1760000
8100000
6940000
135300000
1520000
454828
2498591
393298.5
95581
4097000
996000
617934
312000
24000000
313000
3360000
200000
2011412
370000
3965660
15000000
1572050
112200
2396830
6944000
1380439
140000000
120500
1300000
133255
2349751
15700582
95984
198168
19860400
2482803
187361
6000000
279331
1795450
45000000
14000000
4257116
3612000
3612000
30000
116625
42000
1798360
626400
4659500
1215627
40000000
368000
100000
2203497
6134785.5
708936
4637616
5033414
6300000
17722000
2379007
2440000
21000000
5000000
55000000
10188000
1850320
8945073
1430000
15907950
142000
200000
4500000
220179
400000
32000
355056
35000000
17750000
5157000
38000000
109975000
3197986
150000
2868000
1950000
3200000
93341555
190000
3200000
5157000
1050000
17145000
23319539
8363886
25625000
46800000
1937072
178000
250000000
21923000
8257850
600000
123494.29
3000000
451030
565439
4555922
15675000
14807535
461950
3930399
800000
28000000
20824011
12231750
605000
605000
605000
1500000
4100000
3506406
1153056
4313603
7400000
8710000
96000000
2500000
8000000
1265000
8150000
991815
3633600
7500000
2440000
3087000
10921428
13100000
382779
4007900
15534309
140229650
8996832
3805349
3000000
890000
1200000
300000
15000000
15000000
60000
2090500
207500
831203
109975000
17750000
7000000
2220141
26924120
441229
286149
4285161
4005000
40000000
37459970
45058000
628825
2379007
14500000
6155019
5260000
11600000
7652000
10020000
200000
98150000
839000
1900000
40000
10153000
3260000
1070000000
100000
22000000
100000000
60000000
200000000
898000
225000000
Preconstruction Funding
0
0
0
227150
64398
440000
2526200
0
440000
0
0
4145000
807500
0
0
80000
450000
0
0
180600
2100000
0
0
1320582
0
565439
117793
20000
2366230
155500
0
200000
0
0
47625
50000
1025000
225000
0
31500
210000
220000
0
105000
0
184000
77000
225000
0
249600
249500
174000
101000
17886
0
0
1000000
455346
0
3035138
251211
85000
0
120000
0
0
0
48000
120500
207500
0
160000
1300000
0
80000
816000
47444
0
210000
130000
2990000
0
2288000
0
0
0
85000
320000
0
820000
0
0
0
0
58000
150000
0
0
25000
0
240000
0
0
300000
0
0
0
98000
2000000
Construction Funding
2598320
0
0
2640850
1385602
1260000
0
0
1160000
4126000
840000
6355000
7842500
5468250
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
109471
179418
409430
0
1572097
0
9709305
291450
0
600000
0
0
0
500000
0
0
3155765
1006250
3672243
3480000
0
0
0
0
0
0
712415
0
0
822000
899000
10741042
0
382779
1000000
13495980
0
5738942
2994138
0
801000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
240778
0
0
192000
0
0
0
147720
0
0
3667181
1460000
5500000
0
0
0
0
0
442000
0
0
0
0
750000
3020000
0
0
0
0
0
0
402000
0
AEA Recommendation
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full FUnding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Withdrawn
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Withdrawn
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Withdrawn
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Withdrawn
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Withdrawn
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Withdrawn
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
S2 Recommended Funding
88000
809000
1227000
1025175
265200
19600
3920000
725000
397427
90922
649030
90000
650047
50000
2017818
440000
3400000
4000000
3196000
152000
2555489
792500
675000
187000
296038
111986
135000
53116
50000
429892
341335
667000
50000
40000
1251000
3925000
395200
750000
144000
1305000
307120
390000
45000
1800000
50000
90000
832635
358000
50000
60000
220000
1288018
88400
2017818
440000
3445040
200000
50000
620977
58000
379583
50000
50000
8000000
95000
325000
123500
400000
4348540
102275
240592
20000
500000
270807
493100
391200
40000
88742
627000
175000
455642
35750
800000
3453920
50000
47050
306000
97000
75000
170000
250817
311456
80000
293737
200000
4274575
342000
123500
353400
400000
428646
689251
497773
75000
225000
103000
450000
625000
2017818
440000
3096898
322903
198474
735242
288745
558814
731372
270000
620000
2352653
56841
274750
318289
1470548
35000
119000
114965
80000
560488
158771
1237403
500000
940950
125000
5914491
125000
230200
849984
232620
125000
367965
660000
75000
30700
460000
81700
40000
2988000
30000
290000
30000
30000
185000
472000
143000
250000
142500
142500
5581800
332500
207100
40000
142500
75000
332500
5538592
486000
225000
425811
985805
183200
1319088
668350
199863
350000
425701
168959
466890
6114000
2600000
356400
317788
2753364
400000
1367464
170974
6694000
3149387
236000
4000000
20000
132600
180000
3453920
60000
10000
500000
160000
41360
175000
300000
75000
213750
70000
314367
331240
200000
4000000
400000
420000
223250
240260
240260
142500
142500
240260
264459
3998920
625000
443030
301440
310841
126682
80723
555000
298078
356424
4069000
127065
1993496
467500
1436517
155294
30000
7000000
265000
279525
50000
1215224
49781
3244897
72630
448000
7800000
236000
30000
20000
125000
203000
136500
347000
84000
75000
1896836
475000
250000
61225
105050
277000
369900
99075
99075
69075
37000
500000
576080
100000
2000000
1060500
110000
250000
85000
380000
145000
2000000
472787
67500
1180000
500000
1330467
3751840
1999972
136750
565485
137750
85000
142500
275554
237500
111150
142500
90000
142500
142500
154477
300000
1184000
599200
80000
2000000
468000
93593
25000
750000
75000
2695000
700000
637500
1463200
600000
298000
298000
298000
132000
210000
100000
25000
30000
350000
213690
1060500
193200
80000
4000000
446400
142500
142500
240300
183350
142500
60000
400000
229500
2000000
247360
1900000
1954000
2589200
547611
144301
648284
140000
136500
420000
600000
1421240
1624240
1495231
67000
235523
38100
1993158
412642
84000
115000
2870000
1391000
293238
275142
1748343
1200000
850000
260000
80000
2000000
67325
252000
286580
125000
75000
500000
2000000
98149
203000
347200
2318255
240000
64000
80000
90000
2000000
4000000
428888
150000
700000
1021287
1610440
578719
34070
551408
2000000
151025
80000
255000
0
119263
90000
30000
132000
132000
132000
350000
1000000
193065
4000000
135000
1362551
100000
194540
248160
868000
639806
138210
85835
34740
1787476
435000
126750
428000
2465664
9670361
103256
117610
117610
110000
117610
30000
32500
32500
500000
130000
15000
482387
92000
101000
545934
252000
1760000
1300000
718175
632500
236000
16550
2349751
198168
88320
162000
237772
2995000
175000
395912
300000
910180
303000
915627
75000
347200
40000
500000
108000
5850000
50000
32597
500000
194540
15000
178179
250000
30000
12020000
4126000
2598320
0
0
2868000
1450000
1700000
2526200
190000
1600000
4126000
840000
10500000
8650000
5468250
80000
450000
0
180600
0
1500000
409430
565439
1689890
20000
12075535
446950
0
800000
47625
550000
550000
550000
1025000
225000
3155765
1037750
3882243
3700000
0
105000
0
184000
77000
225000
712415
249600
249500
996000
1000000
10758928
0
382779
1000000
13951326
8774080
3245349
85000
801000
120000
48000
120500
207500
0
160000
1300000
0
80000
816000
288222.3
210000
322000
2990000
0
2288000
147720
0
3752181
1780000
5500000
820000
0
0
0
500000
150000
0
0
25000
750000
3260000
0
300000
0
0
0
500000
2000000
AEA Grant Fund Request
1490077
75000
88000
809000
1227000
1025175
265200
19600
3920000
95733
725000
22748
255000
397427
90922
649030
320000
90000
650047
50000
2017818
440000
384730
150000
140000
5282000
3400000
4000000
3196000
152000
2555489
792500
675000
187000
296038
111986
135000
53116
50000
429892
341335
667000
50000
40000
1251000
3925000
440319
395200
52800
80000
750000
144000
342600
1305000
1750000
341465
307120
85000
45000
977000
102300
1800000
4000000
230000
165000
296786
295775
247560
202696
85000
75000
305000
832635
358000
50000
56000
756335
220000
198731
1288018
382400
88400
2017818
440000
3445040
279562
2495189
699163
620977
390449
698904
2016509
428646
499000
379583
454277
7620000
729600
3000000
8000000
525000
645613
123500
400000
4348540
102275
240592
384730
500000
270807
493100
391200
2797935
800000
40000
88742
627000
1250000
185000
30700
460000
81700
40000
2988000
30000
290000
30000
30000
185000
472000
143000
250000
142500
142500
5581800
332500
207100
40000
142500
75000
5538592
486000
225000
425811
985805
183200
1319088
668350
199863
350000
425701
168959
466890
6114000
2600000
356400
317788
2753364
400000
1367464
170974
6694000
3149387
236000
4000000
20000
132600
180000
3453920
60000
10000
500000
160000
41360
175000
300000
75000
213750
70000
30000
20000
125000
203000
136500
347000
84000
75000
1896836
475000
250000
61225
105050
277000
369900
99075
99075
69075
37000
500000
576080
100000
2000000
1060500
110000
250000
85000
380000
145000
2000000
472787
67500
1180000
500000
1330467
3751840
1999972
136750
565485
137750
85000
142500
275554
237500
111150
142500
90000
142500
142500
154477
300000
1184000
599200
80000
2000000
468000
93593
25000
750000
75000
2695000
700000
637500
1463200
600000
298000
298000
298000
132000
210000
100000
25000
30000
350000
213690
1060500
193200
80000
4000000
446400
142500
142500
240300
183350
142500
60000
400000
229500
2000000
247360
1900000
1954000
2589200
547611
144301
648284
140000
136500
420000
600000
1421240
1624240
1495231
67000
235523
38100
1993158
412642
84000
115000
2870000
1391000
293238
275142
1748343
1200000
850000
260000
80000
2000000
67325
252000
286580
125000
75000
500000
2000000
98149
203000
347200
2318255
240000
64000
80000
90000
2000000
4000000
428888
150000
700000
1021287
1610440
578719
34070
551408
2000000
151025
80000
255000
119263
90000
30000
132000
132000
132000
350000
1000000
193065
4000000
135000
921937
100000
194540
248162
868000
639806
138210
85835
34740
1787476
435000
428000
2465664
8000000
103256
117610
117610
110000
117610
30000
32500
32500
500000
130000
15000
482387
92000
101000
545934
252000
1760000
1300000
718175
632500
236000
16550
2349751
198168
88320
162000
237772
2995000
175000
395912
300000
910180
303000
915627
75000
347200
40000
500000
108000
2000000
50000
32597
500000
194540
15000
178179
250000
30000
2000000
2598320
0
0
2704683.7
1450000
1700000
2000000
1600000
840000
2000000
4000000
2000000
0
80000
450000
0
180600
0
1500000
409430
565439
2000000
20000
4000000
446950
0
47625
550000
1025000
225000
3155765
1037750
3882243
2000000
0
105000
0
184000
77000
375000
712415
249600
249500
996000
1000000
10758928
0
382779
2000000
4000000
4000000
3245349
85000
801000
120000
48000
120500
207500
0
160000
1300000
0
80000
816000
288222.3
210000
322000
2990000
0
2288000
147720
0
3752181
1780000
4000000
820000
0
0
0
500000
150000
0
0
25000
750000
2000000
0
4006500
0
0
0
500000
AEA Cash Match Provided
511038
0
5000
1100000
360000
50000
66300
1545000
23680
85000
34122
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
168336
10554
64448
0
0
122500
100000
725528
3000000
8000
283943
41711
2925000
33000
164053
13438
0
0
0
0
0
113000
50000
0
0
14718750
0
98800
16200
10000
750000
36000
70000
0
0
61424
0
0
280
8900
1061000
10497695
0
0
0
0
61890
50673
17000
75000
0
40000
36000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
201782
44000
0
0
30000
0
40000
49009
0
170000
0
0
0
0
0
0
50000
16000000
0
33980
6500
20000
537460
0
0
64448
250000
11000
10000
97800
6695934
0
10000
78386
113000
1250000
10000
AEA Total In-Kind Match
130625
10000
17000
15280
60680
10251
0
8400
0
38316
40000
0
0
4014
909
423275
25000
900
6566
5000
33446
33446
0
2600000
210000
154500
2500000
150000
0
0
0
0
2600000
0
49140
15000
39000
531
500
54799
37200
0
0
0
0
0
62500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
79300
15356
0
30000
0
48000
0
0
0
1000
107968
29650
0
0
0
0
3050
84708
0
19338
4000
7563
0
105773
0
7500
8840
0
0
34450
5000
220000
7538
0
25000
6989
126500
62500
89990
13796
26439
500000
92296
50000
0
27036
0
0
0
0
314381
266592
0
100000
43000
176850
0
0
100000
13000
3456
55278
0
5000
AEA Existing Grant Fund Offer
AEA Total Requested Phases Cost
2131740
85000
110000
1924280
1647680
1085427
331500
28000
5465000
157729
850000
86400
255000
401441
91831
1072305
345000
90900
656613
55000
2219600
484000
449178
150000
350000
5559000
6000000
4875528
6196000
160000
2839432
834211
6200000
220000
509231
125424
174000
53647
50500
484691
378535
780000
100000
40000
1251000
18925000
502819
494000
69000
90000
1500000
180000
1375000
1750000
420765
383900
85000
55000
4297280
506200
5461000
14497695
230000
164000
299754
325425
309450
253369
102000
150000
308050
932343
394000
50000
60000
763898
220000
200718
1288018
389900
2541549
2219600
484000
3479490
284562
2620189
706701
660977
390449
705893
2313009
491146
503990
433379
454277
7620000
736896
3100000
24000000
552036
679592
130000
1150000
4886000
102275
292184
449178
1100000
313807
679950
489000
13391869
1100000
53000
170583
740000
2500000
200000
208073
4358784
455642
47750
2700000
17045146
250000
47050
306000
152867
17500000
456252
184000
259817
320456
100000
302737
1397403
4749528
360000
130000
372000
1150000
1400000
800000
428646
689251
497773
2997000
447800
375000
160000
225000
161000
311166
450000
629000
230000
2219600
484000
3096898
159000
332590
204428
735242
288745
558814
731372
1250000
2495189
1709825
3257653
3378500
9281615
373838
274750
318289
3800000
213750
54000
133000
135254
300000
700000
12813869
167127
1323851
223536
62772
1375000
980950
587900
11828982
267150
230200
962984
1254013
492850
367965
225660
825000
1940379
455642
81000
8000000
1560558
76000
82000
181000
35700
510000
131700
55000
700000
3320000
70000
292500
172700
372000
527908
181000
695950
4067778
223195
190195
114765
190000
517000
223536
33004000
200000
190000
8696494
350000
117136
150000
150000
6202000
350000
218000
233000
350000
150000
150000
200000
350000
650000
6153991
548000
3258446
438585
1015385
189200
1341063
3485000
688400
205859
360500
437453
168959
1422693
486090
6114000
3900000
381400
2870635
2848939
2050000
1415234
170974
6709000
3399387
690000
9570434
320000
8000000
25200
165750
2190000
20797187
90000
11000
250000
1100000
190000
51360
211000
249385
875000
75000
225000
81300
485828
120200
1790000
31350
2400000
8689033
314367
125000
381320
6500000
3800000
3825000
3686450
340000
29000000
400000
590000
459000
235000
2676273
100000
252905
252905
150000
150000
4217306
252905
278378
4443244
8696494
961400
629000
139825
3113750
527908
296900
45000
48500
50000
486180
317305
327201
50000
112000
30000
50000
37000
64000
48500
133349
413619
50000
115000
587000
338578
115000
168000
401873
6715000
161702.92
341900
2516496
527500
1476485
4000000
155294
19725000
143363
170000
12725000
81973
9156402
186956
295800
323696
478981
1388995
21247840
850000
1375400
12228000
4962965
3244897
23350000
639050
78000
230700
80700
1440000
1815000
9546005
397500
1260000
16000000
233000
200000
295000
39000
26000
165000
3908162
3908162
2500000
1344695
4624041
142000
1561368
302395
2200000
229000
1455000
198000
395000
250000
100000
845805
5520836
1005000
2148536
180825
112050
2360000
4405000
493200
168625
168625
138625
350000
44400
1000000
23900000
250000
4019600
4978000
4978000
125000
270000
94250
10000000
425000
161000
274623
1054000
2000000
8050538
1327235
472787
720388
12725200
500000
3330467
14459790
5882270
9624000
265000
565485
145000
93500
150000
4500000
250000
117000
150000
100000
150000
150000
1190876
154477
360000
1875000
2500000
3554888
2579200
12725000
200000
2400000
2440000
1300000
600000
327130
125000
755500
248065
3050000
16500000
198000
850000
1314651
37792600
1780000
149709
440000
440000
440000
145200
231000
149300
72000
200000
600000
4660750
2000000
250050
1371287
3795000
9679500
850000
45000
6000000
350000
6755497
16616251
150000
150000
3890042
193000
150000
4000000
400000
2360000
229500
912000
4000000
277360
3600000
6501066
2589200
1258935
212942
144301
1661368
648284
140000
198000
500000
85000
1780000
267024
675185
8763227
1661368
1571240
2035300
1661368
5347236
4000000
77000
268523
20000000
317190
4152805
588365
100000
2500000
140000
85000
150000
3120000
1491000
293238
275142
2156010
219071
4494546
1600000
4450000
232170
260000
1600000
10000000
1861500
7815000
290500
35506477
687580
171500
322283
500000
7652000
615591
229000
395200
3308255
312000
600000
500000
200000
2332000
2400000
12725000
1235000
150000
49500000
1371287
658000
340000
240000
2013050
1275500
578719
313280
551408
16500000
4095000
101500
167190
300000
5033414
416392
161386
1486857
90000
4500000
3857047
3857047
3857047
654200
600000
1250000
248065
17031000
561887
2231768
11187738
932250
200000
15907950
2868000
50000
357152
15760000
1995000
1077706
172388
900000
43940
38264.61
38843.58
39869
2428301
600000
500000
146750
1235000
4446950
2727960
10733179
108691
123800
123800
115500
123800
160000
1600000
32000
108500
108500
1590092
1750000
5000000
1760000
8100000
6940000
13700000
20000
454828
1154512
393298.5
95581
4097000
996000
617934
312000
2750000
45500
3360000
200000
1919807
370000
3965660
15000000
1572050
112200
2396830
6944000
1380439
8580000
120500
306000
133255
2349751
24657272
95984
198168
110400
2482804
187361
4406950
279330
1795450
237772
2995000
500000
4257116
3612000
3612000
30000
116625
42000
955460
676400
4659500
1215627
40000000
368000
100000
395200
2812220.7
708963
4367616
5033414
650000
500000
2379007
2440000
21000000
5000000
55000000
10188000
1878070
552073
60000
1000000
142000
200000
5100000
220179
400000
32000
355056
6350000
15020000
5157000
38000000
2520000
3197986
150000
2868000
1950000
3200000
93341555
193600
3200000
5157000
1050000
17145000
11650000
8363886
25625000
46800000
1937072
195543
3225500
21923000
8257850
50000
123494.29
3000000
451030
565439
4555922
15675000
14875535
457505
3930399
800000
495000
20824011
12231750
605000
605000
605000
1075625
250000
3506406
1153056
4313603
7400000
8710000
131250
2500000
224000
95000
471000
991815
3633600
498480
2340000
3087000
10921428
12900000
5042539
4007900
15534309
14673250
8996832
3805349
200000
890000
1200000
300000
15000000
15000000
60000
140500
207500
831203
205000
1620000
360000
2220141
1020000
316668.7
286149
4145991
4005000
5490000
37459970
2860000
628825
2379007
14500000
6155019
5260000
11600000
7652000
2455000
10000000
200000
98150000
839000
150000
105620
95000
40000
750000
3383000
8342810
100000
22000000
775000
650000
1200000
898000
2000000
AEA Additional Monitoring Cost
3500
400
11230
9091
15000
20000
AEA Total Cost Through Construction
2131740
0
3705000
5473280
17306696
7783428
5731500
1750000
5715000
392959
955458
86400
4603385
695269
1067309
168000000
4283056
653277
431982
32840509
7606795
800000
3000000
448663
5289000
6589090
58936366
6196000
2529400
8233369
9317500
6874498
4380000
438341
858556
5598500
496526
311394
484691
50797871
826067
1814049
2600000
1365890
20744264
6300000
3016475
15400000
386000
79247000
1340000
427600
6610000
1750000
420765
383900
1400000
4526280
3380000
5461000
13717479
25000000
165000
299754
309450
4283056
872635
59067808
50000
60000
763898
2200000
200718
1408908
4526458
5541549
26272407
4565200
3479490
284562
2692700
706701
660977
439453
705893
2458622
6870575
503990
433379
458716
7770000
729600
3100000
24000000
6000000
9000000
1634500
9200000
4886000
102275
292184
449178
10000000
200000
679950
3011475
13391869
45320707
15922000
170583
740000
50000000
2100000
Internal Comments
The average load in Circle in June 2015 was 31kW, which means the minimums were in the 16-20kW range. The smallest genset, 100kW, should not operate at or below 20kW for more than a
few hours without being loaded up and run hard afterwards. The manufacturer recommends minimum loading of 30%.There is not sufficient "headroom" for any significant amount of solar
PV between the minimum load requirements of the smallest genset and the loads projected based on June 2015 PCE data. The application stated solar PV capacity of 100-200kW would be
pursued, which is greater than the peak loads reported.This application does not meet minimum requirements for being realistic. David 10-13-15
Original statement post-Stage 2, prior to reconsideration:Not recommended due to incomplete prior phase. Per the Request for Applications #16012, Sections 2, 2.4, 2.5, applicants must
complete prior phases of work prior to receiving funding for future phases. The Crater Lake hydro project proposes to offset diesel electric and heat energy generation, possibly at
a lower cost. As mentioned in your cover letter, Cordova Electric Cooperative cannot provide granular detail of cost and scope for the requested design phase until the feasibility study
is complete, which is currently anticipated to be summer 2016. That timing is very good for a REF grant application in fall 2016, but is premature for this round of funding. There
is uncertainty both in the technical and economic aspects of the project that will become more clear through the feasibility analysis. AEA recommends applying for funding when the
feasibility study is complete, as long as it indicates a technically and economically feasible project.AEA commends Cordova Electric for embarking on the self-funded feasibility study
for this project that may provide significant long-term benefits to the community, and for CEC’s strong performance as an Alaska electric utility.This project is not recommended for
funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications
#16012.
The City has numerous entities involved in the application preparation and proposed for project management, none of which exhibit a strong background in hydroelectric development including
critical aspects such as FERC licensing (DC), aquatic issues and monitoring and mitigation measures resolution and impact analysis and hydroelectric specific feasibility, geotechnical,
and engineering design. While ANTHC has dam and water pipeline experience they have little experience with rural electrical generation and hydroelectric project design and development.
A single experienced project manager is recommended, preferably the hydroelectric engineering consultant, to oversee the project. It is not recommended that AEA allow the project to
proceed without a highly qualified PM.
The project funding request is based on an apparent conservative estimation in the feasibility study as a contingency because obtaining additional grant funds is difficult. Therefore
is expected that actual development, if well handled and performed efficiently, should be less than the requested funding amount.
The AEA should be fully engaged for all work scopes, tasks, contracts, and present at all project and stakeholder meetings. AEA should obtain and review all deliverables. At the completion
of this grant the project should be fully ready for construction with permits expected, designs, specifications, and construction contracts complete, a business plan and updated feasibility
analysis along with a construction cost estimate.
Need econ score, then score stage 3 if needed.
The design budget appears low but if cost based rates are used (assume 60/hr = 240hrs) should be ok, construction budget seems low – study has 400k and that does not appear to include
a replacement structure for the new unit, and the proposed new turbine may lack a deflector system thus potentially introducing operational scenarios with rapid changes in flow which
likely require pipeline modifications, exist water right is for 7 cfs(?) and new turbine requires 10 cfs so modification required, no detailed operational data or data is provided on
spill which should have been obtained as part of the dam replacement / feasibility study. The design indicates the powerhouse is at elevation 51’ yet there was no discussion about
whether it could be moved lower. Overall the feasibility study needs additional work.
Scored as a non-diesels off scenario. diesels off is not considered an established technology, therefore AEA's analysis was run under a scenario of diesels on. We understand that the
grantee will test to determine whether a diesels off scenario is feasible.
Regardless of who performs the stream gauging work AEA should review and approve equipment, methods, and analysis work. Contractor to submit plan for gauging, proposed equipment, proposed
location for site(s), documentation of installation including location, raw level survey data for stage and elevation bench marks, raw flow measurement data, photographs, trip reports,
data downloads, and flow analysis reports.
Contractor shall generally follow standard USGS gauging and measurement procedures.
David to draft comments to include at least:technical issues: curtailing analysis not provided, secondary loads not yet installed, Application uses output from tracking system, cost
and drawings are from fixed open rack system.Applicants should include feasibility report if applying for final design funding, and should submit the final design for if applying for
construction funds.(See S2 comments at bottom of this page- David)
11/22/15 THIS STAGE 2 SCORING HAD TECHNICAL ISSUES WITH THE DATABASE. INDIVIDUAL SCORES ARE MISSING, BUT TOTALS ARE SHOWING. SAM WILL LOOK INTO THIS AND ENSURE ACCURATE RECORDING OF
SCORES.~11/24/15 Individual scores were fixed and verified by all scorers. This applicant requested reconsideration. Sara Fisher Goad agreed with staff decision and did not grant a
reconsideration. -SMS
Current status: 1. Chitina to work directly with CRW on a aREF9 grant application for design/build construction funding based on the current set of 65% drawings with some minor edits
to cost estimate2. AEA to investigate concept design changes related to pipe crossing roadway and aquatic issues3. AEA to resume stream gauging.Award will require of AEA review of concept
changes particularly with a focus on the potential for lowering the powerhouse elevation and eliminating the high pressure pipeline alignment along the highway. Prior to award review
and approve general contract, concept drawings, and bid documents. AEA to review all bids and provide recommendations. Selected contractor will be required to submit final design/record
drawings, O&M procedures and manuals, statement of construction costs by FERC accounting categories, commissioning results, and final design report.
comeback: for economic score
Primary scope of work is to investigate the hydrology and aquatics relating to the potential project configurations on Unga Man Creek and its southwest tributary basin. The reconnaissance
report does not mention this sub-basin development potential. It appears that the City may have mistaken waterfall creek for the sub-basin project that AEA identified. The feasibility
work should include alternative analysis including the combined sub-basin and Unga Man project.
Needs economists bc score and reconsider other benefits. Add Rich language.
The next steps for this project are to verify the concept design technical feasibility and propose any alternate recommendations including some evaluation of storage. The cost estimate
in particular requires additional review and detail. Consultation with agencies should commence with the proposal to eliminate fish passage in the bypassed reach (no bypass/environmental
flows). An updated economic feasibility should also be provided.
AEA considered whether this is a new project that is eligible for funding since REF funded Terror LAke turbine #3. The review committee considers this a new project since this is a
new renewable source that the community sees a future need for. The community could select a different renewable energy source, but has found this new water source to be the most economical
to develop. If the project required a new hydro plant, it would qualify. If this project were an addition to the existing power plant, it would be considered not eligible.KEA contracted
with Lachel to produce a Conceptual Design Report dated January 14, 2015. It is noted that a conceptual design report is not a feasibility report and that the basis for advancing the
project is based solely on the load projections and economics provided by KEA in their application to FERC and the AEA. AEA has reviewed both and concludes the claimed benefits from
the project are reasonable but also notes that the need for power is entirely contingent on load growth that is "due to expansions of Kodiak’s seafood processing sector,the repowering
of the City’s shipping port crane, numerous new building construction projects, and an overall communityâ€wide shift of energy sourcing from diesel fuel to renewablyâ€generated
electricity." It is further noted that Kodiak has experienced a population decline in recent years.Scope of work shall be detailed in award and include project management plan with
procurement procedures, permit acquisition, health and safety plans, work plan covering execution on site (with contingencies) and data collection and reporting, hazard analysis and
spill prevention plans, environmental compliance and onsite safety/health monitoring, quality control and assurance plan, and weekly reporting during onsite activity.
AEA recommends completing the feasibility and final design phases of this project to better understand project impact on water system infrastructure, final design cost estimate, and
subsequent economics.AEA to review selection and award of the feasibility contractor for qualifications and understanding of issues related to transient pressures under load rejection
and expected operation of combined turbine/PRV system (see section 7 of HDR April 2009 concept study.AEA to review final feasibility report as a condition to proceeding with detailed
design and permitting. Final deliverables should be detailed design drawings, permits (ADEC Water system and FERC conduit exemption expected) approvals or applications, technical specifications,
final cost estimate, updated economic analysis, and proposed financing for the constructed project.
This application was received timely, but to the wrong email address. AEA staff confirmed receipt with the applicant, but it was not forwarded to the correct email box for consideration
and went unnoticed until January 14,2015. An expedited but full review was conducted by AEA, DNR and economists. AEA found this project to not pass Stage 1 or Stage 2. Below are
the Stage 2 comments as written in the rejection letter of 1/16/15. Stage 1 comments are in the Stage 1 comments field."Alaska Energy Authority has these additional technical and economic
concerns regarding the project’s fit with the REF program as outlined in the Request for Applications (RFA), regulations, and statutes.• Applicants must demonstrate completion of
prior phases. This construction phase project does not demonstrate the completion of feasibility or final design phases. (3 AAC 107.645, RFA 2.2 Project Phase Descriptions)• There
is a lack of sufficient design detail to properly analyze technical and economic properties of the project for a construction funding application.• Using the applicant’s numbers,
the project as a whole, disregarding funding sources or tax incentives, demonstrates poor economics. (3 AAC 107.655, RFA Stage 2 Review: Project Feasibility and Benefits)• Project
benefit would go to a few customers with the means to purchase shares, which does not meet the public benefit requirement. (3 AAC 107.655)• Proposed matching funds would not garner
a score for the match criterion since the match is based upon future shareholders whose contributions have not yet been committed."
Rich will look at cost overrun from prev grant and advise.
The work proposed in this applications is a follow up to reconnaissance work. The City of Adak did this but the resulting study was not in conformance with the reconnaissance study recommendations
and was incomplete in demonstration of the analysis, benefits, and conclusions. TDX appears to suggest scope consistent with prior reconnaissance work but then reverts to water supply
power recovery only. Proposed budget is consistent with such a limited scope. The applicant should include additional analysis of the larger projects particularly with regard to review
of environmental flows and costs/benefits. The proposed budget and scope is not sufficient. Suggest recommending approval of funding for $390k to include stream gauging, mapping, additional
aquatic investigations, data collection as necessary, energy and economic modeling, concept designs, preliminary design criteria, initial agency consultation, and final recommendations
for design and permitting.
Tim will rewrite recommendations.
Sean check Tim's wording. Compare prior construction funding application for B/C and score if total cost was known at the time.
SEAN AND SHAWN ADDRESS STAGE 1 QUALIFICATIONS AND IF APPLICANT RESPONDED.
alan to look at partial funding amounts
JED look at our comments on 1150 and 1151 to clarify language on incorporating into the regional plans, and to help bring the proposed project to the regional planning efforts.
Applicant did not mark the design box, but the project is design and construction. ADD A CHECK BOX FOR AEA RECOMMENDED PHASES AND USE THOSE FOR THE EXTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS..
Kenai Hydro is a HEA owned subsidiary in the process of developing a license application for FERC. The amount of effort for environmental analysis has been extensive with expenditures
totaling $5,712,558 which includes $2,100,000 from previous REF grants (REF 635 for 1,184,000 and REF 34 for 1,020,000 both for feasibility).
The REF funded feasibility and conceptual design report has not been completed. Additionally, a draft license application has not yet been submitted to FERC.
Generally not recommended until completion or receipt of previously funded work. It is possible the project underwent scope changes that have resulted in additional work and schedule
delays (not uncommon). If additional funding is approved it should be for license application, preliminary design, and feasibility completion.
1/28/15 at REFAC meeting we received public testimony against the project from Kenai Watershed Forum or similar. This occurred after scoring and ranking so could not be reflected in
the score.
Alan will check part funding amount.
The applicant has until Nov 12 to reply with info. Come back to consider if information is provided.
Possible loan option.
IF funded, keep tight control of grant steps to ensure permitting is clear prior to funding design.
Loan potential. Good B/C, high cap cost.
ALAN B. add to the reasoning for funding recommendation.
Applicant requested reconsideration after stage 2 not recommended. Request denied due to missing deadline.
Alan B and Shawn to address match and changed total requested amount. Please correct in REval.
Alan to add to the description.
Mark with Special provision
Dev add provision look for oppty in design to reduce construction cost.
100% Design expected to be complete by July 2015.
Owner/AEA desire to procure materials separately but low cost and contractor markup savings are not likely to make up for the extra coordination cost.
Value of land donated needs to be verified with appraisal or comparable and deed of easement or quitclaim executed before crediting as match.
Additional stream gauging work recommended to verify low flows in winter/spring. Discharge rating curve derivation not included in CDR. Stream gauging data collection should adhere to
USGS standards and daily average stage and flow with rating curve should be published.
Review of design required before construction authorization.
ADNR water rights and ADF&G permitting efforts and requirements not adequately documented in CDR or application.
Need to verify hydrology and energy production, perform geotechnical investigations, obtain site control and other permits, and reassess project size, cost, and economics prior to release
of funds.
Technical Review of Design
Preliminary review of the design documents identified the following concerns:
No geotechnical information at the intake site and insufficient topographic and other data in vicinity of intake
• No geotechnical information available regarding bedrock depths.
• Plans do not show river topography in adequate detail and extent of plans does not cover full width of floodplain. Aerial imagery not shown either.
Intake winter operation
• Exposed trash racks and lack of insulation – proper intake functioning in arctic winter requires intake works are submerged below ice levels and insulation provided in critical
areas to avoid ice buildup and subsequent clogging.
Concern about geomorphology of Yerrick Creek during flood events and intake stability or potential for rerouting of creek.
• Areas of concern include debris flushing mechanism and flood flow modeling. Flood events can result in high amounts of material deposition in the reservoir. If allowed to build up
then there is potential for rerouting of the creek onto the floodplain.
• Potential for rerouting from blockages created by avalanches.
• Assessment of flood flows, spillway hydraulic design, and downstream scour potential.
Original AEA recommendation statement, prior to reconsideration:
AEA does not recommend funding the requested phase of this project at this time due to incomplete prior phases. The design phase shall be complete prior to consideration for construction
funding, per the AEA Request for Applications 15003 section 2.2 to 2.6.
Additionally, construction funding is not recommended until AEA's concerns regarding the resource potential and economics of the project have been adequately addressed. Additional details
of the prior stream gauging effort are required including flow measurements, determination of stage discharge relation, daily average stage and calculated daily average flow for the
period of record. The economic concerns relate to the demonstration, at the conclusion of the design phase, of the project cost and ability of the project to deliver the expected benefits.
No funding recommended.
Alan to update final statement. Need BC from Cady. Need to estimate level of funding.
Alan F to check partial funding amount. If changed, change match to 10% of grant amount.
SHAWN send question to applicant whether (Y/N) $20,000 feasibility is acceptable. Done and applicant replied.Email from David and Cady 11/12/14:We recommend AEA stay with its offer
to fund a feasibility project for $20k for the following reasons:1. AEA requested the detailed cost estimate 10/22 with a response by 10/27. Shawn received a detailed cost estimate
that met most of our requirements on 11/8. This does not leave us enough time to review the info provided.2. Alan Mitchell, our economist, is unavailable until some time next week
and is busy with other work. Cady and I are scrambling to catch up.3. Brad’s PVWatts analysis was based on dual axis trackers, but that is not reflected in the cost estimate. The
Homer analysis he provided assumed fixed panels. There should not be confusion about such basic elements of the project at this late date.4. The array plan provided by KEA on 11/8
shows fixed panels, which contradicts Brad’s statement on 10/27 that he is planning on using dual axis trackers.
Jim will examine numbers closer to check for possible AEA managed. Jim will check with Rick about AEA managed, if desired.11/Jim checked, Tazlina is now requesting AEA managed.
The resource appears more than adequate to meet the energy needs of Whale Pass. Recommend proceeding with feasibility followed by permitting and final design.
As a follow up to the SEIRP, SEAPA is currently under contract with the state to perform a regional hydropower evaluation that is expected to address the recommended sequence of capacity
and storage additions in the southeast region. Completion and acceptance of this study should be precursor to funding further design/construction projects in the Southeast.
City of Saxman requests funds for the Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Project to provide for the following: revise final design and specifications, obtain permits for construction, review
ways to increase storage potential of project, update cost estimate, begin power sales negotiations and prepare a business and operational plan based upon power sales agreement. AEA
has the following concerns: the market for the power is uncertain, given it would be the last to be used in the SEAPA system, including the proposed additions of energy from Whitman
Lake Hydroelectric Project and the proposed Swan Lake expansion and Metlakatla - Ketchikan Intertie. The Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 application (#909) was recommended for partial
funding of $500,000 but did not score within the funding limit. The project did receive a $200,000 FY14 legislative grant for pre-construction activities, but that work has not been
completed. Work to be completed under the legislative grant includes: a hydrology update, license, market, operational, site, and financial reviews, design analysis, and an update of
construction cost.As a follow up to the SEIRP, SEAPA is currently under contract with the state to perform a regional hydropower evaluation that is expected to address the recommended
sequence of capacity and storage additions in the southeast region. Completion and acceptance of this study should be precursor to funding further design/construction projects in the
Southeast.Given the current FY14 funding from the legislature, the project is moving forward to answer key questions; therefore, the project is not recommended for funding from the
RE Fund at this time.
The scope of work being requested includes complete feasibility and concept design although there is limited supporting data to suggest this will be an economically viable project. A
number of conditions should be met before undertaking this secondary hydro development in the Tok region including additional assurance with regard to energy availability and project
operability and subsequent economics. Stream gaging is recommended to evaluate the energy resource prior to undertaking more extensive studies. The gaging will improve confidence in
energy availability for Yerrick Creek as well. Demonstration of cost and operability of Yerrick Creek is also recommended before proceeding with Clearwater Creek development.AEA's funding
recommendation is therefore limited to the proposed stream gaging work in the application consisting of $40k of RE Grant Funds, $10k Grantee Matching Funds, and $3k Other Funds.
Reconsider at end of reviews for full funding through conceptual design versus only funding wind feasibility study. $90K vs $200k (removes geotech expenses too. Are they an IPP?
Change if not. Change ratio of match too.
Application was not recommended. applicant requested reconsideration. Sara recommended, staff reconsider. Staff scored. Application did not pass Stage 2.
Did not pass S2, reconsideration requested. Rescored. Did not pass stage 2 upon reconsideration.
S1Evaluator
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
David Lockard
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Calfa, Skaling
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Sean, Shawn, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
white
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
Crimp, White
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp, Ott, Moller
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
Crimp / White
Crimp / White
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White / Ott
White / Ott
White/Ott
White / Ott
White / Ott
White, Crimp, Kerr, Brown, Harper
White/Ott
White / Ott
White, Crimp
White / Ott
White, Crimp
White / Ott
Crimp / White / Ott
White / Ott
Crimp / White / Ott
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White
White / Ott
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White / Ott
White, Crimp, Landis
White / Ott
White / Ott
White / Ott
White / Ott
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White / Ott
White / Ott
White, Crimp
White / Ott
White / Ott
White / Ott
Butch / Doug
bw & dco
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Peter, Jim, Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter and Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Jim, Peter
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter and Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter and Jim
Butch, Peter, Crimp
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter and Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter and Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Peter, Jim, Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Stage 1 Pass Fail
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
fail
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
N
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
N
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
M
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
M
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
n
M
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
n
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
n
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
S1 Eligible Applicant
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
S1 Eligible Project
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
?
pass
pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
Maybe
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
M
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
M
y
y
y
y
n
y
n
M
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
S1 Auth Doc
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
fail
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pas
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
?
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
n
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
n
n
n
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
n
n
n
y
y
S1 OK Description
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
PASS
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
Maybe
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
M
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
S1 Complete
pass
pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
fail
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
PASS
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
Maybe
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
M
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
?
n
y
n
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
S1 Site Control
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
?
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
S1 Comments
S1#4 and 5: P.3 of application states that it is a feasibility study, but construction box is checked. Box 2.5 (Scope of Work) says it is a feasibility study and preliminary design.
Box 2.4 asks for a one paragraph description, but the applicant response is less than a sentence.S1#5: Sections 5.1.1, 5.4.1, 12 and 13 are incomplete.Applicant notified of missing
information 9/23--SMC9/29- Applicant responded to Shawn's 9/23 e-mail after the 9/28 deadline. He didn't identify which section he was responding to and didn't address resource in
section 5.1.1. However, the application is for a feasibility study and PVWatts provides a good estimate of the solar resource. Section 5.4.1 info is still not complete. The current
diesel genset minimum loads, O&M costs, and efficiency are critical to analyzing the proposal, and should be easy for the operator to provide. I recommend passing this application
in stage 1 and requesting the additional info for stage 2 evaluation. David
Application is not Signed.
Applicants POC was notified on 9/21 and 9/23 that a signed application is required in order for the application to be considered.--SMC
9/30-Applicant provided signed application, Resolution and Authorized signers form--SMC
Feasibility study forthcoming.Resolution will be provided in October.
Sean to determine eligible project status.
Resolution and Authorized Signers form will be sent after Sept 30thDesign and permitting phase work forthcoming
Resolution will be delivered in October.
This application has numerous potentially fatal flaws: AVEC only allows up to 8.5kW total of distributed generation in Minto, yet this application is for 100kWAverage electric loads
are 70kW in Minto, with minimums about 35kW.The proposed system will be on buildings not owned by the applicant (the store is owned by the ANCSA Village Corporation).9/23 Applicant
notified that signed documents are required by 9/28 at noon--SMC9/29 Applicant submitted signed documents--SMC9/29 Mark Bryan of AVEC, in discussion with applicant and David Lockard,
agreed to allow up to a 10kW solar installation. Did the applicant submit a revised application?
The governing body resolution required in Section 14 is missingSections 11-14 of the application are missing.
9/23 Applicant notified that they did not pass S1 and give until 10/5 to appeal--SMC
the Applicant did not check the box indicating that they would own and operate the asset for the public benefit.
The scope of work is clear but the phase description itself may require subsequent revision.
Sections 1.2.3, 4 and 5 are not checked.Section 5.4.1 is incomplete. The applicant should provide this info as soon as possible.Wind turbines are already curtailed. This should be
factored into stage 2 review.Section 6.2.3: applicant intends to adjust scope based on funding and/or cost increases.Applicant may have overlooked O&M and limited life aspects of dual-axis
tracking system.
(9/21- Shawn said he and Sean would complete the S1 review)9/23 Emailed Applicant's POC informing them of deficiencies in the application and allowing them until 9/28 to provide missing
info--SMC9/28- applicant provided updated info.
Removed transmission from project type as denoted in application. Transmission line was constructed in 2008 with federal funding. -Sam
Changed technology from wind and transmission to transmission only. -Sam
Originally entered into REval as HeatBiofuel project type. Changed to Biomass on 10/12. -Sam
Originally entered into REval as HeatBiofuel project type. Changed to Biomass on 10/12. -Sam
Originally entered into REval as HeatBiofuel project type. Changed to Biomass on 10/12. -Sam
Originally entered into REval as HeatBiofuel project type. Changed to Biomass on 10/12. -Sam
Originally entered into REval as HeatBiofuel project type. Changed to Biomass on 10/12. -Sam
Is MOU strong enough Evidence for Site control?
From "did not pass" letter sent: Under the Stage 1 eligibility review, and in accordance with 3 AAC 107.610, an applicant must be an eligible applicant defined in AS 42.45.045(l) and
will own the renewable energy project. While Homer Electric Association is an eligible applicant, the owners identified in the application will be a group of 34 member shareholders.
The Authority may authorize the conveyance of an ownership interest to an eligible applicant if the Authority determines that the conveyance protects the public interest and benefit
provided by the grant. Individual shareholders are not eligible applicants and the public benefit would not serve the public, rather a small set of individual owners.
Authorized Signer needed before a grant
Eligible project?
Eligible Project?
Authorized Signer need before Grant
Authorized Signers form need before grant can be issued.
Site Control ?'s
Used Wrong Application / Insufficient information / application not signed/ requested applicant provide additional information in the following letter: Mr. George, Thank you for applying
to Renewable Energy Fund Grant Program Round VIII. The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) has received and reviewed your application from Akiachak Native Community Electric Company/Akiachak
Native Community IRA Council for a biomass energy project. While reviewing applications the AEA review team uses six standard criteria on a pass/fail basis to determine if an application
passes the stage 1 review. The stage 1 review assesses if the application is complete, meets the minimum submission requirements and had adequate information to proceed to stage 2—the
technical and economic evaluation. The review team identified that your application did not meet one of the criteria. Not enough information was provided that was sufficiently responsive
to the Request for Applications to review and score your application. It appears that your application was submitted on an older application form from 2009 and as such did not provide
information for many fields of required information. The AEA review team has determined that because your application did not meet one of the six review criteria, AEA is unable to
advance your application past stage 1.AEA would like to encourage you to perform the prefeasibility work associated with a potential biomass project through the Alaska Wood Energy Development
Task Group. Guidance and assistance for this process may be obtained by contacting AEA’s Biomass Project Manager, Devany Plentovich, at 907-771-3068 or via email at dplentovich@aidea.org.Per
regulations for the Renewable Energy Fund [3 AAC 107.650(a)], an applicant whose application does not pass Stage 1 review may request that the AEA Executive Director reconsider the
decision of the authority’s staff to reject the application. Any request for reconsideration must be received in writing, including by email, must state the basis for reconsideration,
and must be received by 5:00 p.m. Alaska time, October 13, 2014. All appeals must be addressed to Shawn Calfa, AEA Grants Administrator: scalfa@aidea.orgSincerely,Shawn
Site Control ?'s
Site Control ?'s
Ask Brian Bjorkquist about Eligibility
Follow-up with Brian Bjorkquist eligible applicant Check site control in Stage 2
Follow-up with Brian Bjorkquist about eligible applicant
needs a resolution, not sufficient information to determine scope of project, cannot determine site control due to lack of information, did not meet AEA CDR deadline, despite extension.
ineligible for further review because the applicant did not provide a conceptual design report as required and identified in Sections 1.12, 2.5 and Section 4 of the Request for Grant
Applications dated July 2, 2013
needs a resolution
Resolution not an issue for this stage of review.
This appears to be a duplicate of application #1005 but this one is more complete. 1005 will not be reviewed further. Shawn to notify applicant. 10/29/13 -SMS.
need authorized signers form
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
Does not meet the RFA specifications for a CDR to be available.
Ineligible for further review because the applicant did not provide a conceptual design report 30 days prior to the application deadline as required and identified in Sections 1.12,
2.5 and Section 4 of the Request for Grant Applications dated July 2, 2013
Grant manager will contact applicant for a resolution
Resolution not an issue for this stage of review.
Grant manager will contact applicant for a resolution
Grant manager will contact applicant for a resolution
Grant manager will contact applicant for a resolution
Community Non-Profit.
Grant Manager will contact applicant for clarification of to verify eligible applicant.
Ineligible for further review because the applicant is not an eligible party as defined in Section 1.4 of the Request for Grant Applications dated July 2, 2013.
Applicant requested reconsideration of S1 rejection. SFG approved if they clarify that the utility is the applicant. Applicant submitted letter naming Tanalian Electric Co-op, Inc.
as the applicant instead of Port Alsworth Improvement Corporation. Application was considered for S2, but was not recommended.
Grant administrator has noted applicant is not compliant with Federal single audit act and has been notified by the Alaska Dept of Revenue
Grants Manager will request a resolution from the applicant
Nuvista is not an eligible applicant. Ineligible for further review because t he applicant is not an eligible party as defined in Section 1.4 of the Request for Grant Applications dated
July 2, 2013.
Not an eligible project: this transmission project does not connect renewable projects as required by statute. The transmission project proposed does not ?link an eligible renewable
energy project or eligible natural gas project to other transmission or distribution infrastructures? as required in Section 1.5.
Site control for follow-up in Stage 2
Grant Manager will request resolution from applicant.
Resolution not an issue for this stage of review.
Site
Grants Manager will request a resolution
Grants Manager will request resolution from grantee
Site control concern in application for stage 2 review
Grants Manager will request resolution before match can be counted.
Resolution not an issue for this stage of review.
This is a duplicate application, and less complete than application #1085. Do not evaluate this application further. Shawn to notify applicant. 10/29/13 -SMS
Applicant marked 3 phases.
Site control adequate for feasibility but not for final design and permitting
Need a resolution and verify eligibility
Site control
Note - Does building-level waste heat qualify as an RE project?
Note - follow-up on compliance with bi-annual filings
Note - Compare with EETF grant to see if this is the same project or a competing project
Funds requested exceed potential funding cap.
Need resolution and is not an eligible project based on statutory regulations 1.5.2
Check on previous rounds
Note - None of the specific biomass questions were answered and no pre-easibility study is attached
Note - Energy information appears lacking.
None of the specific biomass questions were answered and no feasibility study is attached
For stage 2 review, how with this impact the Ouzinkie rebuild?
Levelock Village Council is not in compliance SOA single audit act
Looks like a reconnaissance study rather than conceptual design.
Revisit
Need feasibility numbers or an example where this is in commercial operation
Section 4.4.5 Project Cost Worksheet needs information
At least a portion of the proposed project is eligible
Application withdrawn by applicant
The proposal does not meet the stage 1 criterion of "The 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 of evaluation."
The work that is proposed, while potentially valuable to Igiugig, is more effectively accomplished through the existing Rural Power System Upgrade project .
Alaska Gateway School District proposes building a new greenhouse. Although the proposed project includes a connection to the existing wood-fired heating plant, 75% of the proposed
grant would go toward design and construction of the greenhouse. Furthermore less than 25% of the benefit of the project would be from displaced fossil energy. Therefore AEA does
not consider the proposed facility to "be a project that generates energy from or involves the direct use of " renewable energy, as required by section1.3 of the RFA.
Alaska Gateway School District proposes building a new training and administration center. Although the proposed project includes a connection to the existing wood-fired heating plant,
almost all of the proposed grant would go toward design and construction of the new center. Therefore AEA does not consider the proposed facility to "be a project that generates energy
from or involves the direct use of " renewable energy, as required by section1.3 of the RFA.
The work that is proposed, while potentially valuable to St. Michael, is more effectively accomplished using standard methodology on a statewide and regionwide basis that builds on the
work already done in the statewide energy plan. The proposal does not meet the stage 1 criterion of "The 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 of evaluation."
The proposal does not demonstrate sufficient level of feasibility analysis and design required for construction. Thus, the proposal does not meet the stage 1 criterion o f "The 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 of evaluation."
Recommend that proposer submit application for consideration under the Emerging Energy Technology Fund program.
Combined with #825
Application is for design and construction of a wood pellet production facility. RFA provision 1.15 limits funding for biofuels facilities to recon and feasibility.
CVEA is requesting funds to replace the Francis hydro turbine runner in Solomon Gulch unit #2 with a new stainless steel runner that will increase efficiency of energy generation by
10%. The total cost of the project is $2,440,000. Of this amount, CVEA has committed $1,082,600 to July 2011. The application requests that the balance of the costs be shared 50/50
between CVEA and the state grant.
The proposed project is a service activity that all hydro projects eventually require. AEA finds that this project is not eligible for funding under the RE Fund since it is not an addition
to an existing project, but is instead a routine maintenance activity.
The proposal does not demonstrate sufficient level of feasibility analysis required for design and construction. Thus, the proposal does not meet the stage 1 criterion o f "The 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 of evaluation."
Recommend that proposer submit application for consideration under the Emerging Energy Technology Fund program.
Butch check w BB
Butch check w Brian B on Applicant elig
Butch: Check with Brian B on applicant eligibility
See 606
Wanting to export power to Canada?
City & Borough of Sitka owns the property the boathouse is on and leases the boathouse to a non-profit in Sitka established to restore the boathouse.
Refer to #14, 62, 290
Too broad of an application
Refer to #484
Round 0 (#16), 65 (not funded), 447
Refer to #473 (Current project is broader than Hope regional study.)
Question: Too broad of a study? Check with protocol on R3.
Refer to #86, 494
Round 0 (#17), #446
Refer to #475
Refer to #508
Refer to #236
Refer to #63
Refer to #472
Score #670--not this proposal--Unless Doug/Audrey find something different between hydro gen and TX proposals.
Score this proposal--not #671--Unless Doug/Audrey find something different between hydro gen and TX proposals. Fore earlier app, refer to #523.
Refer to #59
Refer to #284 (WTE project, but not as general as current proposal.)
Refer to #98, 222
Question whether they are maxed out on FD, construction grant.
Project capped out for grant funding, per RFA.
Refer to #479
Refer to 480
Refer to # 2 for biomass heat project. This project has no earlier proposal.
Refer to #482
Refer to #502
Refer to #500
Refer to #426 (appears modified)
Refer to #460
Refer to #20, 449
Refer to #450
Refer to #466
Refer to #401
Refer to #477
Refer to #454
Refer to #424
Refer to #46
Refer to #511
Refer to #514
Refer to #298, 516
Refer to #73
Refer to #211
Refer to #34
Refer to Round 0
Refer to #501
Refer to #438
Project has received received $4M in construction grant already.
Failed Stage 1 - already has a Round III grant for $4,000,000 and has been capped out at that level.
Refer to #441
Refer to #439
Round 4 gen issue: Project is a component of Reynolds Creek Hydro Project. It has received received $2M in grant already. Pass to S2 with caveat that if less than $50M in projects,
may allocate funds to project.
Refer to #223, 440 / Project is inline to receive an additional $90,000 if FERC issues resolved (Round III grant) 12/6/2010 - Grantee indicated it won?t pursue this project
Refer to #437
Refer to #226, 443
Round 0
Refer to #218
refer to #246, 470
Auth doc did not come with app
Refer to #37, 425
Interacts with Reynolds Cr Hydro round 0, #104, 439
Question whether feas, final design sufficient
refer to #452
refer to #49
Problem with match
refer to #109
refer to #491
refer to #406
refer to #414
refer to #412
refer to #413
refer to #245
refer to #404
refer to #213, 402
App 410 follow up.
refer to competing apps: round 0 (#2,24), #122, 600
refer to #1
refer to #315 recon
Refer to #434
General issue: wind project in the same community (Bethel) construction. Given established protocol in round 1, allow?
Combined with #517 / only this one (#523) scored
AEA is requested to manage the project.
Applicant proposes to use natural gas input to fuel cells to provide energy to City of Houston facilities. Project not eligible because it uses natural gas in a location that has economically
viable renewable energy resources including hydro and wood.
See letter to applicant.
Combined with #523 / only #523 scored and not this one
Applicant proposes to firm up wind farm using a natural gas resource in the Jarvis Creek area. Although having a readily available source to supplement wind power would be potentially
valuable, natural gas is not a critical component of the wind project since the wind power can be supplement by other resources on the Railbelt grid. Natural gas projects can be funded
under the re Rund if they serve a population of 10,000 or less that does not have an economically viable renewable energy resource.
See letter to applicant.
Earlier phase was funded. S2 review will need recon work.
Project definition is sufficiently narrow in resource (hydro, tx, geothermal) and location (Chakachamna, west forelands, Mt. Spurr) to pass to stage 2.
Maybe. Project goal is to assess wave energy resources, but assessment is not directed to one or more specific projects. Although the proposed work would be useful, scope is too broad
to be funded through RE fund. Consistent with AEA recommendations for round 2 application for statewide assessment of biomass energy resources (#283) project is not recommended to
pass to stage 2 (???).
See letter to applicant.
Budget numbers appear to be off. Butch to clarify with applicant.
Maybe. Project goal is to assess biomass resources, but assessment is not directed to one or more specific projects. Although the proposed work would be useful, scope is too broad
to be funded through RE fund. Consistent with AEA recommendations for round 2 application for statewide assessment of biomass energy resources (#283) project is not recommended to
pass to stage 2 (???).
See letter sent to UAF
Maybe Crimp: Applicant proposes to assess renewable energy resource options for Chistochina and the Ahtna region. The proposal does not address a specific type of project in a particular
location thus can be considered general energy planning. While the proposal would likely yield potentially valuable information it is better supported by general energy planning funding,
not the RE Fund.
See letter to applicant.
Maybe. Project goal is to assess run-of-river hydro resources, but assessment is not directed to one or more specific projects. Although the proposed work would be useful, scope is
too broad to be funded through RE fund. Consistent with AEA recommendations for round 2 application for statewide assessment of biomass energy resources (#283) project is not recommended
to pass to stage 2 (???).
See letter sent to applicant.
App will need documentation of feas and final design. Ott to obtain for S2 review.
Maybe. Applicant did not check boxes 1.2.2-5. Will they own and operate the project. Applicant requests design and construction but did not provide feasibility report. Butch to request
boxes checked and feas report.
Applicant considered as an IPP since they are in GVEA service territory.
Butch: Grant needs to go to IRA council.
Maybe Crimp: Applicant proposes to assess renewable energy resource options for existing and planned facilities in the Mat-Su. The proposal does not address a specific type of project
in a particular location thus can be considered general energy planning. While the proposal would likely yield potentially valuable information it is better supported by general energy
planning funding, not the RE Fund.
Steve H accepted applicant appeal. Pass to stage 2.
Note that project includes a genset, cost of which would need to be excluded if project recommended.
Crimp: Applicant proposes to assess renewable energy resource options for existing and planned facilities in SE Alaska. The proposal does not address a specific type of project in a
particular location thus can be considered general energy planning. While the proposal would likely yield potentially valuable information it is better supported by general energy
planning funding, not the RE Fund.
Maybe. Applicant proposes to consume all power onsite. This is not consistent with definition of an IPP. Butch to contact and ask whether VFDA will sell 100% power to CVEA.
White 11/16: Valdez Fisheries said they basically have to sell to CVEA, since any power generated will have to move from the refinery to their hatchery over CVEA?s lines.
Pass to s2 since they meet IPP def.
Complete enough for requesting feas analysis.
Complete enough for requesting feas analysis.
Maybe. Needs more information on feasibility and concept design before funded for construction.
Crimp11/16: Butch received wind data from Aurora. Pass to s2.
Maybe. Proposal section 7 says that applicant has made progress since unsuccessful proposal # 230 in round 2. Comments for not recommending passing to stage 2 review were that the
applicant did "not provide sufficient engineering and economic detail on system proposed for heat and power production".
Butch to request feasibility and final design work justifying construction
Crimp11/18: Applicant provided sufficient info for s2 review.. Passed to s2.
Applicant proposes recon level work to assess feasibililty of biofuel production in Bethel, Eyak, Nenana, Nome, and Fairbanks. The scope and project locations are sufficiently narrow
to meet requirement that work should address discrete project locations. (Note Round 2 comments supporting rejection of project 283: "Project goal is to assess biomass resources,
but assessment is not directed to one or more specific projects. Proposal is more closely associated with the Alaska Energy Inventory project.")
Maybe. Appears that applicant request funds for feasibility and construction of a greenhouse that requires energy--not for a heat recovery project. Butch to question grantee on how
much of project is heat recovery vs greenhouse.
Maybe. Appears that applicant request funds for feasibility of a greenhouse that requires energy--not for a heat recovery project. Butch to question grantee on how much of project
is heat recovery vs greenhouse.
Discussed project with others--concluded that doesnt fit bill since HCCP not in operation now.
See Letter to applicant
Crimp: Pass to stage 2. BESS upgrade may be considered part of Eva Creek wind (and other wind or RE systems on the GVEA grid. If we decide to say that BESS upgrade only necessary
for Eva, then we may want to limit funding to feasibility only since Eva is only funded to the feas stage. If we think that the upgrade is necessary for Delta Wind project, which is
funded already through construction, then we may wish to recommend full funding (assuming all other aspects of the proposal are appropriate.)
Project is an energy efficiency project, not a renewable energy project.
Maybe. Lean toward approving, but question is whether the distribution extension connects an "eligible project" as defined in 1.5.1. Butch to work with lawyer.
Applicant proposes underground distibution project to replace existing overhead distribution. Project would not result in any additional renewable energy being made available to the
grid.
11/19: Peter wants to move this application to Stage II review.
Govt entity porposes to become an IPP.
No resolution found
Application is for an \'energy assessment department\' - Noatak wants to hire an individual to help with identifying funding sources for assistance with the high cost of energy
Application & resolution not signed
Biomass project / needs further review
Crimp: proposal to build wood combustors out of local material. No design info provided. Not enough info provided to assess application.
Biomass project / needs further review
Crimp: Project would result in biofuel manufacturing plant. Elig.
Other projects proposed in Chignik area. Therefore, one has to assume there are other viable renewable energy resources in the area; thus this project would not be eligible.
Crimp: Chiginik area has viable hydro and wind resources. Not eligible.
There is another wind project proposed in Sand Point too.
No resolution found
Assessment funds should be ok, but construction may not be - especially if funds are to be used to address the environmental issues at the generating plant.
Same application as #311; but different communtiy.
Application signed by secretary?
Indirect costs listed in Budget - not eligible.
I don\'t believe this is an eligible project?
Needs further review
Crimp: Project would utilize liquified and compressed natural gas in an area that has economically viable renewable energy resources. Bethel has class 4-5 wind resources that appear
viable. Project is not eligible.
Project is similar to Round I applications for this type of project; with the same problem - no interaction or contact with the entities that actually have the landfills mentioned.
Crimp: Applicant proposes analyzing feasibility of deploying proprietary plasma gasification waste-to-energy system in Alaska. The application lists as potential project sites landfills
at Eielson AFB, Juneau, Fairbanks, and Anchorage but does not provide sufficient information on potential energy market, waste stream, or local partners.
This one is a tough call. There is a current waste-heat system in Ambler; but it has failed and this request is to refurbish and upgrade that system. (So, is it eligible because the
heat is currently being wasted? Or, is the project not eligible because this is a refurbish of an existing system?)
Also, the budget is way too vague with ANTHC involvement. Any grant for this project will need detailed costs for ANTHC\'s effort.
Crimp: Existing heat poorly utilized from Ambler power plant. This project is a repair of old system. Elig.
Application not signed / resolution not found
Will donate at least 50% of energy produced to the local utility.
Needs further review
Crimp: IPP wind project selling to local community above that used by public radio station. Pass to stage 2 review, but request clarification from M Mitchell.
Resolution not specific to this project. pass
Significant fish & habitat issues
Kasidaya Hydro (3 MW) being started up now; Other regional Skagway/Haines hydro projects being proposed for development using RE funds are West Creek (#262) and Burro Creek (#42)
Project transmission and access is within Chikat Bald Eagle Preserve and Haines State Forest
Have received some notice of public opposition to this project, but larger support for it amongst general public.
FERC has ruled it has licensing jurisdiction; but land is in process of transfer from BLM to State and jurisdiction will likely change when patent is complete;
No corporate document found
No resolution found
No resolution found
At least the wind turbines should be eligible; but the transmission line needs furhter review; as the eligibility requirement for a transmission line states the line "...links an eligible
renewalbe energy project....". It appears this line would contect to the current diesel generators.
No resolution found
No resolution found
No resolution found
No resolution found
No resolution found
This application is also from same person that submitted #295 (Delia Creek Hydro).
Resubmittal of Round I application that failed in Stage I review. Applicant did make contact with MEA;
Since the application was submitted, the applicant has publicly announced the auction of the lodge and powerhouse site to be sold in March 2009 so site control is in question......a
problem.
Some technical questions arose during Stage 1 review but were deferred to Stage 2
No resolution from the City. City Manager willing to sign resolution for grant, but doesn\'t want to do a City & Borough Assembly resolution just for the applicaiton. City Manager
is willing to do a resolution if a grant is awarded. City is acting as pass-thru for applicant.
Bill Wall involved with this project too.
Bill Wall involved with this project too
This application is similar to one submitted in Round I for McGrath; but not exactly like the Round I application; therefore, needs to be reviewed.
Bill Wall involved with this project too
There are several other proposed projects in the area.
The project application has significant technical /financial shortcomings in the preparation of the construction cost estimate and the hydrologic investigation. Funding in the amount
of $150,000 has been provided in Round 1 to obtain stream gauge data, permits and perform final design. Information resulting from that phase will help support a future grant request
for construction funding.
Recommend it not pass Stage 1 review
Will need Power Purchase Agreement and cost-based rates acceptable to RCA in the future if construction funds become available
See revised budget / hard-copy in file.
Application not signed
What about the other wind mill in St. Paul and all the issues surronding it
Need power purchase agreement in place
Need power purchase agreement in place
Need power purchase agreement in place
Application not signed / no resolution
Electronic file empty. This appears to be a resubmittal of a Round I application that was rejected because the scope was too broad. UAF appears to have refined the application.
Project goal is to assess biomass resources, but assessment is not directed to one or more specific projects. Proposal is more closely associated with the Alaska Energy Inventory project.
Assessment of tidal energy possibilities in Kachemak Bay
Application not signed
Appears that AGE has been working with the local community members and utility;
No prior studies are cited;
Concept of project is blurred between run-of-river hydro and hydrokinetic which raises questions on validity of cost estimate, economic analysis and energy production;
FERC licensing issues of time and cost are significantly understated;
Much technical information including energy production and total cost are unsupported;
Red salmon run on Tanalian River is significant
Located within the Lake Clark National Park and Preserve which will further complicate licensing issues
Application not signed
Solar heating demonstration project ?
Needs additional review
Crimp: Solar heating project on elig (housing auth) facility. Elig.
Application not signed / no resolution found
This application may not eligible, since it is for a new waste heat recovery system on a recently completed AEA funded project. Need to determine if heat \'is currently being wasted\'
and for how long has it been wasted.
Crimp: Project is straightforward heat recovery add-on to 2008 diesel power plant upgrade. Eligible for RE Fund.
Unsure if 4 Dam Pool is eligible entity
Unsure if project is eligible - Integrated Resource Plan
Needs further review
Applicant is eligible per Mike Mitchell Per Brian B. there is statutory language that says the 4 Dam Pool doesn\'t need a CPCN right now.
Application withdrawn by applicant / Don\'t review
Application not signed / no resolution PASS
Lightining for a harbor with renewable energy
Needs further review
Crimp: Project appears to request assistance for windpower applied to dock load.
Chaninik Wind Group involved
Application not signed / no resolution included
Chaninik Wind Group involved in this study / design project
Application is not sufficiently complete to allow evaluation.
Application signed by Director of Public Works rather than City Manager?
Heat appears to be currently wasted; if so, then project is eligible.
Power produced will only be used by one facility on campus, is this eligible?
Needs furhter review
Crimp: PV project would supply university facility. Elig.
Applicant is a non-profit corporation per DCCED website; which may be the \'governing\' group, but are not eligible per HB 152. The applicant may be considered an IPP, when the Whitestone
grid is connected to the GVEA grid.
Need to check with Mike Mitchell on eligibility / per Mike the group is currently not eligible.
Waste heat project, this project is an upgrade to current system; thus not eligible
Crimp: Proposal says project would recover 13 million lb/yr of steam currently wasted from summer operation of coal-fired power plant. Proposal does not provide enough information
on feasibility to justify proceeding to final design but refers to UAF Utility Development Plan. Pass this project to stage 2 if UF can provide justification in Plan. Otherwise fail
for stage 1 if not enough info available.
Waste oil project ? Eligible?
Application not signed / Did not find resolution - PASS
Needs further review
Crimp: Project would develop local sources of waste veg and fish oil for biofuel.
Didn\'t see a resolution / PASS
Application appears to be weak, but needs to go to Stage II for further review
Paying for the commercialization portion of the project may need to be rejected.
Application not signed, resolution not as specific as required / PASS
Funds requested for studying the issue
Other projects also proposed in Skagway
Project powerhouse site, tailrace and a portion of the penstock within the Klondike Gold Rush National Historic Park which will complicate project licensing Additionally, Mental Health
Trust Lands may be impacted by needs for project access and power transmission.
Uncertainty if FERC license needed (not accounted for in budget)
Uncertainty if r-o-r or conventional storage hydro
Dr. William Wall involved with this project too
Budget needs to be firmed up; or only allow feasibility study
Dr. William Wall involved with this project too
However, indirect costs mentioned in the budget narrative - these costs are not eligible
no resolution found
There is a Round I application for a Mt. Spur project also.
Scaled down project for Round I
Project is a general study of heat pump feasiblity and applicability, not for a specific site(s). Not eligible for RE Fund
Assessment of the Chena Hot Springs project ?
Needs further review
Crimp: Project assesses geothermal resource. No prohibition in RFA from assessing resources of existing project.
Hydrogen power for vehicle conversions?
Crimp: Project would make H from geothermal resources. Eligible.
TDX power also has an Alternative Energy construction grant for geothermal in Manly Hot Springs
Electronic file empty? No resolution found / PASS
This is a repair project of an earlier constructed AEA (APA) project / eligible
There are other Akutan projects proposed.
Design costs for project. Other Akutan projects also proposed.
Recon costs for geothermal project. There are other Akutan projects proposed.
design costs for transmission line
Needs further review
Crimp: Can\'t reasonably conclude that Atqasuk has economically viable renewable energy resources beyond seasonal solar. Elig.
Resolution provided is draft and unsigned
Project eligible if heat is currently being wasted. If not, then project is not eligible.
Per email from NSB, "... Currently Pt. Lay using only about 5% of waste heat..."
Proposer claims that project will recover 110,000 gpy equiv diesel. Eligible.
Eligible project if heat is currently being wasted.
Application is not signed and resolution not complete /PASS
Per email from NSB waste-heat recovery system in place; "...but it only uses a small percentage of waste heat..."
Crimp: Proposer claims that project will recover equiv of 61,000 gpy of diesel. Eligible.
Don\'t know if there are other viable renewable energy resources in Wainwright - if not, then ok to go to Stage II. If there is, then no.
Crimp: Wainwright appears to have an economically viable wind energy resource that can be developed. The wind map indicates class 5 wind resource. It is midway between Barrow (weather
station data indicates class 4 wind resource) and Pt. Lay (weather station data indicates class 6). Therefore the proposed gas project is ineligible.
There are other viable renewable energy resources in the North Pole area and on the Railbelt grid.
No resolution and application not signed. Not producing power so not an IPP. Project doesn\'t appear to be eligible, though the application is not real clear on what happens with the
waste oil.
Crimp: Waste oil project not eligible.
Peter said to review this one.
Latter parts of the application discuss tidal energy production (?)
Crimp: Applicant is an IPP.
Requested AEA\'s assistance with project
Is the value of donated land ($500,000) considered to be "Other Funds" or "Local Match Funds (cash)" ? Ans: Land donated to the project can be considered as cash match; valuation
determined through assessment by other second party means.
Waste heat project; however it appears waste heat is already being put to use. Per SH, upgrades to waste heat recovery systems not eligible.
Crimp: Project will recover heat from stack, not utiliized currently.
Electronic file not complete IF project is eligible, then it would appear only portions would be. The natural gas option would not be eligible and the waste heat option would not be
eligible, unless the heat was previously wasted - unable to determine this.
Needs further review
Crimp: pass to stage 2
Application not signed, unable to open resolution / pass
However, still unsure about this project ( also submitted in Round I)
Needs further review
Staff Review before assigning to Economist per Peter
Application not signed & no resolution / pass
Unsure about this project / Needs further review
This is a repeat of a Round I application,which did not pass stage 1 because "Budget and cost work sheets are blank. No reconnaissance level work is demonstrated. Team has inadequate
technical background. There appears to no arrangement to handle technical analysis."
Budget and cost worksheets are now sufficiently complete.
Application not signed, no resolution provided / pass
Proposal included information that would be collected as part of a research study, but did not provide sufficient engineering and economic detail on system proposed for heat and power
production.
All electricity would go to the AVTEC facility and not the local utility.
That said, this looks like a good project that needs to coordinate with the local utility.
Peter says this is a State facility; therefore ok to move forward
attached hydro study completed in 1997
Build a power line to the border, with no assurance there would be line to connect to?
Peter says to review
Resolution not specific to project / pass
Year round hydro operation is doubtful in concept of a 13000 ft long penstock carrying Carlson Lake water to powerhouse in the winter in one of the coldest parts of the state.
Why would this project be built if there is an inter-tie going right by? Ans- Provides additional capacity to Ketchikan area should the Swan-Tyee Intertie go out of service.
The Total Project Cost does not include cost of the intertie; if the intertie was not already in place, the power from Triangle Lake could not be sold. The Metlakatla-Ketchikan intertie
received $820,000 for final design under Round 1 of the RE Fund.
AP&T applying for Haines Assisted Living group
This is a Round I applicant that was rejected because the applicant was not eligible. Ok to review this time
Resolution not specific to project / pass
Suggest contacting the local aquaculture association to ensure their concurrence with the project.
This project is duplicate of project # 98 from Round 1. The legislature has approved $80,000 for final design and permitting for this project in Round 1.
It has been previosuly determined this is an eligible applicant. Unable to determine if this is an eligible project. Peter says review Applicant submitted revised info
Unsure if this project is completely eligible. Gas turbines with waste-heat recovery proposed. The waste-heat recovery is not, as this is a new project. Gas turbines?
Crimp: This is a new combined heat and power project. While beneficial as FAQ3, #1 inidates "new projects to be designed and built to include waste heat recovery are not eligible"
Chaninik Wind group involved
Coordination between Cordova Elec and Eyak also demonstrated
Checked with the Fisheries Lab since I know people working there. Verbal support of the project provided.
All electricty produced will go to the lab? Yes
Lab is a federal facility;
Per Mike Mitchell / federal facility is not the public, thus not eligible
Steve agreed with this
Housing authority is the applicant
Not sure this is an eligible project as proposed; installing air-source heat pumps to see if the heat pumps are cost effective.
Needs furhter review
Crimp: Air source heat pump uses energy in ambient air (not ground or geothermal) therefore not a renewable energy project. Not eligible project.
no resolution and application not signed / pass
Request for recon study This is a revised application from Round I
Cantwell has contacted Earle Ausman of Polarconsult also.
the application provides marginal resource information needed to evaluate technical or economic review, however the application requests only recon funding. Additionally AEA has visited
the Jack River site and can attest to its hydropower potential; pass
resolution missing / pass Requested AEA assistance with project
Same project as #203 Only this one (212) is to be scored.
wood-use project / needs further review
Application not signed / no resolution
Application very similar to #208; same applicant - different school
AEA assistance requested
Housing authority is applicant, therefore ok
Study cited is from the early 1980\'s? If nothing else, provide funding to update this study?
AVCP resolution found / pass
One of two sites, Kisaralik, lies within the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge.
The $150K Other Funds is strictly for AVCP admin expenses, etc.
Wood-use project / needs further review
Application, cover letter and resolution all not signed
Needs further review
This is a wood-use project / needs to be reviewed further
Requested AEA assistance with project
APPLICATION WITHDRAWN BY SCHOOL DISTRICT
This project has the same problem the Kenai Winds project had - all power going to Valdez Fisheries and not into the grid, per our current definitioin of an IPP. However, the VFDA agues
that they basically are the \'public\'
Suggest additional review before moving to Stage II
Per Mike Mitchell / Valdez Fisheries proposed project would not serve the public
Steve wants to review this one and discuss more
This is for the construction phase of this project / $1.3 Million was granted in Round I for final design
Resolution missing / pass
This appears to be the same application / project from Round I.
So we carry Round 1 scores forward to Round 2.
Duplicate of Round 1 application
Application is very similar to the Round I / application #6 from Nushagak Elec; but for a different part of the overall project (and a larger request this time). This application requests
funds to construct the Grant Lake Hydro project.
This application is a follow-up to an application received from the City of Petersburg in Round I (for a reconnaissance study of this project).
This application asks for funding to complete a detailed feasibility study and licensing for the 20 MW Ruth Lake Hydro Project.
Need to review hard copy
Note that proposal was not available for stage 1 review. However, we are passing the proposal to stage 2 provisionally, since it is likely a follow-up of the earlier DC/AEA AE RFP proposal.
PM should make initial assessment that stage 1 criteria 4-6 are fulfilled, and if in question pass back to Peter and Jim for full stage 1 review.
Application not signed / resoluiton ok
Note app #75 AVEC proposes a 50 kW PV system without batteries. Recommend PM assess feasibility, merits of combined and separate systems. Not clear what wind resource is. Recommend
that PM work with wind PM on joint review.
Application signed / no resolution - if grant awarded, will need to get a resolution
Applicant requests AEA assistance. Recommend PM consider funding for resource assessment and feasibility assistance; Consider AEA assuming role of project manager. PM to set budget
for recon/feasibility.
Application signed / resolution ok
Application not signed / resolution ok
Application signed / no resolution - will need to get resolution if grant awarded; or use resolution with App #107
Application not signed / resolution ok
Application signed (by an Energy Specialist ???) and not a corporate official / resolution ok
Application signed / resolution names Kongiganak (?)
Application not signed / only one resolution here (should be one from each entity involved in project / Also did not see anything from Nome Joint Utilities about interacting with this
project.
Application signed / resolution ok Project eligible if no waste heat recovery system in place already
Application signed / resolution ok
Application signed / resolution ok Received funding from the Alt Eng for this project ($1 Million)
Application signed / resolution ok Initially selected for funding by Alt Eng - later rejected by LB&A committee
Application not signed / resolution ok No local support found, access to the site???
Note to PM: Project is very expensive and project is not well enough defined for feasibility or construction. Consider partial funding to accomplish reconnaissance.
Application signed / didn\'t find a resolution Is this an eligible project? I don\'t see how - power for a private facility?
Page 16 states that the wind farm would export power less than 5% of the time. This is less than that which is required to meet the definition of IPP.
Application signed / no resolution No support from Nenana City goverment - local traditional council did offer support. Nothing found from the local utility either.
Applicaiton not signed / resolution signed - uncompatiable format (reviewed hard copy)
Proposal did not provide enough description of tasks, milestones, and deliverables.
Proposers appear to have excellent skills and interests in community system operation, but appear not to have sufficient energy resource/systems assessment skills.
Application signed / resolution ok Unable to determine if this entity has access to the site Match offered is reduction in lease payments and royalty payments?
Applciation signed / resolution ok
Application signed / resolution ok This applicant does not have approval yet to even use the landfill. MoA - SWS also submitted a similar application.
Project looks fine, but is the same as gas owner Munic Anchorage Solid Waste Services proposal #68. Recommend PM coordinate review of the two proposals, but score each separately.
Application signed / no resolution Project benefits a private lodge near Hatcher Pass
Peter, Jim reviewed paper submittal - Applicant did not identify how much power would be donated to state facility (i.e. >50%?), so eligibility as IPP in question. Not clear to us whether
or not state facility satisfies "public".
Applicant does not supply feasibility documentation, although they say both recon and feas studies are complete.
Application signed / resolution ok Battery Storage System - eligible project?
Application signed / no resolution found - will need one if grant awarded. Grantee already has a $1,000,000 Alt Eng grant
Application signed / resolution ok Isn\'t there some history with this community (Nikolski)?
Unsure if this is an eligible project? Also unsure if applicants are eligible (private individuals) Application not signed / no resolution
This is in a grey area between statewide assessment and site specific resource assessment that is eary work for a discrete energy project. We pass this through stage one for further
consideration by the pm.
Application not signed / resolution ok
Application not signed / resolution ok
Suggest PM review adequacy of existing reconn and feasibility work. Consider partial funding for reconn/feasibility for this grant cycle.
Application signed / resolution ok Application presented as a report
Application not signed / resolution ok
Appliation signed / resolution ok I can\'t tell if this is an elgible project (battery techonolgy?) Application presented as a report
This project appears to be eligible; It involves the direct use of wind energy.
Application signed / resolution ok Someone else needs to determine if this an eliglible project (I don\'t know)
This project demonstrates a technology to construct a 10 KW fuel maker, that employs electrical energy from a hydro facility that would otherwise be spilled over a dam, to produce an
ammonia fuel, which could then be conveyed to small towns and villages.
It is of moderate size and is "a project that generates energy from or involves the direct use of.....hydropower.
This fuel is to be used to fire an intercombustion generator that will be interconnected to the Juneau AEL&P network.
Vendor / no specific project / no resolution
No specific application is given. The description of the proposed system is very generic. No particular source or description of recovered heat is provided.
The project appears to have a total budget of $28M. Applicants are requesting funding to identify a site, and configure the project to the community. However, the project description
on page 7 of the grant application indicates Ormat intends to use the exhaust stream of an existing GE LM2500 gas turbine that is presently in operation "at the project site". Proposers
need to better describe the proposed project, as the application appears to be internally inconsistent.
Application signed / resolution ok Can\'t really tell if this is an eligible project?
Peter and Jim: Project is natural gas -fired in a grid serving more than 10,000 people that has viable renewable energy resources. Not eligible.
CBM assessment best done in context of Alaska Energy Inventory project.
Application not signed / Resolution ok Match offered Multiple energy sources suggested I can\'t really tell if this is an eligible project?
Applicant claims IPP status. Therefore, recommend evaluation of the power producing parts of the proposal and consider the funding of these discrete projects. Do not consider other
portions of the project, since they are not within the intent of the program. Recommend PM consider funding up to feasibility stage for the power projects.
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA No information availalbe on line
No electronic version of this app. Assume same proposal as for Ambler.
This project\'s feasibility interacts with feasibility of the app#74, Kobuk River hydro feasibility. Recommend consider do not construct until results of Kobuk feas study are available.
At that time hydro and PV should be considered together in an IRP.
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
This project\'s feasibility interacts with feasibility of the app#74, Kobuk River hydro feasibility. Recommend consider do not construct until results of Kobuk feas study are available.
At that time hydro and PV should be considered together in an IRP.
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
Electronic version of grant app is for Toksook Bay. Refer to paper.
Application signed / draft resolution only (Assembly will meet and approve the resolution - I was aware of this) Match offered
Application signed / resolution submitted names another project (Delta) If grant awarded, will need a resolution
The Utility has not yet agreed to support integration of large wind power development into their network. Arrangements for interconnection, land access for the project, tariff, and
permitting are not in place. Therefore recommend PM consider funding to feasibility.
Application signed / resolution ok
Application not signed / no resolution found
This is a simple effective project that may have sufficient definition to allow for funding though construction. Suggest requirement of project manager approval before beginning construction,
to assure regulatory compliance and adequate design.
Application not signed / resolution ok Match offered Could not find where the borough had coordinated with local utilities.
Application not signed / resolution ok Match offered Could not find where the borough had coordinated with local utilities.
Application not signed / resolution ok Match offered Could not find where the borough had coordinated with local utilities.
Note that app# 14 Chignik Lagoon hydro, app# 62 Chignik hydro/wind feas, and app#40 Chignik Hydro all address the same subregion. Pass all three to stage 2 review but if funded recommend
consider requiring the 3 applicants to coordinate on study and milestones. This study appears to be expensive. Consider offering less funding.
Application signed / resolution ok Project eligibile as heat is currently being wasted per application.
Application signed / no resolution found (letter of committment only). Will need resolution if grant awarded
Although applicant references recon level work, no feasibility analysis appears to have been done. Issues that should be addressed include technical risk since biopower unit is precommercial,
and availability/delivered cost of wood fuel. These items should be assessed in stage 2 review. Suggest this project be funded only for feasibility.
Application signed / resolution ok Match offered
Appears that adequate reconnaissance work has been accomplished to justify funding to completion of feasibility/concept design.
Application signed / resolution ok Match offered
Application signed / resolution not as specific as defined in RFA
Report provided in the form of the \'application\' Resolutions provided from the Norhtwest Arctic Borough, Deering and Buckland. Did not see one from Noorvik. Project appears to be
eligible However, Deering (Ipnatachiaq Elec Co) has a grant from Alt Energy for wind assessment.
Suggest project manager confirm wind resource and turbine placement have been established during review.
Application not signed / resolution ok
Project interacts with No. 6 - Nushagak regional hydro project. Application does not provide sufficient documentation and project definition to proceed to construction. Recommend we
consider providing feasibility fund for this project in conjunction with Project No. 6. Given scale of these projects, cooperative planning approach is needed between applicants, utilty
and community.
Application signed / resolution incomplete
Did not see power generation going to the public Applicaiton signed / resolution not as detailed as specifed in RFA.
Jim: The project team does not include an Alaska based engineer. The proposal requests funds for feasibility, design and construction. Suggest moving forward to Stage 2 for Project
Manager Review. Project involves creation of a biomass waste process not yet in existance. Suggest full funding, with first funding to confirm feasibility and complete design, and
construction funds on PM approval. Some feasibility information included in proposal.
Application signed / resolution ok
Applicant doesn\'t appear eligible / project doesn\'t appear eligible Application is not signed / no resolution
Application signed / resolution ok Match offered
Application signed / resolution ok Match offered
This is actually a recon study. Application not signed - draft resolution only. City Council needs to act on it 10/10/08. (I was aware of this when Whittier submitted their application
- CR and I decided this was ok.) Looked at description at the ftp site.
Application signed / resolution ok
Preliminary work funded by a grant from Alt Energy solicitiation. Application not signed and no resolution Would need a resolution if this is recommended for funding
Project construction will be delayed if funding limited to feasibility--project size and complexity relatively small, so stage 2 and 3 review should consider recommending full funding
upon achieving milestones.
Does not appear to be an eligible applicant, project eligibility ? and no resolution - application also is not signed. $300,000 to save $9,000????
This project capitalizes logging operation.
Initial indications that applicant has minimum capabilities. Further assessment required. No apparent arrangement for MOA to buy heat or log forest.
Application not signed / Resolution not very specific. Unsure if this is an eligible applicant and whether it is an elgible project. No indication of local support. The City of Whittier
also has submitted a project on their own.
The project is of a size where the power will flow into the Railbelt Grid and serve other communities; therefore the assertion that it serves a community less than 10,000 appears incorrect.
On that basis, Peter/Jim feel the project is ineligible, and should not be further considered.
Application not signed / Resolution not very specific. Unsure if this is an eligible applicant and whether it is an elgible project. Local support not demonstrated.
The project is of a size where the power will flow into the Railbelt Grid and serve other communities; therefore the assertion that it serves a community less than 10,000 appears incorrect.
On that basis, Peter/Jim feel the project is ineligible, and should not be further considered.
Application signed / Resolution ok. Appears this will be a legitimate IPP if the project were completed as proposed.
Application signed / Resolution not as detailed as specified in RFA / It appears this project is eligible.
Application signed. It appears Trident Seafoods owns the site to be improved - is this really eligible? No resolution from the City Council
Peter and Jim recommend pass. Letters from city council good enough?
Note that app# 14 Chignik Lagoon hydro, app# 62 Chignik hydro/wind feas, and app#40 Chignik Hydro all address the same subregion. Pass all three to stage 2 review but if funded recommend
consider requiring the 3 applicants to coordinate on study and milestones.
A grant to another State agency? A project to heat their office? Application not signed (typed in) and no resolution - where would it come from?
Jim and Peter: project is eligible.
Application signed / resolution ok Same consultant as for the Ketchikan project.
Good description; ask for clarification on the date under section 2.1 of the grant application that Petersburg would seek a FERC application for preliminary permit. App says 2/1/2008;
date has passed; what is correct date.
Application signed / resolution ok
Note supply of hydro to Ktn is in addition to Mahoney, Metlakatla, Tyee, Ruth L, ... Planning required.
Applicant appears to be a vendor, wanting to do a project Application not signed / no resolution
Project description is not well expressed; concern that the concept is valid. Recommend further review by project manager of level of technical definition and feasibility.
There is a duplicate of this application @ #80
Application signed / no resolution
These folks have grants from the Alternative Energy fund already. Application not signed / resolution not as detailed as specified in RFA Match offered
We discussed this one in our meetings and made the decision to accept the application. Application not signed / Resolution also not signed or evidence that it was acted on. Will need
to get resolution if recommended for funding Match offered
Application signed / no resolution; but letters of support. Also, budget has indirect costs detailed - not eligible.
Project goal is to assess biomass resources, but assessment is not directed to one or more specific projects. Proposal is more closely associated with the Alaska Energy Inventory project.
Application signed / Resolution ok. Before any funding decisions made for this project, need to determine exact amount of all funidng being put towards this project. This project received
$808,500 from the Alt Energy solicitation and at least one federal grant. Same consultant prepared this application and the McGrath one.
Application signed / Resolution ok, not detailed as specified. Match offered
Is this a real utility? application signed / resolution not as specific as detailed in the RFA
Is this a real utility? appliation signed, resolution ok; but not as detailed as specified in the RFA
Application signed and resolution not as detailed as specified in the RFA
Possibly eligible project based on 10/8/08 meeting. Resolution ok
Discuss during further review.
Haines Assisted Living, Inc. is not eligible; not an IPP or any of the other 3 choices. Further, applicaion modified to appear as an eligible applicant. (See page 2 of the application;
changes made to IPP definition.)
Resolution is not specific as detailed in the RFA / Application signed
Resolution is not specific as detailed in the RFA / Application signed
Eligible project IF the heat is currenlty being wasted / unable to tell at this time. Application not signed; resolution not specific
Resolution ok / application not signed
Resolution and application signed
Resolutions from Angoon and Gustavus (draft) and the companies involved. Eligible project?
Project is selective recon, prototype testing, conflict analysis and detailed feasibility for 4 sites, Icy Straits, Angoon, Wrangell Narrows, and Central Cook Inlet.
No resolution and application not signed If this moves on, will need to get a resolution
No resolution and application not signed
No budget or cost worksheet was included. Application did not respond to subsections 3.2-4, 3.6 and section 4.
IPP? No CD, so no information on line / Will need to review hard copy. Still need to see a resolution
Request is for 2 year Phase I study. ($500,000, $200,000, $250,000)
In preliminary review, we could not ascertain whether the applicant has legal access to the resource. This should be verified in State 2 evaluation.
Application not signed / resolution ok
Application signed / resolution ok
Note that app# 14 Chignik Lagoon hydro, app# 62 Chignik hydro/wind feas, and app#40 Chignik Hydro all address the same subregion. Pass all three to stage 2 review but if funded recommend
consider requiring the 3 applicants to coordinate on study and milestones.
Is this an IPP? Project eligible? Resolution is from Don West, sole managing member and the resolution is not signed.
This passes stage 1; recommend PM review project budget, as high level review raises concerns that travel and per diem budget are high and labor budgets are low, and overall cost for
reconnaissance appears high.
Is this an IPP? Project eligible? Resolution is from Don West, sole managing member and the resolution is not signed.
This passes Stage 1. Recommend PM review as high level review raises concerns that travel and perdiem are hgh and labor budget is low. Overall cost for recon appears high.
Application signed / resolution ok (draft submitted - need enacted one)
Proposal does not specify energy systems to be developed, but does outline reasonable process for identifying systems to be installed.
Application not signed / Resolution of comunity support demonstrated (City of Gustavus resolution 2008-12)
Application signed / no resloution found - will need one if a grant is awarded; but is this an eligible project - converting boilers from diesel to electric?
Recommend PM explore the potential use of heat pumps with applicant.
Application signed / resoluiton ok If the MoA and this company already have a MoU to do this project; why is a grant needed?
Recommend DGGS verify potential resource
Recommend PM consider partial funding to recon level.
No resolution found, application not signed
Budget and cost work sheets are blank. No reconnaissance level work is demonstrated. Team has inadequate technical background. There appears to no arrangement to handle technical
analysis.
Applicant did not provide feasibility and final design documentation to justify proceeding to construction.
Application signed, resolution not detailed as specified in the RFA.
y
Project interacts with No. 55 - Bristol Bay Health Corp Wind project. Application does not provide sufficient documentation and project definition to proceed to construction. Recommend
we consider providing feasibility fund for this project in conjunction with Project No. 55. Given scale of these projects, cooperative planning approach is needed between applicants,
utilty and community.
IPP? Project? Resolution is from Don West, sole managing member and the resolution is not signed - nor is the appliation signed.
Note to PM: No recon study appears available to justify feasibility phase. Consider possibility of funding only reconnaissance.
IPP? Project? Resolution is from Don West, sole managing member and the resolution is not signed / nor is the application signed
Note to PM: No recon study appears available to justify feasibility phase. Consider possibility of funding only reconnaissance.
Is this an IPP? Project eligible? Resolution is from Don West, sole managing member and the resolution is not signed.
Note to PM: No recon study appears available to justify feasibility phase.
Possibility of funding only reconnaissance, however, note two competing applications that are based on existing reconn/feasibility reports proposing to construct projects using landfill
gas.
CE2 report appears to provide recon/feasibility data. Applicaiton not signed?
Resolution ok
Application signed / Resolution ok
S1 Reconsideration
Accepted
Accepted
S2 Evaluator 1
Daniel Hertrich
David Lockard
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Josh Craft
David Lockard
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Kirk Warren
Rich Stromberg
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Josh Craft
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Alan Fetters
Karl Reiche
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Tim Sandstrom
Jim Vail
Tim Sandstrom
Alan Baldivieso
Rich Stromberg
David Lockard
Alan Baldivieso
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
David Lockard
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Josh Craft
Alan Fetters
Kirk Warren
Josh Craft
Alan Baldivieso
Rich Stromberg
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Daniel Hertrich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Josh Craft
Alan Fetters
Josh Craft
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Helen Traylor
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
David Lockard
Audrey Alstrom
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Josh Craft
Rich Stromberg
David Lockard
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
David Lockard
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Audrey Alstrom
David Lockard
Josh Craft
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Kirk Warren
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Alan Baldivieso
Kirk Warren
Alan Baldivieso
Helen Traylor
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Rich Stromberg
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Helen Traylor
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Audrey Alstrom
Alan Baldivieso
David Lockard
Warren
Stromberg
Plentovich
Traylor
Stromberg
Stromberg
Traylor
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Plentovich
Stromberg
Traylor
Ott
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Stromberg
Baldivieso
Plentovich
Stromberg
Stromberg
Craft
Craft
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Craft
Vail
Reiche
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Baldivieso
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Traylor
Traylor
Traylor
Ott
Ott
Warren
Traylor
Plentovich
Plentovich
Traylor
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Warren
Ott
Ott
Traylor
Stromberg
Ott
Ott
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Ott
Ott
Baldivieso
Ott
Baldivieso
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Ott
Stromberg
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Stromberg
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Stromberg
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Stromberg
Stromberg
Strandberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
McMahon
McMahon
Plentovich/Traylor
McMahon
McMahon
Stromberg
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Stromberg
Ott
Plentovich/Traylor
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Strandberg
Combined with #825
Strandberg
Ott
McMahon
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Ott
Strandberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Strandberg
Ott
Ott
Ott
Strandberg
Stromberg
McMahon
Ott
Ott
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
McMahon
Jensen
Did not pass Stage 1 Review
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Ott
Did not pass Stage 1 Review
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Ott
McMahon
Ott
McMahon
McMahon
Jensen
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Stromberg
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Plentovich
Plentovich, Brown
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Plentovich
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Ott
Stromberg
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
McMahon
Jensen
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich/Brown
McMahon
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Jensen
Plentovich/Brown
McMahon
McMahon
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Jensen
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich
Ott
McMahon
McMahon
Ott
Landis
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich
Plentovich
Ott
Jensen
Landis
Jensen
Ott
Landis
Landis
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Landis
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Brown/Kerr
Landis/Kerr
Jensen
Jensen
Lenny Landis
Brown/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Jensen
Ott
Lenny Landis
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Reiche
Reiche
Landis/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Brown
Brown/Kerr
Ott
Reiche
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Ott
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Ott
Lenny Landis
Brown/Kerr
Jensen
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Reiche
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Landis
Ott
Ott
Lenny Landis
Ott
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Brown/Kerr
Jensen
Brown
Ott
Lenny Landis
Brown/Kerr
Lenny Landis
Landis
Ott
Landis/Kerr
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Landis
Ott
Jensen
Lenny Landis
Jensen
Brown/Kerr
Jensen
Reiche
Reiche
Jensen
Brown/Kerr
Ott
Brown/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Lenny Landis
Ott
Repeat of Round 1 application #106
Ott
Ott
Dabo
Jensen
Dabo
Brown
David Lockard
Dabo
Jensen
David Lockard
Dabo
Dabo
Jensen
Ott
Dabo
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
David Lockard
David Lockard
Jensen
James Jensen
David Lockard
Jensen
Dabo
David Lockard
Ott
Ott
Jensen
David Lockard
Jensen
David Lockard
Jensen
David Lockard
David Lockard
David Lockard
Ott
Ott
Dabo
Dabo
Dabo
James Jensen
Dabo
Dabo
Ott
Dabo
Brown
Dabo
James Jensen
James Jensen
Brown
Ott
Ott
Dabo
WITHDRAWN
Brown
Crimp
Dabo
Dabo
Brown
Ott
Dabo
Brown
Ott
Brown
Ott
Crimp
Ott
Ott
James Jensen
Dabo
Ott
Brown
Crimp
Brown
Ott
Ott
Ott
Brown
Ott
Ott
James Jensen
Ott
Ott
David Lockard
David Lockard
David Lockard
Brown
Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Ott
Ott
David Lockard
Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Brown
Ott
S2 Project Manager
Alan Fetters
Alan Fetters
Tim Sandstrom
Tim Sandstrom
Alan Fetters
Alan Fetters
Josh Craft
Tim Sandstrom
Karl Reiche
Rebecca Garrett
Tim Sandstrom
Alan Fetters
Alan Fetters
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Tim Sandstrom
Karl Reiche
Rebecca Garrett
Rebecca Garrett
Rebecca Garrett
Karl Reiche
Tim Sandstrom
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Karl Reiche
Tim Sandstrom
Tim Sandstrom
Rebecca Garrett
Alan Fetters
Tim Sandstrom
Tim Sandstrom
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
Josh Craft
Jim Vail
Rebecca Garrett
Jim Vail
Tim Sandstrom
Josh Craft
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Alan Fetters
Karl Reiche
Tim Sandstrom
Karl Reiche
Alan Fetters
Rebecca Garrett
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Jim Vail
Tim Sandstrom
David Lockard
Jim Vail
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Alan Baldivieso
Josh Craft
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Jim Vail
Josh Craft
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Jim Vail
Daniel Hertrich
Jim Vail
David Lockard
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Devany Plentovich
Jim Vail
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Karl Reiche
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
Devany Plentovich
Alan Fetters
Devany Plentovich
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
Josh Craft
Alan Fetters
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Karl Reiche
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Josh Craft
Alan Baldivieso
Daniel Hertrich
Josh Craft
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Helen Traylor
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
David Lockard
Audrey Alstrom
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Josh Craft
Rich Stromberg
David Lockard
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
David Lockard
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Audrey Alstrom
David Lockard
Josh Craft
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Kirk Warren
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Alan Baldivieso
Kirk Warren
Alan Baldivieso
Helen Traylor
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Rich Stromberg
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Helen Traylor
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Audrey Alstrom
Alan Baldivieso
David Lockard
Kirk Warren
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Alan Baldivieso
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Doug Ott
Alan Baldivieso
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Josh Craft
Jim Vail
Karl Reiche
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Kirk Warren
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Doug Ott
Helen Traylor
Doug Ott
Kirk Warren
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Helen Traylor
Rich Stromberg
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Alan Baldivieso
Doug Ott
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Rich Stromberg
Doug Ott
Rich Stromberg
Stromberg
Ott
Stromberg
Ott
Stromberg
Ott
Ott
Stromberg
Stromberg
Strandberg
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Plentovich
Stromberg
Stromberg
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Plentovich
Ott
Stromberg
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Ott
Plentovich
Stromberg
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Strandberg
Strandberg
Strandberg
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Stromberg
Stromberg
Strandberg
Ott
Ott
Ott
Strandberg
Stromberg
McMahon
Ott
Ott
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Jenson
Jensen
Ott
McMahon
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
Jensen
Plentovich
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Ott
McMahon
Ott
McMahon
McMahon
Jensen
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Stromberg
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Plentovich
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Plentovich
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Ott
Stromberg
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
McMahon, Lockard
Ott
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon, Lockard
Jensen
Jensen
Strandberg
McMahon
Jensen
McMahon, Lockard
McMahon, Lockard
McMahon, Lockard
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich, Brown
Ott
Ott
Ott
Strandberg
Plentovich, Brown
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon, Lockard
Plentovich, Brown
Plentovich, Brown
Plentovich, Brown
McMahon, Lockard
McMahon, Lockard
Plentovich, Brown, Landis
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
McMahon, Lockard
Ott
Jensen
Plentovich, Brown
McMahon, Lockard
McMahon, Lockard
Jensen
McMahon, Lockard
Ott
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Jensen
Plentovich, Brown
Plentovich, Landis
Ott
McMahon, Lockard
McMahon, Lockard
Ott
Landis
Ott
Ott
Plentovich, Landis
Ott
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Ott
Ott
McMahon, Lockard
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich, Landis
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Plentovich, Brown
Plentovich, Landis
Plentovich, Landis
Ott
Jensen
Landis
Jensen
Ott
Landis
Landis
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon, Lockard
Plentovich, Brown
McMahon, Lockard
Plentovich, Brown
Ott
Landis
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Plentovich, Brown
Ott
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
James Jensen
James Jensen
Lenny Landis
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Lenny Landis
Ron Brown
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Ron Brown
James Jensen
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
David Lockard
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Ron Brown
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Ron Brown
David Lockard
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
James Jensen
Ron Brown
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
David Lockard
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Jensen
James Jensen
Ron Brown
David Lockard
James Jensen
James Jensen
David Lockard
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
James Jensen
David Lockard
David Lockard
Jensen
James Jensen
David Lockard
James Jensen
James Jensen
David Lockard
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Jensen
David Lockard
James Jensen
David Lockard
James Jensen
David Lockard
David Lockard
David Lockard
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Ron Brown
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Brown
James Jensen
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Jim Strandberg
Doug Ott
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
David Lockard
David Lockard
David Lockard
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
David Lockard
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
S2 Economist
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Information Insights Peter Crimp
Information Insights Peter Crimp
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Information Insights Indra Arriaga
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics Gary Eaton
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics David Weiss
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Northern Economics
Information Insights Peter Crimp
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Information Insights Indra Arriaga
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Northern Economics Gary Eaton
Information Insights Peter Crimp
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics Gary Eaton
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics Gary Eaton
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Northern Economics David Weiss
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Northern Economics David Weiss
Information Insights Peter Crimp
Information Insights Jana Peirce
Northern Economics
Information Insights Peter Crimp
Information Insights Jana Peirce
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Information Insights Jana Peirce
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics Gary Eaton
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Analysis North
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics Gary Eaton
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Steve Pratt
Information Insights Jana Peirce
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Alan Mitchel
Steve Pratt
Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Alan Mitchel
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Alan Mitchel
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Information Insights
Information Insights
Information Insights
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Alan Mitchell
Steve Pratt
Alan Mitchell
Alan Mitchell
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
Pratt
Kerr
Kerr
Pratt
Pratt
Pratt
Pratt
Kerr
Pratt
Pratt
Pratt
Kerr
Pratt
InfoIn
Pratt
Pratt
Pratt
InfoIn
Kerr
Kerr
InfoIn
InfoIn
Kerr
InfoIn
Kerr
InfoIn
Pratt
Pratt
InfoIn
Pratt
Kerr
Kerr
Kerr
InfoIn
InfoIn
Kerr
InfoIn
InfoIn
Pratt
InfoIn
Pratt
InfoIn
Pratt
NEcon
InfoIn
InfoIn
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
NEcon
NEcon
InfoIn
Linda Snow
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
NEcon
Linda Snow
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Linda Snow
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Linda Snow
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
NEcon
Alan Mitchell
InfoIn
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
NEcon
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
Robert Logan
InfoIn
Alan Mitchell
Robert Logan
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Linda Snow
NEcon
NEcon
Robert Logan
NEcon
NEcon
Linda Snow
NEcon
NEcon
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
Robert Logan
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
Alan Mitchell
InfoIn
NEcon
Robert Logan
InfoIn
Linda Snow
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Robert Logan
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Alan Mitchell
NEcon
Robert Logan
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Hubbard
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Linda Snow
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Lovas/Hubbard
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Hubbard
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Hubbard
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Linda Snow
Robert Logan
Lovas
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Robert Logan
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Hubbard
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Lovas
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Hubbard
Lovas/Hubbard
Linda Snow
Lovas
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Lovas
Robert Logan
Hubbard
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Hubbard
Lovas
Hubbard
Linda Snow
Lovas
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Lovas/Hubbard
Northern Economics
Lovas
Northern Economics
Robert Logan
Lovas/Hubbard
Tom Lovas
Hubbard
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Robert Logan
Linda Snow
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Linda Snow
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Robert Logan
Emerman
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Robert Logan
Tom Lovas
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Tom Lovas
Robert Logan
Linda Snow
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Linda Snow
Emerman
Emerman
Tom Lovas
Linda Snow
Robert Logan
Linda Snow
Robert Logan
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Emerman
Emerman
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Emerman
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Emerman
Emerman
Tom Lovas
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Emerman
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Emerman
Northern Economics
Emerman
Robert Logan
Emerman
Emerman
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Emerman
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Emerman
Northern Economics
Emerman
Emerman
Robert Logan
Emerman
Tom Lovas
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Robert Logan
Emerman
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Emerman
Emerman
Linda Snow
Emerman
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Emerman
Stage 2 Score Total
0
0
67.33
56.33
45.17
73.67
48.83
59.5
73
10
83.17
0
0
40.67
61.5
83.33
0
49.67
72.5
54.5
78
58.17
0
31.17
0
0
75.67
56.67
66
52.5
71.67
68.5
41.83
73.67
60.83
59.67
50
44.67
59.5
49.17
40.5
72.5
59.67
62
82.67
57.17
0
63.17
37
7.5
79
58
0
63
0
35.67
75.67
61.5
78
36
34.83
40
0
0
0
48
0
0
0
0
0
40.83
89.33
45.67
56
0
62.67
89.33
0
83.17
30.33
42.83
79.17
48.83
77
0
64.33
49.33
86.5
0
0
0
42.83
40.67
47.67
50
2.5
49.33
0
47
40
71.17
59.33
61
56
59
75.83
42
71.67
68.67
82.5
63.5
0
0
42.83
81.83
83.5
0
37.33
73.83
81.33333333
73.16666667
71.16666667
94.33333333
61.5
46.33333333
52.33333333
43.66666667
58.33333333
45.83333333
46.66666667
74.16666667
47
64.16666667
47.5
65
60.83
79.16666667
52.16666667
56.33333333
42.83333333
87.66666667
57.66666667
27.5
53
35.33333333
57.66666667
67.66666667
87.66666667
59.83333333
74.16666667
65.83333333
88
46.5
80.16666667
85.16666667
85.16666667
70.16666667
85.33333333
83
62.83333333
84.33333333
86.33333333
0
54.83333333
69.33
58.16666667
66.83333333
35.33333333
61
85
82.83333333
73
39
81.16666667
90.33333333
88.5
39.33333333
52.16666667
76.66666667
77.83333333
89.33333333
64.5
61.16666667
57.66666667
80.5
66.33333333
54.66666667
49.33333333
0
21.16666667
39.16666667
46
60.5
82
57.33333333
45.66666667
80.5
39.5
47.83333333
60
28.83333333
0
27.16666667
82.33333333
74
85.33333333
29.83333333
48
87.16666667
54.33333333
55.66666667
52.16666667
45
46.83333333
40
59.16666667
62
42.66666667
61.66666667
89.66666667
75.33333333
71.5
78.83333333
82.66666667
87.33333333
35
84
59.66666667
73.66666667
81.5
76.5
84.16666667
79.33333333
80
62.5
81.5
42
65.5
89
57
78.33333333
61
29.5
42
92.5
90
75.66666667
60.5
94
72.66666667
67
49.33333333
91.66666667
63.83333333
77
31
76.16666667
61.66666667
58
28.16666667
0
28.33333333
66.66666667
40
0
92
69.5
62.33333333
72
58
79.83333333
79.83333333
57
62.33333333
79.83333333
74.83333333
54
65.66666667
0
84
79.33333333
82.5
0
0
0
0
0
79.83333333
68.83333333
0
79.16666667
77.5
63.16666667
82.83333333
36
78.66666667
55.16666667
87
74.83333333
54
56.83333333
27.5
83.66666667
64.16666667
44.5
61
59.83333333
61.5
42.33333333
44.33333333
90
0
49.5
51.66666667
50.33333333
73
0
0
80.66666667
75.33333333
52.16666667
58.16666667
42.5
66.66666667
89.33333333
61.66666667
72.83333333
53.16666667
78.66666667
34
82.33333333
55.33333333
52.66666667
52.66666667
90.33333333
57.16666667
57.5
89.66666667
0
75
55.33333333
74.66666667
67.83333333
81.33333333
62.66666667
37.83333333
77.16666667
90.33333333
41.66666667
49.33333333
86.66666667
86.33333333
75.16666667
50
69.5
64.16666667
49
63.83333333
64.5
79.66666667
60
57.33333333
60.33333333
59.33333333
57
81
76
62.83333333
15
34
51.33333333
46.83333333
50.66666667
37.66666667
47
56.33333333
56.66666667
59.5
68.5
81.66666667
0
78.83333333
88.33333333
53.33333333
53.33333333
54.66666667
57
73.33333333
74.66666667
46.33333333
36
66
77
57.33333333
72.33333333
37.83333333
84
75.16666667
0
61
57.33333333
59.83333333
53.66666667
72.66666667
60.83333333
33.83333333
39.33333333
74.16666667
45.5
43
93.33333333
62.66666667
45.66666667
55.66666667
70.5
59.66666667
59.33333333
84
62.16666667
63.33333333
50.66666667
26
57.83333333
76.5
77
43.83333333
74.5
72
65.66666667
46.83333333
85.66666667
82.33333333
47.83333333
64
74.16666667
56.83333333
86
41.66666667
45.33333333
54.33333333
49.66666667
88
81.66666667
59.16666667
40.66666667
52.66666667
56
80.83333333
75.66666667
48.83333333
61.16666667
56.16666667
45.33333333
63.33333333
72
80.5
75.83333333
64
30
62
49.66666667
23
63.33333333
52.83333333
56.33333333
69.16666667
52.16666667
64.33333333
85.66666667
67.66666667
47
40.08333333
50
54.5
50
69.5
76.66666667
61
93.66666667
58.16666667
81.33333333
64.5
35.33333333
84.83333333
65.66666667
89.33333333
68.66666667
77.33333333
76
67.33333333
69.33333333
62.66666667
69.33333333
74
66
71.33333333
62.66666667
72
74.66666667
78.66666667
68
67.33333333
66.66666667
64.66666667
70.66666667
60
60
42.66666667
57.33333333
86
76.66666667
68
86.66666667
69.33333333
58.66666667
68
50
88.66666667
58
82.66666667
75.33333333
86.66666667
86.66666667
70
66
66
69.33333333
85.33333333
93.33333333
52.66666667
65.33333333
60.66666667
76.66666667
63.33333333
67.33333333
78.66666667
62.66666667
93.33333333
42
36.66666667
87.33333333
77.33333333
61.33333333
86.66666667
68
79.33333333
38
40
78.66666667
92
76.66666667
86
48
74.66666667
64
71.33333333
90
93.33333333
63.33333333
34
66
68.66666667
58
80
86
39.33333333
81.33333333
77.33333333
69.33333333
88
68
72
69.33333333
43.33333333
68
56.66666667
60
60
60
49.33333333
76
70
70
67.33333333
96
66
82
60
78.66666667
64
66.66666667
92.66666667
63.33333333
64.66666667
92
95.33333333
68.66666667
98
76
82
77.83333333
79.33333333
56.66666667
74.16666667
70.66666667
74.66666667
72
91.33333333
49.33333333
94.66666667
98.66666667
23.33333333
54
83.33333333
94.66666667
62.66666667
54
67.33333333
58.66666667
96.66666667
78
84
95.33333333
88
95.33333333
93.33333333
30.66666667
32
10.66666667
76.66666667
88.66666667
28.66666667
27.33333333
54.66666667
100
88.66666667
30
54.66666667
42
40.66666667
40.66666667
72
75.33333333
S2 Project Management, Development, and Operation
17.33
16
8.67
14
4.67
9.33
13.33
16
12
16
18
10
16
14
14
19.33
8.67
15.33
12.67
18
16
11.33
15.33
12.67
14.67
17.33
10
12.67
12
14
8.67
10
18
14.67
16
18
11.33
15.33
10.67
15.33
13.33
18
6.67
16
12
16
7.33
9.33
6
14
8
16.67
10.67
16
14
18
18
6
10
13.33
14
15.33
16
14
16.67
12.67
12
8.67
14
14
10
12
12
15.33
11.33
16
14.67
14.67
6
14
18
16
14
10
18
20
11.33
14.67
16.66666667
16
15.33333333
20
14
16
12
12
9.333333333
10.66666667
12
14
16.66666667
12
8.666666667
16.66666667
20
18
15.33333333
11.33333333
12.66666667
17.33333333
18
8
11.33333333
11.33333333
13.33333333
12
17.33333333
12
14.66666667
17.33333333
16.66666667
8.666666667
18
18
18
18
16.66666667
16.66666667
17.33333333
16.66666667
19.33333333
16
16.67
13.33333333
18
10.66666667
11.33333333
17.33333333
17.33333333
14
8
19.33333333
19.33333333
18
6.666666667
10.66666667
17.33333333
14
19.33333333
13.33333333
16
16
15.33333333
15.33333333
16.66666667
10.66666667
8
12
9.333333333
18
17.33333333
16.66666667
6.666666667
14
11.33333333
6
14
6
4
16.66666667
14.66666667
16
5.333333333
14.66666667
17.33333333
18
16
16
13.33333333
12.66666667
11.33333333
18
18
12.66666667
16.66666667
16.66666667
13.33333333
14
18
16.66666667
17.33333333
7.333333333
18
16
18
17.33333333
16
16.66666667
14
14
14.66666667
16
10
13.33333333
18
10
14
16
6
8
18.66666667
18.66666667
17.33333333
10.66666667
20
14
18
6.666666667
20
12.66666667
14
8
13.33333333
18
10.66666667
8.666666667
4
19.33333333
8.666666667
20
20
12.66666667
12.66666667
15.33333333
16
16
18
16
16
16
12
20
16
16
16
18
13.33333333
18
20
18
17.33333333
8
14
15.33333333
18
12
12
7.333333333
16
16.66666667
10
10
18
15.33333333
12
13.33333333
20
8
15.33333333
14
16
16
16
12.66666667
14
7.333333333
10
18
14
17.33333333
17.33333333
18.66666667
7.333333333
16
16
16
10.66666667
20
16.66666667
12
20
14
16
13.33333333
16.66666667
14.66666667
17.33333333
8.666666667
16
19.33333333
11.33333333
13.33333333
17.33333333
16.66666667
20
12.66666667
20
18
16.66666667
18
18.66666667
18
18
18
15.33333333
18
18
19.33333333
14
15.33333333
8.666666667
14.66666667
9.333333333
16
10.66666667
12.66666667
14
14.66666667
13.33333333
20
18
18.66666667
18
18
18
18
16.66666667
14.66666667
12
11.33333333
10.66666667
17.33333333
18
16
14
9.333333333
14.66666667
16.66666667
18
18
18
18
18
18
10
9.333333333
18
10
10
16.66666667
18
13.33333333
13.33333333
18
18.66666667
16.66666667
18
12.66666667
18
14
7.333333333
16
20
17.33333333
8
20
18
14
8.666666667
16
16
14.66666667
18
17.33333333
17.33333333
20
10
16
16
12
16
16.66666667
18
10
16.66666667
12.66666667
16
14.66666667
12.66666667
14
16
14.66666667
14.66666667
16
14.66666667
18.66666667
16
8.666666667
9.333333333
11.33333333
7.333333333
18.66666667
12
16
20
18
16.66666667
18
19.33333333
16
7.333333333
16.66666667
16.66666667
16.66666667
16.66666667
19.33333333
16.66666667
20
16.66666667
16
10
10.66666667
18
18.66666667
19.33333333
18
20
20
17.33333333
13.33333333
10
16
18
14.66666667
18
18
18
18
18
18
16.66666667
16.66666667
12
14
12
12.66666667
8.666666667
16.66666667
18
20
16
16.66666667
18
16
16.66666667
14
18
20
18
16
17.33333333
17.33333333
10
14
14
14.66666667
17.33333333
19.33333333
12
14.66666667
16
16.66666667
14.66666667
14
18
12
19.33333333
10.66666667
7.333333333
18
16
12.66666667
18
14.66666667
16
12.66666667
3.333333333
18
20
16
19.33333333
9.333333333
16
14.66666667
18
20
20
16
5.333333333
14
16
4.666666667
16
17.33333333
12
14.66666667
18
16
18
16
16.66666667
17.33333333
14.66666667
18
11.33333333
16
16
16
12
17.33333333
18.66666667
18.66666667
18
19.33333333
12
16
14
18
18
12
19.33333333
9.333333333
18.66666667
18
19.33333333
16.66666667
18.66666667
12.66666667
17.33333333
17.33333333
17.33333333
14
15.33333333
20
12.66666667
20
18
12.66666667
20
20
4.666666667
13.66666667
16
20
14.66666667
14
20
17.33333333
20
16
18.66666667
18.66666667
18
20
18
11.33333333
16
3.333333333
20
17.33333333
4.666666667
5.333333333
15.33333333
20
16
8
6
10.66666667
10.66666667
10.66666667
20
16
S2 Qualifications and Experience
17.33
15.33
16.67
10
12
12
13.33
16
10
12.67
16
10
12.67
12.67
14
16
8.67
12
15.33
16
16
16
14
10
14.67
18
12
12.67
12
12.67
12
6
20
20
20
20
12
14
12
18.67
14
15.33
8.67
12
12
14
8
10
6
10
6
18
10
14
10
18
18
7.33
11.33
15.33
12
12.67
16
10
17.33
15.33
8
8
10
10
11.33
12.67
14
14
14
14
14
14
8.67
14
18.67
18
14
10.67
17.33
20
8
14
16.66666667
14.66666667
17.33333333
20
14.66666667
14.66666667
14
10
12.66666667
8
12
14.66666667
14.66666667
12
14
16
16
15.33333333
16
14.66666667
15.33333333
17.33333333
16.66666667
8
14.66666667
12
15.33333333
15.33333333
18
16.66666667
12.66666667
15.33333333
18
10
16.66666667
16.66666667
16.66666667
16.66666667
17.33333333
18
16
16
17.33333333
16.66666667
17.33
14
19.33333333
10.66666667
10.66666667
19.33333333
16.66666667
16
10.66666667
19.33333333
18
19.33333333
6
12
16.66666667
13.33333333
20
16
18.66666667
18.66666667
18.66666667
16.66666667
14.66666667
16
5.333333333
14.66666667
13.33333333
16
16.66666667
16.66666667
6.666666667
18
10.66666667
5.333333333
12
10.66666667
6.666666667
16.66666667
13.33333333
17.33333333
6.666666667
13.33333333
16.66666667
14.66666667
14.66666667
14
14
14.66666667
14.66666667
14.66666667
14.66666667
14.66666667
14
18.66666667
14
16
15.33333333
16
16
14
16
16
16.66666667
16
16
14
16
18
16
16
14
16
16.66666667
10
16
18
8
6
20
19.33333333
17.33333333
14
20
19.33333333
18
8
18.66666667
13.33333333
16
9.333333333
16
18
8
8
4
19.33333333
12
20
20
16
16
18
16
16
18
16
16
16
18
18
16
16
16
18
13.33333333
16.66666667
17.33333333
16
18.66666667
12
15.33333333
14.66666667
16
10.66666667
16
6
16
16
15.33333333
16
18.66666667
17.33333333
13.33333333
14
20
8.666666667
15.33333333
15.33333333
15.33333333
14.66666667
14
12.66666667
13.33333333
10
16
18
15.33333333
16
16
18
10
17.33333333
17.33333333
17.33333333
14
20
18.66666667
16.66666667
20
14
17.33333333
13.33333333
13.33333333
18
14
12.66666667
18
17.33333333
13.33333333
14
17.33333333
20
20
14.66666667
18
18
15.33333333
18
18
15.33333333
18
18
18
18
18
20
16
19.33333333
11.33333333
17.33333333
9.333333333
16
13.33333333
13.33333333
14
14.66666667
16
20
20
18.66666667
16.66666667
16
16
16
17.33333333
15.33333333
14.66666667
14
10
20
16.66666667
19.33333333
14
13.33333333
16
18
18
18
18
18
17.33333333
17.33333333
11.33333333
12.66666667
18.66666667
15.33333333
16
19.33333333
18
17.33333333
18
18.66666667
15.33333333
15.33333333
15.33333333
13.33333333
16.66666667
16
5.333333333
14
17.33333333
18.66666667
14
20
18
13.33333333
10.66666667
16.66666667
16
16.66666667
18
17.33333333
16
20
13.33333333
11.33333333
16
15.33333333
20
16.66666667
20
10.66666667
13.33333333
18
16
14
12.66666667
14
16.66666667
15.33333333
18.66666667
18
16.66666667
18.66666667
16.66666667
8
14
14
5.333333333
18
16
20
20
16
16
18.66666667
18.66666667
13.33333333
6
14.66666667
14.66666667
14.66666667
18
19.33333333
16
20
16
19.33333333
10.66666667
10
18
16.66666667
19.33333333
18
20
20
18.66666667
14
13.33333333
16.66666667
20
17.33333333
14.66666667
16
14.66666667
16
16
18
12
12
12.66666667
14
15.33333333
18
9.333333333
18
18
18
14
18
18
18
16.66666667
13.33333333
17.33333333
20
19.33333333
16
17.33333333
17.33333333
14.66666667
15.33333333
15.33333333
14.66666667
18
19.33333333
12.66666667
14
16.66666667
13.33333333
18
16
16
14
20
10
9.333333333
14.66666667
14
18.66666667
16
13.33333333
16
13.33333333
2
20
18
14
18
16
14
13.33333333
17.33333333
20
20
15.33333333
6
13.33333333
17.33333333
10
18.66666667
17.33333333
12
19.33333333
16
15.33333333
18.66666667
17.33333333
17.33333333
16.66666667
16.66666667
17.33333333
10
18
18
18
14
16
20
20
18
17.33333333
12
14
14
14
14
12
20
10.66666667
18.66666667
17.33333333
19.33333333
16.66666667
20
12
17.33333333
17.33333333
18
18.66666667
12.83333333
20
14
20
16
12.66666667
20
20
10
13.33333333
19.33333333
18
14
14.66666667
16
18
18.66666667
16
18.66666667
20
14.66666667
20
18
9.333333333
13.33333333
2
20
17.33333333
8
5.333333333
16
20
19.33333333
12
12.66666667
12
12
12
17.33333333
19.33333333
S2 Technical Feasibility
12.67
16
11.33
16
8
9.33
14.67
18.67
14.67
18.67
16.67
11.33
18.67
18.67
16.67
16
6.67
16
16
18.67
14
14
16
13.33
14
18
14
12.67
12
18.67
13.33
9.33
17.33
19.33
17.33
20
14.67
16
10
15.33
12
16
12.67
18.67
12
16
14
10
10
18
8
16
10
16.67
20
19.33
20
8.67
16.67
17.33
11.33
18
12
18.67
14
11.33
12
13.33
19.33
18.67
8.67
10
15.33
14
14
15.33
16
14.67
9.33
12
15.33
13.33
15.33
7.33
15.33
18
12
14
20
14
16.66666667
20
10
11.33333333
13.33333333
16.66666667
9.333333333
10
14
14
13.33333333
14
11.33333333
17.33333333
17.33
16
13.33333333
14.66666667
11.33333333
20
14.66666667
6.67
14.66666667
8
13.33333333
17.33333333
20
18
15.33333333
19.33333333
16.66666667
5.333333333
20
20
20
20
18
20
12
17.33333333
20
16
18
14
16
10
10
15.33333333
17.33333333
14
10
13.33333333
18
18.66666667
6
15.33333333
16.66666667
16
18
16
17.33333333
16
17.33333333
15.33333333
17.33333333
16
4.666666667
8
17.33333333
18
14.66666667
18
8.666666667
18.66666667
10
7.333333333
12
8.666666667
9.333333333
20
14
18
4.666666667
12
18.66666667
16.66666667
20
14.66666667
13.33333333
12
8
14
16
10.66666667
16
20
15.33333333
20
16
16
20
6.666666667
16
20
20
16.66666667
17.33333333
18.66666667
17.33333333
16
16.66666667
16
11.33333333
14
20
6.666666667
16
17.33333333
10.66666667
6.67
20
17.33333333
16
8
19.33333333
16
16
6
20
11.33333333
16
6
16.66666667
20
8
7.333333333
12.66666667
16.66666667
7.333333333
16.66666667
20
14
14
16
18
18
14
13.33333333
18
18
14.66666667
18
20
15.33333333
20
19.33333333
10
20
20
18
18
10.66666667
18.66666667
17.33333333
18
19.33333333
18
14.66666667
20
18
9.333333333
11.33333333
17.33333333
14
9.333333333
10
18
8.666666667
14
14
14
18
14
11.33333333
7.333333333
17.33333333
15.33333333
20
10.66666667
16
11.33333333
20
7.333333333
16
16
12.66666667
8.666666667
18.66666667
16.66666667
15.33333333
18.66666667
14.66666667
16
14
9.333333333
12.66666667
15.33333333
8.666666667
10
18
15.33333333
16
15.33333333
16.66666667
14.66666667
16.66666667
18
16.66666667
10.66666667
17.33333333
18
17.33333333
16
13.33333333
20
15.33333333
14
18.66666667
20
8
6
13.33333333
14.66666667
10
6
13.33333333
17.33333333
15.33333333
18
20
12
18.66666667
16
13.33333333
13.33333333
14.66666667
16
11.33333333
10
14.66666667
8.666666667
14.66666667
16
12.66666667
17.33333333
8.666666667
19.33333333
13.33333333
15.33333333
15.33333333
15.33333333
10.66666667
15.33333333
16
8
6.666666667
16
11.33333333
10
19.33333333
15.33333333
6.666666667
14.66666667
20
15.33333333
16
16.66666667
10
16
14.66666667
5.333333333
15.33333333
16.66666667
18
11.33333333
14
16
7.333333333
4
16
18
11.33333333
16
15.33333333
15.33333333
14.66666667
11.33333333
7.333333333
16.66666667
10.66666667
18
15.33333333
12
12
16.66666667
20
18
18
10
12
10
6.666666667
14
16
17.33333333
10
10.66666667
6.666666667
9.333333333
10
5.333333333
14.66666667
13.33333333
11.33333333
20
13.33333333
14
15.33333333
18
11.33333333
10.66666667
12.66666667
14.66666667
12.66666667
14
16
16
20
15.33333333
13.33333333
8.666666667
8.666666667
17.33333333
16.66666667
18
10
20
20
15.33333333
17.33333333
9.333333333
8
13.33333333
13.33333333
15.33333333
14.66666667
12
14.66666667
16
16
14.66666667
14
10
10.66666667
15.33333333
15.33333333
6.666666667
9.333333333
20
20
11.33333333
17.33333333
15.33333333
12.66666667
8.666666667
12.66666667
17.33333333
10.66666667
15.33333333
14.66666667
18
16.66666667
12.66666667
9.333333333
9.333333333
14
16
16.66666667
12
10.66666667
10
16.66666667
10
17.33333333
10.66666667
11.33333333
16.66666667
8.666666667
10
20
11.33333333
20
20
8.666666667
16
5.333333333
12.66666667
18.66666667
18
16
16
12
16
8.666666667
12
17.33333333
16.66666667
12
6.666666667
16.66666667
15.33333333
13.33333333
16.66666667
11.33333333
11.33333333
15.33333333
12.66666667
18
20
4.666666667
10
16
2
14.66666667
13.33333333
16.66666667
16.66666667
16.66666667
8
17.33333333
16
16
16
20
8.666666667
16
14
16.66666667
16
12
17.33333333
12.66666667
13.33333333
18
20
13.33333333
20
16
18
13.83333333
20
6
12.66666667
12.66666667
14.66666667
14
18.66666667
16
18
20
3.333333333
11.66666667
13.33333333
20
10
10.66666667
15.33333333
4
20
9.333333333
10
18
16
19.33333333
20
4
2.666666667
2
20
17.33333333
5.333333333
4
15.33333333
20
20
6
5.333333333
6.666666667
5.333333333
5.333333333
18
14
S2 DM LW Comments Feasibility
An easement (or other appropriate authorization as determined by SCRO) will be required for any submerged electrical cable in the Kvichak River, and a lease (or other appropriate authorization
as determined by SCRO) from SCRO will likely be required for the RivGen unit itself. (Depending on how ORPC connects a submerged electric cable from the unit in the Kvichak River, it
could impact ADL 226067, an avigation and hazards easement to DOT&PF, Central Region, ADL 221403, a Management Right issued to DOT&PF, ADL 230875, a private, non-exclusive easement
issued to United Utilities, Inc., and ADL 231288, a public utility easement issued to the Village of Igiugig. If any portion of electrical cable would cross uplands it may impact three
seperate management agreements (ADLs 221403, 224031, and 228387) for the Airport at Igiugig.)
As per application, project is not on state-owned land.
The Elfin Cove Utility Commission (Community of Elfin Cove) has submitted two Applications for Water Rights (LAS 29817 and LAS 29818). The Elfin Cove Utility Commission may need to
apply for a Temporary Water Use Authorization prior to the construction phase of the project. The DMLW Water Resources Section recommends the applicant consult with our Southeast
Office to determine specific water use authorization requirements. May need a shoreland public easement.
The City of Tenakee Springs holds a current Permit to Appropriate Water (LAS 27836). The City of Tenakee Springs may need to apply for a Temporary Water Use Authorization prior to
the construction phase of the project. The DMLW Water Resources Section recommends the applicant consult with our Southeast Office to determine specific water use authorization requirements.
A shoreland public easement may be needed and an upland easement ADL 106204 to USFS exists.
DNR OPMP coordinated permitting process underway or completed including RSAs with MLW Land and Water Sections.
A DMLW Water Resources authorization is recognized to be required. City of Chignik holds title to most affected uplands, remaining potentially impacted parcel owned by Chignik Lagoon
Native Corporation.
Feasibility study to determine economically viable options/potential improvements to combined wind and deisel power generation system. No improvements planned at this time.
On-going feasibility study. DNR MLW is recognized as the water rights manager for Alaska & applicant notes that additional consultation with DNR and DFG is required with respect to management
of environmental flow restrictions (described as a significantly limiting factor affecting power generation and resevoir development.) Land ownership presumed to be Aleut Corp. or City.
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative will need to apply for a Permit to Appropriate Water for this project and may need to apply for a Temporary Water Use Authorization if the project
moves forward to the permitting stage and prior to the construction phase, respectively. The DMLW Water Resources Section recommends the applicant consult with our Southeast Office
to determine specific water use authorization requirements.
No DMLW permits required at this time; proposal is for continued and expanded data collection, review and interpretation requiring installation of interial facility monitoring devices.
No DMLW Managed lands per ADL 215129 Muni. Entitlement and ADL 18018 Tideland Conveyance. No water withdrawal associated with closed-loop system design.
Project does not appear to be on state-owned land, but application does not yet contain info regarding permit which may be required.
No impacts to state land.
A Water Rights Certificate may be required from the DMLW Water Section. No SCRO involvement. The project may require review by the DNR Dam Safety Program.
As per the application, project facilities are not on state-owned land.
The previous comment from 2014 is unchanged: No SCRO involvement.
The City and Borough of Skagway and/or Alaska Power & Telephone Company (per MOU dated August 7, 2014) will need to apply for a Permit to Appropriate Water for this project and may need
to apply for a Temporary Water Use Authorization if the project moves forward to the permitting stage and prior to the construction phase, respectively. The DMLW Water Resources Section
recommends the applicant consult with our Southeast Office to determine specific water use authorization requirements.
The previous comment from 2014 is unchanged: A Water Rights Certificate may be required from the DMLW Water Section. No SCRO involvement.
Project not on state-owned land, however RS 2477 Right of Way is in the vicinity. If RS T 1623 will be used as a route for pipe system, DMLW should be contacted to determine if use
will require public notice or permitting.
The previous comment from 2014 is unchanged: No SCRO involvement.
The application states that a portion of the intertie project will cross State of Alaska land, and acknowledges that DNR utility easements and water permit will be required. The anticipated
timeline for permitting, however, is described as "July 2016 to August 2016". If this is intended to reflect an anticipated application to issuance turnaround of 1 month, this timeline
is not possible for an easement. It could take a year or possibly longer to process easements from the point of application to final issuance, as easements require review and resolution
of any conflicts, a period of public notice, written decision with appeal timelines, and potentially survey requirements. Applicant is encouraged to contact DMLW Northern Region as
soon as possible to verify land ownership and if applicable, begin application process.
The wind facility is not on state land (application notes that it is on Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation-own land); permitting list includes ADNR Coastal Zone Consistency Determination,
and plans to coordinate permitting through the ADNR Office of Coastal and Ocean Management Permitting - this is outdated, as ACMP program is no longer implemented.
Project is not on state land. As per application, it is located on land already leased from Kikikitagrug Inupiat Corporation.
Review finds no SCRO involvement.
The PMCF is located on State owned, DMLW managed lands that have been assigned to the Department of Corrections for the PMCF facility (DNR's file reference is ADL 227302). Please note
that Item 7 of Attachment B of the ILMA document states that "The DOC shall comply with the requirements of AS 38.95.160 during the term of this ILMA. AS 38.95.160 requires that publically
financed improvements costing more than $100,000 be documented by a recorded plat." As this request is for $140,000, and is proposed to be located on state lands, SCRO requests that
DOC coordinate the completion of this survey with DMLW. Additional questions about this requirement may be directed to Candice Snow, SCRO ILMA coordinator, at 269-5032, or candice.snow@alaska.gov.
May require a public easement from the state.
Not on State Land. No SCRO involvement but may require water rights certificate from DMLW Water Section.
This project is on State land within the legislatively designated Kenai River Special Management Area (AS 41.21.500-41.21.514). The project appears to be incompatible with the purpose
and management of KRSMA and would require legislative action to make this activity allowable. Local opposition (Kenai Peninsula Borough, City of Seward and the community of Moose pass)
has been stated during the FERC review process. Site access via a crossing of the Alaska Railroad has not been obtained. DMLW has serious questions about the feasibility of this project
if issues related to KRSMA and the AKRR crossing are not resolved.
Not on State Land. No SCRO involvement.
The project is proposed on DOT -owned lands (1983 quitclaim deed from Shishmaref Native Corporation to DOT/PF). The application acknowledges that applicant must obtain site use authorization
from DOT.
Not on State Land. No SCRO involvement.
Property is subject to EVOS/Conservation Easements. A FERC license is required for DNR to amend the conservation easement.
Not on State Land. No SCRO involvement but may require water rights certificate from DMLW Water Section.
Feasibility study and conceptual design of Unga Man Creek for potential hydro involves State submerged lands within OSL 977 (DOT&PF False Pass Airport) and ADL 224133 management agreement
for airport. This project involves placement of stream gauges, which may require DMLW or DOT&PF permits.
No impacts to state land.
No impacts to state land.
No DMLW authorizations required based on application statement that that proposed wind tower locations are on NANA Corporation land. Application does note that the project contractor
will be tasked with in- depth land ownership and authorization requirement research -if future project revisions result in state land being involved, DMLW authorizations may be required.
Infrastructure is not on state land, and most biomass resource proposed for use is not state-owned; however, reports cited in application note potential for some state-owned biomass
resource. If state timber resources are planned for harvest, state timber sales will be required.
The Rural Energy grant should have no impacts to state land
no DMLW authorizations required for facilities, based on application statement that facilities targeted in this application will be sited entirely on City property. Application notes
that biomass resource study of surrounding lands was conducted to address availability of resource, but application does not specify if any of the biomass resource area is cited on
state land, Native Corp land, etc. If biomass is located on state lands, state resource sales would be needed.
Should this project move forward, beyond feasibility, a formal navigability determination should be requested to determine the status of the Kogoluktuk River. In a letter dated 8/20/2010
to AVEC, it was noted the navigability status of the river is currently unknown. If the river is navigable, state authorizations will be required.
No impacts to state land.
The Rural Energy grant should have no impacts to state land. It is for solar photovoltaic panels to be placed on the Chugach Electric Campus at 5601 Electron Drive which they own.  Â
If the grant is carried out as described in the application, the Chugach Electric would not need any DNR authorizations.
No impacts to state land.
No impacts to state land.
Some of the infrastructure will be on state land and require DMLW easements or leases and material site designation. In spring 2015, APT was issued a permit for hydro data collection.
On October 8th 2015, APT submitted updated development plans to compliment previously submitted easement and material sale applications. These applications had been closed out in
2013 due to lack of response by the applicant. updated plans will need review and full Best Interest Finding adjudication prior to to be applicant's proposed construction start date
in start date inreviewed and applications fully adjudicated, as applicant proposes construction to begin in summer 2016.
Feasibility study and conceptual design of potential hydrokinetic energy involves State submerged lands. This project involves mooring placement of ORPC TidGen devices and associated
cables, which may require DMLW authorizations.
Alaska Power Company (Alaska Power & Telephone Company) will need to apply for a Permit to Appropriate Water for this project and may need to apply for a Temporary Water Use Authorization
if the project moves forward to the permitting stage and prior to the construction phase, respectively. The DMLW Water Resources Section recommends the applicant consult with our
Southeast Office to determine specific water use authorization requirements. May also require a shorelands public lease.
project involves state land. phase II involves placement of stream gauges, which may require DMLW permits. If futue phases of the project are undertaken, infrastructure will require
DMLW authorizations. Access is described as going through a state campground - consultation with Division of Parks early in process will be necessary.
The City of Craig will need to apply for a Permit to Appropriate Water for this project and may need to apply for a Temporary Water Use Authorization if the project moves forward to
the permitting stage and prior to the construction phase, respectively. The DMLW Water Resources Section recommends the applicant consult with our Southeast Office to determine specific
water use authorization requirements. May also require a shorelands public lease.
Existing SAPA Terror Lake Hydro project previously approved under SCRO lease ADL 204024, is seeking to add diversion works from Hidden Basin creek into Terror Lake. SCRO has an active
permit to KEA under LAS 29042 for stream gauges. A portion of the proposed tunnel, and the entirety of the diversion dam and access road are proposed for construction on State-owned
lands and would require SCRO authorization if built. Additional authorization from the DMLW Water Section may also be later required.
The Rural Energy grant should have no impacts to state land. The micro water turbines will be place within the current city owned water treatment facility. If the grant is carried
out as described in the application, the City of Unalaska would not need any DNR authorizations.
Not on state land
Existing project installed in 1947 needs upgrades. Pipeline crossing of Indian Creek authorized by Public Utility Easement under ADL 229178; replacement or upgrade of the lines authorized
under ADL 229178 requires prior notification of DMLW and additional authorizations may be required. Otherwise, the project is not on state-owned lands. A Water Rights Permit issued
from the Water Section. Non FERC project.
A Water Rights Certificate may be required from the DMLW Water Section. No SCRO involvement. The project is not located on State-owned land and the hydro source is not shown as navigable
according to a review of DNR records.
As noted by the applicant, timber harvest for biomass supply may require DNR Division of Forestry to be notified. No SCRO involvement. The project and related biomass sources are not
located on State-owned lands. No DMLW interests such as Section Line Easements or RS 2477 Rights of Way.
No SCRO involvement. Applicant does not identify land ownership, but review indicates that the project is not on State-owned lands. No DMLW interests such as Section Line Easements
or RS 2477 Rights of Way.
Lakes targeted for feasibility study are unclear, but may include Lake De Marie, Lake Leone and Lake Bonnie Rose, all of which are BLM meandered, so any structures eventually placed
on lands below mean high water within this water bodies will require a DMLW authorization. It doesn’t appear that any improvements will run under Sweeper Cove, so authorization will
not be required there. No uplands are state-owned.
Not on state land
Not on state land
Does not qualify for FERC exemption. Wishes to develop existing ADL 100853 upland ROW & possible needs authorization for below MHW. Plans Spring 2015 site visit. Water Right application
received.
A Water Rights permit issued from the Water Section. No opposition known. Non FERC. No SCRO involvement. (Likely no SCRO involvement as it appears Delta Creek and tributaries are
not navigable.)
Proposed project is within the Deadhorse Airport DOT ILMA - coordination/approval from DOT/PF will be necessary.
Although precise met tower locations are not known/identified, the general location apears to be within Selawik National Wildlife Refuge - not on state land.
Not on state land
No SCRO involvement. (Improvements are to existing heat infrastructure.)
No SCRO involvement. (Exact location is unclear, but it appears the project will not be within the boundaries of USS 4394 or RST 456. If it does cross the boundaries of either, location
should be moved.)
Possible Div. of Forestry authorization if tree harvest on State lands is proposed but otherwise no evident DMLW permit requirements for this proposal.Wood-burning boiler installation
to displace current use of fuel oil in 3 communities: Nodalton, Pedro Bay and Port Alsworth. Tree harvests on private updlands identified for Nondalton and Pedro Bay but no information
on wood source provided for Port Alsworth.
No SCRO involvement. (St. Paul community energy use baseline study and products including collection of data and production of reporting tools. No land usages or infrastructure installation
proposed. No DMLW authorizations required based on reported methodology.)
No SCRO involvement. (Adak community energy use baseline study and products including collection of data and production of reporting tools. No Installation of infrastructure or other
land usages proposed. No DMLW authorizations required based on reported methodology.)
Initial reconnaissance phases of proposed run-of-river hydro electric generation plants in Lowell Creek near Seward and Ship Creek at Ft. Richardson. No maps, plans or specific site
locations yet provided but general project description indicates that DNR-managed state upland and shorelands underlying potentially navigable streams (depending on specific site location)
may be involved. Proposed setting of stream gauges within navigable waterways will require authoriztion from SCRO Permitting Unit. Additional DMLW authorizations from SCRO and /or Water
Resources appears likely for any development beyond this investigative phase.
A Water Rights Certificate likely not required during feasibility study. The in-river equipment may need DMLW permits. Feasibility and Conceptual Design phase, three years of in stream
gauging and 35% of design for the hillside hydro project. Penstock is on land owned by the Askinu Native Corp.
Not state land
Project is on DNR managed land and DNR authorization required for the project. Current authorizations are for the environmental studies only. No applications received for any facility
authorizations and consultation not complete for the Iditarod National Historic Trail. Concurrence required from USFS, KPB, KRSMA and SCRO for any trail reroutes per the area plan.Â
Iditarod National Historic Trail is at this location and project is within KRSMA. Water Right application received. It is a FERC project.
Feasiblility study/reporting phase will likely not require DMLW permits; however, if in future a biomass project is pursued, biomass products which are expected to be purchased on the
open market may come from timber sales from state land.
Not state land
Not on State Land
Not state land
Not state land
Not state land
Not state land. (Final design and permitting for 5 wind turbines on City of Chefornak lands.)
A Water Rights permit pending. Non FERC project. Lat/Long is incorrect. No SCRO involvement. (Final design and construction of a hydro including run of the river with penstock and
power house on lands owned and managed by Ouzinkie Corperation.)
Not on state land
Not on state land
Lat/Long indicate limited state holding (Ded Division Law and Finance)
Not state land. (This project would occur inside an existing power plant and within existing homes in Kwigillingok.)
No state lands are affected, as the project is proposed for City property.
Project not on state-owned land, however RS 2477 Right of Way is in the vicinity. If RS T 1623 will be used as a route for pipe system, DMLW should be contacted to determine if use
will require public notice or permitting.
Not on state land
Not state land. (This project would occur inside an existing power plant.)
Timber harvest for biomass supply may require DNR Division of Forestry to be notified. (Biomass Plant is in the vicinity of three separate management agreements to DOT&PF (ADLs 221521,
221534, and 221522) for the Nikolai Airport. DNR, Division of Forestry should be consulted regarding any potential harvest of timber from State land for use in the Biomass plant.)
An easement will be required for any submerged electrical cable in the Kvichak River, and a lease or permit from SCRO will likely be required for the RivGen unit itself. (Depending on
how ORPC connects a submerged electric cable from the unit in the Kvichak River, it could impact ADL 226067, an avigation and hazards easement to DOT&PF, Central Region, ADL 221403,
a Management Right issued to DOT&PF, ADL 230875, a private, non-exclusive easement issued to United Utilities, Inc., and ADL 231288, a public utility easement issued to the Village
of Igiugig. If any portion of electrical cable would cross uplands it may impact three seperate management agreements (ADLs 221403, 224031, and 228387) for the Airport at Igiugig.)
On DMLW tide and/or submerged lands. DMLW permit LAS 28655 in place, additional permit applications planned for submission May 2015 correspondending to next phase of project.
Infrastructure is not on state land, and most biomass resource proposed for use is not state-owned; however, reports cited in application note potential for some state-owned biomass
resource. If state timber resources are planned for harvest, state timber sales will be required.
Infrastructure and most potential biomass resources proposed are not on state land. If biomass is proposed for harvest from state lands at some phase of the project, applicant will need
to obtain timber sales from the State of Alaska.
No SCRO involvement.
Proposed project is entirely on Chitna Native Corp fee estate and/or BLM 17(b) access easement. However, page 8 of the 2014 application notes that Chitina Electric has abandonded an
existing hydro project located partially within Town Lake (aka Trout Lake?) in Chitina; lake is not BLM meandered, but is approximately 35 acres in size. Removal of abandoned infastructure
needed? A Water Rights application received.
Application does not appear to involve state land, however DOT ILMA (casefile ADL 55622) is in immediate vicinity; if pipe systems must cross property, coordination with DOT would be
appropriate.
Timber harvest for biomass supply may require DNR Division of Forestry to be notified. Likely no SCRO involvement: Community roads (ADL 222349) or RST 22 and 32 possibly required for
travel; project vehilces may exceed GAUs, as page 5 includes dump trucks, loader, etc. No DMLW fee simple involvement; biomass to be sources from Akiachak Village Corp Lands, and further
there are no substantial areas of DMLW fee estate for 80+ miles from village.
Some of the infrastructure will be on state land and require DMLW easements or leases and material site designation. Easement and material applications were filed during a previous
phase of the project, but were suspended in 2010 when non-state land use negotiations faltered. On July 16, 2013, APT was notified that the files were being closed out due to non-action
and no updates from applicant. The notice informed them that applicant would need to contact DMLW to re-activate applications if project resumed. To date, no re-activation requests
have been received. No Water Right application received.
Project does not appear to involve state land; however RS 2477 rights-of-way ( RST casefile 105, 115, 124) are in the vicinity. If RS 2477 routes are intended to be used for the project,
applicant should contact DMLW Northern Region to review proposed use.
Not on state land. (Inspection of existing facility.)
Not on state land
SoA holds the development rights for a significant portion of the project under an EVOS acquisition; Feds hold the fee (LSH 478). SoAs Conservation easement may preclude the construction
of the project, however, Cindy Schoniger / Title is presently working to modify the consevation easement to allow (no ADL reference). Water Right application received. Requires FERC
review.
Not on state land
Not on state land
Not on state land. Longitude does not appear to be correct.
Most of dam, intake, penstock, etc are proposed for construction on DMLW managed water or fee estate and will require SCRO authorization. Issued SCRO pededrian public access easement
ADL 226467 may be affected. A Water Rights application recieved. Non FERC project. One or more stream gauges are presently installed on DMLW lands without application/authorization.
Timber harvest for biomass supply may require DNR Division of Forestry to be notified, but no SCRO involvement. (Proposed location for Biomass plant is near/within a building complex
on Native alloted land, but within the vicinity of an ILMA with DOTPF ADL 52590, the Tazlina River, and a conveyed subdivision.)
SSRAA Lease ADL 106174. Uplands designated Public Facilities (P) and Public Recreation Undeveloped (Ru). ADFG has also recently inquired to place a trail in this area.
ADL 106840 lease dam to port facility / ADL 106442 Swan Lake -Tyee Intertie. Use of additional state land required for impoundment area. Water Rights application received. FERC project.
Ketchikan George Inlet 2013-08-28 KPU requests Resolution to Endorse Project. Uplands-native corporation land. Anadromous stream Adjacent tidelands. Water Right LAS 14359.
Project involves state land. Phase II involves placement of stream gauges, which may require DMLW permits, though application states that none would be required until phase III. If
futue phases of the project are undertaken, infrastructure will require DMLW authorizations. Access is described as going through a state campground - consultation with Division of
Parks early in process will be necessary.
Existing SAPA Terror Lake Hydroproject previously approved under SCRO lease ADL 204024, is seeking to add diversion works from Hidden Basin creek into Terror Lake. SCRO has an active
permit to KEA under LAS 29042 for stream gauges. A portion of the proposed tunnel, and the entirety of the diversion dam and access road are proposed for construction on State-owned
lands and would require SCRO authorization if built. Additional authorization from the DMLW Water Section may also be later required.
Water general comment: Many construction projects will require use of water and may require Temporary Water Use Authorizations during construction regardless of land ownership. This
is not noted in each project.
No State Land
This project is not located on DMLW-managed land.
No DNR/DMLW lands affected.
No apparent DMLW lands or permit requirements beyond the Water Use Permit self-reported by applicant in the project description. DNR resources do not currently identify Waterfall Creek
as navigable. If this determination changes, infrastructure proposed for installation on the creekbed may need to be evaluated for additional lease or easement authorizations by SCRO.
Project may involve an RS2477 trail. Applicant must apply to DNR/DMLW for any clearing, grading, or other road development within the route. This RS2477 trail is catalogued under casefile
# RST 619, Stetson Creek Trail.
DNR/DMLW lands will not be affected by the feasibility study. The application mentions possible evolution of the current project, so if structures are to be built under this grant,
re-assessment may be needed with better location information. If the project is entirely on Chugach Electric Corporation\'s land in Anchorage, no DNR/DMLW lands will be affected.
No apparent DMLW managed lands or permit requirements according to the provided project description.
No apparent DMLW managed lands or permit requirements according to the provided project description. Proposed infrastructure planned for placement on non-State lands which ADOT&PF either
previously or currently held limited management rights for operation of local airport.
No DNR/DMLW lands affected.
This project was originally applied for by AP&T (ADL 418154 - easement, ADL 418921 - material sale. New application states that the Yerrick Basin will be protected from outside intrusion:
it is unlikely that DNR would issue authorizations that would impede the use of existing 17(b) access through Tanacross land to the state land in the remainder of the basin.
No state land involved. No other state land management issues noted.
Project will require water right, and possibly a land use authorization from DNR/DMLW for the water line, unless included in the water right. If the generator is outside applicant\'s
property, it will require a land use authorization as well. Boundaries are described in USS 3905 and accompanying notes, but application is not sufficiently descriptive to determine
generator location.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
Applicant\'s immediate funding objective is completion of a feasibility study; system plan and design efforts have not yet been undertaken. Test equipment is proposed for placement on
Village Council lands so no DMLW authorizations appear to be required at this stage of project develoment. Applicant should provide DMLW with site location and design information when
available to determine if any lease, easement, or permit authroizations are necessary for implementation.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
No apparent DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements according to the project description provided.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
Any cross country travel (winter or summer) crossing navigable water bodies may require a permit from DNR as underlying lands are state owned, even if the adjacent uplands are owned
by a village or regional native corporation. It appears that the main intertie between Stebbins and St Michael will be within the road right-of-way?which has an existing?federal right-of-way.???
However, if there are spur roads/lines to the wind turbines or other areas outside the existing right-of-way and they cross navigable water bodies, an easement from DNR may be needed.
For any supporting gravel mining operations, a Reclamation Plan is required for gravel mining operations even on non-state land, if the operation disturbs more than 5 acres or excavates
more than 50,000 cubic yards. There may be a minimal benefit to state resources as there will be a slight decrease in their use of diesel fuel.??
No state managed land involved.
No state managed land involved.
Expect a water right application and DNR is aware of the project. No other authorizations appear to be needed.
Applicant self-reports a requirement for DMLW Water Use Permit and on-going involvement of Water Resources Unit staff. No apparent DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements based on
the project description provided. DMLW resources do not currently identify Mountain Creek as navigable; if this determination is amended the project should be reviewed again for potential
additional lease or easement requirements from SCRO.
No apparent DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements according to the project description provided.
The submerged velocity monitoring research equipment referenced in this application are currently authorized by SCRO temporary permit LAS 28655. Applicant states that "The tideland access
near the airport at False Pass...is considered a municpal tideland. The area is retained in state ownership and managed by the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities.
If the [proposed] transmission line route is designed within the boundaries of the airport\'sjurisdiction, application and approvals would be needed from ADOT&PF." However, ADOT&PF
acquired their airport management right from non-State upland owners rather than DNR and so do not necessarily have use of adjoining tidelands. In addition, SCRO recently issued an
easement for municipal use of submerged lands near False Pass that would not have been required if an ATS to the City or Borough had been in force at the project location. Applicant
is advised to contact DMLW SCRO in addtion to ADOT&PF Airport Management personnel well prior to finalization of plans for any project component intended for placement on tide and submerged
lands in order to determine accurate jurisdiction and permitting requirements.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
Should this project move forward, a formal navigability determination should be requested to determine the status of the Kogoluktuk River. In a letter dated 8/20/2010 to AVEC, it was
noted the navigability status of the river is currently unknown. If the river is navigable, state authorizations will be required.
No apparent DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements according to the project description provided with the possible exception of some sort of water authorization during construction
or operations if needed.
Project appears to be entirely off of DNR/DMLW lands.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
No apparent DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements apparent from review of the project materials provided.
No DNR/DMLW lands affected.
No State Land - replaces existing boilers in Community Buildings
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
Proposal for waste heat recovery system for AGSD\'s existing woody biomass energy facility. Possible AS 38.05.850 permits/easements needed for transmission lines on state land.
The project site was conveyed to Bristol Bay Borough by DNR in 1968 under Patent 695 (amended in 1987). No apparent DMLW permits required.
2.6 and 2.7 cost figures don?t match. No state land involved; within BLM-managed NPR-A, City of Atqasuk, ASRC, and UIC. Section 4.3.3. lists state of Alaska land use permit and easement
are needed; no state land involved so no DNR authorizations are necessary.
Coastal Zone review no longer applicable since the ACMP program sunset in 2011; ADNR will not be coordinating a coastal zone management review. Project review should take place, but
should be initiated by the NSB. US Fish and Wildlife Service must be included for review given endangered species, migratory birds, and proximity to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
No state land involved; KIC lands.
Application states that biomass resources would be obtained from adjacent Native Corporation lands, therefore, no state forest resources are expected to be impacted. The application
states that this project is on land owned by the City of Galena, however Alaska Mapper shows that this is within OSL 328. OSL 328 was granted to DOT&PF on 2/7/1966 under the Omnibus
Act and DNR records do not show that this parcel has been transferred. Regardless, this is in no case on DMLW-managed lands.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed land. (This is not the project that was previously reviewed as #932 during round 6.)
Initial land status research indicates the project will not impact state land.?? The applicant indicates that pipes carrying heat between the power plant and the clinic will be installed
along existing Rights Of Ways (ROW) on City property. ??A brief search for Alaska Department of Transportation (DOT) involvement in roads in Venetie resulted in identifying a 2011 DOT
document that listed two roads in Venetie as ?rural major collector? and ?rural minor collector?? It is not clear if these DOT designations as ?rural collectors? means these roads include
DOT ROWs.? The applicant should verify who holds the right-of-way and coordinate with that entity.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed land.
The listed location of this project is incorrect (lat/long given in application are the same as project 1005). Based on project description this is on lands owned by the city of Eek
and is not located on DMLW-managed land.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed land.
There are no apparent conflicts with rights-of-ways for the arctic piping between the power plant and the end-user buildings, as the route is entirely within existing road rights-of-way
and on city, school, and AVEC property. Rhino-Flex pipe will be buried between the washeteria and the AVEC power plant.? This route includes one creek crossing at Sherman Creek.? COE
and ADF&G permits being requested.? It is not navigable; therefore not state managed land. The application mentions the possibility increasing the potential fuel savings with the heat
recovery system if a planned intertie of the power system with the neighboring village of Teller is constructed.? It appears that the intertie is a separate proposal.
No state lands are affected, as the project is proposed for City property.
No State Land - replaces existing boilers
A DMLW Water Permit is in force for this project under file LAS 27818. Packers Creek is not currently identified as navigable on DNR maps. If the navigability determination of this waterbody
changes, impacted creekbed sites should be reviewed for potential additional easement or lease requirements from SCRO.
Source- USFS land Tenakee Creek head of Tenakee Bay. Anticipates transmitting power to Hoonah & Pelican
ADL 108139 easment application
No known issues
The facility and supporting biomass harvest are proposed to take place on Village or Native Corporation lands, therefore no state lands are directly affected. Roads to facilitate timber
harvest are described; any direct road connection to the Elliott Highway may require driveway permitting through DOT/PF.
No DNR/DMLW lands affected.
No apparent DMLW permitting requirements from the project description provided; however the route of proposed new powerlines should be reviewed when more detailed alignment plans are
available to ensure that they fall entirely within ADOT&PF or municipally-managed ROWs as currently planned.
The State of Alaska considers portions of the Jack River to be navigable and state owned. It appears that all three prospective sites are located within the navigable portions; landowner
authorization would be require for all activities exceeding Generally Allowed Uses below OHW.
Project includes a water line and intake structures on state lands. DMLW land use authorizations will be required for these structures.
No state lands are involved.
A DMLW Water Permit was issued for this project in 2005 under file LAS 23103. According to the information presented, currently proposed work will be limited to modification of existing
facilities (no new construction). No DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements apparent.
Gunnuk Creek - Kake Hatchery-Anadromous stream/ City Water supply conservation easements created in exchanging land at Jenny Creek
ADL 108134 easement application - HSF - UA land possible access concerns
ADL 106840 lease dam to port facility / ADL 106442 Swan Lake -Tyee Intertie. Use of additional state land required for impoundment area
No known issues
No known issues
No known issues
No known issues
Proposal for rehabilitation and upgrade of existing facility sited primarily on non-DMLW uplands. Applicant reports that a DMLW Water Permit and Dam Safety clearance will be required.
The installed raw-water transmission line referenced in this application is approved for its crossing of Indian Creek under SCRO Easement file ADL 229178. Any design that includes placement
of additional infrastructure on the creekbed should be reviewed to determine if additional SCRO Easement or Lease requirements apply (based on the navigable status of the stream at
the specific location).
No known issues
No State land - installs at existing facilities.
Project is on DNR/DMLW lands, requires land use authorization. A land use permit is currently being processed by DMLW. A decision favorable to the project was issued, but the land
use authorization has not been issued, pending the results of the appeal period.
Project appears to be entirely off of DNR/DMLW lands. No permits required.
No known issues
No known issues
No known issues
No known issues
Application references State lands within the future Nenana Tochacket Agriculture Project as a potential source of wood, noting that purchasers of state land must clear timber to prepare
for cultivation - while this is true, it must be clearly understood that Ag land sold by the state of Alaska is subject to covenants, and development of the parcel (including the extent
and nature of clearing) must take place consistent with a state-approved farm conservation plan.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed land.
No known issues
No DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements apparent from the information presented.
No DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements apparent from the information presented.
Ketchikan George Inlet 2013-08-28 KPU requests Resolution to Endorse Project Uplands-native corporation land Anadromous stream Adjacent tidelands GU WTR RTS LAS 14359
Project is will be based in navigable waters, and needs land use permit for location of float, anchors to shore, and electric line. Applicant has obtained this already, and the permit
is attached to the application file, starting on page 304 of the full application.
The Rural Energy grant should have no impacts to state land.? It is for solar photovoltaic panels to be placed on the Northwest Arctic Borough building in Kotzebue which they own.??
There may be a minimal benefit to state resources as they will be a slight decrease in their use of diesel fuel.?? If the grant is carried out as described in the application, the Northwest
Arctic Borough would not need any DNR authorizations.
Preliminary study, no authorizations needed at this time. Utility easements and other DMLW authorizations would be required if project moves forward.
No state land.
No state land interest.
Possible Forestry permit if wood harvested from DMLW managed lands.
No state land.
No state land involved or DMLW authorizations required.
Feasibility study only with no final site selected. No authorizations needed at this time.
This project has not changed from the previous rounds. DMLW is now in a position to issue an Early Entry Authorization under case file number ? ADL 108047. This permit will allow the
City of Tenakee Springs to construct the project and then complete the as-built survey of it so DMLW will be able to issue the easement. DMLW public notice process is done and no
public comments expressing concerns were received.
While most uplands in the vicinity of the project are not state lands, DMLW authorizations may be needed if project work involves state-owned beds of navigable waterways.
Water permit. No additional authorizations needed.
Water permit required. While the physical project is on private land, the effected lands could include Chugach State Park, possibly requiring additional DNR authorizations.
This is the same project as proposed in previous rounds and AP&T has worked with the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA) and developed a better project description
and layout with respect to where the project components will be located and integrated with SSRAA?s existing aquaculture facility.
No state land.
Insufficient info regarding scope of project and land ownership to determine if DMLW authorizations required. No final site has been determined. The proposed site involves no state
land, nor would any site within approximately 10 miles of central Akiak.
Project describes usage of state managed land. Possible .850 permits may be required during the study phase.
No State land involved or DMLW authorizations required.
No DMLW authorizations required if existing facility selected.
No State land involved for this wind project.
No DMLW authorizations required.
The consultant identifies that the Haines State Forest will be the majority provider of pellets for this project.? ?Forestry should comment.?
This is the same project as reviewed in the previous rounds. This project proposes to put two small dams, one on South Excursion Inlet Creek (type is rockfill 5? high by 40? long)
and the other on North Excursion Inlet Creek (type is concrete diversion 5? x 70?). The two proposed locations of the dams are on Federal land but both streams have mean annual flows
of about 120 cfs, comparable to Montana Creek. The gradients from the topo map indicate a relatively low gradient and both streams are identified as anadromous. The division may recommend
that a navigability determination be made for these two streams. For North Excursion Inlet Creek a portion of the project is on state land the improvements includes portions of the
flume, the powerhouse, and portions of the transmission line. For the South Excursion Inlet Creek it is more difficult to determine but a short section of the flume may have to go
into State land. There may be some resource concerns rearding the flumes that would divert water from fairly significant lengths of both streams and if there would be sufficient remaining
water to support the fish.
Water permit, tideland lease and possible AS 38.05.850 permits required.
Insufficient information regarding location of study towers. Possible authorizations required if on DMLW managed land.
No state land or authorization for this wind project.
Currently under permit for study phase (LAS 28046). Additional AS 38.05.850 permits or lease will be required for Phase VI (the post study phase).
No state land.
No state land interest.
Exact location of project site in still undetermined, but most uplands in the area are not state-owned.
No DMLW permtting requirements evident. Land not state owned.
No DMLW permtting requirements evident. Land owned by four village corporations.
No DMLW permtting requirements evident. Land not state owned.
As this project is in the assessment phase, exact locations for the facilities and intertie routes, geotech work, etc and not specified - while most uplands in the vicinity of the project
are not state lands, DMLW authorizations may be needed if project work involves state-owned beds of navigable waterways.
Most uplands in the area of the project are not state lands; however, if geotechnical work/future intertie cross state-owned beds of navigable waterways, then DMLW authorizations may
be needed.
Proposed wind turbine is not on state land.
Insufficient information to review. Request for funding for feasibility study. No location selected for placement of meteorological study tower at this time. DMLW permit required
if DNR managed land selected.
Insufficient information to review. Request for funding for feasibility study. No location selected for placement of meteorological study tower at this time. DMLW permit required
if DNR managed land selected.
Actual Met tower placement appears to be on non-state land, however state easements or permits may be required depending on access routes and equipment type.
Proposed project site potentially within right-of-way for RST 168 (Paimute-Marshall). ; unclear if RST and project are colocated. If not, lands are private, no DMLW authorizations
needed. The issues with locating RS2477s can add complexity to the permitting as there may be disagreement between parties regarding location of the easement.
No DNR land authorizations appear to be required.
Proposed project access road and tower 62Y07 (see propoal page 59 and 71) appear to be potentially located on top of a portion of RST 120 (Kotlik-Marshall). The issues with locating
RS2477s can add complexity to the permitting as there may be disagreement between parties regarding location of the easement. Rest of land private.
Project is not on DMLW managed land.
No DNR land authorizations appear to be required.
Project is not on DMLW managed land.
No DNR land authorizations appear to be required.
AS 38.05.850 permits/easements needed for transmission lines on state land. Possible lease needed for community store.
No DNR land authorizations appear to be required.
Feasibility study and no State land type interest identified.
Project is not on DMLW managed land.
Project is not on DMLW managed land.
Project is not on DMLW managed land.
Appears to be study only, with no development. If development were to occur, the biomass resource ownership not identified. If on state land, resource sale likely required. Even if
not on state land, state easements or permits may be required depending on access routes.
Biomass resource ownership not identified. If on state land, resource sale likely required. Even if not on state land, state easements or permits may be required depending on access
routes.
Application references State lands within the future Nenana Tochacket Agriculture Project as a potential source of wood, noting that purchasers of state land must clear timber to prepare
for cultivation - while this is true, it must be clearly understood that Ag land sold by the state of Alaska is subject to covenants, and development of the parcel (including the extent
and nature of clearing) must take place consistent with a state-approved farm conservation plan.
Hydroelectric project. AS 38.05.850 permits/easements required for electric transmission line and penstock. Easement applications ADL 231698 rec\'d 10/25/2012. LAS 27334 (land use permit)
and LAS 28393 (water right application) also on file for this project.
Application for hydroelectric facility. AS 38.05.850 permits/easements required for transmission lines and penstock on state land. Possible lease required for powerhouse on concrete
slab. Water rights application LAS 27738 currently on file with DMLW.
Feasibility study to include bathymetric survey and geological marine study. No AS 38.05.850 permits needed at this time unless coring or placement of utility lines takes place.
Biomass plant is not on state land. Forest resources have not been identified on state land. Doing an inventory to determine biomass sources.
Proposal for waste heat recovery system for AGSD\'s existing woody biomass energy facility. Possible AS 38.05.850 permits/easements needed for transmission lines on state land.
Tok biomass project. DOF issueing long-term contracts. DMLW might be involved in easements or materials sales for access.
No DMLW permits or authorizations required for project as currently described
No DMLW permits or authorizations for project as currently described.
No DMLW permits or authorizations required for project as currently described.
This project is primarily on State land within the Haines State Forest. DMLW has received an application for this project and assigned it case file number - ADL 108134. The applicant
is Southern Energy Inc. This is not the same entity that is seeking funding from AEA, the applicant for AEA?s Renewable Energy Fund is the Tlingit-Haida Regional Electric Authority.
There does not appear to be a cooperative relationship between the two entities in forwarding this project. Instead there may be a competing interest and presently we understand that
both entities have applied for a FERC license. The division is not in a position to comment on the feasiblity of this application because we cannot adjudicate anything until we know
which party will be issued the preliminary FERC permit.
This is the same project that was reviewed in previous rounds. DMLW has received an application for the portion of the intertie on State tide and submerged land, case file number ADL
108139. Presently this case is in the agency/public notice step of adjudication.
Municipal entitlement not complete and application rests dependency on that. Timing of that decision may affect project timelines. Secondly water rights needed.
Propose to raise the height of the dam to increase capacity in the reservoir, increase from 342? to 425?.? Land that will be inundated is Forest Service land.? No State land type interest
identified.
No state land interest.
Not on state land.
This project has not changed from the previous round reviews. Possible public concern will probably be those related to the potential impact of the project to the Chilkat Bald Eagle
Preserve. There may be secondary impacts with opening of the old logging road, also identified as an RS2477 in the application, increasing access into the Chilkoot valley. This could
be controlled with gates. There may be some permitting challenges and resource management concerns related to the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve.
Applicant self-reports potential requirements for DMLW authorizations (probably Water and/or AS 38.05.850 Permits and Easements); need more specific project information to confirm.
No DMLW permits or authorizations at this time - funding requested for data collection only at this time;. Possible future requirement for AS 38.05.850 permits/easements possible depending
on selection of eventual project site but unlikely due to availability of village-managed lands.
No DMLW permits or authorizations at this time - funding requested for data collection only at this time;. Possible future requirement for AS 38.05.850 permits/easements possible depending
on selection of eventual project site but unlikely due to availability of village-managed lands.
No DMLW permits or authorizations at this time - funding requested for data collection only at this time;. Possible future requirement for AS 38.05.850 permits/easements possible depending
on selection of eventual project site but unlikely due to availability of village-managed lands.
No state land interests but water rights needed.
No DMLW permits or authorizations at this time - feasibility study for replacement of existing turbines only. Potential requirement for amendment of existing SCRO authorizations depending
of extent of facility upgrade.
No state land issues.
From the application it is difficult to tell if an easement to cross State land will be needed and in all probability existing platted easements within State developed subdivision(s)
will probably be used.
Location is not fully identified but appears by proposal to not include state land.
Not state land
Not state land
Application for hydroelectric facility. AS 38.05.850 permits/easements required for transmission lines and penstock on state land. Possible lease required for powerhouse on concrete
slab. Water rights app. LAS 27738 currently on file with DMLW. State land may be in reservoir and thus flooded. May take more than the projected 6 months to authorize.
No DMLW Permits or authorizations for project as currently described.
Not on DMLW land. May require permits from DNF-DOF for biomass source.
Project involves state-owned land and navigable waters. DNR permits required.
It is unclear from the application if this project impacts state-owned lands or waters. DNR permits may be required.
High probability use of State land needed for access facilities and transmission line(s). Navagibility determination needed for lakes.
Project involves state-owned land and navigable waters. DNR permits required.
Project involves meanderable water body. DNR permits are likely required.
Not on DMLW land. No land permits required
Not on DMLW land. Use of subsurface may require DMLW authorization
Not on DMLW land. Requires permit for water rights. Cross-country travel permit may be required for site access
Not on DMLW land. Requires permit for water rights
Not on DMLW land - no DMLW land permit required for installation. Cross-country travel permit may be required for access.
Project as described does not involve state land. Therefore, no land permits or easements from the state are required.
Requires authorizations from DMLW for submerged ROW and potentially for construction.
No state land ownership.
No state land involved. Assume biomass is from corporation lands.
Project as described does not involve state land. Therefore, no land permits or easements from the state are required.
No state land involved.
Not on DMLW land - no DMLW land permit required for installation. Cross-country travel permit likely required for access, as such permits were acquired for previous installations at
this site.
Not on DMLW land - no DMLW land permit required for installation. Cross-country travel permit may be required for access.
No state land involved.
Not on DMLW land - no DMLW land permit required for installation. Cross-country travel permit may be required for access.
Not on DMLW land - no DMLW land permit required for installation. Cross-country travel permit may be required for access.
No state land involved.
No state land involved.
No state land involved.
No state land involved.
No state land involved.
Authorizations from DNR are expected, but insufficient information to identify how many and what type.
Insufficient information to determine if a DNR authorization is required.
Project as described does not involve state land. Therefore, no land permits or easements from the state are required. Please note however, that if any of the recovery lines cross
state land or follow existing Rows, then a permit may be required, or discussion with DOT may be required.
No state land involved.
Authorizations from DNR are expected, but insufficient information to identify how many and what type.
No State land or easement interest
Insufficient information to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been fully evaluated.
Insufficient information to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been fully evaluated.
No state land involved.
No state land involved.
Insufficient information to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been fully evaluated.
No State land or easement interest
No state land involved.
Insufficient information to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been fully evaluated.
Insufficient information to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been fully evaluated.
Insufficient info to determine if a DNR authorization is required.
As the project is proposed to take place on municipality lands, no land permits are required from DMLW. Also since this is only a feasibility study, no permits are required if no part
of the project is on state land. Note that if the project location gets moved, permits or easements may be required for MET towers, access roads, etc. Also, if material is required
for the project and none is available within the city, then the city will need to apply for a material sale contract.
No state land involved.
Insufficient info to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been evaluated.
Insufficient info to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been evaluated.
No state land involved. As the project is proposed to take place on municipality lands, no land permits are required from DMLW. Also since this is only a feasibility study, no permits
are required if no part of the project is on state land.
No apparent DNR land authorization is required based on information provided
No apparent DNR land authorization is required based on information provided
No state land involved.
Resource feasibliltiy analysis - no specific project identified
Assume biomass is from corporation lands. Some state selected lands about 5 miles away.
No state land involved.
No obvious DNR land authorization indicated. Development may affect Section Line Interest depending on how improvements are placed.
Packers Creek DNR 35.05 authorizations may be required depending on location of this project and whether it affects tidally influenced portion of Packer?s Creek. Additionally, the mouth
of the creek occurs within a DOT/PF managed ILMA for the airport.
There are serious deteriorating conditions on the existing dam. It is in a non-failure emergency status and there will most likely be required measures to prevent full failure. This
funding is obviously essential for both hydroelectric and water supply issues for Ouzinkie. Appropriate design approval would be required for replacement.
On KPB land and requires no land authorizations from DNR.
All facilities on DNR land. Will need full spectum of authorizations. Also: within KRSMA, potentially conflicts with existing DNR easement to the USFS, and may affect a national historic
trail. There is substantial public interest on whether this project should be done in this location.
No State land or easement interest
As proposed, project only for a regional feasibility study, and not a specific on the ground project.
Within Haines State Forest - Classified Public Recreation
State tide & submerged land - submarine cable portion of intertie
No State land or easement interest
State tide & submerged land - submarine cable portion of transmission line & marine access facility
No state land involved.
Not DNR land
Assume biomass is not from state lands.
No permits or easements required for the construction of the actual facility.
Assume biomass is from corporation lands. Possible Forestry or DNR authorization for fuel collection, depending on the proposed access and method of harvest.
USFS land, but possible water permit needed.
Upgrades to existing lease. No additional authorizations needed.
Site selected all on DNR lands. Full spectrum of authorizations required.
Possible Forestry or DNR authorization for fuel collection, depending on the proposed access and method of harvest.
State Land - EEA issued, ADL 107151
Possible permit authorization required (insufficient location information to determine).
Not a project but an analysis of the feasiblility of what and where
No State land or easement interest
Potential to use State land within existing SEAPA transmission line corridor, ADL 106442
Application for easement, ADL 106437 for portion over State tide & submerged land
Application for easements, ADL 107601/107792, portions in Haines State Forest & Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve
Mostly within DOT R/W. If not may need a DNR r/w authorization. Project description does not provide enough detail to determine if any of the power lines will run on state land. Project
as described should only require coordination with DOT easements. However, if any of the powerlines should cross state land outside of existing easements of ROWs, then coordination
with DNR may be required for additional permits or easements.
Increase in water elevation will affect private and possibly USFS land
Additional 38.05 authorizations required for the described project.
Project itself not on state land, but an extension of the road authorized in ADL 229859 would be required to access the project area.
No State land or easement interest
No exact location. May involve state land or state selected land. Authorzations would be required.
Municiple conveyance survey underway, but Skagway has management authority at this time.
As brought up on page 15 on the application, there may be some delays in conveying tidelands if that is how they choose to pursue site control. It is possible to issue this authorization
under lease or ROW also. Nonetheless, they are correct in the risk of delays because of permitting in Southeast.
It appears that they are requesting funds to construct this project, DNR has not seen anything on this project to date, water rights, proposed dam evaluation, hydrology, FERC exemption,
habitat study or fish study.
It appears that the consultant has determined the by-pass flow needs for fish without having the hydrology necessary to do so. Gaging ASAP.
The proposed cost for this seems very high, there are state agencies available to conduct a majority of this type of work, including DNR, ADF&G. It might be interesting to work with
DNR and ADF&G and see if they would be interested in conducting this type of study for Southcentral Alaska. If AEA continues to fund recon work for hydroelectric projects, it appears
that Polarconsult, Earl and David Aussman will get to every possible SC site eventually if funded. There should be a consideration of the effects of one business servicing so many projects.
Gaging ASAP. FERC?
System of two hydro projects: It appears that some hydrology work has been conducted, but these projects will require gaging ASAP. Likely FERC project.
This project will gain much attention as it involves a legislatively designated Knik River Public Use Area which recently had a management plan adoption. Heavy recreational use. Expect
substantial resistance as it changes a relatively undeveloped area that is used for recreation and tourism. Hydrology ASAP. FERC Project very likely.
Believe the land ownership is incorrect at this time. I believe it is still BLM land. This is a popular recreation area, although future land transfers to Eklutna will eliminate the
ability to voice complaint, but will have some public opposition. No existing hydrology, gage should be installed ASAP. If they build Glacier Fork Knik River Hydro this project will
not be needed.
The proposal states that the village corporation has signed a letter of intent to supply wood for this system. The Forest Service estimate for the Sitka spruce timber type is about
75 bone dry tons per acre. It is estimated that the Garn unit will use 120 bone dry tons per year or about 1.6 acres of forest land per year. On a green ton basis and using 1.53 tons
per cord, the Forest Service estimate is about 64 cords per acre. This figure correlates well to a previous Tanana Chiefs Conference native allotment timber cruise in the Port Graham
area. In the cruise, the allotments averaged 6,400 cubic feet per acre. On a green basis, the Garn unit would require about 100 cords per year. This amount appears sustainable given
the acreage available for harvest (16,000 acres village corp., 2,877 acres allotments). Native allotments however are held in trust status with the Bureau of Indian Affairs and individual
allottees as well as the BIA would have to approve of timber sales on these lands.
DMLW has issued the private non-exclusive easement for hydropower facilities to the Pelican Utility District.
Not enough information to make analysis.
Seems like a very broad scoping project with almost no detail of what the applicant wants to do. Can not give input.
As this project suggests both river and ocean applicability, there will be slightly different set of permits for each application. State and federal authorizations are needed. In the
proposal to attach to an oil platform, there should be consideration placed on the life expectancy of a specific platform because there are discussions of decommissioning certain platforms
in Cook Inlet and this would be a secondary use that would probably not drive the decision whether to remove the platform after decommissioning.
What happened to the Trout Lake hydro project in downtown Chitina? This project was permitted and built 10-15 years ago but seemed to have problems, from the first day of operation.
Hydrology will be necessary for Fivemile Creek ASAP.
It is estimated that 88 cords of wood in total would be needed per year for the project in the following ratios: 22 cords(ILI), 15 cords (KOK), 39 cords (IGG), 12 cords(PTA). The annual
wood cost is estimated to be $36,841 or about $419 per cord. It is unclear what extent of timber resources is available in the particular villages especially for Igiugig which is located
in an alder dominated vegetation type on the west side of Lake Illiamna. The Tanana Chiefs Conference has performed Native Allotment inventories in the Kokhanok area. These volumes
per acre summaries could provide useful data concerning the forest resources in this area. At first glance however, the relatively small amount of wood required for this project appears
to be sustainable.
Can not open grant application file.
[AEA assumes similar situation as nearby False Pass]
Interesting project, feasibility will be interesting, will need hydrology, as diversion of the Kuskokwim River will need to be evaluated, once you divert a portion of a river this size,
putting it back, if necessary, can be a major problem.
Will require DNR authorizations. It is unclear where on Eska Creek this project would be envisioned. Depending on location, there may be some conflicts with other uses in this popular
use area.
FERC project. Water rights required for the diversion of water from Battle creek to Bradley Lake/reservoir. DNR Water Section working with applicant.
FERC Lic. Issued, construction delayed due to cost. Project will require water rights, land permits for transmission lines. Environmental studies still underway under FERC/State/federal
agreement.
Not sure if the 25\' trail vacation necessary is a ANCSA 17(b) trail or some other type, but may or may not be an issue depending on public input.
Already permitted.
It appears the applicant is working through the largest hurdle which was doing the project in the Admiralty National Monument. The USDA Forest Service appears to be honoring the provisions
of ANILCA.
It appears the applicant is working through the largest hurdle which was doing the project in the Admiralty National Monument. The USDA Forest Service appears to be honoring the provisions
of ANILCA. DNR has required this applicant to file for a permit to appropriate water in the past and they have claimed that because it is a native project, they did not have to file
for any state, or federal permits. It?s been a few years since DNR last contact with Kootznoowoo Incorporated, maybe they have changed their mind, as the grant application mentions
permitting as a cost.
Possible .850 permits required. Project describes usage of what is presumed to be state managed land or water based on information furnished. Narrative identifies DNR permits required.
This project is a feasibility analysis for a proposed biomass fueled combined heat and power (CHP) project for the Tok electrical utility. Roughly $60,000.00 of the total project cost
of $425,000 is for conducting a detailed biomass energy resource assessment. A significant amount of the raw forest inventory data will come from the Division of Forestry?s inventory
work in the Tok area. The forestry consultant, Clare Doig (Forest & Land Management, Inc.) will conduct a thorough review of delivered biomass costs and supply. The $45/green ton
fuel supply cost used in the cost worksheet may be optimistic given transportation, management, reforestation and other costs that will need to be imbedded in this delivered cost.
This uncertainty illustrates the importance of the proposed economic analysis to determine whether a sustainable operable supply of biomass exists to provide the estimated 300 acres
per year (40 tons per acre) needed for the operation of the CHP facility. The resource analysis section in the grant proposal appears to be well thought out and should provide the needed
information for determining whether a sustainable operable supply of biomass is present for the near and long term horizons of the project.
The wood supply for the Garn will be from Kenai Peninsula spruce forests where a volume determination has already been conducted in a Phase II resource analysis. The project proposal
also states that many thousands of acres of spruce beetle killed forests still remain on the peninsula and are a wild fire hazard according to Alaska State DNR foresters. It is estimated
that annual wood use would between 40 and 50 cords at a delivered price of around $160/cord. This wood use appears sustainable in light of the proximity of the total available resource.
It is estimated that 40-50 cords of fuelwood will offset 4,200 gallons of heating oil. Current price of the displaced fuel oil is $12,600. Ionia is currently operating two Garn boiler
units in other buildings within the community.
This project is for the installation of 3 small sized pellet and hammer mills for the village of Gulkana. The project proposal is also requesting personnel funds for one year of equipment
operation. At full production it is estimated that 9,600,000 pounds of finished pellets would be produced annually (4,800 tons). There was no estimate of annual supply needs of raw
material but existing supply was noted at 300 cords of wood ready to be chipped and a hazard fuel reduction clearing of 75 acres of wood. There was also mention of a potential military
clean up area of 80 acres. Based on a two to one ratio of green raw material to finished pellet product, it is estimated that 9,600 tons of raw material would be needed to sustain
the project at full capacity. The project proposal states that Ahtna would consider the sale of wood volume for this project. Based on a completed forest inventory for Gulkana Village
Lands conducted by Tanana Chiefs Conference, timber stands within the Gulkana village area average around 29 tons per acre. Thus approximately 330 acres per year would be required
for the project. The inventory report calculates an allowable harvest level of 177 acres per year. The deficit could be made up from additional areas owned by Ahtna, Inc. or by state
owned forest classified lands. These areas however would be more distant from Gulkana with the possibility of increased raw material costs.
Narrative identifies DNR permits required. As with project 660, there may be significant issues to address with the beluga whales and debris management to have a viable project.
Progressing with permitting for first phases of construction. There is still concern how the beluga whale issues will turn out since there is additional scrutiny being directed toward
the protection of that species. In addition, some of the debris studies are important to determine if the turbines can be kept year round on the sea bed. Would require state permits.
Because this area is a critical habitat area and a research reserve, the biologic and environmental review will be in the forfront of feasibility. Would require state permits.
Doesn\'t seem to offset much other energy costs. Does this type of project fit the grant criteria? Project has expired DNR Permit to Appropriate Water, but water has not been used
since 1990. This permit is likely no longer valid as water has not been used for the past 5 years. City will be required to re-file for water rights.
It appears that MIC does not recognize the need for the state to issue an easement for the submerged cable for the intertie once off of the reservation.
There may be no oversight by FERC because of the Indian reservation, but not sure if that holds if they are going to tie into a grid through an intertie that extends beyond the boundaries
of the indian reservation.
Power use for proposed Rock Creek Mine and others. Rock Creek Mine is not in operation, and is looking for buyers. Project will require TWUP for drilling, and water rights depending
on the temperature of the geothermal resource.
Currently operational with valid permits. May require additional water rights or amendments to existing permits to appropriate water. Will be a FERC project.
May need temporary water permits not identified.
At the minimum they will need to get AOGCC approval for their wells. Of bigger concern is that the Naknek Electric Association filed for bankruptcy on Sept 29th.
The Superior Pellets facility is new and in the startup phase of development. The delivered cost estimate used for pellets from the facility may be questionable over the long term based
on the operating experience once this new manufacturing facility is in full production and has some operating history. Given this uncertainty, it may be prudent to get cost estimates
of pellet delivery from other outside vendors such as Atlas Pellets to have a backup source of pellets and another delivered cost estimate.
Possible .850 permits required. Project describes usage of what is presumed to be state managed land or water based on information furnished. Applicant states that significant improvements
would affect an EVOS easement. Lots of work already completed including on going gaging.
Project map is in close proximity to known RST trail in the area. Unclear whether this is a DOT managed airstrip so unsure whether state authorizations are needed.
Debris management is a serious concern for all types of hydrokintetics in river and tidal applications. Without solving this isssue, there will be challenges to insuring long term application
of hydrokinetic devises in AK. If this project were funded, the information and data should be made public to all to benefit. May need DMLW authorization.
This seems to be more of a planning exercise than a feasibility study of a project. If funded this project will be a good starting point to determine an operable sustainable biomass
resource supply for the region.
This project is for a proposed cordwood fueled Garn boiler school heating system. It is estimated that 160 cords of fuelwood will be required annually and will offset 18,699 gallons
of heating oil. Current price of the displaced fuel oil is $67,500. The contract for wood delivery is estimated at $25,800 or about $161 per cord. The wood supply for the project
seems more than adequate given the fact that large sources of Forest Service timber would be available on Prince of Wales Island. The annual resource supply of 270 million board feet
may be in fact the sustained annual harvest level but the sale of timber off of Forest Service lands has been substantially less than this in recent years. It appears that prospective
wood delivery contractors have been contacted for this project.
Pre-Application meeting already occurred with applicant. Unsure of whether there will be any conflicts with the historic Iditarod Trail. Well into hydrology and fishery studies. Water
right applied for already. Will require State land for transmission line. FERC Project.
No Comments - recognition of permits needed.
The applicant claims that things are progressing well with negotiations with Tanacross, but no agreement is reached. 1/2 of the project is on Tanacross land and as of Sept. 8th, 2010,
Tanacross has not consented to allow development. DMLW authorizations on hold pending indication that APT and Tanacross are making progress toward land use agreements.
Getting the approval from the USFS to allow the project in a roadless area may be a substantial hurdle with the current administration. Has no plans to collect hydrology until 2012 after
they conduct feasibility. They should gage the system ASAP.
FERC Licensed project. Permit to Appropriate Water issued. Construction postponed. State ROW and dock applications received
Will need hydrology for permitting
The applicant is aware of some of the potential oppositions because of the eagle preserve. Will be a FERC project. Lots of past information available.
No flow data or Lake data to date, gaging will not start until Fall 2011. Asking for full funding for a project that has no hydrologic data to determine feasibility. Will need a minimum
of 5 years of real or derived flows. TWUP, Water rights, land use and habitat permits at a minimum. FERC project?
The state would probably request a navigabilty determination to understand whether the inlet creeks are state owned. The project would have to adress the anadromous fish habitat in the
streams. Two proposed sites and little or no discharge date. Review of past proposals and studies may provide basic information, but hydrology will require up to 5 years of flow data.
This project is for a proposed cordwood fueled Garn boiler school heating system. It is estimated that 253 cords of fuelwood will be required annually and will offset 20,800 gallons
of heating oil. Current price of the displaced fuel oil is $58,448. A report completed for AEA?s feasibility funded study of this project (Northern Economics Report 2009) estimated
an annual timber harvest area of 16 acres. The study also estimated a delivered price for wood at approximately $200 per cord or $50,600. The project proposal states that the wood
supply will come primarily from Mat-Su Borough owned forests located in relatively close proximity to the school. It states that 1,400 acres of ?dedicated borough land? will provide
a sustainable harvest block. The assumptions are using approximately 16 cords per acre with an 88 year rotation length. The 16 cords per acre may be somewhat generous given the fact
that the harvesting may not be all by the clear cut method. A more conservative estimate of 10 cords per acre would require roughly 25 acres per year or 2,200 acres of a sustainable
harvest block. The Mat-Su Borough has just recently completed a land management plan which has allowed the sale of timber to begin again after a moratorium was placed on timber sales
prior to the plan?s adoption and completion. The project proposal states that it is the Mat-Su Borough?s intention to offer between 400 and 600 acres per year of commercial timber
sales. This figure may vary depending upon public input on individual timber sales. The management plan mentioned supplying a proposed boiler facility from its management units, but
did not specifically mention ?dedicated borough land? for the project. The Division of Forestry is currently preparing an inventory for forest classified lands in the Mat-Su valley.
This inventory will update the volume and acreage of lands available for timber harvest. Significant accessible timber areas are present in the Willer-Kash road area. State timber
areas will allow additional timber supply from more than just the Mat-Su Borough land ownership. Currently the State is scheduling approximately 1,000 acres per year in the Mat-Su
valley. The supply of timber from borough and state lands would appear to be more than adequate to supply this project. The location of specific sales however will still have an influence
on the delivered price of the raw material.
This project is for a feasibility study for the utilization of waste wood and cardboard to heat one or a few public buildings. The study will analyze the community?s energy needs.
The project proposal also states that alder growing on village corporation land to the east will also be considered as a potential fuel source. The Forest Service is currently conducting
a Lidar remote sensing analysis of the extent of this resource. This project appears to be a reasonable approach to analyzing the feasibility of utilizing biomass for a building heating
program. Most of the feasibility research focuses on the waste wood and cardboard aspect. Analyzing the feasibility of alder use may require additional study of the economic operability
and sustainability of the resource not specifically mentioned in the project proposal.
Will require Temporary Water Use Authorization (TWUP) for drilling. The project may need water right if developed, depending on the water temperature. AOGCC would still regualte the
geothermal drilling.
Project is progressing with permitting mostly done. May need slight adjustment to move the location of the access road.
Hatchery has existing Water rights, will likely need additional water rights or amendment to existing water rights for hydro.
Been discussed as a hydro site for 20+ years. Past feasibility studies should be evaluated. Will be a FERC project. Will need water , tideland, and fish habitat permits. From the cursory
review it appears that Silver lake is actually in Chugach National Forest rather than Native Corp Lands as stated in the application. There is no federal power withdrawal so Chugach
NF would have to make a specific decsion to allow this use of increasing the size of the lake. Secondarily the lake appears to be of sufficient size to make this a navigable lake, thus
state owned lands under the lake and would require state permits. This ownership issue may get sticky when determining who owns the beds of the lake. Finally LSH 536 is a conservation
easement that recognizes this potential hydro site but limits the us to 15 acres and needs approval from both Tatitlek and USFS.
It is also stated in the proposal that based upon current fuel oil consumption; the wood boiler is estimated to use 800 tons of wood fuel each year. Using the figure of 40 tons per
acre as estimated in the above AP&T project (AEA #665), 20 acres per year would be required to heat the school. This amount appears to be available in a sustainable manner for the
Tok area. Even if one uses the more conservative 27 tons per acre as calculated in the Tanana Valley State Forest Inventory Update 2010 for poletimber and sawtimber types, then approximately
30 acres per year would be required to heat the school. This material is projected to be available to the school at roughly $60/ton in chipped form. Thus 800 tons of wood chips would
cost the school $48,000 versus about $138,000 for fuel oil, a $90,000 annual savings. The applicant at page 5, item 2.6, incorrectly states that the Alaska Division of Forestry will
be chipping the 1,000 to 1,200 green tons of decked material resulting from fuel reduction projects. While the material is available to the project, the Alaska Gateway School District
will be responsible for hiring and paying for contractors to process the decks using the Tok Umbrella Corporation?s rotochopper. Because some of the forest supply would be land outside
of State Forest land, there may be a need for additional DMLW permits for the fuel reduction projects in the long term.
This is now in the process of permitting and evaluation by DNR. Access for construction is the biggest challenge to get the turbines up the mountain and across the river, but GVEA is
evaluating the requirements.
Possible .850 permits required. Project describes usage of what is presumed to be state managed land or water based on information furnished.
Section 3.4 in AEA application lists DNR environmental permits under "Project Resources" but does not specify which permits
It is estimated that between 17,000 and 23,000 green tons of biomass would be required for the fuel oil offset. Utilizing conversion estimates from the Tanana Valley State Forest Inventory
Update 2010 of 34 pounds per cubic foot and 90 cubic feet of solid wood per cord, this biomass demand is equivalent to over 11,000 cords per year. In perspective, Fairbanks Area State
Forestry which currently has the largest timber sales program in the Interior sold 8,724 cords of wood for fiscal year 2010. Conversion of this amount of Galena?s fuel oil use would
entail a significant timber harvest program.The Tanana Chiefs Conference forestry program has conducted a forest inventory consisting of timber type mapping of Galena village corporation
lands. This inventory will be invaluable in determining a sustainable and operable wood supply. TCC has conducted a rough estimate of biomass availability in a ten mile radius of
the village and has calculated a volume of over 840,000 tons. The proposal states that a separate grant application will fund a more detailed inventory to refine the volume estimate.
TCC has the expertise available to define operable and sustainable biomass resources to help develop an appropriately scaled facility for the village.
Not sure of navigability of Jack River but there was a previous dispute of the navigability. May or may not need authorizations from DNR beyond that for dam construction if it went beyond
feasibility study. There is mention of a dam being constructed near the Denali Fault. Feasibility of getting a dam construction approved would be an issue our dam safety engineer would
have to evaluate. This project must include stream gaging. A gage in this area operated by USGS could cost as much as $50,000 per year. It will take 5+ years of data to determine if
the project is feasible from a water stand point, not including any other studies that may be required.
This project is for a proposed wood chip fuel drier system. The biomass supply for this project is mill waste generated from the Viking Lumber Company?s sawmill. Most of the round
log material supply for the mill is coming from the Tongass National Forest. Uncertainty of a consistent log supply from the National Forest continues to arise however timber from
State sales has also supported the Viking Mill and provides another potential source of raw material. This project is aligned with broader efforts of the state administration and the
multi-agency Tongass Team to support remaining timber processing facilities in Southeast.
Because the project location was not specific enough, can\'t tell whether any state lands will be involved.
This project will be authorized by FERC under a federal power withdrawal. Uplands will be owned by the municipality. FERC will have jurisdiction of the dam. There may be an issue that
gets bogged down in the ownership of the beds of the Lake. The lake is large enough to be considered navigable. If so, the beds are state owned. Typically the USFS disputes ownership
of lakes within the boundaries of the Tongass NF. Part of the project construction would be on the beds of the lake, therefore this might get sticky around the debate of who owns the
lands under the lake. A secondary concern may be if there is any road built to support the transmission line because there may be local concerns about a new road from Sitka to Baranof.
Will need state tideland and water permits.
Scope of Work cited as Attach C not in package for review. Reference to lake utilization affecting several possible lakes in Section 4.1. MTP maps does not show the federal withdrawals
affected several of the larger lakes. Possible .850 authorizations from DMLW.
Possible .850 permits required for the pipeline from Petro to the parcel applicant intends to purchase. DOT has encroachment permits, but those are not likely to be sufficient authorization
under a grant program to demonstrate site control. Needs to address the permitting for taking water from Abercrombie Creek for cooling.
no comment except it seems that this should be combined with project 517
Concerned that they have not filed for FERC permit yet. Also ignores the need for land authorizations from the state. There will be questions from commercial fisheries groups about impacts
to harvest or fish species.
no comment except it seems that this should be combined with project 523
In process of data gathering before leasing.
Would require some additional coordination in reviewing both gas and wind leases. Because the land in question was supposed to be conveyed to the University but a law suit stopped that
conveyance, there is question of how long the University conveyances will take. This will add in some uncertainty in the leasing without knowing whether this land will be conveyed.
Although this is just design, there are some future hurdles to consider. First, attaching generators to operating oil platforms would require separate authorizations that are not included
in the oil lease operations permits. If the intention is to attach to "aging" infrastucture that will be decommissioned as oil platform, this has considerable risk by having an investment
attached to a platform that will need to be removed unless the power company is willing to assume the platform removal liability. Lastly, there are existing FERC authorizations that
have "locked up" Cook Inlet until the existing permit holders fail to advance their projects to licensing.
Normally the applicant for a power project is the one doing the environmental baseline studies once the project concept is approved. That way the correct information is collected for
the agencies making decisions. It potentially seems premature to gather this data before understanding the scope of the proposed projects. This may be more appropriate once projects
start moving forward and funding is approved for power projects.
Extra hurdles have been placed by the listing of the beluga whales on the endangered species list. Would require land authorization and ROW but ORPC is in communication with DNR on this.
Depending on location may need state land authorizations. As noted in the application, habitat concerns will be paramount to address because of the critical habitat areas and the Estuarine
Research Reserve.
This project describes very well the lack of attention on the source market for the biomass fuels for many of the biomass projects. Without adequate "available" supply, those authorized
and sustainable, a biomass project won\'t work.
State land lease and ROW
This project will gain much attention as it involves a legislatively designated Knik River Public Use Area which recently had a management plan adoption. Heavy recreational use. Expect
substantial resistance as it changes a relatively undeveloped area that is used for recreation and tourism.
This is a popular recreation area. Not sure of the exact location and impact but that may engender substantial comment during the public permitting process.
Would probably require State ROW and dock permitting. This project may have higher probability for problems in that it is nearer to Petersburg than Angoon and Ancoon alreasy has its
own hydro project at Thayer Lake.
This project will require state authorizations. Hurdles will be dealing with ice flows, transmission line ROW, Beluga Whale ESA listing, and fundamentally understanding the impact of
a new technology on fish and mamals.
Contact Rick Rogers with State Forestry (269-8473) for additional assessment of biomass availability.
Believe the land ownership is incorrect at this time. I believe it is still BLM land. This is a popular recreation area, although future land transfers to Eklutna will eliminate the
ability to voice complaint, but will have some public opposition.
This is a popular recreation area. Not sure of the exact location and impact but that may engender substantial comment during the public permitting process.
This is a popular recreation area. Not sure of the exact location and impact but that may engender substantial comment during the public permitting process.
This is a popular recreation area. Not sure of the exact location and impact but that may engender substantial comment during the public permitting process.
New technology may generate concerns. Require land lease and ROW.
Seward owns the tidelands there so no land permit. May or may not need a water right - normally DNR does not issue water rights for use of marine water.
State ROW needed
Past experience with projects in Tenakee is that there is generally an active involvement by the community with diverse view points.
State permitting
Because this project potentially closes off access to certain tidelands this could be challenging to reconcile with the public trust doctrine. Unknown habitat issues with anadromous
species. This will be a challenging permit process.
State permitting.
Although area plans identify options for hydroelectric and fish hatchery, since SSRAA has developed a fish hatchery operation, we are unsure whether there would be any potential conflict
between the two uses.
State ROW and dock applications received.
Application on file. 1/2 project on Tanacross Native Corp land, but records indicate Native Corp may not be interested in authorizing proposed activity on their lands.
Permits required for stream gauging also. Not sure of impact on Bald Eagle Preserve but will gather attention as do most proposals that potentially touch the Bald Eagle Preserve. Some
public concerns expressed.
As expressed in previous rounds, this project is in Wood Tikchik State Park. Although this project is contemplated in the park management, the way in which the transmission lines are
constructed will be of great interest to the park.
Area next to Kachemak Bay State Park and Kachemak Bay Estuarine Research Reserve. Public will be very interested in the environmental impact to the shore birds and visual aesthetics.
Note area is popular for paragliding and hanggliding which may cause some community conflict.
State ROW. Some confusion because the proximity is to Petersburg rather than Angoon.
DMLW has already issued early entry authorization.
Not sure of the exact start location so there could be state land crossed before Forest Service Land. If so, there would be other state permits required beyond what was stated in application.
While state authorizations are minor, there may be public concerns on this project (based on past discussions).
Unsure of navigability of Sunrise lake and if it is navigable, then the permits for stream gauging would be from the state, not USDA.
Not sure if this project location is on land that has agricultural covenants that may restrict development.
Conflict in application - 1 billion or 1 million total cost? No comment
probably only water rights needed.
Water Right, Dam approval potential lease because of submerged land ownership. Also dock improvments.
Unsure biomass availability.Contact Rick Rogers with State Forestry (269-8473) for additional assessment of biomass availability.
Contact Rick Rogers with State Forestry (269-8473) for additional assessment of biomass availability.
Not sure of navigability of Jack River but there was a previous dispute of the navigability. May or may not need authorizations from DNR beyond that for dam construction if it went beyond
feasibility study. There is mention of a dam being constructed near the Denali Fault. Feasibility of getting a dam construction approved would be an issue our dam safety engineer would
have to evaluate.
OK - probably only need to change development plan if the land footprint stays the same.
This has $2 million approved from AEA so this match is from AEA. Contact Rick Rogers with State Forestry (269-8473) for additional assessment of biomass availability.
New technology - environmental concerns and not sure of ramification of the Beluga Whale listing on this project. This project is progressing with FERC permit requirements.
Most components of this project sit wholly or partially in the Knik River Public Use Area and the National Natural Landmark areas. Recent management plan for the public use area did
not address this use, therefore there will be challenges to permit this because of the necessity to revise the management plan.
This has land issues in the Supreme Court. May affect capability to get this permitted until decision is made.
New technology - environmental concerns and not sure of ramification of the Beluga Whale listing on this project.
Within a National Park and Preserve which may take some time to permit.
Environmental concerns with new technology expected to be raised during permitting may slow this project.
Environmental concerns with new technology expected to be raised during permitting may slow this project.
New technology, therefore will take a bit longer to permit to address environmental studies.
Similar to the first round. May have substantial challenges obtaining authorizations for gathering wood in Anchorage.
Complicated landownership. If the foot print varies from existing project, permitting may take more time.
Because the project lies inside a NWR and the ownership of the river bed is disputed between the state and federal agencies, the permitting will be complicated.
As stated in Round 1, this project will have significant public scrutiny durning the permitting required by Division of Parks. The project is in Wood-Tikchik State Park.
DNR Division of Forestry is involved with this project. The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force completed the feasibility study for this project and recommended it for construction. Large
heat demand makes this a viable project.
Possible competetive interest which may make for more challenging permitting.
Underway
Being permitted.
No state permits yet.
The Geothermal resource identified in this proposal is well understood from prior scientific, drilling and geophysical evaluations. It is clearly a viable resource that should be developed
if proper commercial terms can be reached between all interested parties. It would not be prudent for the State to spend Public funds on further scientific evaluation of this resource,
and such funds would be better utilized in drilling and development. DGGS reccomends this project is not funded in it current form.
FERC permitted area to another company. This project was completed without permits and is now in process to get permits.
Palmer project will require a number of drilling permits and produced fluids permits from AOGCC, DEC and possibly the Div. of Oil & Gas.
Although this is moving forward and possible, there is a risk that an associated lawsuit about land ownership being given to the University could effect this project.
Project appears viable. The area has a wood supply, including a lot of beetle-killed spruce.
Underway
state land
The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force completed the feasibility study for this project. Large heat demand makes this a viable project. The DNR Division of Forestry is involved with this
project, which has particularly strong community support.
The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force completed the feasibility study for this project; it is a viable medium heat-demand project.
Red flag: Should not proceed. Harvesting would be on Municipality of Anchorage land, but proposers have not yet contacted the Muni. Major pitfalls in project. Proposers are high school
students, which is impressive -- they deserve encouragement, but not $300,000.
Permitted to Trident Seafoods. May be challenge with second applicant.
DNR Division of Forestry is involved with this project, and it is a demonstration project for a state office building. The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force recommended this as a demonstration
project.
This is one of 3 projects in same area. Is AEA considering other energy projects that are proposed for same area to evaluate whether it is necessary to do all projects?
Underway
The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force completed the feasibility study for this project; large heat demand makes it a viable project. The DNR Division of Forestry participated in development
of a forest stewardship plan for Native lands around Fort Yukon in support of this project.
The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force completed the feasibility study for this project. Large heat demand makes this a viable project. Lands for biomass harvesting have not yet been identified.
Alder is the proposed biomass source. Proposed boilers are both manual feed which will require commitments of personnel.
The Gustavus portion of the project may have certain issues that may effect National Park land and waters, depending on where they place it. Permitting challenges will be high for any
project that is in park waters or are seen as directly affecting marine life going into the park. Gustavus just got a hydro project funded (part of another grant proposal) and in construction
that may supply all power needs. Beluga whales were just placed on the endangered species list and therefore permitting just became more difficult for the Nikiski portion. This project
has good merit but may have some permitting challenges.
They didn\'t get geothermal bids - Ormat did. Where do they get access to the geothermal resources? Probably major show stopper.
Wood Tikchik State Park- know of strong public opposition. Parks may have a challenge in permitting, but it is recognized as a compatible use.
The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force completed the feasibility study for this project; it is a small project and easy to accomplish.
S2 Forestry Comments Feasibility
This project is for reconnaissance, feasibility and conceptual design of an electrical power plant that will utilize recycled construction and demolition cellulose biomass waste. No
additional biomass from timber harvest operations will be required. It is anticipated that up to 2,000 tons of material will be diverted from Alaskan landfills. Biomass supply appears
sustainable for this project and Central Environmental Incorporated maintains a recycling service which is able to separate out the cellulose biomass required for this project.
This project, for design and construction, will install a wood fired chip boiler to heat two main school buildings. The source of the chips would come from Viking Lumber located about
½ miles from the Klawock School location. It is expected that 188 tons/year of dry fuel would be required to heat the main building and gymnasium at a cost of $22,560 ($120.00/ton).
The required amount of biomass is well within the realm of sustainability as the Tongass National Forest is stated to have an annual resource availability of 60-70 million board feet.
The State of Alaska also provides timber sales which are purchased by Viking Lumber.
This project was reviewed for the Round 8 application period. No changes for wood requirement have been made in the current application (approximately 77 cords per year) or delivered
price ($300/cord). This project is for design and construction of a biomass heating system to heat the Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plan. A manually fed cordwood boiler
would be installed in a prefabricated building. Resource availability has been previously examined by the Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program. A detailed inventory report was
written that provides a preliminary assessment of the biomass energy resources within a 25-mile radius of Huslia. A significant volume was available indicating that the 77 cords can
be harvested relatively close to the village. A detailed harvest plan will be written as part of this proposal. This harvest plan should answer resource sustainability and harvest
location concerns.
This project is for design and construction of a biomass heating system to heat the City Hall and washeteria it was previously reviewed for the Round 8 application period. A manually
fed cordwood boiler would be installed in a prefabricated building. It is estimated that 30 cords annually would be needed at a price of $210.00/cord. This amount and price is unchanged
from the Round 8 submittal. Resource availability has been previously examined by the Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program. A detailed inventory report was written that provides
a preliminary assessment of the biomass energy resources within a 25-mile radius of Ambler. A significant volume was available indicating that the 30 cords can be harvested relatively
close to the village. A detailed harvest plan will be written as part of this proposal. This harvest plan should answer resource sustainability and harvest location concerns.
This project was reviewed for the Round 8 application period. This project is similar to the above project 1208 because it is a conversion to pellet boilers from fuel oil. This project
is for feasibility and design of a larger scale system that will supply heat to a variety of Gateway Borough owned buildings from a central installation. It is estimated that 2,203
tons of pellets would be required annually at a price of about $300.00 per ton. Currently the Federal Government, Forest Service and City of Ketchikan have pellet boilers in service
so delivered prices as well as a reliable supply chain should be well established in this area.
This project was reviewed for the Round 8 application period. This project is for construction of pellet/biomass fired boilers for the Ketchikan High School. Although the square footage
serviced remains the same, the wood requirement has been revised downward from 1,049 tons of pellets annually to 708 tons per year. Currently the Federal Government, Forest Service
and City of Ketchikan have pellet boilers in service so a reliable supply chain should be well established in this area.
This project is for construction of a Garn biomass district heating system that will heat four community buildings. Cordwood would come from road accessible village corporation lands
near the facility. It is anticipated that 100 cords per year would be needed. A biomass inventory assessment prepared by Chugachmiut Forestry stated that the annual allowable harvest
on Port Graham village corporation lands is over 7,000 cords. As long as harvest areas are agreed upon, the resource should well be able to sustain this biomass system. The project
proposal states that fuel source agreements are currently being negotiated with Port Graham Corporation and some Native allotment owners.
This project is for a feasibility study for a biomass district heating system. The system would heat multiple buildings and a proposed greenhouse. Up to 32,000 gallons of heating fuel
would be displaced using biomass. The Forest Service has been involved with Hoonah in looking at solutions to the high energy costs. Two mills near the town produce waste material
that may be suitable for biomass. Landowners including the Forest Service, Hoonah Totem, and Sealaska may also be a source of biomass. The project appears to have adequate supplies
of raw material available. Firewood is currently available for $250/cord. The study would determine a delivered price of wood pellets.
This project is for construction of cordwood fueled outdoor wood boiler heating systems located in the Lake Illiamna region of southwest Alaska. The heating systems would be installed
in three different villages within the region (Nondalton, Pedro Bay, and Port Alsworth). It is estimated in the proposal that 9,104 gallons of fuel oil per year would be offset annually
at an average price of $5.65 per gallon. The proposal states that area landowners support the project and have signed letters of intent to provide wood for the boilers. These landowners
comprise the associated village corporations in the area. It is estimated that 20-80 cords of wood in total would be needed per year for the project. The annual wood cost is estimated
to be about $29,000 or about $360 per cord. It is unclear what extent of timber resources is available in these particular villages although a boiler is currently operating in Kokhanok.
The Tanana Chiefs Conference has performed Native Allotment inventories in the Kokhanok area and these volumes per acre summaries could provide useful data concerning the forest resources
in this area. At first glance however, the relatively small amount of wood required for this project appears to be sustainable.
This project was reviewed for the Round 7 application period. No changes for wood requirement have been made in the current application (approximately 250 cords per year). This project
is for upgrade of two Garn boilers at the Thorne Bay School to larger capacity units. The original units would be moved and installed in the Whale Pass and Hollis Schools. The project
would also fund a Garn installation at the Naukati School. All of the schools are located within the Tongass National Forest on Prince of Wales Island. The proposal states that approximately
20-40 million board feet is available sustainably per Forest Service estimates. A vendor has been delivering wood to the Thorne Bay School and it appears other vendors are available.
A sustainable wood supply for the approximately 250 annual cord consumption does not seem to be a problem.
This project is for a feasibility study for three Interior Regional Housing Authority facilities in Fairbanks and Nenana. The study will look at various types of biomass for heating
that include cordwood, wood pellets and pellet logs. All these biomass types are available in the Fairbanks-Nenana area and with the State Division of Forestry, Toghotthele Corp. and
the Fairbanks North Star Borough all offering timber sales, supply should not be a problem. Superior Pellet Fuels is also producing wood pellets and pellet logs in North Pole. Fairbanks
Area state forestry is currently offering timber in the area well below its allowable cut threshold.
This project is similar to the above project 1140 because it is a conversion to pellet boilers from fuel oil. This project is for feasibility and design of a larger scale system that
will supply heat to a variety of Gateway Borough owned buildings from a central installation. It is estimated that 2,203 tons of pellets would be required annually at a price of about
$275.00 per ton. Currently the Federal Government, Forest Service and City of Ketchikan have pellet boilers in service so delivered prices as well as a reliable supply chain should
be well established in this area.
This project is for construction of two pellet fired boilers for the Ketchikan High School. Pellets are being made locally in Ketchikan and are also available from commercial vendors
in Southeast. It is estimated that 1,049 tons of pellets would be required annually at a price of about $275.00 per ton. Currently the Federal Government, Forest Service and City
of Ketchikan have pellet boilers in service so delivered prices as well as a reliable supply chain should be well established in this area.
This project was reviewed for the Round 7 application period. No changes for wood requirement have been made in the current application (212 cords annually). This amount is well within
the realm of sustainability as the Tongass National Forest is stated to have an annual resource availability of 60-70 million board feet. There are commercial vendors available who
are currently supplying biomass boilers for Coffman Cove and Thorne Bay schools.
This project is for the installation of a manually fed cordwood boiler to heat the community building, city lodge, school and city shop. It is estimated that 81 cords annually would
be needed at a price of $300.00/cord. Resource availability has been previously examined by the Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program. A detailed inventory report was written
that provides a preliminary assessment of the biomass energy resources within a 25-mile radius of Nikolai. A significant volume was available indicating that the 81 cords can be harvested
relatively close to the village. A detailed harvest plan will be written as part of this proposal. This harvest plan should answer resource sustainability and harvest location concerns.
This project is for design and construction of a biomass heating system to heat the Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plan. A manually fed cordwood boiler would be installed
in a prefabricated building. It is estimated that 77 cords annually would be needed at a price of $300.00/cord. Resource availability has been previously examined by the Tanana Chiefs
Conference Forestry Program. A detailed inventory report was written that provides a preliminary assessment of the biomass energy resources within a 25-mile radius of Huslia. A significant
volume was available indicating that the 77 cords can be harvested relatively close to the village. A detailed harvest plan will be written as part of this proposal. This harvest
plan should answer resource sustainability and harvest location concerns.
This project is for design and construction of a biomass heating system to heat the City Hall and washeteria. A manually fed cordwood boiler would be installed in a prefabricated building.
It is estimated that 30 cords annually would be needed at a price of $210.00/cord. Resource availability has been previously examined by the Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program.
A detailed inventory report was written that provides a preliminary assessment of the biomass energy resources within a 25-mile radius of Ambler. A significant volume was available
indicating that the 30 cords can be harvested relatively close to the village. A detailed harvest plan will be written as part of this proposal. This harvest plan should answer resource
sustainability and harvest location concerns.
This project’s first step is examining the feasibility of offsetting fuel oil use with biomass. The source of biomass will be from forests on village corporation lands. Forest inventory
data for this area is lacking and the only known sources are LandFire and the National Land Cover Dataset which have rather coarse estimates of biomass volume per acre. Depending upon
how much biomass is ultimately needed this dataset could be used to provide initial resource estimates. Other data sources include recent Spot and Quickbird satellite imagery which
covers much of the area around the village. More detailed forest inventory estimates may be required if timber resource sustainability becomes a question.
The project is for the replacement of an oil fired boiler with a pellet boiler to provide heat for eight residential buildings and one community center in Klawock. Similar to the above
grant application 1113, pellets would be provided by existing pellet manufacturers either in Southeast, Interior or out of state suppliers. It is estimated that the annual fuel cost
would be $330.00 per ton with an annual fuel usage of 42 tons. Delivered pellet vendor price estimates were not included in the proposal though commercial scale pellet utilization
is successfully occurring in various Southeast communities.
The project is for the replacement of an oil fired boiler with a pellet boiler to provide heat for eight residential buildings and one community center in Angoon. Pellets would be provided
by existing pellet manufacturers either in Southeast, Interior or out of state suppliers. It is estimated that the annual fuel cost would be $360.00 per ton with an annual fuel usage
of 103 tons. Delivered pellet vendor price estimates were not included in the proposal though commercial scale pellet utilization is successfully occurring in various Southeast communities.
This project was reviewed for the Round 7 application period and is for design and construction of a wood chip fired boiler at Tazlina. The system would be used to heat four collocated
community public buildings. The supply of chips is expected to come from NRCS funded moose habitat clearings occurring on Ahtna lands and on BIA funded hazard fuel breaks. Roughly
116 green tons will be required annually. Based on state lands inventory data collected in the Glennallen area, roughly 30 green tons per acre of above ground biomass is present on
the forest lands. The amount of raw material required for Tazlina would be quite sustainable if harvested in the Copper River Basin area. In the event these publicly funded projects
are unable to provide biomass, Tazlina is willing to procure the raw material at an estimated cost of $90.00/green ton. They would also be willing to purchase fuel wood locally at
$250-300 per cord and then chip prior to burning. At a fuel price of $90.00/ green ton, the annual fuel purchase price would be $10,400. This amount is significantly lower than the
annual cost ($39,582) of 8,078 gallons of fuel oil. Tazlina expects to use information from the Mentasta village boiler for possible purchase of a similar system for trial. If it
does not perform adequately for Mentasta then Tazlina may default to a more standard Garn solid wool boiler.
This project was reviewed for the Round 7 application period. This project is for construction of a new biomass boiler to heat the Craig High School. The boiler will be in addition
to one that is currently operational and is heating the elementary and middle schools. The system will use dried wood fuel from the AEA funded drier at Viking Lumber. Wood supply
for this project appears sustainable because Viking’s raw wood supply originates from a variety of land owners including the Tongass National Forest, Southeast State Forest and village
corporation lands.
This project is for final design of a wood chip fired boiler to heat several buildings within the Organized Village of Kake tribal government campus. The boiler is expected to displace
60,000 gallons of fuel with 1,000 tons of biomass fuel sourced from forest stewardship thinning activities on adjacent Kake Tribal, Sealaska and Forest Service lands on an annual basis.
Although the availability of the raw resource appears to be sustainable, there is no mention in the proposal of a pool of vendors to supply the chips or if there are any issues in
supply if potentially publically funded pre-commercial activities do not materialize.
This project submitted by Chugach Electric Association is for a reconnaissance study to determine the feasibility of developing a waste to energy system for electricity generation.
The waste to energy system would be located in Anchorage and utilize a portion of the approximately 330,000 tons of refuse disposed in the municipal landfill. At this time it is not
known if the project is sustainable relying solely on the landfill. Annual usage of refuse will be determined in this study.
This project is a resubmittal of a Round 5 proposal for construction of a combined wood pellet boiler and solar thermal system that would provide heat for both a 3,200 square foot shop/office
building and a 1,160 square foot administration building. This is a similar system that is installed in the Ionia community located in Kasilof. It is expected that this combined system
will displace 1,818 gallons of diesel fuel per year and 1,022 gallons of propane for a combined savings of $11,560. Wood pellets would come from either in-state suppliers such as Superior
Pellets in North Pole or from Gulkana Village?s small pellet plant. Pellets may also be purchased from local building supply stores. Given the relatively small annual pellet requirement,
sourcing a reliable supply should not present a problem. The project proposal lists a purchase price of pellets at approximately $250.00/ton and a 15 ton requirement which totals $3,750
per year in pellet costs.
This project submitted by the City and Borough of Yakutat requests design and construction funds for two Garn 2000 boilers. The boilers will displace about 7,000 gallons of diesel and
consume 38 cords of wood. Forest Service and village corporation lands are nearby with an extensive road network built from previous harvest operations. From recent inventory analysis
as stated in the proposal, a sustainable annual supply of 800 cords is available. Stands are generally second growth on previous cut over lands. Many of the forest stands are in need
of pre-commercial thinning. The Village Corporation and Forest Service have committed to making the timber available. The current rate of fuelwood in Yakutat is $200 per cord. It
is not clear in the proposal of who would provide this material or what firewood vendors are currently doing business in the area.
This project submitted by the City of Galena requests construction funding for a biomass boiler for the Galena Interior Learning Academy campus. The projected amount of biomass needed
per year is 2,500 tons with a delivery cost of $200 per ton. An updated forest inventory completed by Tanana Chiefs Conference in 2012 reported biomass dried tons within various radii
of Galena. A sustainable annual harvest level of over 3,600 tons is available within a 4 mile radius indicating ample resource availability for the project. The village corporation
has signed a letter of support and is willing to enter into a contract for the sale of timber which will support procurement of the biomass. This commitment combined with nearby state
lands that would also be available as a raw wood supply should provide a means for a sustainable timber harvest operation in this area of Alaska.
This project submitted by the City of Kotzebue requests final design and construction funding for a refuse derived wood fired boiler that would also be capable of burning wood pellets.
The project will utilize 300 tons of refuse derived fuel. If wood pellets are used as a supplemental feed stock, the price is anticipated to be around $300 per delivered ton. This
project appears to be sustainable in that the roughly 22 million BTUs of paper waste are generated per day in Kotzebue. This project requires about 3,442 million BTUs per year or about
40% of the total yearly generated paper waste.
This project submitted by the Ketchikan Gateway Borough requests construction funding to install two pellet fired boilers. One boiler would be installed in the Ketchikan Airport and
the other in the Ketchikan Gateway Borough High School. The boilers would be designed to use standard grade pellets which allow for higher ash content. The total combined demand is
approximately 1,230 tons per year at an average price of $275 per ton. Discussions for a long term pellet supply contract have been made with Tongass Forest Enterprises that is offering
contracts up to 5 years in length for volumes exceeding 500 tons per year. A silo would house the bulk delivery of pellets in Ketchikan. This successful fuel delivery model is similar
to what is employed in Juneau to provide pellets to the Sealaska corporate building.
This project submitted by the Minto Village Council seeks final design and construction funding to install a hydronic wood boiler serving the multi-purpose building and the health clinic.
The actual boiler type will be determined in consultation with the Council and AEA. The proposal states that the wood will be sourced from local forests owned by the village corporation,
Seth-do-ya-ah. A forest inventory conducted by the Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program concludes that a project using about 100 cords per year could easily source all its fuel
within one mile of the Elliot Highway. Wood species would primarily be fire killed spruce with some green timber as well. TCC will also assist the village in developing a harvest
and operations plan to ensure sustainability of the project. It is expected that 11,400 gallons of fuel oil will be offset by the use of wood. Oil prices average about $5 per gallon
and the delivered wood price is estimated at $200 per cord however this amount seems low for Interior Alaska and may be closer to $250 per cord. An important aspect of the project
is a statement from the executive director of the village corporation supporting the project and committing to resource supply. The letter states that the corporation supports harvest
in the burn area that is located approximately 40 miles north of the village.
This project submitted by the Haines Borough seeks funding to conduct construction of ten wood pellet boilers and storage silos in several Borough-owned buildings. It is expected that
the pellet boilers will displace 80,000 gallons of fuel oil annually for a savings of $59,000. This is based on a pellet delivered price of between $300 and $360 per ton and consuming
about 695 tons of pellets. The borough is working with Sealaska and other potential pellet suppliers to provide a secure, long-term supply of pellets. Pellets are sourced from Washington
and delivered by Sealaska of Juneau. This project appears to be well thought out and likely to be successful given the fact that the Sealaska Corporation already is utilizing a significant
amount of pellets with a proven fuel delivery system. The proposal also mentions that Chilkoot Indian Association in Haines is considering the construction of a pellet plant in Haines.
If this materializes, it could provide another source of pellets to the borough. Timber resources in the Haines State Forest are adequate to provide a significant local source of
raw material for pellet production. The State Division of Forestry is currently updating the Haines State Forest inventory to be able to more accurately describe the volume estimates
of its lands.
This project is for upgrade of two Garn boilers at the Thorne Bay School to larger capacity units. The original units would be moved and installed in the Whale Pass and Hollis Schools.
The project would also fund a Garn installation at the Naukati School. All of the schools are located within the Tongass National Forest on Prince of Wales Island. The proposal states
that approximately 20-40 million board feet is available sustainably per Forest Service estimates. A vendor has been delivering wood to the Thorne Bay School and it appears other vendors
are available. A sustainable wood supply for the approximately 265 annual cord consumption does not seem to be a problem.
This project is for design and construction for 4 Garn wood fired boilers adjacent to the Hydaburg school site. The units would plumb into the school?s heating system, four teacher
housing units and a greenhouse. It is estimated that 200 cords of wood per year would be required to fire the Garn units. This is well within the realm of sustainability as the Tongass
National Forest is stated to have an annual resource availability of 60-70 million board feet. It is not clear what firewood vendors are in place to supply this volume but the project
proposal states that the Howard Valentine School in Coffman Cove purchased 200 cords from a commercial vendor. If vendors are available to supply the raw material, and the Forest Service
offers up volume, then there should be sufficient biomass available for the project.
This project is for design and construction of a wood chip fired boiler at Tazlina. The system would be used to heat four collocated community public buildings. The supply of chips
is expected to come from NRCS funded moose habitat clearings occurring on Ahtna lands and on BIA funded hazard fuel breaks. Roughly 116 green tons will be required annually. Based
on state lands inventory data collected in the Glennallen area, roughly 30 green tons per acre of above ground biomass is present on the forest lands. The amount of raw material required
for Tazlina would be quite sustainable if harvested in the Copper River Basin area. In the event these publicly funded projects are unable to provide biomass, Tazlina is willing to
procure the raw material at an estimated cost of $90.00/green ton. They would also be willing to purchase fuel wood locally at $250-300 per cord and then chip prior to burning. At
a fuel price of $90.00/ green ton, the annual fuel purchase price would be $10,400. This amount is significantly lower than the annual cost ($39,582) of 8,078 gallons of fuel oil.
One good aspect of this proposal is that although ease of stoking is achieved by a chip system, Tazlina expects to use information from the Mentasta village use of a similar system
for trial. If it does not perform adequately for Mentasta then Tazlina may default to a more standard Garn solid wool boiler. A commitment from Ahtna to provide the moose clearing
residue at no cost other than chipping was stated in the application with attachment. The attached letter was not available for this review.
This project is for design and construction of a new biomass boiler to heat the Craig High School. The boiler will be in addition to one that is currently operational and is heating
the elementary and middle schools. The system will use dried wood fuel from the AEA funded drier at Viking Lumber. Wood supply for this project appears sustainable because Viking?s
raw wood supply originates from a variety of land owners including the Tongass National Forest, Southeast State Forest and village corporation lands. The overall annual demand of the
new and old boiler installations will only consume about 2% of the annual production of biomass at the mill.
This project was reviewed for the Round 6 application period. No changes for wood requirement have been made in the current application (approximately 1,037 green tons 30% moisture
content). The approximately 20-75 acres of timber per year required for this project, depending on timber harvest equipment configuration, would be quite sustainable for this area
of the Tanana Valley.
This project is for feasibility and design of a wood heating system and district heating loop for an office building and lodge owned by the Organized Village of Kake. The assessment
will expand on previous reconnaissance level work performed by Dan Parrent in 2008. The scope of the study will include examining the suitability and economics of various wood boiler
systems, comparing costs of locally sourced cordwood and imported bulk fuel and conducting a resource inventory for local cordwood production. The study will also compare job creation
attributes between locally sourced wood and imported pellets. At this time no known sources of forest inventory information exist for this area but potential sources could include
the Forest Service, since much of the surrounding area is within the Tongass National Forest. Sealaska or the Division of Forestry may also maintain some useable inventory data. It
is expected that adequate biomass resources are available to sustain the project given that the project proposal estimates a demand of 53 cords per year.
This proposal submitted by Mentasta Traditional Council (MTC) seeks construction funding for the installation of a cordwood fueled Garn boiler heating system for four community facilities
located centrally in the village of Mentasta. MTC has consulted with the City of Tanana and Gulkana Village Council which both have operating Garn units. This project hopes to displace
approximately 22,000 gallons of heating oil. This would require the burning of about 220 cords annually to meet the heating loads of the four facilities. The amount of wood stoking
may be somewhat optimistic given that the village of Tanana is burning between 35 and 50 cords per Garn unit. However, this depends on the number of times per day each Garn boiler
is fired.
Seasoned cord wood sells for $200 per cord in Mentasta. This supply is expected to come from vendors in the Tok area. Harvest of Tok fuel wood is managed on a sustainable basis by
the State Division of Forestry, Tok Area Office. The harvest generally occurs on Tanana Valley State Forest lands which have established an annual allowable harvest amount. The delivery
of 220 cords annually would not exceed this amount.
This project submitted by the Haines Borough seeks funding to conduct design and construction of six wood pellet boilers and storage silos in several Borough-owned buildings. It is
expected that the pellet boilers will displace 31,000 gallons of fuel oil annually for a savings of over $50,000. This is based on a pellet delivered price of $350 per ton. The borough
is working with Sealaska and other potential pellet suppliers to provide a secure, long-term supply of pellets. Pellets are sourced from Washington and delivered by Sealaska of Juneau.
This project appears to be well thought out and likely to be successful given the fact that the Sealaska Corporation already is utilizing a significant amount of pellets with a proven
fuel delivery system. The proposal also mentions that Chilkoot Indian Association in Haines is considering the construction of a pellet plant in Haines. If this materializes, it could
provide another source of pellets to the borough. Timber resources in the Haines State Forest are adequate to provide a significant local source of raw material for pellet production.
The State Division of Forestry is currently updating the Haines State Forest inventory to be able to more accurately describe the volume estimates of its lands.
This project submitted by the Fairbanks North Star Borough seeks additional funding to continue with the construction of a wood pellet boiler for the Ticasuk Brown Elementary School
in North Pole. It is expected that 20,000 gallons of fuel oil will be displaced annually by the wood boiler. The installation of a pellet boiler is expected to save the school district
an estimated $31,000 per year. The supply of pellets should not be a problem since Superior Pellet Fuels is located only a short distance from the school and manufactures pellets for
the Fairbanks area. The supply of raw wood to the pellet plant is also sustainable and is in part being sourced from state timber sales in the Tanana Valley State Forest. In the project
proposal it mentions working with the local supplier of pellets and alternative sources if the local provider is unable to meet demand. This is a plus for this project to have multiple
supply sources identified. The proposal provides an estimate of $295 per ton as the delivered price of pellets to the wood boiler.
This project submitted by Interior Regional Housing Authority will provide feasibility studies for additional Interior villages. The project is essentially a continuation of last year?s
project # 822 proposal. It will provide for a feasibility study of seven Interior villages and for pre-engineering analysis of the size and type of boilers required. The studies will
examine the use of proposed cordwood fueled Garn boiler heating systems similar to the facility in use for the village of Tanana but, the analyses are not limited to these systems.
The proposal seeks to acquire forest inventory data from Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program. The studies will include forest inventories and wood harvest assessments prepared
by TCC and will use a combination of existing inventory data and classified satellite imagery. This project will continue work to determine an operable sustainable biomass resource
supply for individual communities within the region.
This project submitted by Interior Regional Housing Authority would design and construct wood heating facilities in three Interior Alaska communities out of a total of 12 that have conducted
or will conduct feasibility assessments. The studies include forest inventories and wood harvest assessments prepared by Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program and use a combination
of existing inventory data and classified satellite imagery. Tanana Chiefs has currently assessed the villages of Hughes, Ruby, Nulato, Kaltag, and Holy Cross. The selection process
will also look at village capacity to help ensure a particular project?s success. It is likely that the wood heating systems will be similar to the village of Tanana which utilizes
Garn boilers. Many of these villages are within forested areas along the Yukon River. A sustainable supply of wood is generally thought to be available for the scale of these projects.
Three entities including the Nenana City School District, the City of Nenana, and the Nenana Native Council have submitted this project for design of a wood fired district heating system.
Toghotthele Corporation owns a significant amount of timber land near Nenana and has offered support for this project and is interested in participating in sales of the raw resource.
The area is also close to the Tanana Valley State Forest which maintains a logging road infrastructure and offers timber sales in the Nenana area. This raw resource woodshed combined
with volume potentially from state land agriculture clearings and Mental Health Trust Authority lands should ensure a sustainable harvest operation. It is anticipated that this project
will utilize a woodchip boiler that requires approximately 1,037 green tons (30% moisture content). The Tanana Valley State Forest Inventory update estimates 59 tons of above ground
biomass per acre. Thus approximately 20 acres of timber per year would be required for this project. The amount would be quite sustainable for this area of the Tanana Valley.
This project submitted by the City of Galena seeks to design and construct a biomass boiler for the Galena Interior Learning Academy campus. The boiler will be located at the Galena
Base Steam Plant adjacent to the former Galena Air Force Base. The chosen system consists of a 4-7 MMBTU woodchip steam boiler, using wood fuels up to 40% moisture content. The projected
amount needed per year is approximately 2,900 tons of woodchips which would displace 224,831 gallons of #1 fuel oil. An estimate of delivered biomass modeled for other off-the-road
communities is $175-$200/ton. Current fuel oil at $4.91/gallon results in an annual fuel savings of $523,920 per year using $200/ton for the woodchips. The Louden Tribal Council previously
conducted a feasibility study of the project. As part of the feasibility study an initial estimate of available biomass on Galena village corporation lands was conducted by Tanana
Chiefs Conference Forestry Program in June 2012. The estimate confirmed that adequate supplies of biomass are available. The estimate was general in nature and a more detailed estimate
has been contracted with Geographic Resource Solutions. This project would also be able to potentially harvest timber on nearby state lands however, detailed estimates of available
timber volume from these lands has not been conducted. This project appears to be well thought out and likely to be successful given the fact that a significant amount of pre-planning
has been undertaken. The village corporation has signed a letter of support and is willing to enter into a contract for the sale of timber which will support procurement of the biomass.
This commitment combined with nearby state lands that would also be available as a raw wood supply should provide a means for a sustainable timber harvest operation in this area of
Alaska.
This project submitted by Alaska Power & Telephone seeks to undertake final design and permitting of a 2MW combined heat and power system located in Tok. This project has had extensive
review of the wood resource in and around Tok. The state Division of Forestry has performed work to update the Tanana Valley State Forest inventory and has also completed an analysis
of wood availability within several mileage distance radii of the proposed CHP facility. In addition to the forest inventory work, Tok Area Forestry has conducted research to determine
local values of total above ground wood weight by species and size class. Regression equations developed from this research will be applied to the forest inventory update to calculate
green weight values in addition to more common volume measurements such as cubic and board feet. Currently the state is developing a preliminary best interest finding to determine if
it should proceed with a competitive 25-year timber sale contract for biomass.
This project undertakes final design and construction of a wood-fired hydronic heating system in three Seward schools. The project is essentially a continuation of last year?s project
# 834 proposal in that it seeks design and construction funds. The project was reviewed in a document similar to this last year. Briefly, in pre-feasibility reports prepared by USDA
Forest Service, State and Private Forestry, a wood pellet system that replaces the oil fired boilers appears to be cost effective with a reasonable simple payback time period. Pellets
would be shipped to Seward either from in state or out of state suppliers depending on price and availability. It is estimated that 80% of the annual fuel oil consumption could be replaced
by wood for an annual savings of approximately $117,330. This is based on a fuel oil cost of $461,794 at $3.83 per gallon. The project estimates an average wood resource demand of
1,121 tons of wood pellets per year though it is not clear at what price the pellets would be bought for. Working backwards from the amount claimed in savings, roughly $344,464 would
be spent for the pellets or $307.28 per ton. The pre-feasibility study researched commercially available pellet providers and identified vendors from both in-state and Outside including
Superior Pellets in North Pole, a small plant in Ketchikan and Pacific Northwest and Canadian sources. It also looked at BTU comparisons between pellets and fuel oil with an estimated
price of $453/ton equating to $3.82/gallon. As mentioned above for project # 921, ideally several quotes should be available for pellet delivery to the facility to enable a range of
estimated raw material costs to be calculated.
This project submitted by the Native Village of Afognak would produce a feasibility study and conceptual design for the installation of a biofuel system to heat the Kodiak High School.
The proposal seeks to explore and assess identified potential feedstock material. This focuses on the use of available recycled material in Kodiak that may consist of cardboard, other
paper resources and woody material species (if required). The boiler configuration proposed is downdraft gasification technology capable of converting locally available waste streams
into power used to heat the school. Project implementation will depend on the amount of material available. If it is determined that there is not enough material, then other sources
such as pellets and possibly chips may be able to supplant the raw resource. Afognak Island timber harvest operations could possible be a supplier of this resource but delivered costs
are unknown at this time. The main information gathered on feedstock supply currently consists of Coast Guard base info of 707 tons of fiber waste that was recycled last year.
This project would design and construct a wood pellet boiler to provide heat to an Association of Village Council Presidents Rural Housing Administration campus in Bethel. The campus
provides housing for 48 low-income households, a 30-bed aviation dormitory, and a 20-bed construction worker bunkhouse. It is anticipated that 540 tons of wood pellets would be required
annually. It is estimated that with shipping costs included the annual cost would be $248,347 or $459.90 per ton. A silo would house the bulk delivery of pellets in Bethel. AVCP
estimates $103,264 per year in fuel savings through the conversion to pellets. This is based on a diesel fuel cost of $6.28 per gallon. At these prices and a total grant cost of almost
$3.4 million, the simple pay back time is about 33 years. Pellet costs were obtained from an engineering study investigating the use of pellet boilers at the AVCP Regional Housing
Authority Complex. This study however was not included in the application. Ideally several quotes should be available for pellet delivery to Bethel since these prices form the overall
cost savings assumptions used in the proposal.
A letter of support from the president of AVCP acknowledges the benefits of woody biomass and considers the possible future use of biomass from the upper Kuskokwim River area.
The project is for the replacement of oil fired boilers with wood boilers that utilize either wood pellets or chips to provide heat for the Hydaburg Schools campus. The campus consists
of an elementary school, high school and a gymnasium each with its own oil-fired boiler. If pellets are the chosen fuel source, Sealaska has committed to delivering pellets to Hydaburg
on a bi-monthly basis shipped from Juneau to Hydaburg for about $300/ton. A silo would house the bulk delivery of pellets in Hydaburg. This fuel delivery model is similar to what
is employed in Juneau to provide pellets to the Sealaska corporate building. Hydaburg estimates $18,000 per year in fuel savings through the conversion to pellets.
If wood chips are the chosen fuel source, Viking Lumber in Craig has committed to delivering chips to Hydaburg for $75 per ton. Hydaburg estimates $27,000 per year in fuel savings through
the conversion to chips. This project appears to be well thought out and having two confirmed sources of delivered raw wood supply is an added bonus. The proposal however examines
the total life cycle cost and when considering the increase in operation and maintenance costs associated with wood heat sources there is little economic incentive to convert the buildings
to wood heating. The use of in state produced wood chips however has other economic spin offs of a positive nature to the southeast Alaska economy. This project may have a better
pay back if a solid fuel wood heater such as a Garn boiler is used in a single building installation.
This project is for the construction of two centrally located Garn boilers to heat 5 community buildings within the village. This project was reviewed last year in the Round 4 applications
and it has been revised somewhat this year. Total wood use is estimated at 101 bone-dry tons per year. Chugachmiut?s GIS and forest inventory data identifies 4,025 acres of Sitka
spruce on accessible Native allotments near Port Graham that contain an average 98 bone-dry tons per acre. In addition 10,640 acres of Sitka spruce covered Village Corporation lands
are also present. There is a developed logging road system to these lands. Using the 98 BDT per acre volume, approximately one acre of timber would be enough to supply the annual requirements
of the Garn boilers. The project appears quite sustainable based on the stated quantities of the raw wood resource.
This project is similar in scope to the above Tanacross project # 881. It is for the construction of three centrally located Garn boilers to heat five clustered community buildings.
It is expected that about 10,800 gallons of heating oil will be displaced by the project. The annual wood requirement is 110 cords of seasoned fuel wood at $220 per cord. The Mentasta
Community Wildfire Protection Plan calls for 1,200 acres of forest managed for hazard fuel reduction. Based on the Tok Management Area?s average of 14 cords per acre, a significant
amount of volume could be available from the hazard fuel reduction clearings. Fuel wood is also available for purchase from Tok at the delivered price of $220.00 per cord.
The Tanana Chiefs Conference forestry program conducted a forest inventory for Mentasta Village Lands in 1989. In the report a spruce allowable harvest of 106 acres per year was calculated
yielding over 2,000 cords. Thus, the annual wood requirement for this project appears sustainable even if the wood resource was mostly sourced from village lands.
This project is for construction of three centrally located Garn boilers to heat four clustered community buildings. It is expected that about 26,000 gallons of heating oil will be
displaced by the project. At a price of $5.00 per gallon, $126,500 is spent annually on fuel oil purchases. Based on the village of Tanana?s experience in operating the Garn boilers,
one cord of seasoned fuel wood is roughly equivalent to 100 gallons of fuel oil. Thus this conversion equates to an annual wood requirement for Tanacross of about 260 cords or 87 cords
per boiler. This amount of wood stoking may be somewhat optimistic given that the village of Tanana is burning between 35 and 50 cords per Garn unit. However, this depends on the
number of times per day each Garn boiler is fired. Cordwood can be purchased for $200 per cord for a total price of $52,000.
A large fire burned in the Tanacross area in 2010 which contains significant dead material suitable for firewood. In addition Tanacross has identified hazard fuel reduction areas of
1,800 acres that would also be a supply of firewood. The 2010 Tanana Valley Inventory Update indicates the Tok Management Area averages about 14 cords per acre. Tanacross would then
need to harvest approximately 19 acres per year to supply the Garn boilers. This amount appears to be sustainable based on the number of forested acres within the State Forest and
Tanacross Inc. lands and with the additional burned over lands. An appropriate harvest schedule would need to be developed to plan access to these areas.
This project will extend a new hot water heating and return loop from the recently completed Tok biomass heating plant to two additional buildings. A combined heat and power system
will be added to the biomass heating plant and completed in the fall of 2011. When this CHP system is operational it will generate waste heat as a byproduct. The intent is to recover
the surplus heat and supply it to the additional two buildings. This project was reviewed last year in the Round 4 applications and it has been revised slightly this year. Estimated
biomass fuel use for the entire facility including electrical generation and heating the additional buildings is stated between 25 and 35 acres per year. There would also be hazard
fuel reduction material and sawmill waste material available as a biomass fuel source. The acreage required for the facility is well within the sustained yield estimates for the Tok
Management Area. The 2010 Tanana Valley Inventory Update indicates the Tok Management Area can sustain an annual harvest of 984 acres within existing poletimber and sawtimber types.
This does not account for additional acreage available through in-growth of reproduction types and burned timber salvage which would increase this amount.
This project will complete a study to determine the feasibility of a biomass fuel system for the existing water treatment and wastewater treatment plants. It is unknown in the project
proposal what system is favored or information about the known raw material resource. The project proposal states that Klawock is surrounded by forests and that biomass supply sources
are readily available in and around the community and throughout Prince of Wales Island. The proposal does mention the benefits of Craig?s wood biomass system. This chip based system
sourced from sawmill waste could include wood chip deliveries to Klawock.
This project is for a feasibility study to review the potential for a biomass heating system for the City of Lower Kalskag water treatment plant. The project proposal doesn?t state
what system it is in favor of or the potential fuel oil offset. If a Garn boiler system similar to Kobuk were installed, then a likely scenario would be a wood demand of about 35 cords
per year. The feasibility study will include a forest data and harvest assessment to determine the extent to which biomass could be potentially utilized. An assessment of forest resources
in this area would ensure that the proposed project is sustainable. In 2004 the Tanana Chiefs Conference conducted a Native allotment forest inventory for the Bureau of Indian Affairs
along the lower Kuskokwim River including the Lower Kalskag area. This data could provide some valuable on the ground per acre timber volume estimates to assist in the forest data
assessment.
This project is for design and construction of a Garn boiler system to heat Kobuk?s water treatment plant building. It is estimated that 35 cords per year would be required for the
facility. The fuel source would be purchased at $259.50 per cord. A total of 4,200 gallons of diesel would be displaced by the wood boiler. A pre-feasibility report examined the
available wood resources near the village and stated that more than adequate resources were available to support a larger multi-building biomass system rated at 183 cords per year.
At this time due to some uncertainty in resource access and operability which was mentioned in the resource assessment, a 35 cord annual use appears sustainable. This is a good first
step for a remote village to utilize woody biomass in its area.
This project will provide final feasibility and conceptual designs, build, and install of a wood-fired hydronic heating system for the three Seward schools. It is estimated that 80%
of the annual fuel oil consumption could be replaced by wood for an annual savings of approximately $239,000. Pre-feasibility reports have been prepared by USDA Forest Service, State
and Private Forestry. A wood pellet system that replaces the oil fired boilers appears to be cost effective with a reasonable simple payback time period. Pellets would be shipped
to Seward either from in state or out of state suppliers depending on price and availability. Given that the Interior?s Superior Pellet Fuels is located near the Alaska Railroad a
potential to ship pellets to Seward by rail may exist.
This project will provide final feasibility and conceptual designs, build, and install of a wood-fired hydronic heating system for the three Seward schools. It is estimated that 80%
of the annual fuel oil consumption could be replaced by wood for an annual savings of approximately $239,000. Pre-feasibility reports have been prepared by USDA Forest Service, State
and Private Forestry. A wood pellet system that replaces the oil fired boilers appears to be cost effective with a reasonable simple payback time period. Pellets would be shipped
to Seward either from in state or out of state suppliers depending on price and availability. Given that the Interior?s Superior Pellet Fuels is located near the Alaska Railroad a
potential to ship pellets to Seward by rail may exist.
The project is for the replacement of an oil fired boiler with a pellet boiler to provide heat for Kake City School District buildings. Pellets would be provided by Sealaska Corporation
and shipped from Juneau to Kake in bulk quantities. A silo would house the pellets in Kake. This fuel delivery model is similar to what is employed in Juneau to provide pellets to
the Sealaska corporate building. Kake estimates $80,000 per year in fuel savings through the conversion to pellets. This project appears to be well thought out and likely to be successful
given the fact that the Sealaska Corporation already is utilizing a significant amount of pellets with a proven fuel delivery system.
This project is for a feasibility study to utilize biomass to provide sustainable energy for a 30,000 square foot public health center in Tazlina. The study would seek to determine
if the biomass would be better utilized by existing Copper Valley Electric Association facilities or as stand-alone biomass power units within individual facilities such as the health
center itself. The project proposal lists the volume availability from the Division of Forestry?s Glennallen inventory report and then applies the sustained yield ratio to total volume
to Ahtna forested lands. This method provides a good starting point on volume availability. The project proposal further states that operability will affect the final volume availability
amount. It should be noted that the Division of Forestry is currently conducting volume assessments on Gulkana, Gakona and Tazlina areas of Ahtna lands. The Glennallen inventory will
be applied to timber type acres within the three villages. This data will be useful in the final analysis of sustainability and wood sourcing.
This project will provide feasibility studies for additional Interior villages. The project is essentially a continuation of last year?s project # 637 proposal. It will provide for
a feasibility study of seven Interior villages and for pre-engineering analysis of the size and type of boilers required. The studies will examine the use of proposed cordwood fueled
Garn boiler heating systems similar to the facility in use for the village of Tanana but, the analyses are not limited to these systems. The proposal seeks to acquire forest inventory
data from TCC?s existing village forest inventory projects in the region. Two villages, Nenana and Tanacross are also adjacent to State Forest lands. Inventory data for the Tanana
Valley State Forest is available that provides data for additional wood source areas. This project will continue work to determine an operable sustainable biomass resource supply for
individual communities within the region.
The resource supply analysis for Huslia?s two Garn boiler system would identify specific areas to be harvested and utilize Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program?s GIS system along
with other existing regional forestry and Native allotment inventories conducted Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program and others. A preliminary feasibility assessment prepared
by the Juneau Economic Development Council confirms that driftwood can be a significant source of wood. This project will require approximately 254 cords of fuel wood which equals
about 125 cords per year for each Garn unit to displace approximately 21,736 gallons of #1 fuel oil. This resource supply analysis would assist in determining if Huslia has sufficient
accessible harvest areas.
This project would design and construct wood heating facilities in three Interior Alaska communities out of a total of eight that are currently conducting feasibility assessments. The
ongoing studies include forest inventories and wood harvest assessments. The selection process will also look at village capacity to help ensure a particular project?s success. It
is likely that the wood heating systems will be similar to the village of Tanana which utilizes Garn boilers. Many of these villages are within forested areas along the Yukon River.
A sustainable supply of wood is generally thought to be available for the scale of these projects.
"This project is for a proposed wood chip heating system for Glennallen School Facilities. The system would utilize a Messersmith Boiler System similar to the ones constructed in Tok
and Delta. The project proposal states that the system would displace 1,266,300 gallons over a 20 year period or about 63,300 gallons per year. It is estimated that 1,007 green tons
of biomass would be required annually for the boiler. An important positive aspect to this proposal is a letter of support from the local sawmill that states a commitment to provide
wood chips at $80 per ton.
The Division of Forestry?s Glennallen forest inventory indicates that within a 30 mile distance from the town center there is an estimated 4,400 tons of biomass annually available on
a sustainable basis. An average of 11.37 net tons per acre of volume is present. The 1,007 tons needed annually for the boiler would equate to approximately 89 acres per year. In
light of biomass availability, which doesn?t factor in additional supply potentially available from Ahtna and BLM lands, the project appears quite sustainable.
"
This community has a completed Forest Stewardship plans developed with DOF which should help assess wood supply.
DOF has not been directly involved but has discussed fiber supply with Ahtna. Ahtna has been very supportive of the chip fired boiler proposed for the Kenny Lake School, and would likely
make fiber available for this project in the future. Having Ahtna develop a pellet facility would create a market that would greatly increase the ability of all landowners in the area
to manage their forests for wood production, reduction of wildfire hazards, and wildlife habitat enhancement.
This community has a completed Forest Stewardship plans developed with DOF which should help assess wood supply.
This community has a completed Forest Stewardship plans developed with DOF which should help assess wood supply.
This community has a completed Forest Stewardship plans developed with DOF which should help assess wood supply. The AK Wood Energy Development Task Force completed a feasibility study
for this project with very promising results. The high cost of heating fuel and the problems with delivery due to low water levels, made this project pencil out with a very short return
on the investment (less than 10 years). The wood resource would come solely from MTNT native corporate land. MTNT would have to be willing to enter into a long term timber supply
commitment. The 2002 Vinasale Fire burned most of the timber that was accessible by road. The burned timber may still be a viable wood source. The resource availability would have
to be reassessed.
Proposers have not yet talked with Municipality of Anchorage about proposed harvesting on municipal park land. Review proposers\' qualifications.
The Div. of Forestry assisted the training center with this project.? The center has an isolated site powered by 3 diesel generators.? The plan is to utilize timber from the Tanana Valley
State Forest and other State land surrounding the site and DOF would accommodate the need for wood.? If the project is successful, the technology could be applied to a village for power.
Gasification is an expensive and technology driven process.? Because of these factors, the project may not pencil out.? ?Feasibility? would be a step in the right direction.
This community has a completed Forest Stewardship plans developed with DOF which should help assess wood supply.
S2 DG GS Comments Feasibility
Geothermal could be considered as a potential energy source as well. The Navy conducted a study from 1976 to 1982 and drilled geothermal observation holes, reported in Katzenstein, Allan
M., and Whelan, James A., 1985, Geothermal potential of Adak Island, Alaska: China Lake, California, Naval Weapons Center, NWC TP 6676, 92 p. They reported that: “Favorable results
point to the desirability of further drilling to verify the existence of an economic geothermal energy source.†The Adak Renewable Energy Reconnaissance Report (AEA REF Grant #2195450,
August 29, 2011) reports that a consultant hired to evaluate geothermal potential on Adak was unable to obtain the results of those test. DGGS recently obtained a copy of this report
and AEA has this document as well.
The proposed project plans to conduct a LIDAR survey initially to locate faults and topographical details to design a drilling program that will be also based on an earlier reconnaissance
study in 2011 (Renewable Energy Grant number 7040073) that included collection of detailed water analyses, conduct a shallow temperature probe study and to locate a number of hot springs
in the area. The reconnaissance study suggested that the geothermal zone at Tenakee Inlet is broader than originally thought and that water geochemistry from this site suggests temperatures
of (127?C, 260?F) are sufficient for binary electrical power generation (Organic Rankine Cycle). It further suggests that ground-based geophysical studies such as SP and magnetotellurics
would not be suitable because of the water saturated ground and the lower temperature of the resource. It appears that is why the Round VII proposal will add a LIDAR survey to attempt
to examine local structures. This Round VII proposal includes the drilling of two slim holes to about 2,500 feet each to collect thermal temperature data and conduct well testing.
This is more within the capabilities of a slim-hole drill rig than an earlier proposal (Round VI) that called for drill holes up to 4000 feet deep. The project will prepare a conceptual
design to develop the resource and refine their economic analysis with the primary goal to collect the necessary data to verify resource viability and determine whether the project
should move on to an investigation and development in a Phase 3. The proposal costs seem reasonable for slim-hole drilling to 2500 feet as well as the time necessary to drill two holes
with a slim-hole drill rig (about 50 days for completion).
We recommend that the applicant provide a detailed outline of the methodology that will use the reconnaissance thermal probe and chemistry data along with the LIDAR data to select and
justify the drilling locations for the first drill hole, understanding that the second drill hole would be determined on the basis of the results of the first drill hole. It may be
that after the first drill hole is completed, two 1250 ft deep holes may be necessary rather than a single 2500 foot deep hole. This is the nature of exploratory drilling. Additionally,
we suggest a summary description of slim-hole drill rigs being considered and their depth capabilities and bore hole diameters should be included. It appears from the proposal that
they will not be actually coring with these rigs, but rather collecting cutting chips for their studies that will include fluid inclusions.
The proposal seeks to explore near the village of Elim for low to moderate temperature geothermal resources to determine their potential for binary (Organic Rankine Cycle - similar to
Chena Hot Springs) electrical power generation for the community. The proposal recognizes the need to locate a nearby geothermal source that is of sufficient temperature to be economically
viable to generate electricity using a binary system. They propose a 4 stage approach to evaluate any potential geothermal resource: 1.) Thermal Infrared Mapping and Analysis; 2) Ground
Based Reconnaissance-water chemistry and geologic mapping. 3) Develop a Conceptual Model of the System; and 4) Preliminary Design Analysis and Cost. We concur that collecting new chemistry
data for Clear Creek hot springs is an important step and would show if there are any changes in the predicted reservoir temperatures from the earlier 1970?s era chemistry and is a
valuable component of this proposal. Visiting the other four springs identified in Figure 1 and collecting water temperature and water chemistry data is important as well. Assuming
those results are positive, the next step in evaluating the potential geothermal resource, after the reconnaissance investigation is completed, would be to determine the best location
to conduct test drilling. It is not clear in the proposal how these determinations will be made, and we recommend that the applicant provide details on how the thermal and geologic
mapping will be used to select the best drill sites with the highest chance of encountering the active hydrothermal system, and sufficient porosity and permeability to evaluate the
resource potential.
This project proposes to conduct detailed gravity and SP geophysics in several areas where a study published in 1985 suggested there are helium anomalies that may denote geothermal potential.
One area in the 1985 study was suggested as a drilling target. The proposed project states on page 18, under .Milestone or Task 2c ?Conduct geothermal resource studies?. In order to
complete our review of the geologic feasibility of this proposal, the applicant needs to provide details on the specific geothermal resource studies they plan to conduct, what geological
and/or geophysical methods will be used, what are the results these methods will report, and where these studies will be conducted (including location maps). Additionally, the proposal
should address their plan for transmitting energy from the proposed geothermal sites to the local power grid.
The proposed project is requesting ~$32.5 million for geothermal reconnaissance that will include drilling, feasibility, design and permitting and construction of a road to the drilling
area. $20 million is indicated for drilling of test wells. The proposal plans to design a field exploration campaign to delineate the geothermal system as accurately as possible and
will use reservoir modeling and other tools to analyze the exploration and drilling data as the project proceeds. The proposal lacks sufficient information to review the approach that
will be used to select the drilling sites in the reconnaissance phase. The applicants should provide a detailed outline of the methodology for this proposed study, what necessary information
it will provide that will directly lead to development of the geothermal resource, and provide a detailed list of the planned drilling and geothermal testing operations. This information
should include a description of the current data that indicates the existence and quality of a geothermal resource in the planned project area, any planned non-drilling mapping of the
field, how the wells will be located, the type of drill rig and diameter of the drill holes for the test wells (i.e. are these production test well size?), and how the geothermal reservoir
and flow testing will be evaluated. Additionally, it will be important for the applicant to show how these operations will change what is currently known about the resource from work
performed in the 1980s. It is not possible to evaluate this proposal without significant additional information.
The proposed project plans to conduct mostly slim-hole drilling for up to two drill holes, each to about 4000 feet, to evaluate the geothermal resources. An earlier Renewable Energy
Grant (grant number 7040073) provided funds to conduct a reconnaissance study in 2011 that included collection of detailed water analyses, conduct a shallow temperature probe study
and to locate a number of hot springs in the area. This study suggests that the geothermal zone is broader than originally thought and that water geochemistry suggests temperatures
(127?C, 260?F) sufficient for binary electrical power generation (Organic Rankine Cycle). It further suggests that ground-based geophysical studies such as SP and magnetotellurics would
not be suitable because of the water saturated ground and the lower temperature of the resource. A conceptual model has been developed as the result of the earlier study, and the geothermal
resource may be shallow rather than deep. The proposal costs seem reasonable for slim-hole drilling as well as the time necessary to drill two holes with a slim-hole drill rig (60-75
days). We recommend that the applicant should provide a detailed outline of the methodology that will be used to select and justify the drilling locations for the drill holes. Additionally,
a description of slim hole drill rigs being considered and their depth capabilities and bore hole diameters should be included, along with information on drill coring (continuous or
selective) and how these cores will be used in the study.
Geothermal heat pump
The proposal seeks to investigate the geothermal potential of the Ivanof Bay area and is based on fumaroles fields related to Kupreanof Volcano and a deep oil and gas exploration well
drilled in 1976-77, the Big River A-01. The proposal will gather literature and thermal satellite images, and proposes to test geothermal prospecting and exploration techniques including
geochemical sampling, shallow temperature surveys using thermal probes, gravity and/or magnetotelluric surveys in select locations and evaluate the Big River A-01 core. The proposal
could be improved by providing a map showing the locations of the communities, fumarole fields, oil and gas well and be more specific in delineating the areas where geothermal exploration
will be conducted. The resource proposed for study is distant from the Chignik communities (~90 km, with at least some FWS Refuge land in between). Although the Big River well encountered
geothermally interesting temperatures (~190F) the depth was great (~12,000\') and the drilling log mentions significant hydrothermal mineralization which would would presumably have
a large negative impact on reservoir characteristics. Significant spring systems suggestive of a shallower, more accessible, hydrothermal system do not exist.
The proposal seeks to explore near the village of Elim for low to moderate temperature geothermal resources to determine their potential for binary (Organic Rankine Cycle - similar to
Chena Hot Springs) electrical power generation for the community. The 4 stage approach appears to be reasonable (1. Thermal Infrared Mapping and Analysis; 2) Ground Based Reconnaissance-water
chemistry and geologic mapping. 3) Develop a Conceptual Model of the System; and 4) Preliminary Design Analysis and Cost. The proposal recognizes the need to locate both a nearby source
and of sufficient temperature to be economically viable to generate electricity using a binary system.
The project proposes to seek warm (40?F) ground water to be utilized for a geothermal heat pump system. The proposal refers to Anaktuvuk Pass as being near one of four distinct geothermal
regions, citing AEA?s 2011 Renewable Energy Atlas of Alaska. The nearest identified hot springs is over 150 miles away to the southwest of Anaktuvuk Pass. Because there are no known
nearby geothermal springs, specific details that provide their rational behind this aspect of their proposal, and the methodology used to conduct a reconnaissance study on potential
geothermal resource opportunities within the vicinity of Anaktuvuk Pass, should be provided. This is essentially a heat pump proposal, although the area is well north of areas of successful
heat-pump utilization. Because of the lack of thermal springs in the area, it is likely that 40F water would need to be produced from ~2000-foot wells. The cost of drilling, and the
significant risk of not finding a reservoir at depth with sufficient capacity, need to be considered along with heat-pump economics.
Pilgrim Hot Springs has been known to be a major geothermal anomaly, and suspected for decades of hosting a significant moderate-temperature geothermal resource. Earlier exploration
(?70s and early ?80s) failed to find the upflow zone which produces the surface springs. Location of and drilling into the upflow zone is essential for an understanding of this resource
that is an adequate basis for development decisions. This project suggests a stepwise progression, with drilling following geophysical surveys, which in turn followed geological surveys.
The surveys are proceeding under Phase I of this project, although results are not given. This proposal is for Phase II, drilling and results of phase I are needed to fully evaluate.
The timeline given in the proposal states that this Phase II drilling will be done between about February and November of 2012.
The proposal states that a geothermal resource has not (yet) been positively identified at Spurr, however, enough encouraging signs are present to proceed with exploration. This is
very encouraging news, yet more information from the current efforts is necessary to provide an independent review of the results and evaluate the proposal for funding. The proposal
for ?Phase III? of Spurr geothermal development, which is drilling a full size production well as part of well-field development is scheduled for the summer of 2012, but only after
a go/no-go decision is made at the end of August, 2011, which in turn will be based on Phase II results. Funding should logically proceed stepwise, like exploration, with support for
the next level of effort contingent upon favorable results from the preceding phase.
The current information provided in this proposal, as well as that provided in previous proposals, fails to establish the existence of a robust geothermal resource capable of generating
the amount of electricity described.? In fact, the current data outlined in the press suggests ?the temperature and flow rates in the initial well are insufficient to maintain the level
of electrical production stated as the goal of the project.? In order to correctly evaluate the current proposal, the state will need additional information.? This information should
include:
- Sustained down hole temperature profile from well G1
- Sustained and long term affective flow rates from Well G1
- Any down-hole geophysical information to substantiate water flow, porosity, permeability, and cement bond to casing. (to determine level of fluid influx into wellbore and from what
horizon)
- Any additional observational or deterministic information that could be used to quantitatively evaluate the potential operational capacity of the geothermal system identified.
We will be unable to evaluate the proposal further until this information is provided.
Tenakee Inlet (as opposed to Tenakee Springs) has the highest surface temperature and the highest apparent reservoir temperature (based on chemical geothermometry from the ?80s statewide
inventory program) of any of the southeast Alaska hot-spring systems. There is a reasonable chance of encountering a moderate temperature geothermal resource that would be capable
of generating hundreds of KW to a few MW. Evaluation of the resource generation potential will require direct investigation of reservoir characteristics through properly sited drilling.
The two-phase plan outlined in this proposal; (a) geological and geophysical studies followed by (b) site test drilling, is a reasonable approach and necessary to firmly establish
the existence, location, and characteristics of a resource. However, the proposer?s ability to identify the exact location of the sub-surface resource through geological and geophysical
investigation cannot be determined from the proposal because the work description lacks sufficient detail to fully evaluate. For example, in section 3.2 Phase I it is stated that ?LIDAR
and aerial photography will be collected as well, if deemed useful for this work?. Similarly, site-specific aeromagnetic surveys are mentioned but not described ? it?s unclear what
the target would be (imaging the reservoir?) and how the survey would be configured to achieve the goal. Additional clarification and details of the work plan, and how the information
will be used to provide drilling locations and/or indication of reservoir should be provided to fully evaluate the proposal. Additionally, if chosen for funding, it would seem reasonable
to provide the funds in a phased manner that coincides with the phases of the work: drilling to occur only after geological and geophysical fieldwork and economic, environmental, and
permitting issues are resolved favorably.
Drilling at Akutan during the summer of 2010 confirmed the presence of a high-temperature geothermal resource. This resource is comparable to that at Makushin, and is in the tens-of-megawatts
class, as distinct from resources such as Chena, which is in the hundreds-of-kilowatts class. Akutan?s combination of a good resource and coordinated management and investigation teams
make Akutan the most promising high-temperature geothermal resource in the state. This proposal documents as fully as possible the extent of results of previous and ongoing work.
The proposal itself is for Phase III, final design and permitting. This is clearly the next step, but is somewhat removed from the geologic aspects of the project on which DGGS can
provide meaningful technical comments.
The proposal mentions ?previously discovered gas-bearing strata in shallow holes drilled during exploration at the coal prospect at Jarvis Creek? . The Jarvis Creek coal field was rotary
drilled with air to very shallow depths (<150 ft) and chips not core was collected. A single drill hole encountered a small, pocket of ignitable gas in a sandy black zone beneath shallow
frozen gravels (likely the base of permafrost) between 61-70 ft depth (U.S. Bureau of Mines OFR 7-73). The source and composition of this gas is unknown. It should be noted that small
pockets of biogenic methane is sometimes encountered at shallow depths beneath the permfrost during water well drilling in interior Alaska.
Grant application mentions the CIRI proposed in situ coal gasification study and further states that the resource, technology and economics in the western Cook Inlet is unproven. This
is an accurate assessment
Tenakee Inlet hot springs is known to be one of the hottest springs in southeast Alaska -- ~175F at the surface and ~240F at depth (by geothermometry) ? somewhat hotter than Chena Hot
Springs. This suggests the existence of a resource capable of generating a moderate amount of electricity (as much as a few MW, but probably not tens of MW). However, not much is
known beyond the temperature and flow rate of the springs at the surface. Any attempt to utilize this resource must be preceded by a more focused investigation of the size, temperature,
and depth of the reservoir and the rate at which fluids can be sustainably produced. This proposal is aimed at producing that next-level understanding in a direct and simple way ?
surface geophysics to target small-diameter drill holes that will intersect the resource. The work outlined in this study needs to be done before a rational decision can be made about
the potential utility of Tenakee Inlet springs as a power generation site. This proposal is recommended for funding, but at a lower priority than other geothermal proposals recommended
for funding in this round.
[Round II comments apply] Ormat submitted a similar proposal to AEA for REF Round II, and all of our comments on that proposal remain valid. This proposal is for staged, sequential
geothermal resource investigation moving from reconnaissance to detailed field studies, with confirmation by drilling is warranted. Ormat is clearly aware that go - no go decisions
will need to be made at each stage, depending on the results of the previous stage. The state needs to know if there is a geothermal resource at Spurr or not, and Ormat is correct
in assuming that the prospects are encouraging although the presence or absence of a resource has not yet been confirmed. Geotechnically, this is a very solid proposal and deserves
to be supported.
Ormat is among the most highly experienced companies in the world in geothermal exploration and development. This proposal is for appropriate resource assessment work. The proposed
work is correctly stepwise, with surface geology leading to targeted geophysics and exploratory drilling, leading to resource confirmation drilling. Ormat is clearly up to speed on
previous work which has been done at Spurr, including the largely unpublished (at least in geothermal literature) conclusion that existing petrologic and geochemical data do NOT suggest
the existence of a persistent high-level magma chamber/heat source ? but note the unequivocal fact that high temperatures must nevertheless exist at shallow depths. They also note
that existing exploration data is permissive of the existence of an accessible geothermal resource, yet in many respects is equivocal. Their view of the Spurr system is accurate.
<P> It is in the State?s interest to know if there is a geothermal resource at Spurr, and to move toward development of that resource if feasible. This proposed work is the best way
forward. It may be problematic for the State to fund a private for-profit entity, but that issue is outside DGGS? responsibility.
[Round II comments apply] This proposal represents the continuation of a successful geothermal resource investigation at Akutan. The work is appropriately progressive ? from reconnaissance
to detailed surface geophysical and geochemical studies to exploratory drilling and reservoir testing. From the DGGS perspective the nature and quality of the work, the pace, and the
team are all part of a robust prospecting project. Recommend continued support.
Hot Springs Bay/Akutan is one of four stand-out high-temperature geothermal systems identified during the statewide geothermal resource inventory of the late 1970?s and early 1980?s.
The other three are Makushin/Unalaska, Geyser Bight/central Umnak Island, and Atka. Makushin was chosen for additional study, including drilling, only because of the larger nearby
electrical load (Unalaska/Dutch Harbor). Surface studies, including chemical geothermometry of spring waters, have always indicated that the geothermal resource at HSB is substantial.
<P> This proposal seeks to take the next step ? drilling (after necessary prospecting) to confirm the temperatures inferred from surface samples and make direct observations of the
depth of the system, and, through flow testing, reservoir volume and permeability. The proposed project is very similar in scale to that carried out at Makushin during the 1980?s.
<P> In terms of geologic science and resource exploration DGGS fully supports this proposal. The management team is fully capable and all indications are that a resource exists
and is capable of megawatt-scale electrical production. The fact that the City of Akutan is an active participant, rather than a potential customer (as at Makushin) bodes well for
successful integration of a geothermal resource into the local economy and infrastructure.
[Round II comments apply] This study was recommended for funding during Round II -- that recommendation from DGGS still stands. This is a comprehensive, appropriately sequential study.
A resource of some sort must exist at Pilgrim, and the likelihood that it is capable of generating the amount of power discussed in this proposal is high. The recent award by DOE
of funds for portions of the greater Pilgrim project, of which this proposal is part, does not necessarily obviate the need for funding from the state for this proposal.
In terms of temperature, chemistry, and flow rate of fluids coming to the surface Pilgrim is one of the most attractive of the moderate temperature geothermal systems in the state.
Because of this it was targeted for detailed study, including drilling, in the 1970s to early ?80s. Frustratingly, the drilling only pierced a thin perched layer of hot water, with
strong temperature reversal below the layer. Finding the upwelling source which feeds this outflowing layer remains. Understanding the full potential of Pilgrim requires knowing
the dimensions of this zone and its temperature and volume at depth . <P> This proposal is for a clearheaded stepwise exploration program which will gather necessary preliminary
data and, ultimately, correctly site a drill hole for direct sampling of the upwelling fluid.
This study has the objective ?to determine the potential extent and amount of the energy resource that is available? at Melozi Hot Springs. However, the only data that are proposed
to be collected and analyzed are remotely sensed (satellite and airborne), along with ?limited field validation?. The proposal also outlines an economic feasibility study of ?developing
the resource?. Satellite and airborne visible and infrared data are necessarily restricted to surface evaluation, where emerging geothermal fluids cool by mixing with surface waters
and by conduction and convection. Surface temperatures underestimate reservoir temperatures by an unpredictable amount. For evaluation of the geothermal resource the reservoir itself
must be characterized in terms of volume, temperature, depth, porosity, and permeability (i.e. the temperature and sustainable rate of production of fluids need to be known). This
proposal should be considered a minimal first step in acquiring the data necessary to evaluate Melozi as a geothermal resource. Not recommended for funding at this time.
"This project has changed dramatically in presentation since Round I. The applicant now anticipates (quite correctly) a normal geothermal gradient and that the resource will be created
using EGS (Enhanced Geothermal System) techniques. EGS involves drilling into warm or hot rock and artificially creating a fracture system with sufficient volume to host a geothermal
reservoir; surface waters are then injected and heated by contact with the country rock; finally the heated waters are brought to the surface, the contained heat energy extracted and
used, and the waters reinjected. EGS is not a mature technology. There are a few developmental demonstration projects in the world, but none produce electricity in the megawatt range,
and none approach economic viability. (In addition, there are earth process which work against the probability of producing an engineered reservoir with the high volume, porosity and
permeability necessary to host a geothermal reservoir). Because EGS is unproven despite decades of investigation the probability of success of this project is extremely low.
Additionally, at the normal geothermal gradient that the proposers anticipate, temperatures of only about 300F are accessible at 14,000? ? lower than the 390F reservoir temperatures
at known high-temperature resources such as Makushin, yet higher than the temperature of fluids at Chena Hot Springs. The total amount of electricity that can be extracted from a geothermal
system is directly limited by the difference in temperature between the hot and cold reservoirs. It is unclear if the 25MW described can be produced from a single injection/production
doublet.
Finally, it is known that current activity at the proposed site is well under way and that a significant amount of new subsurface data has been gathered. These un-interpreted data would
be critical for the reviewers to make further determination of the geothermal potential and make a more informed decision. Nevertheless, given that EGS continues to be in a research
phase and is an unproven technology at the scale proposed for this project, and that no new information is presented by this proposal to substantiate the existence of a viable geothermal
resource at the proposed site, the reviewer suggests the current proposal should not be funded."
This project suggests the use of an unsubstantiated low-temperature geothermal fluids in the lower Susitna Basin (roughly, near Houston) to provide space heat for Anchorage. However,
the existence of these fluids has never been confirmed, and indirect evidence of their existence is equivocal. Nearly three decades ago exploration wells drilled in the area for oil
and gas and reported elevated bottom-hole temperatures. However, no attempt was made at the time of drilling to analyze or collect other pertinent data in order to record equilibrium
crustal temperatures and identify a geothermal resource. In fact, the area is an unlikely candidate for such a resource. A follow-up geothermal resource investigation in the 80?s was
unable to find direct evidence of geothermal fluids. Subsequent studies have also been unable to confirm elevated crustal temperatures. Finally, recent DGGS investigation of physical
samples from the exploratory holes has provided strong evidence that the elevated temperatures reported during drilling did not reflect crustal conditions. Given there is no direct
evidence that the ?geothermal resource? which underpins this proposal exists, and there are many reasons to doubt its existence, the primary activity in this area (if any) would need
to be resource identification and quantification. However, most of the proposed activities are not related to resource confirmation, they are instead various aspects of system design,
permitting, and land rights analysis. Even the geotechnical activities proposed in the pre-feasibility study at the end of the proposed work period will not, in themselves, provide
direct evidence of a resource. In short, this project and proposal make unwarranted assumptions about the existence of a geothermal resource to power a regional space heating system
and the proposal is not recommended for funding.
It was our understanding that HB 152 does not provide funding for CBM projects unless other alternate forms of energy are not available. CBM potential in the Chignik region is unknown
at this time. The proposed Chignik CBM Assessment provides for two phases: Phase 1 ? Reconnaissance and Phase 2 ? Feasibility Analysis, Resource Assessment. The proposal does not
designate a specific site for CBM resource assessment, but rather alludes to the site selection taking place during the Geologic Survey portion (2.2) of Phase 2. The actual methodology
of conducting this geologic survey is not specified in the proposal. The basis for the proposed project is a preliminary study (presented in Reports A and B in the proposal) that lists
a number of communities that have may have CBM potential. This list was generated by DGGS, BEG, USGS, and BLM in the late 1990s and very general in nature. The authors of the Chignik
Lake CBM proposal were told in a meeting in Fairbanks with DGGS personnel (October 2008) that the potential in many of these 38 communities has been discounted or significantly reduced.
Only very few communities are now thought to maintain reasonable CBM potential and the State is in the process of better quantifying that potential across the state, including the
Chignik region. Prior to selecting a drill site in the Chignik area, a detailed structural study, including field mapping is necessary to locate a specific site for test drilling.
This is because of local block faulting in the Chignik region. Project proposers should contact DGGS for details on best approach. Prior to selecting a drill site in the Chignik area,
a detailed structural study, including field mapping is necessary to locate a specific site for test drilling. This is because of local block faulting in the Chignik region. Project
proposers should contact DGGS for details on best approach.
Based on work already being performed by the state, and the fact the data justifying the proposal is outdated and in the process of being replaced, DGGS recommends that this proposal
not be funded.
This proposed project focuses on design study and engineering phases (I and II) for a LCNG system for the City of Bethel, Alaska. As such, this proposal has no direct component that
would involve the use of local energy resources through exploration or development. If the proposed project later proceeds to construction issues involving geologic hazards and the
use of wetlands (addressed on page 34, 4.8.3 Wetlands/Protected Areas) would potentially involve a geologic component. If funded, we suggest that the applicant include an assessment
of potential geologic hazards as part of their feasibility study.
The applicants correctly state that:
a) these springs are poorly known,
b) the springs are likely to be moderate temperature, with potential for production of hundreds of kilowatts (as opposed to tens of megawatts),
c) current understanding of the tectonics is that there may be some rifting in the area. [Note: rifting may be associated with movement of the Bering microplate, which is moving independently
of both the Pacific and North America plates. It is unlikely that there has been enough crustal thinning associated with such rifting to result in the kind of mantle upwelling and
elevated heat flow associated with rifting in places like Iceland, the Salton Sea, or Nevada. The rifting may instead result in deep faults along which geothermal fluids can rise.]
The proposed work includes ground-based mapping and sampling, satellite and airborne mapping, including imaging capable of returning quantitative ground temperatures (FLIR). Based on
this reconnaissance, sites most likely to contain resources will be selected and imaged by ground-based EM, which will in turn be used to site drilling sites. This work plan is generally
reasonable, and is a stepwise way to gather information on these geothermal sites. There is nothing in here which is totally fabricated, offbase, or outlandish.
There are some geosciences concerns with the proposal (in order as they appear):
a) The geochemical survey mentions rock, soil (As, Hg), and water sampling on a grid, but not specific detailed sampling of spring waters for standard geothermometry. This may be an
oversight. However, no-one on the project has specific expertise in geothermal fluid chemistry. Mention is made of the UU Energy and Geoscience Instute (who specialize in innovative
technology, not routine exploration) but specifics are not given. Fluid inclusion studies on bedrock samples that are merely adjacent to the geothermal system will not return information
relevant to geothermal resources.
b) The shallow temperture probe survey presumably will use the same 2m probes that HDL used at Naknek. It seems unlikely that this technique will be useful in permafrost areas, or that
it will be usefull unless temperatures are collected well below the seasonal freeze/thaw layer.
c) Several satellite remote sensing platforms are mentioned ? there is substantial duplication between many of these platforms, with newer instruments making older data obsolete. Few
(perhaps none) of these satellite systems can image the small (magnitude and size) surface anomalies generated by hot springs.
d) There is no discussion of a way to ascertain that any of these spring systems are capable of delivering the large amounts of hot water necessary (e.g. flow rates similar to the ~1,000
gal/min Chena uses.
Also, the following are noteworthy, although outside the direct expertise of DGGS.
a) Most of these spring systems are several tens of miles from the nearest communities ? if these springs are used for producing electricity long transmission lines will be required,
even though power production is low and the load is moderate.
b) Discussion of economic feasibility makes use of current figures of diesel fuel currently used and PCE expenses currently incurred, and also estimates of the cost of development from
outside the proposing group. We have not seen the economic study, which apparently concludes that developing these springs would be economic over 30 years. It appears to be an internal
NANA document prepared by Kolker.
This is not a conventional geothermal project and DGGS does not have specific expertise or comments. (Summertime temperature regulation of west ridge buildings has been a problem for
years.)
In terms of temperature, chemistry, and flow rate of fluids coming to the surface Pilgrim is one of the most attractive of the moderate temperature geothermal systems in the state.
Because of this it was targeted for detailed study, including drilling, in the 1970s to early ?80s. Frustratingly, the drilling only pierced a thin perched layer of hot water, with
strong temperature reversal below the layer. Finding the upwelling source which feeds this outflowing layer remains. Understanding the full potential of Pilgrim requires knowing
the dimensions of this zone and its temperature and volume at depth .
This proposal is for a clearheaded stepwise exploration program which will gather necessary preliminary data and, ultimately, correctly site a drill hole for direct sampling of the upwelling
fluid.
Ormat is among the most highly experienced companies in the world in geothermal exploration and development. This proposal is for appropriate resource assessment work. The proposed
work is correctly stepwise, with surface geology leading to targeted geophysics and exploratory drilling, leading to resource confirmation drilling. Ormat is clearly up to speed on
previous work which has been done at Spurr, including the largely unpublished (at least in geothermal literature) conclusion that existing petrologic and geochemical data do NOT suggest
the existence of a persistent high-level magma chamber/heat source ? but note the unequivocal fact that high temperatures must nevertheless exist at shallow depths. They also note
that existing exploration data is permissive of the existence of an accessible geothermal resource, yet in many respects is equivocal. Their view of the Spurr system is accurate.
It is in the State?s interest to know if there is a geothermal resource at Spurr, and to move toward development of that resource if feasible. This proposed work is the best way forward.
It may be problematic for the State to fund a private for-profit entity, but that issue is outside DGGS? responsibility.
Chena is representative of a class of moderate-temperature geothermal resources capable of producing electricity at the scale of hundreds of kilowatts. These are distinct from high-temperature
resources such as Makushin. Such systems are spread throughout southeastern and interior Alaska and are potentially attractive targets for exploitation. However, because of their
moderate temperature and often fault-hosted geometry they are substantially different than bigger, better-known systems elsewhere in the world. Understanding reservoir limitations
of these systems is paramount if they are to be considered part of the State?s energy portfolio.
This proposal seeks to investigate the reservoir characteristics of one of these systems (Chena) ? the only one with drill data and a production history. The benefit for the State is
not the additional information that will be gained about Chena, but the additional information that will be gained about this class of system. The PI (Mongrain) is well suited for
this because of her previous experience in reservoir modeling in the petroleum industry.
While this proposal is not about producing power at a particular site, it is an essential part of understanding energy alternatives statewide.
Manley is one of few sites in Alaska where a resource (probably) capable of generating electricity for local consumption exists geographically within the community. Hence it is a clear
target for investigation of the potential of using that resource for power generation. The scale of the potential development would be very similar to that of Chena. It is logical
and appropriate that Bernie Karl (Chena) and Gwen Holdmann (UAF/ACEP) be involved in this project.
Moving forward with understanding the capabilities of the resource at Manley, and evaluating the potential for its exploitation, is a clear priority of the geothermal community in Alaska.
This proposal is a clear way forward.
The main issues at Manley involve management, engineering, and development cost. They are not in the geosciences realm.
As noted in the proposal, resolving land use issues is paramount, since much or all of the resource lies on private land. Additionally, Manley Village Council and TDX (current power
provider) need to start to work together. These issues are not within the expertise or influence of DGGS.
Robust hot spring systems do not exist within the region addressed (except for Akutan, subject of a separate very strong proposal by a different group). Those springs which exist are
(with one exception) located on USFWS Wilderness Areas and are up to several tens of miles from the communities whose power needs are considered. The geosciences merits of the proposal
are difficult to determine because this proposal and Application Number 304 (Seward Peninsula/AVEC) are, for sections 2 and 3 (workplan description) word-for-word identical for the
vast majority of the text, including such details as the number and rate of placement of shallow temperature probes, and the number and depth of proposed drill holes. The budgets vary
by an even $35,000.00. Personnel vary only in upper level management and oversight by AEB vs. AVEC. The project timelines for the two are identical for 18 out of 20 items ? committing
the proposers to, for instance, two 120 day drilling programs, both starting on October 1, 2010 (each with the challenge of a winter drilling program). Thus at least one of these proposals
is a cookie-cutter proposal not actually geared toward the particular resources in the areas. Since the AVEC proposal mentions the geothermal sites to be investigated, and this proposal
does not, it is likely that this is the carbon copy.
Because this proposal has the same words as AVEC, there are the same geoscience concerns (in order as they appear):
a) The geochemical survey mentions rock, soil (As, Hg), and water sampling on a grid, but not specific detailed sampling of spring waters for standard geothermometry. This may be an
oversight. However, no-one on the project has specific expertise in geothermal fluid chemistry. Mention is made of the UU Energy and Geoscience Instute (who specialize in innovative
technology, not routine exploration) but specifics are not given. Fluid inclusion studies on bedrock samples that are merely adjacent to the geothermal system will not return information
relevant to geothermal resources. b) The shallow temperture probe survey presumably will use the same 2m probes that HDL used at Naknek. It seems unlikely that this technique will
be useful in permafrost areas, or that it will be usefull unless temperatures are collected well below the seasonal freeze/thaw layer. c) Several satellite remote sensing platforms
are mentioned ? there is substantial duplication between many of these platforms, with newer instruments making older data obsolete. Few (perhaps none) of these satellite systems can
image the small (magnitude and size) surface anomalies generated by hot springs. d) There is no discussion of a way to ascertain that any of these spring systems are capable of delivering
the large amounts of hot water necessary (e.g. flow rates similar to the ~1,000 gal/min Chena uses.
In summary, hot spring systems in the general area are small and of only moderate temperature, unlikely to produce megawatt scale electricity. In addition, they are in Wilderness Areas,
and unreasonably distant from communities (esp. Sand Point). Coupled with the flawed and vague proposed exploration program this makes for a very weak proposal.
Hot Springs Bay/Akutan is one of four stand-out high-temperature geothermal systems identified during the statewide geothermal resource inventory of the late 1970?s and early 1980?s.
The other three are Makushin/Unalaska, Geyser Bight/central Umnak Island, and Atka. Makushin was chosen for additional study, including drilling, only because of the larger nearby
electrical load (Unalaska/Dutch Harbor). Surface studies, including chemical geothermometry of spring waters, have always indicated that the geothermal resource at HSB is substantial.
This proposal seeks to take the next step ? drilling (after necessary prospecting) to confirm the temperatures inferred from surface samples and make direct observations of the depth
of the system, and, through flow testing, reservoir volume and permeability. The proposed project is very similar in scale to that carried out at Makushin during the 1980?s.
In terms of geologic science and resource exploration DGGS fully supports this proposal. The management team is fully capable and all indications are that a resource exists and is capable
of megawatt-scale electrical production. The fact that the City of Akutan is an active participant, rather than a potential customer (as at Makushin) bodes well for successful integration
of a geothermal resource into the local economy and infrastructure.
It was our understanding that HB 152 does not provide funding for CBM projects unless other alternate forms of energy are not available. The proposed AIN Coalbed Methane Project at
Wainwright is presented as Phase III of a multi-year project. The authors propose to drill delineation wells in the Wainwright area and conduct pump testing of the wells to determine
the quality, quantity and availability of methane. As proposed the AIN Coalbed Methane project does not provide details on the specifics of the pump testing of the wells, whether long
term production testing is planned and whether a water disposal method (i.e. downhole reinjection) will be tested as part of this project. This location for coalbed methane has one
of the highest likelihoods of success in rural Alaska based on geology, coal rank, coalbed seam abundance and location at favorable depth beneath Wainwright. If not funded through
HB152, DGGS strongly encourages additional funding sources be sought to finalize the project. DGGS recommends that a more detailed plan of operations and full explanation of the proposed
testing be presented to the AEA.
This project is a feasibility study to prepare a conceptual design of a new natural gas distribution system in the North Pole area, Interior Alaska. This project does not propose the
exploration for or development of natural gas resources. The proposal states: The feasibility study will serve as the first step toward understanding the impact of a gasline to/through
Fairbanks and North Pole on local energy resources and the energy infrastructure. Therefore, the Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys (DGGS) has no comment on engineering
feasibility study for a gas pipeline.
The proposal does not state the expected temperature of water as it exits the well field, but does make it clear that this system, through heat exchange, is expected to provide domestic
hot water ? presumably > 100F ? in addition to space heat. Ground temperatures at 125? should be near the mean annual temperature (~40-45F). If heat pump technology is capable of doubling
the temperature of the water then this proposal could work. If the proposers expect the water exiting the well field to be substantially warmer than 45F (they use the term ?geothermal?)
then the feasibility of this proposal is doubtful. DGGS does not have expertise in heat pump technology and restricts comments to ground temperature.
It was our understanding that HB 152 does not provide funding for CBM projects unless other alternate forms of energy are not available. Nevertheless, CBM potential at the proposed
test site in Palmer is unknown at this time. There is a reasonable chance that methane will be produced, but ultimate permeability and saturation are unknown, and close monitoring
with long-term tests will be required to substantiate the existence of a sustainable resource. Component 2 should not be funded until that resource has been identified and proven sustainable.
Component 3 of the project description sites that 38 communities were identified by State and Federal agencies has having CBM potential. This list was generated by DGGS, USGS, and
BLM in the early 1990s and very general. The authors of this proposal were told in a meeting in Fairbanks with DGGS personnel (October 2008) that the potential in many of these 38
communities has been discounted or significantly reduced. Only very few communities are now thought to maintain reasonable CBM potential and the State is in the process of better quantifying
that potential across the state. Based on work already being performed by the state, and the fact the data justifying component 3 of the proposal is outdated and in the process of being
replaced, DGGS recommends that component 3 of this proposal not be funded.
The Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys (ADGGS) has reviewed this proposal and recommends against providing funding. The available geological data and regional scientific
information, as well as the information provided in this proposal, does not provide sufficient evidence for the existence of a sufficient geothermal resource, nor does it provide sufficient
evidence for the potential of such a resource in the project area. If other data exists that provides reasonable evidence of a geothermal resource, ADGGS would be willing to include
such new data in the interpretation and re-evaluate the potential for the project?s success.
Reject because of no identified method of accessing geothermal resouces
The Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical surveys has reviewed this proposal and recommends against providing funding. The available geological data and regional scientific
information, as well as any information provided in this proposal, does not indicate the existence of a geothermal resource, nor a reasonable chance of the existence of a sufficient
geothermal resource for the planned project. If non-public information is available that indicates the existence of a geothermal resource, we encourage the proposal writers to include
that in a revised proposal.
S2 DG GS Comments Geohazards
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone and associated tsunami. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures
should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes,
liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a
geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary
fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone and associated tsunami. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures
should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes,
liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a
geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary
fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical
site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence,
storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as
a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database:
http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical
site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence,
storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as
a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database:
http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Queen Charlotte/Fairweather fault system located ~70 km from the project. All projects proposing the development
of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis,
landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be
required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available
in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Queen Charlotte/Fairweather fault system located ~30 km from the project. All projects proposing the development
of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis,
landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be
required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available
in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical
site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence,
storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as
a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database:
http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions from earthquakes generated on the Aleutian subduction zone. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical
site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence,
storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as
a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database:
http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions from earthquakes generated on the Narrow Cape fault zone and the Aleutian subduction zone. All projects proposing the development of permanent
structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides,
volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to
perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the
Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Ground motions from earthquakes generated along the Aleutian subduction zone and associated tsunami hazards should be considered in project planning and design. All projects proposing
the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes,
active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate
the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information
on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Ground motions from earthquakes generated on the nearby Dot "T" Johnson and Cathedral Rapids faults should be considered in project design. All projects proposing the development of
permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis,
landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be
required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available
in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions from earthquakes generated on the Narrow Cape fault zone and the Aleutian subduction zone. All projects proposing the development of permanent
structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides,
volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to
perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the
Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Strong ground motions from subduction zone earthquakes should be considered in design. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site
survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm
surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition
of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alask
a.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
The proposed project is ~150 km from the Queen Charlotte/Fairweather fault, ground motions from earthquakes on this source should be considered in design.All projects proposing the development
of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis,
landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be
required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available
in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
The proposed project is ~150 km from the queen Charlotte/Fairweather fault, however given the size of the dam ground motions from earthquakes on this source should be considered in design.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone and Castle Mountain fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone. Consider tsunami hazards.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone. Consider tsunami hazards.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Dot "T" Johnson and Cathedral Rapids faults.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone and Chugach St. Elias mountains faults.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Bendeleben fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone and Narrow Cape faults.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone and other upper plate crustal faults such as Hanning Bay and Patton Bay faults.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone. Consider tsunami hazards.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone. Consider tsunami hazards.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone. Consider tsunami hazards.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Fairweather fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Fairweather fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Denali fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Denali fault and Park Road fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Cathedral Rapids fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Fairweater fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Denali fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Fairweater fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Denali and Fairweather faults.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Fairweather fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from Aleutian subduction zone. Consider tsunami hazards.
Consider seismic ground motions from Aleutian subduction zone.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Narrow Cape fault zone and Aleutian subduction zone.
Consider ground motions from Fairweather fault.
Earthquakes on the Denali fault and Park Road fault should be considered in project design (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Lake Clark fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). The relative activity
of this structure is unknown.
Project should consider earthquakes along the Castle Mountain fault in project design (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should consider earthquakes along the Queen Charlotte-Fairweather fault in project design (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Feasibility study should incorporate impacts of strong ground shaking due to earthquakes on the Bendlebeden fault on design costs and design plan (see Quaternary fault & fold digital
database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Feasibility study should incorporate impacts of strong ground shaking due to earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone on design costs and design plan (see Quaternary fault & fold
digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Feasibility study should incorporate impacts of strong ground shaking due to earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone on design costs and design plan (see Quaternary fault & fold
digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Insufficient info regarding scope of project and land ownership to determine if DMLW authorizations required. If all development sites are within the community, no state land is affected.
Feasibility should consider ground motions due to earthquakes on the Denali fault (Chilkoot River section) for design purposes.
Facilities should incorporate design to withstand strong ground shaking due to the Aleutian subduction zone (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
The feasibility study should consider the impacts of strong seismic shaking due to earthquakes on the Aleutian subduction zone on project design costs (see Quaternary fault & fold digital
database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
The proposed project should consider shaking from earthquakes along Cook Inlet fault-cored folds and Aleutian subduction zone (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov
/pubs/id/23944).
The proposed upgrades should consider seismic shaking from the Queen Charolotte-Fairweather fault in design considerations (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pu
bs/id/23944).
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Bendlebeden fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). However, this fault
is located south of the project (>140 miles) and likely should not affect the proposed project.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Denali fault (Togiak-tikchik section) (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Consideration of seismic shaking should be done in assessing project costs during feasibility studies.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Kaltag fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). Due its close proximity
to the fault, appropriate design considerations should be employed for seismic shaking.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Kaltag fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). However, this fault
is located north of the project and likely should not affect the proposed project.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Bendlebeden fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). However, this fault
is located north of the project and likely should not affect the proposed project.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Kaltag fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). However, this fault
is located north of the project and likely should not affect the proposed project.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Kaltag fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). However, this fault
is located north of the project and likely should not affect the proposed project.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Queen Charlotte-Fairweather fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should be designed to withstand appropriate ground motions.
The Aleutian subduction zone, faults of the Chugach-St. Elias fold and thrust belt, and the Patton Bay fault have potential to cause strong ground motions at the site (see Quaternary
fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). Appropriate design should be implemented to withstand these forces.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Aleutian subduction zone which is capable of generating strong ground motions at the site (see Quaternary fault & fold digital
database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). Designs should be implemented to withstand these forces.
The proposed project does not cross any known fault zones. The closest seismic sources are the Narrow Cape fault zone and the Aleutian subduction zone. Both sources are capable of
generating strong ground motions and should be considered in future project design (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
The project sits between the Queen Charlotte-Fairweather fault and Denali fault (Chatham Strait section) (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should be designed to withstand appropriate ground motions.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Eastern Denali fault (Chilkoot River section) (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should be designed to withstand appropriate ground motions.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Eastern Denali fault (Chilkoot River section) (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should be designed to withstand appropriate ground motions.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Queen Charlotte-Fairweather fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should be designed to withstand appropriate ground motions.
The project is located in the vicinity of the Eastern Denali fault (Chilkoot River section) and the Chatham Strait fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs
/id/23944). Project should be designed to withstand strong ground motions related to earthquakes on these structures.
Feasibility study should consider design impacts of earthquakes on proposed facilities in regard to project cost.
Project should be designed to withstand ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23
944).
Project should be designed to withstand ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23
944).
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Queen Charlotte-Fairweather fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should be designed to withstand appropriate ground motions.
The only known potentially active fault in the project vicinity is the Lake Clark fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). The
relative activity of this fault is unknown.
Active fault structures in the vicinity of the site include the Denali fault and associated thrust faults. (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
The dam should be designed with considerations for strong ground motions based on a seismic hazards assessment. A detailed site specific geotechnical investigation should be performed
to insure that no previously unrecognized faults extend through the dam site.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Engineering considerations for strong ground shaking from subduction zone earthquakes is appropriate. There is high potential for un-mapped fold and thrust faults nearby, warranting
focused seismic hazard studies in the area. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
There are no known active faults in the project vicinity. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Tsunami and strong ground motions from Aleutian subduction zone earthquakes are the primary seismic hazards at the site. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Tsunami and strong ground motions from Aleutian subduction zone earthquakes are the primary seismic hazards at the site. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
There are no known active faults in the project vicinity. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
The project is located ~17 km northeast of the Chatham Strait segment of the Denali fault, however this structures activity is unknown. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Tsunami and strong ground motions from Aleutian subduction zone earthquakes are the primary seismic hazards at the site. See general DGGS comment.
Strong ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone and Narrow Cape faults are the primary seismic hazards at the site. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Primary seismic hazard is strong ground motions from subduction zone earthquakes. See general DGGS comment. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
The project is close to the Chilkat River segment of the Denali fault. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
There are no known active faults in the project area. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
There are no known active faults at the project site. See general DGGS comment.
There are no known active faults at the project site. See general DGGS comment.
There are no known active faults at the project site. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Strong ground shaking from earthquakes is not considered in the environmental issues identified in the EA and FEA. The project site is ~214 km from the Queen Charlotte fault. Low to
moderate ground shaking should be considered in engineering design. The Canoe Passage fault is listed as a Neogene fault on the Neotectonic Map of Alaska, however, little is known
about it. Although it may not be a major issue, the applicant should search for any studies done for other projects that may have assessed this structure. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Located in the vicinity of the eastern Denali fault (Chilkoot River section) and the Chatham Strait fault. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
No known active faults near proposed project. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Located near Denali fault and associated thrust faults. Dam should be designed with considerations for strong ground motions based on a seismic hazards assessment. A detailed site specific
geotechnical investigation should be performed to insure that no previously unrecognized faults extend through the dam site.
Project is ~20 km away from Chilkat river segment of the Denali fault. See general DGGS comment.
Subduction zone earthquakes should be considered in engineering design. See general DGGS comment.
The project site lies ~12 miles west of the Chatham Strait segment of the Denali fault. Strong ground motions from earthquakes on this fault should be considered in engineering designs.
See general DGGS comment.
Engineering considerations for strong ground shaking from subduction zone earthquakes is appropriate. Potential un-mapped fold and thrust faults occur nearby. See general DGGS comment.
The project site is in between the Denali and Queen Charlotte-Fairweather fault systems. The Fairweather fault extends ~15 miles west of the site. Engineering designs should account
for large earthquakes on these structures. See general DGGS comment.
Proposal states that geotechnical risks will be evaluated during the design phase. Engineering designs should consider strong ground motions from earthquakes on the subduction zone,
Castle Mountain fault, and fold and thrust structures associated with the Chugach Mountains. See general DGGS comment.
Engineering designs should consider strong ground motions from earthquakes on the subduction zone and Castle Mountain fault. See general DGGS comment.
This project is close to a complicated tectonic junction between the Transition and Fairweather faults. However, it is an upgrade project for an existing facility. The upgrade should
use engineering designs that consider strong ground motions (i.e. strongly attached foundation elements). See DGGS general comment.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
See general DGGS comment.
The Castle Mountain fault extends very close to the project site. Earthquakes on this fault should be considered in engineering design. See general DGGS comment.
The Chatham Straight segment of the Denali fault passes ~6 miles west of the site. Strong ground shaking from earthquakes on this fault should be considered in engineering designs.
See general DGGS comment.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Primary seismic hazard is strong ground motions from subduction zone earthquakes. Upper plate sources (i.e. Narrow Cape fault zone) should be considered in design. See general DGGS
comment.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Primary seismic hazard is strong ground motions from subduction zone earthquakes. Upper plate sources (i.e. Narrow Cape fault zone) should be considered in design. This is a small
system and thus, there is not a major hazard risk. However, emphasis should be in securing project foundation elements to withstand shaking. See general DGGS comment.
Primary seismic hazard is strong ground motions from subduction zone earthquakes. See general DGGS comment.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
The projects site is near the newly discovered Cathedral Creek fault zone. This fault is not shown on many geologic maps. The applicant should consult DGGS for the most recent maps
of fault traces. This fault should be considered in engineering design. Additionally, DGGS has recently published surficial geologic maps in the proposed site area. These maps should
supercede surficial maps presented in some of the preliminary reports. See general DGGS comment.
The Chilkat River segment of the Denali fault extends near the project site(~10 miles to the west). Strong ground motions due to future earthquakes on this structure should be considered
in engineering designs. See general DGGS comment.
The site is over 60 miles from the Queen Charlotte fault zone, thus seismic hazards should be considered low. However, towers constructed for the transmission line should take low to
moderate ground motions into consideration. See general DGGS comment.
The Queen Charlotte fault passes about 85 miles to the west of the project site, thus seismic hazard is low and structures should be designed to withstand low to moderate ground shaking.
See general DGGS comment.
The Chilkat River segment of the Denali fault extends near the project site(~6 miles to the west). Strong ground motions due to future earthquakes on this structure should be considered
in engineering designs. The powerhouse was considered vulnerable to seismic activity in an earlier reconnaissance report which noted that the site was in seismic zone 3, a reference
to the obsolete Uniform Building Code. This should be reevaluated in light of new probabilistic seismic hazard maps and the current International Building Code. See general DGGS comment.
The Denali fault passes ~10 miles to the northeast of the project site and should be discussed in the geotechnical report. Large magnitude earthquakes along this fault should be considered
in engineering designs of structures. See general DGGS comment.
The Chatham Straight segment of the Denali fault passes ~15 miles east of the project site. Strong ground motions due to future earthquakes on this structure should be considered in
engineering designs. See general DGGS comment.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Strong ground shaking from earthquakes is not considered in the environmental issues identified in the EA and FEA. The project site is ~110 miles from the Queen Charlotte fault. Low
to moderate ground shaking should be considered in engineering design. The Canoe Passage fault is listed as a Neogene fault on the Neotectonic Map of Alaska, however, little is known
about it. Although it may not be a major issue, the applicant should search for any studies done for other projects that may have assessed this geologic feature. See general DGGS
comment.
The site lies just within the zone that was uplifted during the 1964 Prince William Sound earthquake. This should be accounted for in design considerations. The project calls for an
18 mile submarine cable for power delivery. Submarine landslides due to strong ground shaking and earthquakes and other causes have been documented in Valdez Bay. This hazard to the
transmission line should be addressed. Proposed geologic studies if conducted should incorporate the above topics. See general DGGS comment.
The proposal does not mention the Denali fault which passes a few miles north of the project site and was the source of the 2002 m=7.9 earthquake. Strong ground motions due to another
event on the Denali fault should be considered in the cost estimates of engineering a proper structure to withstand such strong ground motions. See general DGGS comment.
The site lies between two major strike slip fault systems. Known active faults do not occur on the project property, however the site is close enough to major sources to experience
strong ground shaking. Project is relying on a 1968 report that states that the conditions at the site are adequate for construction of a concrete arch dam. The City is evaluating
the need for additional geotechnical studies. An updated geotechnical study should be performed to assess seismic hazards, incorporating information from probabilistic seismic hazard
maps. In particular, strong ground motions from earthquakes along the Queen Charlotte-Fairweather and southern Denali fault systems should be addressed. The proposal mentions a proposed
geotechnical study that will conduct a query with BLM to see if there are any mineral claims prior to building. This is not the purpose of a geotechnical report. Seismic hazards are
not listed as one of the environmental issues to be addressed in the EA. See general DGGS comment.
General DGGS statement. Located in the vicinity of the eastern Denali fault and Chatham Strait fault. Dam construction guidelines for high seismic hazard zones should be followed.
The projects are located in the vicinity of the western Castle Mountain fault, Lake Clark fault, and Bruin Bay faults. All infrastructure related to the proposed projects should incorporate
seismic safety design based on a seismic hazards analysis and complete geotechnical reports
General DGGS statement. Located near the Kenai lineament and the Johnson Bay fault
Located in the vicinity of the eastern segment of the Castle Mountain fault, Caribou fault, Hicks Creek fault, and East Boulder Creek fault. Given the large dam proposed, the project
should incorporate a complete geotechnical report and seismic hazards assessment.
General DGGS statement. Located in the vicinity of the eastern segment of the Castle Mountain fault.
General DGGS statement. Located near the Kenai lineament, a structure depicted as suspicious on the Neotectonic map of Alaska
General DGGS statement. Located near the eastern section of the Castle Mountain fault, the Caribou fault, Hicks Creek fault, and the East Boulder Creek fault.
General DGGS statement. Located near the Kenai lineament, a structure depicted as suspicious on the Neotectonic map of Alaska
General DGGS statement. Located in close proximity to the Denali fault.
General DGGS statement. Located in the vicinity of the eastern Denali fault (Chilkoot River section and the Chatham Strait fault.
Proposed system may cross active traces of the Dot "T" Johnson fault. A site investigation should be conducted to determine the feasibility of moving the proposed location of the project
to insure that infrastructure does not cross this active fault.
Located in the vicinity of the eastern Denali fault (Chilkoot River section) and the Chatham Strait fault.
Seismic hazard assessment and detailed site specific geologic study should be completed to insure long term safety of this large structure.
Located in the vicinity of the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte fautl and the Eastern Denali/Chatham Straight fault to the west and east, respectively. A seismic hazard assessment and a
detailed site specific geologic study is necessary.
Located near Denali fault and associated thrust faults. Dam should be designed with considerations for strong ground motions based on a seismic hazards assessment. A detailed site specific
geotechnical investigation should be performed to insure that no previously unrecognized faults extend through the dam site.
General DGGS statement. Located in general vicinity of Kodiak fault, Narrow Cape fautl, and Aleutian subduction zone.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
S2 Economic Feasibility
0
0
12.5
2.5
2.5
25
22.5
25
25
10
25
0
0
7.5
25
0
12.5
17.5
2.5
25
0
0
0
0
0
25
7.5
7.5
2.5
25
15
0
25
2.5
15
7.5
0
7.5
7.5
7.5
10
0
0
15
12.5
0
12.5
0
7.5
25
12.5
7.5
0
25
20
22.5
2.5
2.5
12.5
0
15
25
12.5
2.5
12.5
25
17.5
0
0
25
7.5
25
10
0
25
0
0
10
0
2.5
0
12.5
0
25
10
15
2.5
7.5
25
15
25
7.5
25
15
12.5
25
17.5
2.5
22.5
16
20
12
20
12
0
6
0
20
10
2
20
0
16
6
8
20
20
2
8
0
20
0
0
8
0
8
14
20
2
20
6
20
16
14
18
18
6
20
16
8
20
18
0
0
7.5
8
0
0
20
20
20
20
6
20
20
20
14
6
14
20
20
8
2
0
18
8
0
0
0
0
0
20
0
14
18
2
20
14
0
0
0
16
20
20
6
2
20
0
0
2
0
0
0
6
6
0
8
20
20
10
18
20
20
0
20
0
8
18
14
20
20
20
6
20
0
8
20
20
20
0
0
17.5
20
20
16
20
20
14
8
20
20
16
20
0
18
0
20
0
0
0
6
0
20
2
8
16
0
20
20
0
8
20
16
2
0
0
20
20
20
0
0
0
0
0
14
20
0
14
10
0
20
0
20
0
20
20
0
20
22
20
2
2
10
0
2
0
0
20
0
14
0
0
16
0
0
20
20
8
14
0
14
20
14
14
2
12
2
20
0
0
12
20
0
6
20
20
0
20
14
20
8
0
20
20
0
0
20
20
6
0
2
2
0
2
2
16
0
0
0
0
8
12
12
12
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
0
12
20
0
0
0
0
20
20
0
20
20
0
20
14
0
0
2
0
8
2
0
0
10
0
0
20
0
0
0
6
0
0
20
14
0
0
0
2
10
12
2
6
8
20
14
20
20
0
0
10
0
20
0
0
0
0
20
20
2
0
0
0
20
16
6
6
6
0
8
12
20
20
8
0
20
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
20
0
0
10
0
2
0
6
12
0
20
2
20
20
0
20
0
20
12
0
0
0
12
16
18
12
8
8
0
12
12
14
0
8
8
20
20
0
0
10
0
20
0
14
20
0
0
12
0
16
0
20
18
20
20
20
12
12
12
18
20
0
16
8
20
10
10
20
14
20
0
20
20
0
20
16
16
0
12
2
20
14
18
0
12
12
20
20
20
8
6
12
0
20
12
20
0
18
20
0
20
20
14
0
6
0
12
0
0
0
0
14
0
0
0
20
18
20
8
12
0
14
20
18
0
20
20
6
20
16
12
12
4
8
18
0
20
0
20
0
20
20
0
0
20
20
4
0
0
10
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
0
0
0
0
20
0
0
0
20
18
0
18
0
0
0
0
10
S2 Financing Plan
4.83
4.17
3.67
3.33
1.33
2.5
4.33
4.83
2.33
4.67
5
3.5
4.67
4.67
4
4.83
2.83
4
3.17
4.83
4
3.33
3.5
3.83
3
5
3.67
3.5
4
4.67
3.33
3
4.5
4.67
4
5
2.67
3.33
2.67
4.33
3.83
3.17
3
3.33
2.83
3.5
2.17
2.67
3.5
4.67
2.5
5
2.5
3.5
4.5
4
5
3.67
3.17
3.5
3
4.67
3.33
4.67
4.83
1.5
4
3.33
4.67
4.67
3.5
3.67
3.5
3.33
2
4.17
3.17
3.17
2
3
4.17
3.17
3.17
1.67
3.83
5
3.5
3.67
5
3.5
4.5
5
3.833333333
3.333333333
3.5
3
2
2.666666667
3.5
3.5
2.333333333
3.5
4
5
4
3.833333333
4
3.333333333
1.5
4.666666667
5
1.83
2.333333333
2
4.666666667
2.833333333
4
4.666666667
3.5
4.666666667
4
2.5
5
5
5
5
5
5
3.5
4.666666667
4.833333333
4.833333333
4.5
4.833333333
4.833333333
3
3
4.666666667
4.5
3
1.833333333
4.166666667
5
3.833333333
1.833333333
2.666666667
3.5
3.5
4.666666667
4.5
5
5
5
4
3.333333333
5
2.166666667
2.833333333
5
4.833333333
4.666666667
5
3.5
5
4.666666667
2.5
3.833333333
3.166666667
2.5
5
4.333333333
5
5
4.833333333
4.833333333
5
5
5
4.333333333
4.5
5
5
4.833333333
4.666666667
5
5
4.333333333
5
5
5
5
2.333333333
5
5
5
5
5
4.833333333
4
5
3.666666667
4.833333333
4
3.833333333
5
3.666666667
5
5
3.5
2.83
4.166666667
5
5
2.5
5
4.166666667
5
2.333333333
5
4.5
5
2.666666667
5
5
5
3.166666667
5
5
2.5
5
5
4
4
5
4.5
4.5
5
5
4.5
4.5
3.166666667
5
5
5
3.5
5
3.833333333
5
5
4.833333333
2.5
3.333333333
3.666666667
4.166666667
5
2.5
5
0.833333333
5
5
2.666666667
3.833333333
2.5
5
5
3.666666667
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4.5
5
4.166666667
3.833333333
5
3.166666667
5
5
5
3.833333333
5
5
5
4.333333333
5
2.166666667
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
3.833333333
3.833333333
5
0.666666667
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4.166666667
4
5
1.666666667
5
5
5
5
5
4.833333333
2.5
5
4.5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.666666667
5
5
4
4.5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.833333333
5
5
2.5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.5
5
5
2.5
5
5
5
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
1.333333333
3.833333333
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.5
1.166666667
5
5
2
5
2
5
3.833333333
5
2.5
3.166666667
5
5
5
5
2.25
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.5
5
4.5
5
S2 Other Benefits
2.67
2.33
2.33
5.33
0.33
1.33
2.33
2.67
1.67
2
2.67
2.33
3
2
4.33
2
4.33
3.33
2
1
0
2
4.67
2
2.33
0
5
1
4.67
2
4.33
4.67
2.67
1
4.67
4.67
4
2
1.67
0.33
2.33
3
4.67
0.67
2.67
6
2
0.33
2
1.33
1.33
8.67
0
3.33
1.67
5
4.67
4.67
1.67
4.67
1
1.33
7
2
8.67
2
4.67
4.33
2
2
1
1.67
1.33
2.67
4.67
4
3.67
4.33
1
3.67
5
7
2
0.67
2.33
3
0
5
3
0
2.333333333
4.333333333
4
1
2
2
0
2
2.666666667
3
0
2.666666667
2
0
1
1
1
2.333333333
2
3.333333333
3.333333333
3
0
2
1
2.666666667
3.333333333
6
3
1.666666667
7.666666667
0
3
3
3
3
3.333333333
3.333333333
4
4.666666667
2.333333333
1.333333333
5.33
2
8.666666667
1
1
3.333333333
2
1
1
0
5
3.666666667
1.333333333
4
5
6
2.333333333
4.666666667
1.666666667
2
1.666666667
5
2.666666667
1.666666667
1
1.666666667
1
3.666666667
3.666666667
1
2.666666667
2.333333333
0.333333333
1.666666667
0.666666667
0.333333333
4.666666667
4
2.666666667
4
0.666666667
0.666666667
4.666666667
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
1
0
0
4.333333333
3.333333333
4
2
4
4
4.666666667
4
2.666666667
4
4
4.666666667
5
3
2
4
3.666666667
2.666666667
8.333333333
4.333333333
1.666666667
2.333333333
4.666666667
1.333333333
1
4.666666667
4.666666667
0
0.333333333
4.666666667
1.666666667
0
1.333333333
3
2
1
5
2.666666667
0.666666667
1.333333333
1
2.666666667
6.333333333
2
5.333333333
2
5.666666667
5.333333333
3.666666667
0.333333333
0.333333333
2
2
0.333333333
0.333333333
3.666666667
4.666666667
2
2
2
2
3.333333333
2
2.666666667
6.333333333
1.333333333
2
2
3.666666667
5
5.333333333
3
3
1.666666667
6
4.666666667
7.333333333
3.333333333
7.333333333
2.666666667
3.333333333
2
1.666666667
2
2
2.666666667
2
1.333333333
1
1
3.666666667
4
3.333333333
1
1
1
2
3
3
1
1.666666667
0
1.666666667
3
1
2
2.333333333
1
4
6
6
1
4
4.333333333
5.666666667
1
1
6.666666667
4
8
1
6
4
1.333333333
3
2.333333333
4
3
3
2
3
2
8
7
1
4
1
4.333333333
3.666666667
2.666666667
2.666666667
6
7
7.333333333
6
1.666666667
3.333333333
7.666666667
1
1
1
2
2
8
3.666666667
1.666666667
9
1.333333333
5.333333333
2
2
4
4.666666667
4.666666667
1
1
2
7
2
1.666666667
5.666666667
4
6.333333333
2
8
6.333333333
4.333333333
4.666666667
1.333333333
5.333333333
6.333333333
4
3.666666667
7.666666667
1
3
5
5
3
3
8
5
1
1
7
2.333333333
2.666666667
7
6.666666667
5.666666667
1.333333333
2
5.666666667
2.666666667
6.666666667
4
3
1.666666667
3
1
4
2
4
1
8.666666667
1
3.666666667
1
2
4.333333333
2.333333333
5.666666667
1.666666667
2.333333333
9.333333333
3
7
7.666666667
4
6.666666667
1.666666667
2.666666667
3.666666667
6.666666667
1.333333333
1.333333333
1
1
1
8.333333333
2
7.333333333
3.666666667
2.666666667
2.666666667
7.666666667
1
2
8.666666667
12.66666667
10.66666667
17.33333333
16
16
12.66666667
14
10.66666667
10.66666667
12.66666667
15.33333333
14
15.33333333
14
14.66666667
16
16
16
10
12
17.33333333
14
8
13.33333333
10
18.66666667
12.66666667
14.66666667
18
12
14
10
20
7.333333333
10
10.66666667
14
15.33333333
12.66666667
15.33333333
15.33333333
14
16
18
16
10
10
10
10.66666667
10
14
11.33333333
17.33333333
12.66666667
10
14.66666667
16
10
12.66666667
15.33333333
15.33333333
6.666666667
10
20
16
16.66666667
14.66666667
10.66666667
16.66666667
15.33333333
4
12.66666667
16.66666667
12
10
10
20
10
16.66666667
20
4
14
10.66666667
20
11.33333333
10
14
19.33333333
4
18
10
9.333333333
9.333333333
9.333333333
15.33333333
11.33333333
15.33333333
15.33333333
15.33333333
19.33333333
15.33333333
16
10
18
16
16.66666667
16
12.66666667
14
18.66666667
16.66666667
16
19.33333333
19.33333333
17.33333333
17.33333333
20
10
15.33333333
18
13.33333333
18
18.66666667
8
16.66666667
18.66666667
5.333333333
15.33333333
14.66666667
16.66666667
20
14.66666667
16
9.333333333
18
16.66666667
16.66666667
18.66666667
19.33333333
16
17.33333333
6
0
3.333333333
16.66666667
16.66666667
10.66666667
12.66666667
8
20
15.33333333
4
12.66666667
12.66666667
12.66666667
12.66666667
16.66666667
16
S2 Comments
The proposal from the Igiugig Village Council to complete final design and construction of a river hydrokinetic power project follows years of work starting in 2008 with resource assessment
and continuing with site characterization through device demonstration. It also builds on experience and information gained from an Emerging Energy Technology Fund (EETF) award and
other significant state and federal investments in hydrokinetics. The community has actively pursued a hydrokinetic installation and the project team has been on the forefront of hydrokinetic
development, including design and permitting.The proposed location in the Kvichak River is widely considered the most promising for a hydrokinetic device in the state with clear water,
consistent current velocities, and lack of river ice formation. Significant salmon runs will play a central role in project permitting and require extensive biological monitoring. While
the site and river characteristics are unique in Alaska, many aspects of the project could result in information transferrable to other sites and other device types and could contribute
to lowering costs for similar projects in the future. The project proposes to use a second generation device that has not yet been constructed and would still need to overcome numerous
hurdles to be successful. As a first-of-a-kind project, costs are expected to be high. Costly device retrieval and redeployment would need to occur annually, at a minimum. As proposed,
the calculated benefit to cost ratio under current assumptions is around 0.2. Given the state of development of the technology, the proposed project does not compete favorably in the
Renewable Energy Fund (REF) process on economic or technical terms with more mature technologies. AEA examined what it would take to obtain a benefit to cost ratio of 1. In order to
be economical it is projected permitting and engineering costs must be drastically reduced, the device cost would need to drop, and operations costs would have to be very low. It is
within the realm of possibility that continued development and testing could result in a significant reduction in the upfront engineering work and a streamlined permit process. Continued
development and testing could also result in lower capital and maintenance costs. Advancing this technology may solve the economic issues. The Renewable Energy Fund regulations require
that for demonstration projects, recommendation can be made if there is potential for application in other areas of the state; the need for the project is shown; and the risks of the
proposed system are reasonable and warrant demonstration. There is certainly a large need, and potential, for a viable hydrokinetic project. Extrapolating application of this device
to other hydrokinetic sites throughout the state remains a significant hurdle. The Kvichak River site in Igiugig is somewhat unique in that the water in that portion of the river is
very clean and generally lacks debris and sediment load because it is at the outlet of a large lake. Most sites across Alaska however have significant amounts of debris and sediment
loads. Progress is being made on a debris diverter but such a device adds to the cost of the system further challenging the project economics. On the basis that the ORPC technology
appears to have limited potential economical application at other river sites throughout the state this project is not recommended. AEA recognizes that the quality of the resource,
the outstanding commitment of the community and project team, and the investment in site characterization and preparation combine to make this a compelling river hydrokinetic project.
However, the technical and economic challenges of this developing technology do not yet allow it to compete well as a standard REF project, and the project's ability as a demonstration
project to apply to other parts of the state are limited due to unique river characteristics. Therefore AEA does not recommend funding this project at this time.This project is not
recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request
for Applications #16012.
Circle Utilities Inc. applied for a $75,000 grant to fund a $85,000 feasibility study of a 100kW to 200kW solar photovoltaic project. The project would be located adjacent to the powerplant
on utility property. This project is not recommended for the following reasons:
1. 100kW to 200kW is too large a solar PV project to integrate onto a grid that had annual average loads of 44kW in FY15 unless a significant percentage of the solar output is curtailed.
2. The smallest genset is 100kW. According to John Deere, it should not be run below 30% load for extended periods of time. Since the loads are already below this threshold, adding
solar PV would only reduce the minimum loads on the diesel genset.
3. The project economics are poor. Even when evaluated with a more reasonably sized 10kW solar system, at an installed cost of $8 per Watt (less than Eagle’s recent experience at
approximately $10 per Watt), the benefit cost ratio is 0.44. The total construction cost in this scenario is only $80,000, which is less than was requested in this application for
a feasibility study.
4. Not enough detail was included in the application. It does not appear that the applicant used the best practices checklist for solar, as was recommended on the first page of the
Request for Applications #16012.
This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section
4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The Community of Elfin Cove Non-profit Corporation applied for an $88,000 grant to partially fund a $110,000, 140kW hydro project's permitting process.
AEA has the following concerns about this project, which should be monitored if it is funded by the legislature:
The population is low and has decreased in recent years. The electric demand is very seasonal. If population continues to decrease in the off-season, it may be difficult to operate the
hydro facility continuously. Many hydro projects experience cost overruns. If this one is financed by the community, cost overruns could be problematic for the project and the community.
This project is recommended for full funding.
The grant request is to augment existing funding to reduce the new debt applicant requires to complete the project. The project recently completed the first phase of construction and
is expected to resume construction after bids are advertised the first half of 2016.
If awarded, the additional funding is expected to reduce the cost of energy by $0.13/kWh through a decrease of $45k in the predicted annual debt service payment.
The applicant has performed well recently in executing the development and construction phases of this project resulting in high scores for project management and qualifications. The
first phase of construction completed the highest risk geotechnical portion of the project consisting of the access road and site grading at the intake and powerhouse sites. Remaining
construction carries less risk and designs for infrastructure are complete and fully detailed. All permits have been obtained. Consequently the project scores well technically.
The additional funding request would cover project costs that are above the original estimates. As the overall project cost has increased and the benefit has remained constant the economic
score has declined to slightly less than 1.
Recommended for full funding.
This application was initially not recommended due to incomplete prior phase (per the Request for Applications #16012, Sections 2, 2.4, 2.5, applicants must complete prior phases of
work prior to receiving funding for future phases).
AEA found uncertainty both in the technical and economic aspects and recommended CEC apply for design funding when the feasibility study is complete, as long as it indicates a technically
and economically feasible project.
The applicant requested reconsideration and provided recently completed draft memoranda from the feasibility study contractor. The draft memoranda describe a 500 kW power project with
an estimated total cost of approximately $17 million that will offset approximately 2 million kWh's of diesel electric generation annually.
Through the appeal process, AEA agreed with the applicant in that feasibility data was available and requested that staff score the project. Consequently staff scored the project and
is recommending it for full funding with the special condition that the feasibility study is completed, reviewed and approved by AEA, and demonstrates a technically and economically
feasible project.
The City of Chignik has made significant progress on rehabilitation and development of the proposed project since acquiring the aging hydro and water conveyance system from private ownership.
The ownership transfer allowed the City to utilize REF funds for the feasibility study which found that a modified project with a powerhouse located near the upstream limit of salmon
habitat had the best economic and environmental benefits. Significant benefits include improvement in resource utilization, public water system improvement, potential for hatchery development,
access and recreation improvement. Potential concerns include aquatic and permitting issues.
This grant request is for funding the design and permitting work required to advance the development which is expected to result in nearly complete displacement of diesel electric generation
for the long established fishing community. Proposed work consists of aquatic, cultural, FERC permitting investigations, LIDAR topographic surveying, geotechnical investigations, and
hydroelectric engineering design with the end goal of having a construction ready project.
AEA recommends the applicant focus on retaining qualified engineering, regulatory, biological, and cultural consultants through an experienced hydroelectric developer/project manager
as a condition of award.
The project would produce valuable information on choosing between renewable energy, fossil-fuels and energy efficiency for high-contribution wind systems. The proposal is thin on details.
The cost is high for a normal reconnaissance and feasibility scope with no met tower or other renewable resource assessment. Recommend full funding but with a series of gating deliverables
to be determined by AEA and written into the grant agreement, if issued, that must be reviewed before funding for the next deliverable is released.
Adak appears to have good hydroelectric potential if water use issues can be mitigated to allow for increased project benefits which are needed to reach economic parity with the cost
of development. Both the Mitt Lake project and the PRV power recovery, if technically feasible, are impacted by existing water reservations for non-anadromous aquatic habitat.
TDX proposes to proceed with the PRV project under the assumption that the development time will be short and that the economics are about equal. It is noted that there is a considerable
range in the estimated development cost for the power recovery project and that the overall project size is significantly below present energy needs.
It is clear from the previous reconnaissance study by Hatch that continued hydroelectric development should be pursued. The next step would be a feasibility study. TDXs proposal to perform
the feasibility study for the power recovery turbine represents a component of the required overall feasibility work that would include the Mitt Lake project.
Recommended for partial funding to complete only the feasibility study proposed by TDX, not design or construction phases.
The City of Kake's application for construction funding is based on a reconnaissance report and IPECs self-funded continuance of the feasibility and design phases. The reconnaissance
report is of good quality and demonstrates the excellent economic benefits that follow from the utilization of existing infrastructure. The existing infrastructure includes a dam with
an outlet sized for the future penstock and an existing building proposed to serve as the powerhouse. Overall the project technical and development risk appears very low.
AEA notes some concerns including an unrealistic timeframe for completion of design and permitting. Additionally the conclusions in the reconnaissance study stated further feasibility
work is required to determine whether two other alternatives warrant further consideration. AEA also suggests additional feasibility work address, in detail, additional head potential
through powerhouse, dam modifications, and turbine selection (francis versus crossflow) and the subsequent costs and benefits. Finally, there are no concept designs provided from which
to base the construction costs.
Based on the low technical and permitting risk, this project is recommended for funding contingent upon completing remaining feasibility, design, and permitting work prior to issuing
an award.
This project is not recommended due primarily to poor economics: high cost of study for marginal benefits, required long life for the investment to achieve economic payback and the associated
uncertainty about whether the resource will be available for its economic life. The proposed project economics require a 17 year project life to achieve parity with the diesel alternative.
It is noted that about half the potential savings (preheating the diesel plant) requires the demand to remain relatively the same and the percentage of hydro generation and the operation
methods to remain relatively the same. Additional changes such as alternative utilization of excess power (i.e. transportation), installation of a flywheel and/or battery, or major
demand changes could curtail the electric boiler completely (a similar change in conditions appears to have resulted in the ORCs current inoperable state). A static situation is unlikely
and the feasibility study currently underway for the Crater Lake hydro should include an excess energy analysis that will shed more light on the potential benefits for heat utilization.
Frequency controlling electric load governors, which also perform as electric boilers, are prevalent and commonly used to regulate small hydroelectric plant operation. Overall, AEA
does not expect the actual installation and use of electric boilers powered by excess energy only to be an overly challenging or costly effort, probably not much more costly than the
proposed feasibility work itself (AEA estimated construction costs to be less than $100k per boiler). The proposed feasibility study appears to cost nearly the same as performing the
proposed work. Past efforts have already concluded the potential for savings and found the project to be technically feasible. There appears to be little value to the additional study
other than making operational improvements at existing generation facilities (work that is potentially excluded from Renewable Energy Fund eligibility). Further, the additional study,
by being such a large component of cost, significantly reduces economic benefit without an apparent commensurate gain. This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance
past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The City of Seward, applying as a local government, requests funding in the amount of $725,000 for the design and construction of an ocean/ground source heat pump system to offset the
use of #1 diesel for heat in buildings owned by the City. The proposed project’s total cost is estimated at $995,458 including the cost of a major component replacement in year 25
and the capital cost associated with connecting to the new shower house. $125,000 will be provided as match and the applicant has expended $72,999 in completing a feasibility study
and conceptual design that provides the foundation for the proposed project. Additionally, the buildings proposed for inclusion in the heat pump system have undergone $32,497 in energy
efficiency upgrades. The City of Seward has experience installing and operating heat pumps and the proposed district heat loop architecture may provide a model for other communities
wishing to use heat pumps.Full funding is recommended. A 65% design must be accepted by AEA prior to release of funds for items requiring long lead times. A 95% design must be accepted
by AEA prior to release of funds for construction. All deliverables must be accepted by AEA prior to the release of the final 10% of funds.
Minto Development Corporation submitted an application for $22,748.80 to partially fund the feasibility study, conceptual and final design, and construction of a $56,872, 10.8kW solar
photovoltaic system in Minto. This application is not recommended for funding for the following reasons: 1. Per Section 2 of the Round 9 Request for Applications #16012, there is not
enough information provided in the application to assess the feasibility and cost of this project, or properly review the design for construction funding eligibility. The application
is for all four phases of construction. 2. The applicant did not document that it had reached a written agreement with the electric utility regarding interconnection standards or rates.
The Request for Applications #16012 on page 1 directed applicants to the Best Practices Checklists to ensure complete applications. This was a checklist item under "Common Pitfalls"
on the Solar Program Best Practices Checklist. The original application was ineligible because the applicant was the Minto Development Corporation. AEA gave the project developers an
opportunity to amend the application, which resulted in the Native Village of Minto becoming the applicant. When AEA pointed out that the application violated AVEC's interconnection
standards for maximum distributed generation capacity and did not include a written agreement with AVEC, the applicant got verbal agreement from AVEC to allow interconnection of a 10kW
solar PV system. The application still does not address interconnection standards or costs, net metering, or electric rates. This project is not recommended for funding and will not
advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The City of Ouzinkie's application seeks funding for the design and replacement of a turbine and generator which is a component of a larger project to reconstruct the existing hydro
in Ouzinkie which has reached the end of its useful life. The replacement effort began when the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) constructed a new dam to replace the wooden
dam that failed recently. The City proposes to have ANTHC complete the remainder of the project reconstruction.
In Round 8 AEA concluded the replacement penstock and turbine is an addition to the existing hydro project and that only the projected incremental increase in hydro power production
is allowable in the economic analysis. However, it is noted that the dam failed and the turbine and generator apparently require replacement. The pipeline is also reported to have
issues as well. Despite continued operation it appears that the project is at the end of its useful life.
The City's application only requested grant funding for the turbine and generator replacement. In evaluating the project economics consistently AEA has included the entire project cost
and benefits. The prior investment of the dam has also been included as match. AEA has concerns that the proposed budget for design work is too low. Recommended for full funding.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a significant amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project demonstrates marginal economic value. AEA believes
that cost saving measures can be identified during the design phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
Partial funding of $90,922 recommended for the final design phase only.
The proposed system offers a new option in balancing diesel generation with variable wind energy generation. Reduced diesel loading is possible without damaging under loading that is
seen with standard fixed-RPM gensets. The ultra-capacitor bridging allows the system to provide spinning reserve while keeping voltage and frequency within spec. The system will allow
for significant periods of diesel-off operation and the generator's power converter doubles as a grid-forming inverter during periods when the wind turbines are the sole power generator
on the system. The applicant has a good track record with wind energy projects in Sand Point and Saint Paul and is very cooperative in providing high-resolution operational data for
those systems.
Recommend full funding.
The scope of work is to conduct an environmental review to meet the requirements of FERC licensing. The basis for undertaking the licensing and development of the project has not been
demonstrated through a feasibility study. Per the Request for Applications #16012, Sections 2, 2.4, 2.5, applicants must complete prior phases of work prior to receiving funding for
future phases. The feasibility study should be prepared by a licensed Alaska professional engineer.
Lacking a feasibility study AEA performed a basic analysis of the project benefits and technical feasibility. Significant issues remain unaddressed, particularly whether the City would
be able to acquire a long term (20+ years) power sales agreement with the multiple cruise ships sufficient to finance the project. Alternatively, there is no identifiable revenue stream
associated with the emissions from the ships and the detrimental air quality results. The City itself does not appear to require the power and energy available from the project, yet
under-developing the resource is probably not feasible or desirable either. A long-term development plan identifying regional opportunities for demand growth coupled with a regional
hydroelectric resource evaluation is the recommended first step for Skagway.
This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section
4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The City of Scammon Bay requested funding for stream gauging and preliminary design for the continued development of the hydro project based on the recommendations of the feasibility
study completed in 2014. Those recommendations included verifying the hydrology followed by design and permitting. AEA is limiting the funding to stream gauging only for the first year
in order to verify the resource potential. The City did not provide a detailed budget and scope for the stream gauging. AEA believes the proposed scope is higher than need be and is
recommending a reduced amount of funding.
AEA recommends the project for partial funding to complete stream gauging to better understand the hydroelectric resource potential of Hillside Creek in Scammon Bay. AEA notes that AVEC
is currently performing a feasibility study of the wind energy potential in Scammon Bay. Following the completion of this phase, a feasibility update should be conducted to compare
diesel electric generation, heat recovery, wind, and hydro to identify the best mix of energy solutions for the community.
AEA recommends partial funding of $90,000 for stream gauging only. The work shall generally conform to USGS procedures.
The project demonstrates the best economic value of any heat recovery applications received this year with a B/C ratio of 1.44.
AEA recommends full funding of the final design and construction phases.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a significant amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project demonstrates marginal economic value. AEA believes
that cost saving measures can be identified during the final design phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
AEA recommends funding only the design phase to allow for improved construction cost estimates prior to funding the construction phase. Requested design costs of $75,760 (17.5% of total
project cost) is higher than expected based on the complexity of the project. Partial funding of $50,000 recommended for final design phase only.
This current application is for final design and permitting for the “Barrow to Atqasuk Transmission Line and Home Conversions to Electric Space Heatingâ€.
This project was funded in rounds 2 and 4 of the Renewable Energy Fund for feasibility study and conceptual/preliminary design. The North Slope Borough also applied for but did not receive
funding in round 7 as the preliminary design from round 4 was not yet complete.
Prior to application during round 9 the Preliminary design report was completed in a satisfactory manner and thus, AEA recommends full funding for the final design and permitting of
this project.
Kaktovik has received REF Round 4 funding to complete a wind resource analysis, feasibility study and conceptual design. That project is complete. The existing power plant is easily
adaptable to integration of wind energy. The application includes a good summary of permitting and environmental concerns. NSB has a long history of maintaining village power systems
at a high level of reliability and functionality. The budget is higher than standard wind project designs due to increased avian/environmental assessment and permitting needed on Barter
Island. The project will need to address cold weather design considerations for the proposed wind turbine. Good wind resource. Recommend full funding.
Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA) has applied for a $384,730 grant to fund a $449,178 100kW solar photovoltaic project at the electric utility's wind energy site. AEA does not recommend
funding this project for the following reasons: The application included a confusing combination of solar racking configurations: section 5.1.1 describes a dual-axis tracking array,
section 5.3.1 states the panels will be south-facing, yet the array plan submitted with the application shows fixed panels oriented E, SE, S, SW, and W. The application is for final
design, permitting and construction, yet did not provide the feasibility study and conceptual design information required per section 4, criteria 7 of the Request for Applications.
The integration concept on p.15 of the application does not address curtailment of the solar output even though KEA currently curtails its wind output. If sufficient thermal loads are
planned to allow for use of all solar output this should be described so that the economics can be properly analyzed. This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance
past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
Central Environmental Incorporated (CEI), Inc. requested funding for reconnaissance, feasibility and conceptual design to determine the viability of a waste to energy project in Anchorage.
Construction and demolition debris currently being landfilled would be used as fuel for the plant. The plant would utilize Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) technology to generate electricity
to sell to a local utility or the Alaska Railroad Corporation. The application states that the ORC system will deliver an electrical efficiency of 18% - 20%.The review team had a number
of concerns with the technical feasibility of the project: 1. The application states that there are up 2,000 tons per year of combustible materials that could be diverted from the Anchorage
landfill. However, the economics were based on 4,525 tons per year of fuel. There is concern about the actual availability of the waste resource in a radius that is economically feasible.
2. Because this is an incineration project (construction & demolition debris, tires), permitting could be contentious in the Anchorage area. 3. The proposed site is an EPA brownfield
site and the permitting implications are unknown. 4. The State of Alaska has supported the installation of four Organic Rankine Cycle systems, and all of the systems have performed
at an efficiency significantly less than the manufacturer’s claims. No actual operating data on a system achieving 18% - 20% electrical efficiency was found. 5. The review team had
concerns that the technical partner, Supercritical Technologies, did not have experience in a sub-arctic environment. The company is a small start-up, with limited operational experience.
The project scored low for economic viability demonstrating a benefit/cost ratio of 0.42.This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation
process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The State of Alaska Department of Corrections applied for a $140,000 grant to fund all phases (reconnaissance, feasibility, design and construction) of a 100kW solar photovoltaic project
at the Point McKenzie Correctional Farm. The Alaska Energy Authority has reviewed the application and determined that it does not meet the minimum requirements for funding. The initial
application lacked sufficient information to pass stage 1 review. In a 9/23/15 e-mail, AEA gave the applicant until 9/28/15 to complete the application. A revised application was
submitted, but still does not meet minimum standards. The applicant did not respond to AEA's 10/8/15 e-mail requesting additional information by 10/13/15, did not provide information
regarding electric utility interconnection standards and rates, and did not provide information on projected operations and maintenance costs. The lack of utility standards and rates
information is described as a common pitfall in the AEA Solar Program Best Practices Checklist. The requirement to respond in a timely manner to information requests is described in
Section 4.0 of the Request for Applications. AEA also heard from the applicant's electric utility, Matanuska Electric Association (MEA), that the applicant has not contacted the utility
about the proposed project. According to MEA, the project is above the 25kW threshold of a net metering project, so would require a separate contract with MEA if it is under 100kW.
If it is over 100kW, it would require approval from the Regulatory Commission of Alaska. The applicant has not provided any indication that these requirements have been addressed.
This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section
4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The City of Hoonah is proposing the feasibility, final design, and construction of a waste-to-energy facility that will use anaerobic digestion to generate methane from waste water biosolids
and other biomass feedstocks. The methane would be burned to generate electricity for City of Hoonah buildings. The project includes the design and construction of the anaerobic digestion
facility, a transmission line to convey electricity to the City of Hoonah, and ancillary facilities to dispose of digestate by-products. The bio-solids would be sourced from the City
and Borough of Juneau, where CBJ is currently spending up to $2MM annually to transport waste water treatment biosolids to the Lower 48. The project schedule states that feasibility
work funded by the applicant will be complete by December 2015. There is not enough information in the application without the feasibility study to make an informed technical analysis
or economic evaluation of the proposal. Per Section 2 and further detailed in sub-sections 2.2 through 2.4, AEA requires the applicant to “include sufficient information to allow
for the evaluation and ranking of the application.†There are many significant questions that need to be addressed in a completed feasibility study before AEA would recommend REF
funding for design and construction. The proposed content of the feasibility study is comprehensive, and we look forward to evaluating this project in a future application of the Renewable
Energy Fund. The following information is critical for the proper evaluation of the project: 1. Information from the RCA stating that electricity can be directly provided to the target
buildings and the local utility does not need to be involved in the project. 2. Detailed analysis of the cost of generation and its impact to the community energy rates. 3. A letter
of support/interest from the City and Borough of Juneau stating that they will consider this proposal for the disposal of their sewage waste. 4. Proposed disposal method and costs for
the digestate. 5. Estimated capital and O&M costs for the anaerobic digestion technology, including the gas cleaning process. 6. The assumptions that resulted in the projected energy
generations of 750,000 kWh/year. 7. Assessment of the impact to the local electric grid and the current generation sources of hydro and diesel, including impacts to the heat recovery
system. 8. A permitting evaluation. This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045,
3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
Past evaluation found low economic benefit and incomplete phases as factors for not recommending additional funding. Project revisions include preparing a design build contract to overcome
insufficient development funding and performing value engineering such as eliminating the intake gate and changes in the pipeline concept. In conjunction with AEA's inclusion of O&M
savings from diesel off projects the economics have improved significantly and the design build approach is expected to result in a net savings and faster implementation. Recommended
for full funding.
Last year the project was initially not recommended for design and permitting due a lack of a complete feasibility study. Major deficiencies included not having project concept designs
and economic analysis completed sufficiently. The applicant requested and received reconsideration of AEA's initial decision. AEA accepted the appeal and the project was recommended
contingent on completion of the feasibility and concept design work. However, the project was not funded due to its ranking on the recommendations list. The application this year shows
significant progress on the project with concept designs (Exhibit F) and economic analysis (Exhibit D) submitted as part of the Draft License Application.The Exhibit D analysis includes
avoided cost rates that are calculated by the applicant (seller), a wholly owned subsidiary of the utility (buyer), which has the sole authority to provide electric service and set
tariffs for power and energy paid by the public and approved by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA). The RCA would be expected to review the proposed rate analysis and is the
entity that issues approval of rates.AEA finds that the ability to contract for the sale of power at the proposed rates significant enough that funding was not recommended until Kenai
Hydro obtain RCA approval of a power sales agreement and interconnection agreement or, if not necessary, demonstrate concurrence from the RCA that such agreements are unnecessary. Kenai
Hydro requested reconsideration explaining that a contract was not necessary, that the project was not subject to RCA review because it was a wholly owned subsidiary of HEA, and that
rates charged to HEA would fall under the existing AEECI contract with HEA or the project would merged with AEECI assets creating a blended rate. The appeal was accepted by the AEA
Executive Director and staff were directed to complete project evaluation and scoring. ADNR comments regarding the Kenai River Special Management Area appear to primarily pertain to
the location of the Iditarod National Historic Trail and are being addressed through the FERC licensing and NEPA process. The INHT trail and trail corridor is to have a conveyance of
a 1,000-foot-wide easement to include a visual and sound buffer between the recreation corridor and adjacent uses. No permanent structures or equipment are to be placed within the trail
corridor. In keeping with the management plan, the Project has provided an alternate route for the INHT easement, keeping the 1,000-foot-wide corridor away from any permanent structures
and adjacent uses.Recommended for full funding contingent on providing a means for transmission of power from outside HEA service terriority demonstrated by a wheeling arrangement or
RCA approval to build redundant transmission infrastructure and contingent on concurrence from easement holders and management plan authorities that the proposed project is consistent
with the KRSMA.
The proposed project makes better use of the funding already approved for the REF 8 wind energy project. 65% design is complete on the intertie. The wind turbine proposed has a solid
track record in Alaska as does the applicant as an owner and operator. AEA reduced the expected energy production due to observed icing events during the wind resource study. Recommend
full funding with the special provision that the final wind turbine selection not lower the economic score.
The project is proposed in a Class 4 to 5 wind regime. The applicant, AVEC, has a long track record of operating wind projects in remote Alaska. The project scope is consistent with
other wind projects and the economics are expected to improve once site-specific wind data is available. AEA recommends full funding with the provision that a US Fish & Wildlife consultation
be completed before proceeding with the project.
Bethel has ample waste heat available for recovery and numerous significant loads within a one mile radius to the powerhouse. The existing system is near the end of its useful life
and an analysis of alternatives including a complete rebuild is in progress with funding through Round 8 of the Renewable Energy Fund.
This project application is the second phase of the rehabilitation of the Bethel Heat Recovery System. In this phase, the equipment to capture the heat from the cooling system of the
generators will be replaced with a properly designed modular system. No additional recovered heat will be utilized as a result of this phase, but this phase is critical to the future
expansion of the heat recovery system.
The economic analysis is based on the capital estimate provided by the applicant and an estimate of fuel displacement for the expansion of the heat recovery system to 10 buildings. Because
this project is still in the evaluation stage, these capital and fuel displacement estimates must be refined.
Recommend full funding with the provision that the economic evaluation be rerun at the completion of the design phase. This evaluation must include total capital costs including building
integration and displaced fuel for each additional building serviced by the heat recovery system. Construction funding will be released only if the benefit/cost ratio remains strong.
Comments from the previous round reviews centered on licensing, site control, and budget (for design and geotech). Review of the project in its current state finds that licensing risk
is now low with FERC issuing a FEA in partnership with USFWS. Also, the site control issues appear on track to resolution with a complete Exhibit G and apparent willingness by all parties,
including the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, to issue authorization for land use. It is noted that AVEC should pay particular attention to the lease requirements of FERC in
drafting leases for this project.
Previous reviews also found that the budget for the design appears excessive particularly with regard to the geotech work. This project is economically challenged and AVEC should endeavor
to develop this project with potential for cost savings a priority. AEA believes remote sensing geotech investigations would be a much lower cost investigation and are likely to provide
the necessary data to proceed with full design.
Recommend funding full design and partial geotech funding with the recommendation that GPR and/or seismic surveys be done prior to investing in costly helicopter supported drilling.
Also, as a condition of award, AVEC will be required to provide proposed staff for AEA approval of the design and geotech work or provide an RFP and award process approved by AEA for
the selection of proposed staff.
The Waterfall Creek project will allow the community to generate power with diesels off for a portion of the year and will lower the amount of new debt for the community to complete
the project. Using grant funds, the project remains economical to the community with the increased expenditure despite AEA assumed bypass flow requirements.A Renewable Energy Fund (REF)
Round 6 grant (#7060929) in the amount of $2,600,000 was provided by AEA to fund the construction phase of the proposed project through completion. The grant application was evaluated
using the grantee's expected total project cost provided at the time. The project is currently expecting higher construction costs and is seeking additional funding to complete the
construction phase. AEA recommends full funding with special provisions. The applicant shall satisfy the following special provisions prior to the issuance of a subsequent grant. 1.
Demonstrate site control 2. Become current on financial and progress reports 3. Amend existing grants to reflect proposed milestone and deliverables 4. Provide a work scope and budget
for staff, consultants, and/or vendors to commission the integration of the new hydro with existing hydro and diesel plant. Scope shall include head to spill to energy relationship
development and integration based on operational constraints and maximizing hydro generation.
The City's recent reconnaissance report on Unga Man Creek, prepared by Polarconsult, shows potential for a small run of river hydroelectric project that could potentially provide economically
positive benefits.
The City has completed prior phase work and is actively pursuing further development. Additionally, the proposed consultant has extensive experience in this type of work. The proposed
schedule is reasonable and the recommendations to begin focused study on the hydrology and aquatic biology is appropriate.
The City has started off well with this development although it is noted that the southwest sub-basin to Unga Man Creek was overlooked. AEA previously found that development to have
comparable economics to Unga Creek (as opposed to Waterfall Creek) with the possible advantage of not having fisheries issues.
Recommended for full funding for feasibility work that should include alternative analysis of projects such as the combined sub-basin and Unga Man project.
Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority (THRHA), applying as a Housing Authority, requests funding in the amount of $296,038 for the design and construction of an air-source heat pump
system to offset the use of heating oil at the Saxman Low-Rent Multifamily complex for the communities of Saxman and Ketchican. The proposed project cost is $509,231 with THRHA supplying
$164,053 in cash match and $62,410 in efficiency upgrade match. The applicant invested $28,890 into the efficiency upgrade match over the past five years and completed a feasibility
study that will provide the foundation for the proposed project.
Full funding is recommended.
A 65% design must be accepted by AEA prior to release of funds for items requiring long lead times. A 95% design must be accepted by AEA prior to release of funds for construction. All
deliverables must be accepted by AEA prior to the release of the final 10% of funds.
The Klawock City School District proposes the design and construction of a chip fueled boiler to heat two school buildings in the City of Klawock. Wood chips would be provided by the
local lumber mill in Klawock that currently provides chips to the City of Craig biomass heating system. This project could replace approximately 16,200 gallons of heating fuel a year
with a local fuel source.
While the economics of this project are good, the engineering will be challenging due to the site constraints. The project could benefit from a more in-depth analysis of the project
and fuel storage siting, equipment layout, and equipment specifications.
Recommend partial funding of $111,986 for the development of final design and a business/operating plan.
AEA believes that it is too early in the conceptual design process to lock in the EWT-52m/500kW wind turbine option, as presented by the applicant. Without an intertie to Ambler, the
combined load for Shungnak and Kobuk are not large enough to support more than 400kW of wind power without designing very complex controls. The Shungnak power plant is not currently
scheduled for upgrades that would facilitate variable wind energy. The most significant factor influencing the developability of this project is the recent low river levels and resultant
unpredictable barge deliveries that have not happened in the past few years. The project would need to incorporate turbines, materials and construction equipment that could be mobilized
through alternate methods - likely by air cargo. This might eliminate larger turbines that offer better economies of scale and would add costs that are well above existing benchmarks.
In addition to the standard deliverables in AEA's wind Guidelines for Conceptual Design Reports (CDR), the applicant should address the logistical challenges that are unique to this
location in the CDR. The CDR should also focus heavily on the existing diesel generation and intertie system constraints. While AEA will want to take a cautious approach to this project,
the funding is to examine the feasibility of a potential wind project in a community with very high energy costs. Per the May 2015 REFAC meeting and the Round 9 request for applications,
the REF program is seeking to fund a greater percentage of early project development to help communities determine if projects are feasible and economically beneficial.
AEA recommends full funding for phase 2 conceptual design phase with special provisions that the conceptual design adequately address all the factors listed above to determine the feasibility
of the project prior to advancing to future phases (final design and construction). If a grant is issued, AEA will set milestones for the grantee to achieve--in order--prior to advancing
to next milestones to ensure productive use of state funding should any of the challenges prove unfeasible. In the event that a go/no-go point stops the project, remaining funds will
be returned to the Renewable Energy Fund, per program regulations.
ANTHC and the City of Huslia proposed the Final Design and Construction of a manually fed cordwood heating system to serve the Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plant in Huslia,
Alaska. The project is estimated to save the Clinic and Water Treatment Plant 8,474 gallons of heating oil per year.
The economics of this project are challenging, but there has been significant community involvement in the initial planning of the fuel supply. The community champion has attended biomass
workshops and is knowledgeable of the proposed system.
Recommend partial funding of $53,116 to complete the design phase only and work to improve the economics of the project.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a significant amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project demonstrates marginal economic value. AEA believes
that cost saving measures can be identified during the final design phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
AEA recommends funding only the design phase to allow for improved construction cost estimates prior to funding the construction phase. Requested design cost of $68,262 (21% of total
project cost) is higher than expected based on the complexity of the project. Partial funding of $50,000 is recommended for final design phase only.
ANTHC and the City of Ambler propose the final design and construction of a cordwood fueled biomass heating system to serve the Washeteria and City Office building in Ambler. The proposed
biomass heating system would be manually fed and housed in a prefabricated building. The system is anticipated to displace 3,516 gallons of heating fuel per year. The request is a continuation
of a Round 2 grant, "Upper Kobuk River Biomass".
The economics of this project are marginal but there is opportunity to reduce the overall cost of the project. The design phase should focus on a lowering the cost of installation. The
community must also develop an acceptable operations and maintenance plan for this project, including contingencies for staffing and wood supply.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that no construction funding be released until the final design and business/operating plan is approved.
This proposed hydro project may provide significant benefits but at a very high cost. Additional review of the feasibility study and conceptual design, with additional focus on the Kogoluktuk
development, should be performed as part of the next step in development.
The project is recommended for full funding with the condition NANA and its subsidiaries hire an industry recognized consultant with relevant hydroelectric project experience to perform
the development work.
The proposal to use wastewater effluent as a source for a heat pump system is a compelling use of an otherwise unused heat source, and could serve as a model for similar systems in other
parts of the state. The high temperature and availability of effluent would result in a higher heat pump coefficient of performance (COP) than seen in other heat pump installations
in the state. This project has been recommended for funding in the past two years.
Full funding recommended.
Chugach Electric's application for a 500kW solar garden project is recommended for funding at 50% of the requested level. The applicant requested a $100,000 grant to match $100,000 in
a cash contribution from Chugach Electric. However, AEA has determined that the applicant should be able to complete the proposed feasibility study, conceptual design and cost estimate
for $100,000. If the grant is awarded, the scope will reference the phase 2 Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design Requirements described in Section 2.2.4 of the Round 9 Request
For Applications.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough requests funding for the feasibility and design of a pellet fueled biomass heating system for five buildings: Schoenbar Middle School, Valley Park School,
the Gateway Recreation/Aquatic Centers (two buildings) and the School District Maintenance Facility. The project is estimated to displace up to 95% of their current annual heating fuels
- 75,000 gallons of fuel oil and 4,542,000 kWh.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough received funding through the US Forest Service to complete the design of the Ketchikan High School and have requested construction funding. They have demonstrated
their capability with the installation, operation, and maintenance of pellet systems through their library installation. The Borough is completing the construction of a pellet boiler
for the airport complex with funding through the Renewable Energy Fund – Round 7. Ketchikan is an example of the effective use of pellet heating to stem the conversions to resistance
heating that are occurring due to the low cost of hydroelectric generation.
Although the economics of this project are challenging, there are opportunities in the feasibility phase to identify an economically viable option. The project scores low in the REF
economics evaluation because there is no value assigned to displacing hydro power so 95 percent of displacement at the aquatic center is not counted in the calculation of economics
score.
Recommend partial funding of $40,000 for a feasibility study.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough requests funding for the construction of a pellet fueled biomass heating system for the Ketchikan High School. The project is estimated to displace 89,146
gallons of fuel/year. The Ketchikan Gateway Borough received funding through the US Forest Service to complete the design of this system. They have demonstrated their capability with
the installation, operation, and maintenance of pellet systems through their library installation. = The Borough is completing the construction of a pellet boiler for the airport complex,
with funding through the Renewable Energy Fund – Round 7. = Ketchikan is an example of the effective use of pellet heating to stem the conversions to resistance heating that are occurring
due to the low cost of hydroelectric generation.
Recommend full funding for construction with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design and the final business/operational plan.
UTE applied for grant funding in round 8 and was recommended for funding after reconsideration. AEAs concern in round 8 primarily related to an incomplete design and limited hydrology
data. AEA still has the same concerns with the round 9 application but is recommending the project for award due in large part to the expectation that outstanding deficiencies will
be addressed in the near future (AEA performed a detailed evaluation using more conservative hydrology information and found that the project is still economically viable).
In the last year UTE was awarded a USDA grant that will provide the matching funds allowing them to use the outstanding round 7 award and APT has advanced the project further by extending
transmission lines from Tok to Tanacross and conducting additional hydrology work with the installation of stage recorders at 3 locations on Yerrick Creek.
As a condition of award, UTE is still required to address the deficiencies noted in round 8 and it is expected the round 7 award will be utilized for this purpose. The outstanding deficiencies
include providing complete design drawings (the current drawings are not complete) including addressing the intake geotechnical conditions, hydraulic design, and winter operation and
also performing additional stream and hydrology analysis to verify the economic feasibility of the project and optimize hydraulic capacity and turbine selection.
UTEs application is recommended for full funding conditioned on UTE completing the work above and providing a complete design and permit package generally conforming with AEAs best practices
and including a one line electrical drawing of existing and proposed electric system, property boundary drawing for existing and proposed with a proposed boundary description and generally
conforming with FERC Exhibit G requirements, project engineering drawings generally conforming with industry standards and FERC Exhibit F requirements, and a design report with calculations
and other information pertinent to the project design generally in conformance with industry standards and FERC requirements.
AEA is currently considering a change to an existing Renewable Energy Fund grant to ORPC allowing a requested location move of the round 4 REF award for Cook Inlet TidGen Project to
False Pass for feasibility, conceptual design, final design, permitting and construction of a TidGen tidal hydrokinetic device. The scope of work for the existing grant overlaps with
this REF round 9 requested funding for the feasibility phase, and is therefore not recommended.
A round 9 application was also received and recommended by AEA to conduct a hydroelectric feasibility study and conceptual design for a run-of-river hydroelectric for Unga Man Creek,
which has the potential to meet most of the electric needs of False Pass. The REF process allows for simultaneous funding of feasibility studies for competing projects, but will ultimately
not fund two construction-phase projects that serve the same need (RFA 16012, Section 4, Stage 3, Criteria 8).
AEA recommends allowing for controlled development of both the hydro and hydrokinetic projects through the feasibility stage to determine which project or combination of projects is
most cost effective and provides the greatest public benefit for the community. This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process
per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
AP&T's reconnaissance study indicates this project may be economical despite the very low population and energy demand in Whale Pass. The application indicates that demand is expected
to increase because several residents in Whale Pass lack connection to the local utility.
AEA recommends feasibility analysis to include assessment of project size and economics for offsetting heat demand and the growth potential for the community followed by design and permitting
if warranted.
The primary concerns for this project relate to the need for power and the timing and quantity of hydroelectric resources including the Yerrick Creek project. At this stage quantifying
the resource potential and understanding the Yerrick Creek resource better through stream flow measurements is recommended before undertaking environmental resource studies on Clearwater
Creek.
AEA performed an analysis of the combined Yerrick Creek and Clearwater Creek projects with dispatch priority given to Yerrick and load growth considered. The results indicated that about
1.7 GWh (in 2021) could be utilized to offset diesel generation because of the limits of demand.
Overall, the project may be viable but improved reconnaissance analysis should be included in future applications with technical and conceptual development followed by focused environmental
studies.
AEA scored this project assuming a recommendation for partial funding for stream gauging (tasks 2 and 3, $69k total cost), however the project did not pass minimum stage 2 score of 40
points. The primary reason for not passing stage 2 is the low benefit cost ratio of 0.74.
This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section
4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The Prince of Wales Island is an isolated grid with existing and planned hydroelectric resources. The construction of the Hiilangaay (Reynolds) Hydro is expected to be complete in the
next few years. The total hydroelectric generation capacity on Prince of Wales Island will exceed the demand for many years in the future negating the need for the energy from this
project. While this project's energy could be used for building heating, the energy production is low, AEA estimates it would cost approximately the same as heating fuels (benefit/cost
ratio 1.07), and the projects complexities increase risk to the water system operations. Due to these reasons, this project is not recommended for funding.
Additional concerns with this project include the long pipeline, potentially damaging transient pressures, and maintaining water system operation. If the applicant pursues the project
with other funds, AEA recommends conducting a feasibility study first with particular focus on the operational modeling including transient pressure analysis from the combined water/power
generation system operation.
This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF regulation 3 AAC 107.645(b), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications
#16012.
This project is expected to significantly increase the average annual hydroelectric energy generation at the existing Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project at a relatively low cost because
the project addition is for construction of access and diversion works only (the existing generation infrastructure remains unchanged). The geotechnical investigation is required to
advance the project through the FERC permitting and the final design phase of project development. Kodiak Electric currently meets all of their electrical demand with existing renewable
energy resources. Demand growth is expected to reach the point where the additional energy from this proposed project addition would be fully utilized in about 10 years. The basis for
recommending award is primarily the significant benefits if demand growth occurs. It is noted that if load growth does not materialize the project increases the cost of power. Other
options for meeting minor demand would be to invest in energy efficiency measures.
A condition of award is to provide AEA for review an updated feasibility study addressing need for power, alternatives (including energy efficiency), demand projections by type/industry
(including electric heat and transportation conversion), fuel costs, hydrology, diversion operation reliability, and other factors necessary to evaluate the project economics. As a
condition of award the scope of work shall include a project management plan, evidence of permit acquisition, health and safety plans, work plan covering execution on site (with contingencies)
and data collection and reporting, hazard analysis and spill prevention plans, environmental compliance and onsite safety/health monitoring, quality control and assurance plan, and
weekly reporting during onsite activity. The above requirements shall flow down to consultants and contractors as well.
Unalaska proposes to modify its water supply system to incorporate a power recovery turbine in lieu of a pressure reducing valve. AEA received similar proposals from 2 other REF applicants
this year. Unalaska's application was the most advanced with a study dedicated to such a proposal.
The preliminary economics for these types of projects looks positive but there are technical challenges that must be addressed. A turbines hydraulic behavior is significantly different
than a pressure reducing valve. Understanding how the turbine will interact with the combined water supply and power generation system (particularly under load rejection) is a difficult
task and will require specialized analysis.
AEA recommends partially funding the feasibility and final design phases of this project to better understand operation of power recovery turbine and PRV under varying flow conditions
and events such as load rejection. The study should include evaluation of traditional hydroelectric alternatives utilizing the same resource. AEA also recommends Unalaska evaluate other
potential hydroelectric resources in the region.
AEA finds that this project, while creative in its attempt to leverage federal incentives, is not a good fit within the Renewable Energy Fund. The project did not pass Stage 1 review.Under
the Stage 1 eligibility review, and in accordance with 3 AAC 107.610, an applicant must be an eligible applicant defined in AS 42.45.045(l) and will own the renewable energy project.
While Homer Electric Association is an eligible applicant, the owners identified in the application will be a group of 34 member shareholders. The Authority may authorize the conveyance
of an ownership interest to an eligible applicant if the Authority determines that the conveyance protects the public interest and benefit provided by the grant. Individual shareholders
are not eligible applicants and the public benefit would not serve the public, rather a small set of individual owners.
The City of Chignik using the services of CE2 Engineers and Hatch produced a feasibility study for a hydro project on Indian Creek. The $207,500 in funding for the feasibility study
came from previous REF. As required by the previous grants the City received control and ownership of the hydro resource from NorQuest Seafoods owned by Trident Sea Foods. Water rights
for up to 18 cfs will need to be requested above the existing 2.7 cfs. The existing dam and penstock have historical significance. They will require studies and documentation before
they can be considered for removal. Easements will be required for new facilities from the City. LIDAR mapping, stream gauging and geotechnical investigations will be needed. Potential
issues with FERC, SHPO and DNR must be resolved as early as possible. Include upgrades at the existing diesel powerhouse to integrate the hydro power and their associated construction
costs. The design must maximize the use of the excess hydro by additional sales to the local processor or by heating fuel displacement and include any additional construction cost.
Recommend for full funding with the special provision of receiving a detailed design budget and a list of the proposed consultants prior to grant execution.
This application was submitted for construction funding. However, permits, land use authorization, construction ready design and specifications, final design cost estimate and an updated
business plan need to be completed prior to consideration for construction funding, per the AEA Request for Applications 15003 section 2.2 to 2.6.
No funding recommended.
The Port Graham Village Council proposes the construction of a cordwood fired biomass boiler system to supply a small district heating system consisting of four buildings: community
hall; the clinic/police; an office; and a shop. The system would displace 5,365 gallons of fuel oil per year. The design and business/operating plan were funded in Round IV of the Renewable
Energy Fund for $75,000. The project also received $127,640 from the US Department of Energy for design and permitting activities. The economics of this project are very challenging
due mostly to the small amount of fuel that will be displaced and resulting in a benefit/cost ratio of 0.36. The applicant submitted additional heat loads that could be added to the
system at the time they appealed AEA's decision to not fund the project. The integration costs associated with these loads was not included. The project B/C ratio would still be less
than 1.0 with the additional loads, and even lower with the additional integration costs. This proposed change did not elevate the stage 2 score above the minimum threshold.
No funding recommended. Did not pass stage 2.
This project shows a very good economic payback and much of the design work is already complete. The wind turbines have been operating for more than two years and there is an established
performance baseline on which to model and design the secondary load system. Applicant has submitted a year (2012) of electrical load data along with wind turbine speed, a HOMER modeling
file and hourly modeling of excess electricity. Additional high-resolution data (1-second interval) has been made available to study power quality with the existing system to identify
if other factors need to be addressed in the final design. An earlier power sales agreement between the utility and the city is no longer in place. A new power sales agreement will
be needed with the city and with the school/borough prior to allocation of construction funds. A 65% design has been completed for a 100KW electric boiler at the Sand Point health center
and 500KW electric boiler at the school. AEA will need to accept the final design prior to release of any construction funds. Recommend full funding.
AEA recommends continued feasibility work consistent with the reconnaissance study. TDX’s application is focused on the smaller of the two hydroelectric options identified. In order
to fully address the feasibility of hydro development in Adak it is recommended that the scope of work and budget be increased to examine all recommendations in the reconnaissance report.
Specific recommendations include performing feasibility level studies to further evaluate future load growth (or decline) along with fish processor loads, perform hydrology data collection
and analysis, develop more detailed project cost estimates, and provide project capacity and storage recommendations with concept designs. Additional requirements for this phase include
aquatic investigations and review of environmental flow restrictions, agency consultation, appropriate permitting investigations, and coordination with other community rehabilitation
efforts particularly related to water and energy use. AEA recommends funding of $390,000 to complete a larger scope of work to include stream gauging, mapping, additional aquatic investigations,
data collection as necessary, energy and economic modeling, concept designs, preliminary design criteria, initial agency consultation, and final recommendations for design and permitting.
Recommended for funding with the special provision that additional funding be used to expand the scope of the feasibility study as described above.
The Hoonah Indian Association proposes feasibility and conceptual design for a district heating loop for Hoonah School/pool, autoshop/carving shed, Boys and Girls Club, HIA Cookhouse,
Headstart, city hall, and a large privately owned commercial building (apartments, laundry, and store). This heating loop would be operated as a heat utility by HIA and could displace
up to 32,000 of heating fuel annually.The community of Hoonah has developed a collaborative for energy planning and biomass development and is demonstrating initiative to understand
potential biomass solutions to their high heating costs.
Recommend full funding.
A REF Round 6 grant (#7060978) in the amount of $3,300,000 funded complete construction of the proposed hydro facility. The grantee is seeking an additional grant of $977,000.
The proposed project did not pass the stage 2 minimum score and is not recommended for funding. The primary reason for the low score was the economic feasibility of the project scored
in criteria 4 a, b and c, which comprise 40 percent of the score. With the additional $977,000 of costs requested in this grant, the benefit/cost ratio dropped from 1.57 when the project
was reviewed in fall 2012 to 0.96 in the fall 2014 economic evaluation. This resulted in earning only 1 point out of 10 for criteria 4a. Additionally it is noted that the applicant
has encountered significant delays in the submission of required deliverables associated with project milestones.
AEA's Community Assistance program provides help with identification of funding for energy projects; the applicant is encouraged to contact this program for assistance moving the project
forward. Additionally, the applicant may be eligible for a loan from AEA's Power Project Fund (PPF) loan program.
Not recommended for funding; did not meet stage 2 minimum score.
While the proposed project appears to be technically feasible using an available local hydro resource, which if paid for by REF grant funds could reduce the cost of electricity for Elfin
Cove, the project did not pass the stage 2 (technical and economic evaluation) minimum score.
The primary contributing factor to the low stage 2 score is a relatively low benefit/cost ratio of 0.99. This coupled with high technical complexity associated with operating a two-stage
hydro project, and increasing construction costs (22% higher) over those presented in earlier grant applications, and late deliverables for the applicant's current grant for the same
project, all contributed to the stage 2 score.
Not recommended for funding; did not pass stage 2.
A Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Round 6 grant (#7060929) in the amount of $2,600,000 was provided by AEA to fund the construction phase of the proposed project through completion. The
grant application was evaluated at the time using the grantee’s expected total project cost provided at the time. The project is currently expecting higher construction costs and
is seeking additional funding of $1,800,000 from REF in the current Round 8 evaluations to initiate the construction phase. It is noted that the applicant has encountered significant
delays in the submission of required deliverables, and the applicant has not yet demonstrated site control.
AEA recommends full funding with special provisions.
The applicant shall satisfy the following special provisions prior to the issuance of a R8 grant or expenditure of any existing project grant funds. Any obligation of project funds
prior to the acceptance by AEA of the special provisions shall be at the applicants risk.
1. Demonstrate site control
2. Become current on financial and progress reports
3. Amend existing grants to reflect proposed milestone and deliverables
4. Provide detailed project management plan addressing project controls, reporting, and change management
The proposed heat recovery project would make excellent use of wasted heat. The project could serve as a demonstration of Organic Rankine Cycle generators operating in arctic conditions
and may prove economical even if performance were lower than expected. However, as described in Section 1.6 of the Request for Applications (RFA AEA 15003):
"During the economic evaluation and scoring of applications, only the economic benefits to the public, direct and/or indirect will be included in the benefit/cost analysis. For example,
if 50 percent of the energy produced is for the purpose of providing power to one private industry user, that portion of the energy will not count as a public benefit in the economic
evaluation."
TDX North Slope Generating, Inc. exists to serve Prudhoe Bay oil service companies. AEA has concluded that the project does not provide an economic public benefit consistent with the
above description that could be used in an economic evaluation. Per program regulations 3 AAC107.645(b):
"The authority will reject applications that it determines under (a) of this section not to be technically and economically feasible, or not to provide sufficient public benefit, and
will notify each applicant whose application is rejected of the reasons for rejection."
No funding recommended.
The applicant was not able to demonstrate in their application, and through follow-up questions, that they are an eligible applicant for the Renewable Energy Fund (REF) as outlined in
the Request for Applications and in statute.
Additionally, the proposed project is already covered under the scope of an REF Round 1 grant to the Northwest Arctic Borough entitled "Buckland Deering and Noorvik Wind Construction"
(grant number 2195377). These funds should be used first to study the new location on Hotham Peak and further investigate possible benefits of an intertie beyond what was done in the
existing conceptual design report. The applicant should consider approaching the grantee for 2195377, Northwest Arctic Borough, to team up on that project. AEA’s community assistance
staff and technical staff can assist as needed.
No funding recommended.
The City of Noorvik applied for $164,000 in grant funding for construction of a $165,000 20kW fixed-tilt solar photovoltaic project in Noorvik. 10kW of panels would be installed on a
City building and 10kW would be installed on a Council building. This application is not associated with previous REF grant funding.
The AVEC tariff regarding “qualified co-generators and small power producers†states an 18.2 kW cap for the community of Noorvik. There is an existing solar installation of 12 kW
at the water treatment plant, leaving only 6.2 kW available, less than the proposed project. AEA requested a letter of support, MOA or copy of applicable utility rates and standards
from the applicant but did not receive the requested information. AEA confirmed with the utility that even though the applicant does not intend to sell power back to the grid, if they
are connected to the grid, the tariff applies.
No funding recommended.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a moderate amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project demonstrates marginal economic value. AEA believes that
cost saving measures can be identified during the design phase that can significantly improve the project economics. Partial funding of $50,000 recommended for final design.
Unalakleet Village Electric Cooperative (UVEC) has applied for a $295,775 grant, with $29,650 in matching funds, to collect and analyze high-resolution electric power data from the hybrid
diesel-wind project in Unalakleet. The results of the data collection and analysis would be used to model the system and as the basis for a conceptual design report describing system
improvements to optimize its performance in terms of power quality, electric grid stability, and fuel savings.
The UVEC wind farm is performing nearly as expected in a class four wind resource and UVEC's recent improvements to the controls will result in further performance improvements. There
is limited potential for improving the production performance of the UVEC diesel-wind hybrid project. At a proposed cost of over $300,000 for the data collection and analysis, the potential
incremental performance improvements do not support these high costs. AEA does support continued improvements to the wind-diesel system performance and recommends continuing to work
with AEA's wind and powerhouse programs and staff to identify specific areas to improve grid stability and efficiency in a more cost-effective manner.
No funding recommended.
The Lake and Pen Borough proposes the construction of cordwood boilers for the communities of Port Alsworth (Improvement Center and Fire Hall), Nondalton (single structure or multiple
units), and Pedro Bay (Smokehouse Bay Annex). This project would displace approximately 9,104 gallons of heating fuel. This application is based on a feasibility study that was completed
in June of 2010 that recommends different technology from what is proposed in this application. There is no discussion of the engineering design or the business/operational plan of
the proposed system. Wood inventory work has only been completed on Native Allotments in this area. While the volume of wood required for this project is very small, the applicant has
not adequately demonstrated the sustainability of this project without a business/operating plan. AEA recommends no funding at this time, but encourages the Lake and Pen Borough to
apply for updated feasibility studies through the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group and to further develop the business and operational plan for the biomass systems.
No funding recommended.
TDX Power, is applying for a $202,696 grant, and offering $50,673 in match, to perform a community energy baseline study in St. Paul.
The application did not demonstrate that the proposed work is eligible under the Renewable Energy Fund (REF) as defined in section 1.5 of the request for applications. Specifically,
the applicant stated in question 4.1 regarding the proposed energy resource:
“The proposed Community Energy Baseline Study does not include identification of renewable energy resources. Previous studies conducted by TDX Power and others have shown that St.
Paul is in a location where sufficient wind is available for abundant electrical power generation. In addition, 15 years of continued operation of the wind farms on St. Paul have validated
the resource. This study defines energy use, transportation and efficiency.â€
While AEA supports the general “baseline study†approach outlined in the application to better understanding energy efficiency opportunities and energy generation and distribution
needs in a community, the application as presented does not fit within the scope of the Renewable Energy Fund. The proposed work is in alignment with the Aleut Regional Energy Plan,
currently underway with AEA funding. AEA recommends that the applicant incorporate this proposal into the regional energy plan for further development and prioritization. AEA staff
will work with the applicant and other regional planners to incorporate aspects of the proposed baseline study.
No funding recommended.
Adak Generating LLC, a subsidiary of TDX Power, is applying for an $85,000 grant, and offering $17,000 in match, to perform a community energy baseline study in Adak.
The application did not demonstrate that the proposed work is eligible under the Renewable Energy Fund (REF) as defined in section 1.5 of the request for applications. Specifically,
the applicant stated in question 4.1 regarding the proposed energy resource:
“The proposed Community Energy Baseline Study does not include identification of renewable energy resources. Previous studies conducted by TDX Power and others have shown that Adak
is in a location where sufficient hydro is available for abundant electrical power generation. This study defines energy use, transportation and efficiency.â€
A Round 2 REF grant used to study potential hydro, geothermal and wind resources, used a portion of the funding to determine the community load. This and other existing research was
not cited in the application. Finally, key sections of the application form were marked “N/Aâ€.
While AEA supports the general “baseline study†approach outlined in the application to better understanding energy efficiency opportunities and energy generation and distribution
needs in a community, the application as presented does not fit within the scope of the Renewable Energy Fund. The proposed work is in alignment with the Aleut Regional Energy Plan,
currently underway with AEA funding. AEA recommends that the applicant incorporate this proposal into the regional energy plan for further development and prioritization. AEA staff
will work with the applicant and other regional planners to incorporate aspects of the proposed baseline study.
No funding recommended.
A reconnaissance study can be completed for the suggested projects without performing stream gauging. There are years of data compiled on Ship Creek stream flow available through the
USGS and agencies holding water rights. There are also enough gauges in the Seward area to support a reconnaissance level analysis to assess potential hydroelectric generation. Without
the stream gauging component, the applicant has committed sufficient match to perform reconnaissance level studies. No funding recommended.
ANTHC requested funding on behalf of Scammon Bay for a feasibility and conceptual design; plus 2 to 3 years of stream gauging. Scammon Bay's application was based on a feasibility study
completed by Hatch in mid-September 2014. Stream gauging is typically done during reconnaissance. AEA recommends the project be partially funded to complete stream gauging. AEA and
the applicant discussed and agreed to AEA management of this phase of the project.
AEA has concerns with the lack of stream gauging information; the fact that earlier hydro studies questioned the feasibility; the fact that Hatch recommended additional 2 to 3 years
of stream gauging; and concerns that the feasibility tended to be optimistic considering other concerns noted above.
AEA recommends partial funding of $90,000 for stream gauging/reconnaissance phase only.
The Southeast Island School District currently operates cordwood fueled heating systems at their Coffman Cove and Thorne Bay Schools. The Thorne Bay system is undersized, so the school
district is proposing the relocation of the Thorne Bay boilers to the schools in Hollis and Whale Pass. The application also includes the design and construction of replacement boilers
for Thorne Bay and the design and construction of a heating system for the Naukati School to replace the heat recovery system that is being eliminated by the decommissioning of the
Naukati power plant. The Southeast Island School District has proven the successful operation of cordwood boiler systems and has integrated the operation and maintenance of these systems
into their culture. Greenhouses heated by the biomass systems have been installed on Thorne Bay and Coffman Cove, and more are planned in conjunction with this project. SEISD is a success
story for the State of Alaska Biomass Program.
Recommend full funding.
The Applicant made an appeal to the AEA Executive Director contesting the original recommendation of no funding due to incomplete prior phases and incomplete information sufficient to
perform an economic and technical evaluation. The AEA executive director accepted the appeal for reconsideration.
AEA staff performed the stage 2 scoring of the application as required by the appeal process and performed a subsequent review in order to establish a recommended funding amount and
any special provisions. AEA staff anticipate that Kenai Hydro may be able to perform the geotechnical component of design related activity in FY2016. AEA estimates geotechnical investigations
will cost $394,000 with Kenai Hydro providing $36,000 (9%) as match. Recommended grant funding under Kenai Hydro’s application is $358,000.
In order to receive design funding, Kenai Hydro will be required to complete the feasibility and concept design report to include, among typical feasibility work, analysis of alternative
schemes including the no action alternative, alternative tunnel and powerhouse locations, a bored intake gate shaft with multilevel lake taps in lieu of a concrete intake structure,
assess need for upper grant lake channel dredging, perform detailed energy modeling with reservoir levels, prepare quantity based cost estimates of alternatives, and provide economic
analysis of benefits using tariff/contract/market based projected savings. The study shall include consideration of Falls Creek diversion using HDPE conveyance and recommendations for
Grant Lake power house and turbine sizing if Falls Creek diversion may be constructed at a later date. Report shall be prepared under the direction of a qualified PE and shall be subject
to AEA approval.
Kenai Hydro LLC did not include proposed staff or resumes for qualified Alaska PE’s to perform the proposed design work. Kenai Hydro will be required to publicly solicit qualifications
based proposals for performing the design work funded through this grant. Contract and award shall be subject to AEA approval.
AEA recommends partial funding with the special provisions listed above.
Interior Regional Housing Authority is proposing a biomass feasibility study in order to examine to potential is using woody biomass to heat three IRHA facilities - the IRHA office building
in Fairbanks, the IRHA warehouse in Fairbanks and the Meda Lord Center which is a 15 unit senior housing complex in Nenana. All three facilities currently are using heating oil, and
have been weatherized. AEA strongly supports this project and the use of high efficiency, low emissions biomass heating in the Fairbanks and Nenana areas. AEA recommends full funding
and recommends considering a natural gas option in the feasibility report for the Fairbanks buildings.
The applicant did not sufficiently demonstrate that the proposed solar photovoltaic system would perform technically or economically. Specifically missing from the application were battery
specifications, hourly load data, hourly solar production data, interconnection specifications, compliance with utility cogeneration policy, and other technical information. The project
economics appear weak with an estimated benefit/cost ratio of 0.42.
No funding recommended.
Extremely high fuel costs and accessible heating loads make powerhouse heat recovery particularly attractive in Scammon Bay. Unfortunately, numerous issues in the supporting feasibility
study and application raise concerns regarding the thoroughness of effort made to accurately estimate project costs. A more deliberate approach is warranted; AEA recommends standalone
funding for project design prior to committing funding for the construction phase.
Partial funding of $60,000 is recommended to advance the project through final design.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough requests funding for the construction of a pellet fueled biomass heating system for the Ketchikan High School. The project is estimated to displace 108,715
gallons of fuel/year. The Ketchikan Gateway Borough received funding through the US Forest Service to complete the design of the Ketchikan High School and have requested construction
funding. They have demonstrated their capability with the installation, operation, and maintenance of pellet systems through their library installation. The Borough is completing the
design of a pellet boiler for the airport complex, and has received construction funding through the Renewable Energy Fund – Round 7. Ketchikan is an example of the effective use
of pellet heating to stem the conversions to resistance heating that are occurring due to the low cost of hydroelectric generation.
Recommend full funding for feasibility update and design.
The proposal to insulate existing heat recovery pipes in Selawik does not demonstrate favorable economics based upon the proposed high cost and relatively small amount of heating fuel
that would be offset. The economics of the project may improve if significant cost reductions could be identified. AEA recommends that BTU meter data from the existing system should
be collected and analyzed to support assumptions regarding the performance of the existing system.
No funding recommended.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough requests funding for the construction of a pellet fueled biomass heating system for the Ketchikan High School. The project is estimated to displace 108,715
gallons of fuel/year. The Ketchikan Gateway Borough received funding through the US Forest Service to complete the design of this system. They have demonstrated their capability with
the installation, operation, and maintenance of pellet systems through their library installation. The Borough is completing the design of a pellet boiler for the airport complex, and
has received construction funding through the Renewable Energy Fund – Round 7. Ketchikan is an example of the effective use of pellet heating to stem the conversions to resistance
heating that are occurring due to the low cost of hydroelectric generation.
Recommend full funding for construction with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design and the final business/operational plan.
The City of Chefornak, applying as a local government, and working with Intelligent Energy Systems, proposes to complete a final design of and permitting of: a 475 kW wind farm; distribution
repairs and upgrades; a secondary load at the power plant in the form of an electric boiler to control grid frequency and for the capture of excess wind power for use as heat; and 40
secondary loads to be installed in residential homes in the form of electric thermal storage (ETS) units that would capture excess wind power for use as heat. The proposed system would
serve the community of Chefornak, Alaska. The final design would be based on a feasibility study and CDR (Conceptual Design Report) performed under a Round 4 Renewable Energy Fund (REF)
grant #7040056. A feasibility study and CDR have been submitted for review.
This project did not score high enough to pass the stage 2 technical and economic evaluation minimum score of 40. The primary contributing factor for the low score was the economic feasibility
scores in criteria 4a which comprises 25 percent of the score. AEA's calculated benefit/cost ratio is 0.71. This score reflects a reduction in predicted annual energy production due
to the underperformance of comparable projects. A score below 0.9 earns 0 points for criteria 4a. Other significant contributing factors to the low score are the tardiness of deliverables
and reports and the underperformance of comparable systems in Kongiganak, Tuntutuliak, and Kwigillingok.
The current CDR does not validate the selection of the proposed project. AEA recognizes that the wind resource in Chefornak is good and that a CDR that compared various turbine types
and quantities and various secondary heat loads could identify an economical project for the community. AEA has met with Intelligent Energy Systems to discuss the project potential
and improving the project economics.
In addition to the low economic score, AEA has the following concerns that also influenced the stage 2 score: tardiness of project deliverables, progress reports and financial reports
on the existing Chefornak wind feasibility grant, the underperformance of comparable high penetration systems, and the CDR not addressing the causes of the existing similar systems'
low performance and recommending remedies in the proposed new conceptual design.
Additionally, the application identifies upgrades and repairs to the distribution line that are required to proceed with the project as planned. Repairs are not eligible for funding
and the upgrades required will need to be as a direct result of the proposed wind-diesel system to be eligible for funding. Any required, ineligible, upgrades or repairs necessary for
the proposed project will need to be addressed prior to funding. AEA will continue to work with the applicant and their contractor towards completion of their CDR.
No funding recommended. Did not pass stage 2 minimum score.
The City of Ouzinkie partnering with ANTHC has recently replaced their previously condemned wooded dam with a new rock and concrete dam with $2,087,000, of which the majority, $1,800,000,
came from a 2013 Alaska Legislature appropriation. The existing penstock and turbine started producing hydro power again with water from the new dam in mid November 2014. This proposed
new replacement penstock and turbine is an addition to the existing hydro project. As such only the projected incremental increase in hydro power production is allowable in the economic
analysis. The incremental increase of hydro power produced is projected to be about 141,218 kWh per year saving and additional 11,100 gallons of diesel generator fuel. Adding a new
load bank and a new dispatchable electric boiler could increase the public economic benefits and reduce fuel consumption for both the diesel generators and heating fuel.
AEA recommends partial funding for completion of the conceptual design and permitting. Once the design is complete with the maximum hydro benefit to the community considered the applicant
may consider applying for construction funds in a future funding round.
This current application is for final design and permitting for the “Barrow to Atqasuk Transmission Line and Home Conversions to Electric Space Heatingâ€.
This project was funded in rounds 2 and 4 of the Renewable Energy Fund for feasibility study and conceptual/preliminary design. The North Slope Borough also applied for but did not receive
funding in round 7 as the preliminary design from round 4 was not yet complete.
AEA recommends full funding for the final design and permitting of this project.
North Slope Borough, applying as a utility, proposes to complete a final design of and permitting for a wind-diesel power system in the community of Kaktovik, Alaska. The final design
will be based on a feasibility study and conceptual design report performed under a Round 4 RE Fund Grant #7040025. The feasibility study and conceptual design report have been reviewed
and accepted by AEA.
AEA recommends full funding with the special provision that a 65% design, that includes all necessary permits, be accepted by AEA prior to the release of funds for final design work.
It is recommended that during the 65% design process the applicant re-evaluate the installation of a single wind turbine capable of meeting the project goals in order to increase the
economic viability of the project.
The high cost of heating fuel, low cost of electricity, and moderate climate make Metlakatla well suited for heat pump systems. Although little data is available documenting the performance
of commercial scale ground source heat pump systems in southeast Alaska, the large discrepancy in heating oil and electrical costs result in project economics that appear favorable
even if the system performance is well below what is anticipated.
The proposed project can take advantage of excess hydropower and offset a significant amount of heating fuel. The fuel savings from the project will result in additional income to the
local public utility and reduced operational costs for a community facility.
Full funding recommended.
Kwigillingok received Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Round 1 and direct legislative appropriation funding to install five Windmatic 17S 95-kilowatt wind turbines, completing that project
in 2012. This proposal would make use of excess electricity by diverting surplus kilowatt-hours to residential heat loads. The current performance of the wind system is only 27% of
the goal according to FY2014 PCE data - well below the level that could be explained by curtailing of wind turbines due to a lack of additional ETS heaters. The average benefits seen
for the existing 27 ETS installations would be significantly lower if the number of heaters were increased to 50 as proposed in the application. The applicant has not been timely in
submitting required quarterly operations and maintenance reports on the existing wind energy project and has not provided as-built drawings and an operations and maintenance plan required
to close out the REF Round 1 grant. There is a pending grant to upgrade the Kwigillingok power distribution system. When the REF Round 1 deliverables have been met, the distribution
system upgrade is underway and wind system performance increases significantly, and economic viability can be demonstrated, the applicant could consider reapplying in a future funding
round.
No funding recommended.
The City of Kotzebue is proposing the design and construction of a refuse derived fuel (RDF) fired boiler system to heat two city owned buildings. This project is estimated to displace
a total 98,000 of gallons per year of fuel oil, using cardboard, paper, and construction debris supplemented with wood pellets. Feasibility was completed with Round 4 funding through
the Renewable Energy Fund. This project has the opportunity to provide key direction for rural communities struggling with municipal solid waste disposal. AEA recommends partial funding
of $200,000 for the final resource inventory/operations plan, final design, and permitting. The City of Kotzebue should first assess the waste fuel availability and develop an operating
plan to confirm the economics of this project. Final design and permitting must select appropriate technology to meet EPA’s new emissions standards for incinerators.
Recommend partial funding.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a significant amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project appears uneconomical. AEA believes that cost saving
measures can be identified during the design phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
Partial funding of $50,000 recommended for final design phase only.
The Hydaburg City Schools in Hydaburg, AK on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska has proposed the design and construction of a cordwood fired boiler system to heat the school
buildings. The project will be a district heating system for the school buildings, four teachers housing units, and a greenhouse. The system is anticipated to displace approximately
25,500 gallons of heating fuel annually. The Hydaburg City Schools is under the same leadership as the Southeast Island School District (SEISD). SEISD has proven the successful operation
of cordwood boiler systems and has integrated the operation and maintenance of these systems into their culture. Greenhouses heated by the biomass systems have been installed on Thorne
Bay and Coffman Cove, and more are planned in conjunction with this project. SEISD is a success story for the State of Alaska Biomass Program.
Recommend full funding.
The applicant did not demonstrate an economical project with clear public benefits. The long distances to the heating loads from the power plant and the potential to offset only moderate
amounts of heating fuel make the economics of a heat recovery system at Holy Cross challenging. Additionally, there were numerous discrepancies between the 2013 and 2014 feasibility
studies for a heat recovery system that should be clarified.
No funding recommended.
ANTHC and the City of Nikolai propose to complete the final design and construction of a biomass heating system to serve the community building, school, city lodge, and city shop. This
system would be a manually-fed cordwood system and is anticipated to displace 9,630 gallons of heating fuel annually. The applicant did not demonstrate an economical project nor strong
community involvement that is crucial to the successful implementation of a manually stoked cordwood system. AEA recommends no funding at this time, but encourages the City of Nikolai
to work with AEA staff and the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group to identify potential operators and wood fuel suppliers.
No funding recommended.
The proposal from the Igiugig Village Council to complete final design and construction of a river hydrokinetic power project follows years of work starting in 2008 with resource assessment
and continuing with site characterization through device demonstration. It also builds on experience and information gained from an Emerging Energy Technology Fund (EETF) award and
other significant state and federal investments in hydrokinetics. The community has actively pursued a hydrokinetic installation and the project team has been on the forefront of hydrokinetic
development, including design and permitting.
The proposed location in the Kvichak River is widely considered the most promising for a hydrokinetic device in the state with clear water, consistent current velocities, and lack of
river ice formation. Significant salmon runs will play a central role in project permitting and require extensive biological monitoring. While the site and river characteristics are
unique in Alaska, many aspects of the project could result in information transferrable to other sites and other device types and could contribute to lowering costs for similar projects
in the future.
The project proposes to use a second generation device that has not yet been constructed and would still need to overcome numerous hurdles to be successful. As a first-of-a-kind project,
costs are expected to be high. Costly device retrieval and redeployment would need to occur annually, at a minimum.
Given the state of development of the technology, the proposed project does not compete favorably in the Renewable Energy Fund (REF) process on economic or technical terms with more
mature technologies. However, a successful project would represent a major step forward and could help pave the way for other projects to better compete on equal terms.
AEA recognizes that the quality of the resource, the commitment of the community and project team, and the investment in site characterization and preparation combine to make this a
compelling river hydrokinetic project. However, the substantial technical risk associated with deployment of a device that is still under development and the related economic uncertainty
do not make this a suitable Renewable Energy Fund (REF) project. Therefore AEA does not recommend funding this project at this time.
AEA and the REF Advisory Committee have identified a potential gap that exists between the EETF and REF programs in which technologies that have demonstrated some level of technical
feasibility through an EETF award may still be unable to compete successfully for an REF award; this proposal appears to fall into that gap. AEA will be requesting the advice of the
REF Advisory Committee regarding the appropriateness of funding projects that fall in the gap between the programs.
No funding recommended.
The City of False Pass proposed to conduct a feasibility study for a tidal power project in Isanotski Strait, building on previous reconnaissance efforts. The proposal, which calls
for additional field measurements, modeling, site selection, and preparation for permitting, was submitted on behalf of a strong project team actively involved in pioneering hydrokinetic
development in the state.
It is difficult to predict how rapidly the installed costs of tidal power generation plants will decline as the technology matures. The applicant has reasoned that deployment and retrieval
costs will decline dramatically as operators gain experience and equipment is improved. Although numerous challenges may remain before economic deployments can be realized in Alaska,
the potential for such deployments does exist.
The project does not compete economically with other renewable energy projects using mature technology types, and therefore is not recommended for funding.
ANTHC and the City of Huslia proposed the Final Design and Construction of a manually-fed cordwood heating system to serve the Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plant in Huslia,
Alaska. The project is estimated to save the Clinic and Water Treatment Plant 8,474 gallons of heating oil per year. The economics of this project are challenging, but there has been
significant community involvement in the initial planning of the fuel supply. The community champion has attended biomass workshops and is knowledgeable of the proposed system.
Recommend partial funding of $58,000 to complete the design phase only and work to improve the economics of the project.
ANTHC and the City of Ambler propose the final design and construction of a cordwood-fueled biomass heating system to serve the Washeteria and City Office building in Ambler, Alaska.
The proposed biomass heating system would be manually-fed and housed in a pre-fabricated building. The system is anticipated to displace 3,516 gallons of heating fuel per year. The
request is a continuation of a Round 2 grant, "Upper Kobuk River Biomass".
The economics of this project are marginal and there is opportunity to reduce the overall cost of the project. The design phase should focus on a lower cost installation. The community
must also develop an acceptable operations and maintenance plan for this project, including contingencies for staffing and wood supply.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that no construction funding be released until the final design and business/operating plan is approved.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a significant amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project is marginally economical. AEA believes that cost
saving measures can be identified during the design phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
Partial funding of $50,000 recommended for the final design phase only.
AEA does not recommend funding the requested phase of this project at this time due to incomplete prior phases, per the AEA Request for Applications 15003 section 2.2 to 2.6. The project
appears to have marginal economic benefit and the final design and cost estimates may impact the economic viability.
No funding recommended.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a significant amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project demonstrates marginal economic value. AEA believes
that cost saving measures can be identified during the design phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
AEA recommends partial funding of $50,000 to complete the final design phase only.
This project did not pass stage 1 eligibility requirements.
AEA REF review staff originally concluded that this application did not demonstrate a verifiable technically and economically feasible project for the following reasons:
• Insufficient information was provided on the intake geotechnical conditions, hydraulic design, and design documents with sufficient information to evaluate the technical feasibility
and cost of the project.
• Insufficient information was provided on the stream gauging data and hydrology analysis to verify the economic feasibility of the project.
AEA’s review staff performed a more detailed evaluation and found that the technical feasibility can be expected to be resolved in a timely manner, that the project is still economically
viable even when the project operation and cost is adjusted to alleviate economic concerns.
AEA recommends full funding with the special provision that the design be finalized and approved by AEA prior to issuing a grant for the construction phase.
Because a full conceptual design has not yet been completed, several key technical considerations remain unknown. Without an intertie to Ambler, the combined load for Shungnak and Kobuk
are not large enough to support more than 400kW of wind power without designing very complex controls. The Shungnak power plant is not currently scheduled for upgrades that would facilitate
variable wind energy. The most significant factor influencing the developability of this project is the recent low river levels and resultant unpredictable barge deliveries. The project
would need to incorporate turbines, materials and construction equipment that could be mobilized through alternate methods - likely by air cargo. This might eliminate larger turbines
that offer better economies of scale and would add costs that are well above existing benchmarks. The applicant should work to finish the conceptual design report (CDR) that has been
self-funded to date. In addition to the standard deliverables in AEA's wind Guidelines for Conceptual Design Reports, the applicant should address the logistical challenges that are
unique to this location in the CDR.
Recommend partial funding to complete the CDR.
Bethel has ample waste heat available for recovery and numerous significant heat loads within a one mile radius of the powerhouse. The existing heat recovery system is near the end of
its useful life and will require both immediate and ongoing repairs and modifications to prolong operation for an additional 20 years. Construction costs associated with repairs to
the existing system are not eligible for Renewable Energy Fund funding, however, expansion of the existing system is eligible.
Estimates of the cost of new connections to the heat recovery system were not provided although expansion does appear to be economical under a broad range of scenarios. The addition
of exhaust gas heat exchangers contemplated in the proposal appears to increase the amount of heat available for recovery beyond the demand projected for the potential heat loads identified
in the application; AVEC believes that additional loads may be identified that could increase demand to the point where additional heat capture could be beneficial.
AEA is concerned with the high cost of ultrasonic testing of the existing main pipeline proposed in the application and believes that alternate methods may prove more cost effective.
Such methods could include an assessment of maintenance history of the distribution pipes to identify common failure points, and physical removal and inspection of sections of the pipe.
However, AVEC may choose to complete ultrasonic testing as a part of its operation and maintenance plan for the system.
Partial funding in the amount of $325,000 is recommended to complete conceptual design of expansion of the heat recovery system.
AVEC (Alaska Village Electric Cooperative), applying as a utility, proposes feasibility and conceptual design work to determine the advisability of installing wind turbines in Goodnews
Bay. AVEC is working with AEA, through the wind program's Anemometer Loan Program, to install a meteorological tower and study the wind for a minimum of 12 months. AVEC would perform
geotechnical work and investigate multiple turbine types and quantities in the process of preparing a conceptual design report.
Recommend full funding.
The project received grants in Round 1 (#73) for $225,000 and Round 4 (#644) for $237,500 to complete a feasibility study, FERC licensing, and preliminary design. Additionally, the City
of Old Harbor received a Community Development Block Grant in support of the project for $250,000 to complete the FERC License Application and permitting. FERC license application processing
could cause delay. Significant site control issues could arise since the project lands include Kodiak NWR and a conservation easement by Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council. Turbine
and penstock are oversized anticipating future growth. Requested funds for this portion of work are excessive. AEA recommends partial funding to advance final design work, excluding
geotechnical work, with the special provisions that 1) the grantee maximize the use of excess hydro or reduce hydro size to maximize the public benefit and project economics, and 2)
provide a detailed design budget a list of the proposed consultants prior to grant execution.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, applying as a utility, proposes the construction of a wind farm along the St. Mary's/Pitka's Point intertie along with components necessary for the
integration of wind power into the diesel power plant. The wind-diesel system would serve the communities of St. Mary's and Pitka's Point. The basis for the proposed wind-diesel system
is a design funded through Round 4 RE Fund grant #7040017. Permitting for the project is completed, site control has been established and a 65% design has been submitted to the Authority.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that the 95% design be accepted by the Authority prior to allocation of construction funds.
THRHA have demonstrated that pellet and cordwood heating systems can significantly reduce the heating costs in their buildings. They are successfully operating and maintaining the systems
and helping to develop the pellet supply infrastructure in Southeast. There are few details for the engineering design in this proposal and AEA is concerned that it might be difficult
to complete the design within the budget allocations.
Recommend full funding for design and construction with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design and the final business/operational plan.
Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority proposes a biomass district heat system to serve eight multiplex residential buildings and one community center in Angoon, Alaska. This project
is expected to displace 11,400 gallons of heating fuel annually.
THRHA have demonstrated that pellet and cordwood heating systems can significantly reduce the heating costs in their buildings. They are successfully operating and maintaining the systems
and helping to develop the pellet supply infrastructure in Southeast. The engineering complexity of this project is a concern and AEA recommends careful integration and budget planning.
Recommend full funding for design and construction with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design and the final business/operational plan.
The application as proposed and additional information received did not fully address the feasibility and conceptual design-level issues expected to be complete prior to providing REF
funding for final design and construction. AEA recommends partial funding of $20,000 to complete a feasibility study for solar PV development in Kotzebue. The study should consider
fixed, single and dual tracking systems.
The proposed budget for the feasibility analysis appears insufficient for the project scope that should include stream gauging, operational modeling, sensitivity analysis and capacity
recommendations, conceptual designs, cost estimating and economic analysis for the hydro, water supply system, and spinning reserve alternative analysis.
Recommended for funding with the special provision that the prior phase of feasibility is included in the grant scope followed by design and permitting contingent on results and AEA
acceptance of feasibility report.
The reconnaissance assessment through the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group indicates a viable project. The buildings to be heated by this project are in need of energy efficiency
upgrades, and the amount of fuel displaced would be significantly less after the energy efficiency work. The Copper Valley Region has embraced biomass as an alternative fuel source
and has operating systems in Kenny Lake, Gulkana, and Glennallen. The Native Village of Tazlina has shown commitment to a successful wood heating project through persistence in their
applications to the RE Fund. There is a sufficient wood supply through a BLM wildfire mitigation contract. The Alaska demonstration of the boiler technology proposed for this project
is in the start-up phase in Mentasta Lake, and AEA is monitoring the performance.
AEA recommends full funding for a cordwood boiler system. The applicant has requested that AEA manage the project. The project will examine energy efficiency within the served buildings.
The Craig High School District in Craig, AK requests funding for engineering design and construction of a chip fueled biomass heating system for the Craig High School. The project is
estimated to displace 18,485 gallons of fuel/year. The Craig City School District has over 6 years of experience in operating and maintaining a chip system at their middle school, elementary
school, and pool complex. The chips will be supplied by a local sawmill and will be dried by dryer funded through the Renewable Energy Fund. Energy efficiency improvements are underway
or completed at the high school to maximize the efficiency of the heating system.
Recommend funding for design and construction with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design and the final business/operational plan prior to starting
the construction phase.
AP&T's reconnaissance study indicates this project may be economical despite the very low population and energy demand in Whale Pass. The application indicates that demand is expected
to increase because several residents in Whale Pass lack connection to the local utility.
AEA recommends feasibility analysis to include assessment of project size and economics for offsetting heat demand and the growth potential for the community followed by design and permitting
if warranted.
AEA does not recommend the requested phase of this project be funded at this time due to unsupported feasibility claims and incomplete prior phases. For a design/construction project
the applicant must provide sufficient information to complete an economic and/or technical evaluation. This application did not provide sufficient information on the amount and cost
of diesel generation (the alternative to the proposed project) and a clear, verifiable demonstration of how much diesel generation is expected to be offset by the proposed project.
Additionally, the application did not demonstrate the fulfillment of all requirements of earlier phases. This application indicates that that the final design and permitting tasks are
not yet complete.A Southeast Alaska hydro needs assessment has been funded by the State to identify the next most economical hydro needs in the region. This work is underway but not
yet complete.No funding recommended.
The applicant did not adequately demonstrate feasibility. For a design/construction project the applicant must provide sufficient information to complete an economic and technical evaluation.
This application did not provide sufficient information on the amount and cost of diesel generation (the alternative to the proposed project) and a clear, verifiable demonstration of
how much diesel generation is expected to be offset by the proposed project.
A Southeast Alaska hydro needs assessment has been funded by the State to identify the next most economical hydro needs in the region. This work is underway but not yet complete, and
when complete may help the applicant better demonstrate the feasibility of this project.
No funding recommended.
The applicant requested funding in the amount of $413,600 with match and in-kind support of $103,400 for complete feasibility and conceptual design phases. There is limited supporting
data in terms of potential hydro energy production, that if available, could increase AEA's confidence of the project economics. A number of conditions should be met before undertaking
this secondary hydro development in the Tok region including additional assurance with regard to energy availability and project operability and subsequent economics. Stream gauging
is recommended to evaluate the energy resource prior to undertaking more extensive studies. The gauging will improve confidence in energy availability for nearby Yerrick Creek as well.
Demonstration of cost and operability of Yerrick Creek is also recommended before proceeding with Clearwater Creek development.
AEA's funding recommendation is therefore limited to the proposed stream gauging work in the application consisting of $40k of REF grant, $10k grantee matching funds, and $3k other funds.
SEAPA submitted similar proposals in Rounds 5 and 7 and was recommended by AEA, but never funded due to the project's rank and funding availability those years. SEAPA has been given
a 34-meter met tower from AEA's met tower loan program. Whether funded or not in Round 8, the applicant is encouraged to coordinate with the AEA wind program, which can assist in site
assessment, site selection and permitting. If future REF funding will be applied for, the applicant should attempt to start collecting data as early as possible in order to complete
either one or two full years of wind data collection prior to applying for the next phases of project development, which are typically due in September. The project schedule is thorough
and achievable. The staff at SEAPA has experience with large energy projects. Due to the size of the electrical load and infrastructure in the region, a multi-megawatt scale wind project
would be appropriate and allow for the best economies of scale. AEA recommends full funding.
The proposal to use wastewater effluent as a source for a heat pump system is a compelling use of an otherwise unused heat source, and could serve as a model for similar systems in other
parts of the state. The high temperature and availability of effluent would result in a higher heat pump COP than seen in other heat pump installations in the state. Cost savings identified
by the applicant since a Round 7 Renewable Energy Fund submission have dramatically improved the project’s economics.
Full funding recommended.
The design phase request is not recommended at this time. For design funding the prior phase of feasibility shall be complete so that the project viability and the future funding needs
can be determined per the AEA Request for Applications 15003 section 2.2 to 2.6.
No funding recommended.
AEA's primary concern with this project is the current condition of the power generation and distribution system. The utility needs to develop a plan to get their four original gensets
in good working order and follow a maintenance schedule that ensures long-term operation before the addition of a wind energy project can be pursued. AEA has programs available to provide
technical assistance to the utility to help with this.
A preliminary wind study has been conducted in the Manokotak vicinity in 2008/9. That data was used to feed economic and technical assumptions into a wind-diesel model, which indicated
that there may be an economic wind resource in the community. The next steps, once the current power generation system is prepared to accept wind energy, is to identify the specific
location of the best local wind resource through the installation of meteorological tower(s), as requested in this application. At that time, AEA wind staff should be consulted prior
to selecting the met tower locations.
This project did not pass the Stage 2 (economic and technical evaluation) minimum score.
No funding recommended.
The Organized Village of Kake is proposing final design and permitting for a low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party tested district wood-fired heating loop for a tribal government
office building, Kake City School District, Tlingit and Haida Senior Center, the City of Kake?s Bingo Hall, and a lodge owned by the Organized Village of Kake (OVK), a federally recognized
tribe. This project is estimated to displace approximately 35,000 gallons per year of fuel oil. The application includes substantial support from the community and endorsement from
the Kake Community Energy Committee. AEA recommends partial funding of design and permitting to allow the Organized Village of Kake to make an informed decision about pursing biomass
as a heating option.
AEA recommends partial funding for the final design and permitting includes business/operations plan; biomass storage; biomass resource inventory assessment; harvest plan, $175,000.
Ineligible for further review because the applicant did not provide a conceptual design report 30 days prior to the application deadline as required and identified in Sections 1.12,
2.5 and Section 4 of the Request for Grant Applications dated July 2, 2013.
Section 4 of RFA, page 26
7. Wind applications requesting Phase III (Final Design and Permitting) or Phase IV (Construction, Commissioning, Operation and Reporting) funding will submit documentation necessary
to demonstrate the fulfillment of all requirements for earlier phases of the project identified in Section 2 of the RFA [i.e. Phase II (Feasibility Analysis, Conceptual Design) or Phase
III (Final Design and Permitting)] 30 days prior to the application deadline.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the Native Village of Tuntutliak are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing power plant planned to
the Water Treatment Plant and Washeteria.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
The utility has funding for an electric heater for excess wind. The design should take into account the integration of wind-to-heat.
Recommend full funding.
Ram Valley LLC requests funds for reconnaissance study of a hydroelectric project on Juniper Creek.
The run-of-river project is located in high alpine terrain near Mile 10 of the Eagle River valley. Ram Valley LLC would sell Juniper Creek Hydroelectric power to Matanuska Electric Assoc.
as an IPP. Several different development options are proposed for the project from 250 to 1,300 kW, some of which involve private landowners not currently committed to the project.
The project would generate seasonally as proposed.
AEA recommends funds for a reconnaissance study.
Special conditions: In the course of conducting the reconnaissance study, explore and define the project scheme and obtain commitments from involved landowners.
City of King Cove requests an additional $800,000 to construct the 1 MW run-or-river Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project. The City was awarded a $200,000 grant (#887) in Round 5 to
complete permitting and final design for Waterfall Creek and $2,600,000 (#929) in Round 6 for construction. Permitting, final design, site control, and bidding all remain incomplete.
AEA supports this request though notes that permitting, final design, construction cost estimate, and bidding are not complete at this time.
Special conditions include completion of all grant requirements for #887 and demonstration of site control.
Chugach Electric Association requests $3,453,920 to complete construction of the Stetson Creek Diversion to Cooper Lake Hydroelectric Project. Project will add 6,020,000 kWh annually.
It will also provide environmental benefits for increase in 1) water temperature and 2) increase flows at upper reaches of Cooper Creek to enhance fish habitat.
Bids were opened on 9/28/12 and construction is underway. Project cost is $21,772,523. CEA received funds in Round 4 (#674) for $576,080 for design and permitting and a State appropriation
for $5,825,000 in FY13 for construction. The project applied for funding in Round 6 but failed to score within the funding limit. CEA will continue to seek grant funding and finance
any cost in excess of grant amounts.
Construction of this project satisfies the Settlement Agreement established in support of the FERC re-license of Cooper Lake Hydroelectric Project, which, along with this diversion,
has annual energy of 48,000,000 kWh.
The Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) on 1/7/14 advised AEA to recommend to the Legislature partial funding this project if funding is kept within the Governor?s budget
of $20M. REFAC further advised AEA to include the initial recommendation of full funding should the Legislature make available additional funds this year. One other hydro project,
Allison Creek, was also recommended for partial funding. The primary reason was to allow the funding of six additional projects in higher cost areas of the state.
AEA recommends partial funding of $1,760,019 if the Renewable Energy Fund Round 7 budget is limited to $20M, and recommends this project first in line for any additional funding beyond
$20M, up to the requested grant amount of $3,453,920.
Chugach Electric Association (CEA), Inc. request funding for a reconnaissance study to provide a preliminary assessment of the viability of a waste to energy project in Anchorage.
A portion of the municipal solid waste minus recyclables that currently goes to the Anchorage landfill would be used as fuel for the plant.
AEA supports the concept of utilizing municipal solid waste as an energy source. The first step in clearly understanding the viability of a waste to energy project is a comprehensive
assessment of the fuel resource availability. CEA has provided a match of $100,000 toward this effort. AEA recommends partial funding of design and permitting to allow Chugach Electric
Association (CEA) to make an informed decision about pursing a waste to energy project in Anchorage.
AEA recommends partial funding of $50,000.
The City of False Pass Electric Utility, applying as a local government, proposes feasibility and conceptual design work to determine the advisability of installing wind turbines on
the False Pass electrical grid. This work will augment feasibility and conceptual design work already performed under a Round 4 Renewable Energy Fund Grant #7040051. The results of
the Round 4 grant demonstrated that the False Pass wind regime contains enough energy to create a feasible wind project but, due to complex terrain, has high turbulence. The applicant
proposes to continue wind and electrical data collection to investigate other locations in False Pass for a less turbulent wind regime and better understanding of community loads.
The applicant proposes to then revise the existing Conceptual Design Report based on the aggregate findings.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that Wind Resource Assessment(s) and Feasibility Study be accepted by AEA prior to the allocation of Conceptual Design funds.
The New Koliganek Village Council, applying as a governmental entity, proposes to complete a final design of and permitting for a wind-diesel power system in the community of Koliganek
Alaska. The final design will be based on a feasibility study and conceptual design report performed under a Round 4 RE Fund Grant #7040011. The feasibility study has been completed
and a draft conceptual design report has been reviewed by the AEA Wind Program. A final conceptual design report will be completed in early 2014 in conjunction with an AEA Rural Power
System Upgrade Program power plant conceptual design report.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that a final wind-diesel conceptual design report be accepted by the Authority prior to the allocation of final design and permitting
funds.
The Chickaloon Native Village proposes construction of a pellet and solar heating system to supply heat for both a 3,200 sq. ft. shop/office and a 1,160 sq. ft. administrative building.
Included in the project is construction of a building addition to house the boiler system, purchase and installation of solar thermal panels and pellet boiler, and focused monitoring
and evaluation.
AEA recommends partial funding for Chickaloon Native Village pellet system installation only because the thermal only capital cost is less than the solar/thermal capital cost; the benefits
and savings are the same when comparing solar/thermal and thermal technology.
Before any funding is released to the grantee, AEA must review and accept the final design for the pellet system, the business/operations plan, and a biomass fuel supply plan. The system
must meet AEA?s biomass program requirements of low emissions, high efficiency, third party tested, and UL listed.
AEA recommends partial funding of $97,000.
Native Village of Tanacross requests $6,000,000 for construction of a seasonal 1.5 MW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Yerrick Creek to serve Tanacross, Tok, Tetlin and Dot Lake,
located 20 miles west of Tok. Total project cost is $19,000,000 and depends upon many other sources of funds that are not in hand (USDA RUS, New Markets Tax Credits, BIA loan). The
project is to be jointly owned by NVT and Tanacross Inc., which will form an IPP to sell power to AP&T. The project will require 15,000 ft of penstock and 10 miles of transmission line
upgrade from single phase to three phase.
AP&T will be hired to prepare final construction plans and specs.
The project was partially funded by AEA several years ago through a series of RE Fund grants when AP&T was the sole developer but ran into problems with lack of cooperation by landowner
Tanacross Inc. Funds were made available in what is called Round 0 for reconnaissance study and Round 3 (#438) for construction.
AEA has the following concerns: All funds for construction are not available, MOA not signed, IPP not formed, land ROW not in hand, permits not in place, design not complete, cost estimate
is vague, exact siting of intake and powerhouse is unclear.
Recommend partial funding of $75,000 to finalize permits, final design and specs, cost estimate, IPP arrangements, MOA, power sales agreement, bid documents, etc.
The Northwest Arctic Borough School District (NWABSD) applied for a grant to fund the construction of solar thermal water heating systems at eleven schools. Grant funds of $456,252
were requested with a match of $11,000 for a total project cost of $467,252. The project is intended to allow the boilers at the eleven schools to be turned off during summer months.
It would also offset water heating fuel use during other periods of the year.
AEA does not recommend this project for funding. The applicant made an error in reading solar panel output on p.39 of the application. 3.1 kWh/m^2/day is the solar insolation on the
panel. The panel thermal output is 3.2 kWh/panel/day. A confusion between the energy output expressed in units of ?per panel? and the insolation expressed in terms of energy per square
meter resulted in an over-estimation of energy that would be generated. Also, the application did not include enough detail regarding school occupancy during school days, summer months
and on weekends, and associated water heating requirements, to calculate the related fuel use and potential savings.
AEA recommends that NWABSD investigate advanced controls, alternative sources of water heating, and energy efficiency measures to reduce water heating fuel use at these facilities.
AEA encourages NWABSD to work directly with AEA staff to address the community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy planning staff for direct assistance.
This project is not recommended for funding.
Blue Hole Properties, LLC requests $170,000 in grant funds to complete feasibility and conceptual design of 200 kW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Cascade Creek, located at milepost
35 of the Richardson Highway and adjacent to the Tsaina Lodge.
The project is estimated to cost $2.25 million to construct and would require a 14-mi transmission to interconnect to the CVEA transmission system. It does not appear the cost of interconnection
has been included in the cost estimate. It would provide 1,040,000 kWh annually. How much would be purchased by the CVEA system is unknown due to the Allison Creek project currently
under construction and already operational Solomon Gulch.
Recommend full funding.
Tuntutuliak received REF Round 2 and direct legislative appropriation funding to install five Windmatic 17S 95-kilowatt wind turbines, completing that project in 2012. This proposal
would make use of excess electricity by diverting surplus kilowatts to residential heat loads. Unlike the other two project proposed for Kongiganak and Kwigillingok, the economics of
this project suffer from the lower residual energy available having already installed 30 stoves instead of just 20 stoves in Kong and Kwig, plus Tuntutuliak\'s ~10% lower wind regime,
plus their lower cost of diesel fuel. Applicant and contractor have prior experience installing ETS units. Average benefits seen for existing 30 installations will be somewhat lower
when aggregated among 50 homes. Residents see full benefits of heat savings. Final determination and survey of homes for install (community designation) must be accepted by AEA prior
to release of additional funds. Project needs to integrate with a separate project to upgrade the village distribution system as a condition of funding. Applicant has not been timely
in submitting required quarterly operations and maintenance reports on the existing wind energy project. Applicant needs to meet reporting requirements on existing project from this
point forward to receive funding. Recommend full funding.
Kongiganak received REF Round 1 and direct legislative appropriation funding to install five Windmatic 17S 95-kilowatt wind turbines, completing that project in 2012. This proposal would
make use of excess electricity by diverting surplus kilowatts to residential heat loads. Applicant and contractor have prior experience installing ETS units. Average benefits seen for
existing 20 installations will be somewhat lower when aggregated among 50 homes. Residents see full benefits of heat savings. Final determination and survey of homes for install (community
designation) must be accepted by AEA prior to release of additional funds. Project needs to integrate with a separate project to upgrade the village distribution system as a condition
of funding. Recommend full funding.
Igiugig Village Council, applying as a governmental entity, proposes to complete a feasibility study and conceptual design report to study the advisability of installing wind turbines
in Igiugig, Alaska. The applicant has finished a meteorological tower study and has submitted a Wind Resource Report with the application.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that the Wind Resource Analysis and Feasibility Study be accepted by AEA prior to allocation of Conceptual Design funds.
Kwigillingok received REF Round 1 and direct legislative appropriation funding to install five Windmatic 17S 95-kilowatt wind turbines, completing that project in 2012. This proposal
would make use of excess electricity by diverting surplus kilowatts to residential heat loads. Applicant and contractor have prior experience installing ETS units. Average benefits
seen for existing 27 installations will be somewhat lower when aggregated among 50 homes. Residents see full benefits of heat savings. Final determination and survey of homes for install
(community designation) must be accepted by AEA prior to release of additional funds. Project needs to integrate with a separate project to upgrade the village distribution system as
a condition of funding. Applicant has not been timely in submitting required quarterly operations and maintenance reports on the existing wind energy project. Applicant needs to meet
reporting requirements on existing project from this point forward to receive funding. Recommend full funding.
TDX Power intends to build on a successful wind?diesel power system at Sand Point, Alaska, by adding an energy storage component to its Sand Point Generating power plant. The inverter
and battery bank would allow the utility to purchase more wind power from the existing turbines and shut off the diesel engines for approximately 30% of the year. The project includes
the final design, procurement, installation and commissioning of an inverter and battery bank and integration with the existing wind-diesel power system in Sand Point, Alaska.
AEA recommends partial funding of $200,000 for a feasibility study and final design to provide additional detail on the proposed project as well as alternative savings options. additionally,
AEA recommends that the applicant consult with AEA?s powerhouse design team regarding the latest innovations in diesel efficiency, marine manifolds, heat recovery design, and dispatchable
boilers for frequency control. The feasibility study should investigate the economics of expanding the heat recovery loop to the clinic, school and/or city buildings, adding marine
manifolds to one or more of the gensets, adding interruptible electric heating to commercial customers, and/or adding a dispatchable electric boiler to the heat recovery loop. The
study should consider repairing or replacing the smallest genset to improve system diesel generation efficiency and the potential for paralleling effectively with the wind turbines.
The lessons learned from other battery installations in Alaska (Kodiak, Kotzebue, Kokhanok, etc.) will provide a valuable framework.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, applying as a utility, proposes the construction of a wind farm along the St. Mary\'s/Pitka\'s Point inter tie along with components necessary for
the integration of wind power into the diesel power plant. The wind-diesel system would serve the communities of St. Mary\'s and Pitka\'s Point. The basis for the proposed wind-diesel
system would be a design funded through Round 4 RE Fund grant #7040017. Permitting for the project is completed, site control has been established and a final design has been submitted
to the Authority.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that the 95% design be accepted by the Authority prior to allocation of construction funds.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, applying as a Utility, proposes to complete a final design of and permitting for a wind-diesel power system in the community of Stebbins, Alaska.
The wind-diesel system would service the communities of Stebbins and Saint Michael, Alaska. The final design will be based on a feasibility study and conceptual design report performed
under a Round 4 RE Fund Grant #7040008. The feasibility study and conceptual design report have been reviewed and accepted by the AEA Wind Program.
Recommend full funding.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, applying as a utility, proposes to complete a wind feasibility study and conceptual design report to study the advisability of installing wind turbines
in Mountain Village, Alaska. The applicant performed a meteorological tower study from November 2009 to August 2011. A Wind Resource Analysis based on this study was submitted with
the application and demonstrates a class five wind resource. Class four through seven wind regimes typically support viable wind-diesel projects in Western Alaska.
A best case scenario is often used by AEA Project Managers when evaluating the merits of a feasibility project and, in regards to this proposal, resulted in higher production estimates
than the applicant. The proposed project and future design work would refine production estimates prior to construction.
Recommend full funding.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, applying as a Utility, proposes to complete a final design of and permitting for a wind-diesel power system in the community of Marshall, Alaska.
The final design would be based on a feasibility study and conceptual design report performed under a Round 4 RE Fund Grant #7040021. The draft conceptual design report was submitted
and reviewed by AEA prior to the Round 7 RE Fund application deadline. A final conceptual design report has been submitted.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that the final conceptual design report be accepted by AEA prior to allocation of design and permitting funds.
AVEC requests $1,092,500 to complete final design for a 262 kW hydroelectric project on East Fork Mountain Creek and Lagoon Creek at Old Harbor.
The project received grants in Round 1 (#73) for $225,000 and Round 4 (#644) for $237,500 to complete a feasibility study, FERC licensing, and preliminary design. Additionally, the City
of Old Harbor received a Community Development Block Grant in support of the project for $250,000 to complete the FERC License Application and permitting.
AEA has the following concerns: The FERC License Application was submitted October 2013 and it will take 18-24 months for the application to be reviewed and granted. Site control, including
an easement within the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge, and changes to the conservation easement with the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, remains to be established. Additionally,
project economics are marginal and the requested funds for this phase of work are extremely high and unsupported.
Recommend partial funding to complete final design.
It is suggested AVEC make every effort to keep as much of the costs down to keep this project moving ahead.
Native Village of Chenega requests $1,400,000 to construct the 64 kW hydroelectric project on Anderson Creek. The project is estimated to reduce diesel consumption for electrical generation
by half.
The project received grants in Round 0 for reconnaissance study and Round 3 for final design and permitting (#455).
AEA has the following concerns: Permits and site control have not been received, the Declaration of Intent has not been submitted and it is unknown if the project is exempt from FERC
licensing. Draft plans titled as 95% design were submitted with the application but did not include technical specifications, and cannot be finalized until permitting is complete. The
estimated cost for construction is $1,650,000 and it is unclear where the additional funding will come from.
For these reasons we believe it is premature to grant further funding. Not recommended.
The Iliamna Village Council has applied for an $800,000 grant with a $120,000 match for reconnaissance, feasibility and conceptual design of a ground-mounted solar photovoltaic system.
The system would offset heating and electrical costs at its Village Council office and possibly adjacent buildings.
Since 2009, AEA has assisted the Iliamna-Nondalton-Newhalen Electric Cooperative (INNEC) with a series of utility upgrades to repair the hydro tailrace, rebuild hydro turbines and generators,
improve the intake system, upgrade controls, and install interruptible electric boilers at the schools in Newhalen and Nondalton. These projects are intended to benefit all three communities
by improving the reliability and reducing the cost of hydropower. AEA has recently funded a feasibility study to determine if the existing capacity at the Tazimina Hydro project should
be increased.
AEA does not recommend this application for funding because of its high cost, minimal proposed fossil fuel savings, the lack of a utility net metering policy and procedures or endorsement
of the project, and the alternative opportunity to heat with interruptible hydropower from INNEC.
AEA recommends that the applicant contact the INNEC board regarding electricity rates and the possibility of heating the applicant building with excess hydropower. Also consider energy
efficiency measures in public buildings for cost-effective energy savings. The applicant may also be able to participate in the projections of future heating and power use that will
be part of the Tazimina Hydro capacity increase study.
The City of False Pass proposed to conduct a feasibility study for a tidal power project in Isanotski Strait, building on previous reconnaissance efforts. The proposal was submitted
in response to language in the Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Round 7 Request for Applications (RFA) that specifically identified reconnaissance and feasibility stage hydrokinetic projects
as eligible for REF funding; this language was included in an effort to address a perceived eligibility gap between the Emerging Energy Technology Fund (EETF) and REF. This language
was included at the recommendation of the REF Advisory Committee.
The proposal, which calls for additional field measurements, modeling, site selection, and preparation for permitting, was submitted on behalf of a strong project team actively involved
in pioneering hydrokinetic development in the state.
As required by the review protocol described in the RFA, the proposal was evaluated by the same criteria used for all REF applications, and was disadvantaged by the high costs and uncertainty
associated with a nascent technology. The proposal is recommended for funding. As described in the RFA, the proposal could be recommended for funding ahead of its rank, if it demonstrated
both the importance of the proposed resource area relative to other potential resource areas and evidence that tidal power shows potential for economic deployments in Alaska in the
future.
While other strong and potential promising tidal resources exist in Alaska, the project team has made a convincing case that the proposed resource site is exceptional because it boasts
the strongest tidal currents identified in the state being considered for power generation and is located nearby an electrical load.
With only a single grid-connected tidal installation operating in the country, it is difficult to predict how rapidly the installed costs of tidal power generation plants will decline
as the technology matures. The applicant has reasoned that deployment and retrieval costs will decline dramatically as operators gain experience and equipment is improved. Although
numerous challenges may remain before economic deployments can be realized in Alaska, the potential for such deployments does exist.
AEA requested the advice of the REF Advisory Committee regarding the advancement of the proposal ahead of higher ranking projects as permitted by the RFA; however, the committee did
not recommend elevating the proposal beyond its scoring rank.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Emmonak are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the AVEC power plant planned for 2015 to the Water
Treatment Plant, Boys and Girls Club, and the City Office/Hotel.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
The design should consider the opportunity for marine jacketed engines supplying heat to additional community buildings.
Recommend full funding.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Holy Cross are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing power plant to the Water Treatment
Plant and Washeteria
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
The uninsulated AVEC power plant modules should be insulated to maximize available heat.
Recommend full funding.
AVEC requests $2,922,000 in grant funds for permitting and 65% design for a 690 kW run-of-river hydroelectric project on the Kogoluktuk River. The project would serve the communities
of Ambler, Shungnak and Kobuk. Shungnak and Kobuk are interconnected at present, while Ambler is not interconnected. Ambler is 29 miles from Shungnak.
The project received a Round 1 Renewable Energy Fund grant (#74) for $1,025,000 to complete a feasibility study. A draft feasibility study was included with the application but has not
been finalized and accepted by AEA.
According to the draft feasibility study, it is still unknown if the project would require FERC licensing and the project description mentions fish ladders may be required. FERC licensing
adds additional costs to a project and fish ladders also create higher costs and a technical barrier for development. It is unknown if a fish ladder can be permitted and operate successfully
in an Arctic environment. A feasibility study generally would be more definitive with these matters.
The requested funds of $2.9M for the design phase of work are high and unsupported. The proposal does not indicate the design team members. Additionally, small hydropower engineering
and operation with long, above-ground penstocks have not been proven north of the Arctic Circle, and a major concern is system freeze-up during sustained temperatures approaching -40
to -50 deg. F. Therefore, practical successful operation of potential projects remain speculative and risky.
The project is estimated to provide 1,669,835 kWh of the electrical demand and displace approximately 45,000 gallons of diesel used for heat. The proposal estimated a total capital cost
of $38.66 million; however, the cost estimate did not include the cost of a transmission line to Ambler nor the cost to implement hydro generation to be used for space heating. Although
the project appears to have fairly significant benefits, the costs are more substantial and the benefit/cost ratio of 0.38 reflects this.
Considering the concerns listed above and the challenging economics, the project was not recommended for funding. The applicant appealed AEA's decision. Staff reconsidered based upon
new information and scored the project which did not meet the minimum Stage 2 score.
The Northwest Arctic Borough (NWAB) proposes a 52.5kW solar photovoltaic system adjacent to the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) powerhouse in Noatak. The NWAB intends to
transfer ownership and operation of this project to AVEC. The project would generate approximately 49,500 kWh the first year with a capacity factor of 11%.
This proposal contains a number of technical deficiencies:
- There is no design, which is typically required for a project of this size
- There is no site control in place, which is required for construction projects
- The feasibility study provided, which is the basis for the application, was performed without a site visit.
- The proposed site is between the powerhouse, which is in the floodplain, and the river
- The cost estimate did not provide cost details
- The NWAB resolution authorizing the grant application was not signed
- The Noatak powerhouse needs work: the smallest genset is in poor condition, the three phase is unbalanced, and the heat recovery system is not working.
AEA does not recommend this project for funding. The AEA powerhouse program offers technical assistance to the community and utility in planning for improvement of the diesel powerhouse
and heat recovery system, and AEA?s energy planning staff is also available for assistance.
The community of Newtok, AK is relocating due to erosion. The new community site of Mertarvik, Alaska is Southeast of the current location and the State wind model projects a possible
class four to six wind resource in the area.
Ungusraq Power Company (UPC) / Newtok Traditional Council (NTC), applying as an Independent Power Producer (IPP), proposes feasibility and conceptual design work for a diesel power plant
and distribution system and to determine the advisability of installing wind turbines, solar pv, biomass and/or heat recovery in Mertarvik, Alaska.
Design work for the power plant and distribution system is ineligible for funding under the RE Fund. Conceptual design work for a wind or solar farm or heat recovery loop should be
done concurrently with or after the power plant and distribution system has been addressed. A biomass feasibility study should be performed concurrently with or after a determination
of which buildings could be served by a heat recovery loop.
Currently, there are two groups claiming legitimacy as the Newtok Traditional Council with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) making the determination. An initial decision was made
by BIA and is being appealed. It is anticipated that a final decision from BIA will be made in the second half of 2014. Securing site control and obtaining a proper Waiver of Sovereign
Immunity may be an issue until this situation is resolved.
Recommend partial funding of $75,000 to collect wind data at Mertarvik and electrical and thermal load data at Newtok, both for a minimum of one year, and to write a wind/solar resource
assessment.
The City of Adak is proposing to conduct a feasibility analysis of including wind energy in their local energy grid. The wind resource model predicts a Class 6 wind resource at the
proposed met tower site, indicating a very good wind resource. AEA is concerned that the existing community power generation and distribution system is not currently ready to incorporate
wind energy, but we also recognize that Adak is addressing the energy system and is likely to be working with AEA through the Rural Power System Upgrade program in coming years. The
amount of wind energy proposed for this community is much higher than AEA is comfortable pursuing. AEA believes that a 0.9 to 1.0 megawatt system would be more appropriate for this
community. The cost estimate to install the met towers is twice the highest AEA has ever seen.
Weekly monitoring of the met tower site is warranted given the extreme winds possible in Adak. Electrical load data must be collected with dataloggers at the power plant and in parallel
from the fish processing plant and other self-generating users not presently connected to the grid to develop a properly sized power generation system.
AEA encourages Adak to continue to work with AEA staff to address the community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy planning staff for direct assistance.
The project did not pass the minimum Stage 2 score criteria.
The City of Seward proposes to install a run around heat recovery loop in the Alaska SeaLife Center to recover wasted heat from exhaust fans, appliances, and overheated rooms and deliver
it into the building?s sea water source heat pump system, resulting in improved heat pump performance.
The calculated benefit derived from improved heat pump performance expected with the addition of the recovered heat into the system appears to be marginal, even assuming a dramatically
increased heat pump output than is currently used. However, the additional benefit of avoiding the costs of a dedicated split cooling system for the overheated rooms is substantial.
Even using more conservative assumptions regarding performance increase, the project appears to be economic.
Full funding recommended.
Ineligible for further review because the applicant did not provide a conceptual design report 30 days prior to the application deadline as required and identified in Sections 1.12,
2.5 and Section 4 of the Request for Grant Applications dated July 2, 2013.
Section 4 of RFA, page 26
7. Wind applications requesting Phase III (Final Design and Permitting) or Phase IV (Construction, Commissioning, Operation and Reporting) funding will submit documentation necessary
to demonstrate the fulfillment of all requirements for earlier phases of the project identified in Section 2 of the RFA [i.e. Phase II (Feasibility Analysis, Conceptual Design) or Phase
III (Final Design and Permitting)] 30 days prior to the application deadline.
The City and Borough of Yakutat is proposing final design and installation of low emissions; high efficiency; 3rd party tested cordwood boiler systems to heat three City/Borough-owned
buildings: City Hall Building; Court House Building; Yakutat Community Center . This project is estimated to displace a total of 7,238 gallons per year of fuel oil, using 38 cords of
wood per year. The project has completed a feasibility study.
This project is an example of good collaboration efforts among community organizations in an effort to provide low cost heating to the entire community of Yakutat. Also the local community
appears to be supportive of a district biomass heating project. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
AEA recommends partial funding of design and permitting to allow the City and Borough of Yakutat to make an informed decision about pursing biomass as a heating option.
Recommend partial funding with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design; biomass storage; business/operational plan; harvest plan; inventory plan,
$103,000.
The Community of Nunam Iqua is proposing the design and construction of a recovered heat system from the new power plant to the washeteria/water treatment plant for building heat; the
water treatment plant for process heat; and to the Clinic, Community Hall and Corporation Store for building heat. This project is proposed to be managed by AEA in conjunction with
the design and construction of the new power plant.
The preliminary heat recovery assessment performed in September 2013 showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
Recommend full funding.
Alaska Gateway School District proposes adding on a heat loop off the newly-completed wood-fired heating system at the Tok School to provide heat to two school buildings ? the multipurpose
building housing the ice rink and shooting range and the Zamboni building . The project team would complete a final design phase and construction documents prior to construction.
This application is similar to the Round 6 submittal #926 that was recommended for funding, but below the $25MM allotment. This Round 7 application significantly decreases the number
of buildings and the size of the proposed in the heat loop.
Recommend full funding with the provision that AEA approve the final design before construction funds are released.
The applicant proposes a 52kW solar photovoltaic system at the Bristol Bay Borough School in Naknek. This system would offset approximately 42,367 kWh of electricity in the first year.
The applicant did not provide details regarding electric load (weekday average, weekend average, summer average, etc.) or an agreement with the utility regarding interconnection.
Naknek Electric Association provided a 10/30/13 e-mail stating that it does not offer net metering. Both the application and the utility director indicated that the applicant had not
discussed the project with the electric utility to request permission to interconnect.
AEA does not recommend this project for funding due to the lack of electric load detail and the lack of an agreement with the utility that would allow the proposed system to be connected
to the local grid.
AEA encourages BBB School District to work directly with AEA staff to address the community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy planning staff for direct assistance.
This grant request is to fund the subject Project for final design and permitting. There is a current grant to the North Slope Borough for Feasibility and Concept Design in the amount
of $210,000.
As of this current grant application review there have been $0 expended on the grant currently in place although much work has taken place.
Recommend funding of this Project commensurate with substantial completion and acceptance of the previous grant documents.
Kaktovik has received REf Round 4 funding to complete a wind resource analysis, feasibility study and conceptual design. The existing power plant is easily adaptable to integration of
wind energy. Power plant description in section 3.5 and 4.2.2 of this application is one of the most detailed we\'ve seen. Good summary of permitting and environmental concerns. NSB
has a long history of maintaining village power systems at a high level of reliability and functionality. Budget is higher than standard wind project designs due to increased environmental
assessment and permitting. Good wind resource. Recommend full funding.
The City of Galena is proposing installation and commissioning of a low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party tested chip-fired boiler system to heat its school district and the Galena
Interior Learning Academy School (GILA). This project is estimated to displace a total 203,850 gallons per year of fuel oil, using 2,300 tons of chips per year. The technical feasibility
phase of this project is complete, but the final design and harvest/fuel inventory work is still in process.
The application includes substantial support from the community, the Louden Tribal Council, Galena City School District, and Gana?A-Yoo Limited. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure
that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project. Also, AEA must review and approve Phase III ? Final Design.
Recommend full funding with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design funded in Round 6, including the decreased load resulting from end-use efficiency
measures; business/operational plan with heat sales agreement; harvest plan; biomass storage; inventory plan prior to the release of construction funds.
The Tanalian Electric Cooperative requests funds to assess hydroelectric and hydrokinetic resource potential and economics of the Tanalian River for electrical generation for Port Alsworth.
The Tanalian River is located in Lake Clark National Park and Preserve and any hydroelectric development would require specific authorization by Congress, indicating significant permitting
challenges. The application included a support letter from the National Park Service (NPS) for investigation of a potential hydrokinetic project; however, the letter was dated October
29, 2008 and was in support of a previous Round 3 grant application and applicant (#436), and did not indicate any support for a conventional hydroelectric project. It is unknown if
the NPS supports hydroelectric studies in the Tanalian River. Additionally, the river is a known salmon stream and is listed as anadromous by Alaska Department of Fish & Game.
In Round 4, Alaska Green Energy submitted and was funded for a similar proposal (#436) to conduct a reconnaissance study of hydroelectric potential for Port Alsworth. However, the grant
was canceled before expending any grant funds due to inactivity and inability of applicant to obtain support letters for the project and to hold community and agency meetings.
Although assessment of the hydrokinetic potential of the river was mentioned in the application, no detail was provided regarding the work to be performed, the amount budgeted for the
work, or the location of interest. Even if NPS support for a hydrokinetic project had been renewed, insufficient detail was provided for consideration of this component of the proposal.
Additionally, hydrokinetics is a developing technology and economics are unlikely to be positive at this time.
Until the applicant can demonstrate that a project has a reasonable chance to be developed and permitted at the location, funding is not recommended.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Grayling are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing power plant to the Water Treatment
Plant.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
The uninsulated AVEC power plant modules should be insulated to maximize available heat.
Recommend full funding.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the Village of Venetie are proposing to extend the use of recovered heat from the existing Venetie power plant for heating the newly constructed
clinic. Recovered heat is already being used to heat the Washeteria and Water Treatment Plant.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
Recommend full funding.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Saint Mary?s are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing AVEC power plant to City Shop,
Water Circulation Loop, Cold Storage/Hotel, and City Office Building.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
Recommend full funding.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Eek are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing AVEC power plant to the circulating water
distribution loop and the water storage tank.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
AVEC is investigating the feasibility of wind power in the City of Eek. The design should take into account the integration of wind-to-heat.
Recommend full funding.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Chevak are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing power plant to the Water Treatment Plant
and Vacuum Sewer System.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
ANTHC has funding for an electric heater for excess wind. The design should take into account the integration of wind-to-heat. The design should also consider the opportunity for marine
jacketed engines supplying heat to additional community buildings.
Recommend full funding.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Brevig Mission are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing power plant to the Water Treatment
Plant and the Washeteria/City Office. The Heat Recovery System will require the installation of a marine manifold on one of the existing generators.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
The intertie to Teller was damaged and AVEC is working with FEMA on repairs. Significant more recoverable heat will be available when the intertie is repaired, and the heat recovery
system should be designed to handle this heat load.
The uninsulated AVEC power plant modules should be insulated to maximize available heat.
Recommend full funding.
Ineligible for further review because the applicant is not an eligible party as defined in Section 1.4 of the Request for Grant Applications dated July 2, 2013.
The transmission project proposed does not ?link an eligible renewable energy project or eligible natural gas project to other transmission or distribution infrastructures? as required
in Section 1.5.
The City of Kotzebue is proposing installation and commissioning of a refuse derived fuel (RDF) and low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party tested biomass fired boilers in two city
owned buildings.
This project is estimated to displace a total 98,000 of gallons per year of fuel oil, using 2,300 tons of chips per year. The technical feasibility phase of this project is complete,
but the final design and harvest/fuel inventory work is still in process.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency and air quality is addressed in conjunction with this project. AEA recommends partial funding of design and
permitting to allow the City of Kotzebue to make an informed decision about pursing biomass as a heating option.
Recommend partial funding with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design; business/operational plan; biomass storage; biomass inventory assessment,
$270,000.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough requests funding for construction to build two biomass heating system for the Ketchikan Airport and Ketchikan High School. The project is estimated to
displace 111,033 gallons of fuel/year and has the potential to save the Ketchikan Gateway Borough fuel costs in excess of $ 8.0 million over 20 years.
Due to the differing economics of the two proposed projects, AEA recommends partial funding for the Ketchikan Airport pellet system installation only.
Before any funding is released to the grantee, AEA must review and accept the final design for the pellet system, the business/operations plan, and a biomass fuel supply plan. The system
must meet AEA?s biomass program requirements of low emissions, high efficiency, third party tested, and UL listed (the product meets public safety requirements as designated by the
Underwriters Laboratories).
Ketchikan Gateway Borough should reevaluate the potential for a biomass system at the high school after the final design has been completed. AEA encourages Ketchikan to work directly
with AEA staff in the coming year to continue to examine the implementation of biomass at the school.
AEA recommends partial funding of $620,000.
Chignik Lagoon Village Council requests an additional $2,352,653 to complete construction of the 167 kW Packers Creek Hydroelectric Project. The project will displace 97% of diesel fuel
(521,000 kWh) used to generate power today and will also displace additional heat energy through dispatchable electrical heat to the school.
The project received grants in Round 1 for permitting and design (#14) and Round 5 for construction (#836). The project was bid and all bids received were well above the engineer?s estimate.
Phase I under the Round 5 grant includes construction of access roads and bridge, powerhouse, and purchase and installation of turbine, generator, and switchgear. Phase I is anticipated
to be complete by August 2014. Phase II will complete the remainder of the project.
Despite the increase in cost the project still appears favorable and is expected to result in a decrease in electric costs from 75 cents to 33 cents per kWh.
The applicant calculation of their B/C ratio differed from AEA analysis in a few substantial ways. The applicant calculated using base system generation efficiency of 10 gallons/kwh;
AEA analysis uses 13 gallons/kwh. Applicant analysis assumed 10,000 gallons of displaced heat load; AEA analysis assumes that no additional heat beyond that going into existing heat
recovery system is used. Applicant analysis assumes generation level that is greater than current community demand; AEA analysis uses current community demand.
Recommend full funding.
With a Round 4 Renewable Energy Fund grant, IPEC completed a reconnaissance study to investigate the Tenakee Inlet geothermal resource. The study indicated some encouraging early signs
regarding the potential resource, but also confirmed that the significant transmission line and access road costs make the project very expensive and economically unfavorable, with
a benefit/cost ratio below 1.
While there does not appear to be demand for electricity produced by the project in either Pelican or Tenakee Springs, many residents of Hoonah demonstrated their support for the project.
Construction of a road to the geothermal site and the addition of other large electrical loads in the area could change the economic picture for a geothermal plant, but at this point
both prospects are speculative.
Without exploration wells?proposed in this application?key characteristics of the geothermal resource and the viability of a geothermal power plant will remain unknown. But absent a
clear economic justification for the power plant itself (a community energy demand and an apparent cost-effective manner to generate the energy), costly geothermal exploration is inappropriate.
No funding recommended.
Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC) proposes construction of an intertie that connects Metlakatla to Ketchikan. AEA is providing $2 million in Renewable Energy Fund rounds 1 and 4 (applications
#20 and #656). Additionally another $2 million in grant funds from the state have been awarded.
The RE Fund round 4 grant was negotiated this year (2013). Conditions of the grant support a step-wise approach to determine feasibility; conceptual design; and completion of all preconstruction
activities (including final design documents, final construction cost estimate, demonstration of site control, bathymetry, NEPA, and permitting) prior to construction funding being
awarded.
AEA is assisting MIC in complying with these conditions; however this work remains in process. The review team believes it is premature to allocate construction funds.
$4M has previously been provided to the requesting entity and previous grants suggest a step-wise approach. Funding for this round is not recommended until such time as the previous
grant?s milestones have been met as described above.
Not recommended for funding.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes to install a sea water source heat pump system at the Sitka Sound Science Center.
Because the Science Center is already equipped with a sea water intake to supply its aquarium and hatchery, the proposed project represents a lower cost opportunity to install a sea
water source heat pump system relative to other buildings.
According to AEA?s review, given the anticipated capital costs of the proposed system, the size of the building and existing heat loads would not result in the displacement of a sufficient
quantity of diesel for system payback. However, the possibility of expansion of the system to provide heat to additional nearby buildings could make the project more economically compelling.
AEA recommends funding for the design portion of the project with the requirement that incorporation of additional loads be considered in order to improve overall project economics.
Partial funding recommended.
Village of Minto proposes final design and construction of a biomass boiler system that is low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party tested to supply heat to the Minto Multi-Purpose
Building/Lodge and the Health Clinic. The system would consume approximately 99 cords per year and displace 11,400 gallons of fuel oil per year.
Reconnaissance assessment through the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group indicates a viable project. Village of Minto is supplying a building to house the boiler (s) as a match.
AEA is concerned by the lack of a harvest /operations plan for the project, but it is a deliverable. However, we recognize the existing fuel wood market in the interior Region. AEA
will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding for final design, permitting, and construction with requirement that Minto provide a harvest plan; business/operations plan; biomass storage; final design that
must be reviewed and approved by AEA before construction funds are disbursed.
The Cook Inlet Housing Authority proposes to install a ground source heat pump system in the Seldovia House housing complex in order to reduce the building?s heating oil consumption.
Despite some unknowns regarding ground source heat pump performance on the Kenai Peninsula, the economics of the proposed installation appear to hold up to a range of conservative assumptions.
The project could provide useful GSHP performance data for the Kenai Peninsula in addition to demonstrating the effectiveness of a hybrid heat pump/fuel oil system. The high cost
of fuel oil in Seldovia makes the potential savings of a ground source heat pump attractive despite higher local electricity costs.
Full funding recommended.
Kodiak Electric Association (KEA) presents a compelling proposal for the incorporation of a flywheel into their grid with numerous potential benefits including accommodation of a new
electric crane at Pier III, extension of the life of the utility?s battery energy storage system, and facilitated integration of future wind turbine installations. KEA is well-suited
to demonstrate how flywheel systems can be used for integration of variable renewable energy sources and provide grid stability.
However, because the electric crane would serve a private entity, the offset diesel fuel by the flywheel is not included as a public benefit in AEA?s economic evaluation, dramatically
reducing the application?s Benefit/Cost ratio and overall score.
The application also proposed construction of a new tie line to relieve several overloaded feeders; although this tie line could help the integration of the flywheel, its construction
will be required regardless and was therefore removed from the recommended award amount. This had the effect of increasing the Benefit/Cost ratio and overall score.
Partial funding recommended, excluding construction of the proposed tie line.
The Native Village of Cantwell requests funds for feasibility assessment of a 3 MW storage hydroelectric project on Jack River.
The Village received grant funds in Round 4 (#606) for reconnaissance assessment of the project and has installed a stream gauge. The results of the funded reconnaissance report were
that a hydroelectric project on Jack River is technically possible with a range of installed capacities from 1.7 to 7.3 MW. The proposed project reconnaissance report had a cost estimate
of $31.5-$50.3 million. AEA used a mid-range estimate, or $40.9 million, to arrive at the benefit/cost ratio of 0.79, indicating the project is likely to have poor economics and would
likely be costlier than the existing energy system.
The project was scored but did not pass minimum Stage 2 scoring.
Native Village of Cantwell requests funds for a reconnaissance study of a 1-2 MW run-of-river project on Carlo Creek to sell power to GVEA through the AK Intertie. This is similar to
the Jack River hydro site recently studied in reconnaissance through Round 4 (#606).
The Village applied for funding in Round 6 (#977) but did not score within the funding level.
Partial funding recommended for reconnaissance study.
The applicant has studied the wind resource in other locations south and southwest of Tok. AP&T has a very experienced staff working in Port Townsend as well as the Tok facility. APC
already has a 50-meter tower staged in Tok ready for deployment to the Chisana Mtn site. Access to the proposed site is relatively easy. Met tower site is adjacent to a 15kV buried
transmission line. Permitting is relatively straightforward for this project. A class 4 wind regime has been found elsewhere in the region. The electrical load allows for a fair amount
of wind energy on the system. Construction costs for this project would be among the lowest for wind projects in the state do to the location on the road system. Recommend full funding.
City of Atka requests $114,965 in grant funds to install dispatchable electrical heating systems in public buildings to utilize excess hydroelectric generation from the Chuniisax Creek
Hydroelectric Project. The project is expected to displace 8,300 gallons of diesel fuel annually.
The City completed permitting and design under a Round 3 REF grant (#7030001) for $80,000.
AEA has the following concerns: The environmental report did not investigate the potential for encountering lead based paint and asbestos containing materials in the installation of
the new heating equipment in the older buildings to be served. This oversight may add risk to the project, since, if found, these would require specialty subcontractors to remediate.
Also, it appears the powerhouse load bank will still be in use for frequency regulation, which will continue to ?waste? electricity.
AEA recommends making energy efficiency improvements to the buildings that will receive hydro heat, further enhancing the benefit of the hydro energy.
Recommend full funding.
IPEC requests funds to perform feasibility study of a hydroelectric project on Gunnuk Creek near Kake.
AEA has the following concerns: The principle study attached to the application appears to draw unsupported conclusions upon which to base award of grant funds. Because of this, AEA
recommends a new reconnaissance report be prepared using a professional engineer, qualified to perform such a study.
Recommend partial funding for a reconnaissance study.
The application did not have an estimated project cost. AEA estimated a cost of $7.5 million, from which the B/C ratio of 4.44 is derived. Once the reconnaissance study is complete a
new project cost should be available, and thus a new B/C ratio. Additionally, Kake?s powerhouse and bulk fuel facilities are being upgraded through AEA?s RPSU program. The reconnaissance
study should help determine the next course of action for Kake in regard to power generation.
Special Provisions: All available basin records be collected and meeting transcripts between USACE, ANTHC and IPEC to provide backstop for the new study. Field collection and analysis
of data shall be conducted. Study will also consider other potential renewable energy sources to serve Kake, and in comparison to the proposed Kake-Petersburg intertie. Elements of
the study are to be as listed in the RFA.
THREA requests $700,000 in grant funds to perform a reconnaissance and feasibility study of a 1 MW storage or run-of-river hydro project at Walker Lake. The primary purpose of the project
would be to supply IPEC?s Chilkat Valley and Klukwan system with hydropower. THREA would be an IPP selling to IPEC.
IPEC applied for funding to study Walker Lake in Round 5 (#829) and Round 6 (#920) but did not score within the funding limit in either case. In October 2011 IPEC acquired the 600 kW
Ten-Mile hydro project, which provides about 60% of the energy needed for the IPEC?s service area. The balance of their power needs (700,000 kWh) is purchased from AP&T?s Upper Lynn
Canal grid. That grid is 97% powered by hydropower, so the amount of diesel to be saved by building Walker Lake is very limited (1,500 gallons per year).
Alaska Power Authority prepared a reconnaissance assessment for Walker Lake in 1988 with an estimated capital cost of $10.5M. Sealaska Corporation updated the assessment in 2005. Both
studies concluded that the project feasibility was marginal to poor. The current application did not include an estimated project capital cost.
AEA has the following concerns with this project:
1. AEA has already funded reconnaissance and feasibility assessments for possible hydro projects in the region including Connelly Lake, Schubee Lake, West Creek, and Burro Creek. These
projects were found not to be economically feasible, mainly from a lack of a market to justify the capital costs.
2. The demand for the project power will be a fraction of the potential annual energy available from Walker Lake; given that, the project will spill nearly year round.
3. While the application states that THREA will sell its power to IPEC below the APC rate, it is highly likely the cost of power from Walker Lake would exceed that purchased from APC
unless the project was fully funded with grants, given the rising costs of FERC licensing and construction for new hydro projects.
4. This project would displace very little diesel generation (approx. 1,500 gallons per year). 97% of the power purchased from APC (the load Walker Lake would satisfy) is generated
from the following hydropower projects: Lutak, Kasidaya, Dewey, and Goat Lake.
5. The amount requested for the reconnaissance study exceeds that which can be justified. If funded, partial funding is recommended.
The project did not pass the minimum Stage 2 score criteria.
SEAPA requests funding to perform final design and construction to raise the Swan Lake reservoir by 15 feet. This will increase the firm energy available to the SEAPA system and provide
for an additional 7500 MWh of hydroelectric generation in an average water year.
SEAPA anticipates submitting the non-capacity license amendment to FERC in April 2014, begin design in May 2015, complete design in March 2015, bid construction in spring 2015 and award
construction contract in summer 2015.
Given the anticipated project schedule, AEA believes it would be premature to award grant funds for construction in this round. Also, a 50% cost share will allow SEAPA to match on an
equal basis through final design.
Partial funding of $560,488 is recommended to complete the final design phase.
Special Provision: Issuance of FERC non-capacity amendment and resolution of land issues before any Round 7 funds are expended.
SEAPA submitted a similar proposal in Round 5 and has already been given a 34-meter met tower from AEA\'s met tower loan program. Applicant should work with AEA\'s anemometer loan program
to get the existing met tower installed in Spring of 2014. Site assessment and selection should begin in 2013 with the assistance of the AEA met tower loan program. A permitting plan
can be developed at that time. Most met towers require an FAA permit which takes a shsort time to complete, a preliminary meeting with US Fish & Wildlife Service and request for site
access from the land owner. US Forest Service permission can be requested in 2013 at very low cost to applicant. The staff at SEAPA has experience with large energy projects. Due to
size of electrical load and infrastructure in the region, a multi-megawatt scale wind project would be appropriate and allow for the best economies of scale. Recommend full funding.
The Haines Borough is proposing final design and installation of low emissions; high efficiency; 3rd party tested pellet-fired boiler systems to heat Borough-owned buildings; Haines
School and Pool, Chilkat Center, Sewer Treatment Plant, Water Treatment Plant, Vocational Education Building, The Library, old City Shop, new City Shop, The Public Safety Building and
The Sheldon Museum. This project is estimated to displace a total of 80,000 gallons per year of fuel oil, using 695 tons of pellets per year. The project has completed feasibility/conceptual
design phase work.
The application includes substantial support from the community and Borough. Haines Borough has already purchased and installed a pellet system at the Borough Senior Center. This project
will develop an anchor tenant for pellet supply in the Southeast Alaska region and will potentially support the development of pellet manufacturing infrastructure.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding for design, permitting, and construction with requirements of AEA acceptance of final design, fuel supply plan, biomass storage, and business/operational plan
before construction funds are released.
The Haines Borough requests funds for a feasibility assessment of two hydroelectric projects totaling 3 MW, and 1.5 miles of transmission to connect to the Ocean Beauty\'s fish processing
facility and residences in the non-organized community of Excursion Inlet. The processor and most residences are seasonal. There is no community power system, which would be necessary
to distribute the power to the community.
The project received a Round 4 grant (#625) to perform a two-step reconnaissance study. The first step to determine the reach of the anadromous fish habitat is now complete. Work
continues on the second half of the study.
The currently funded second half of the reconnaissance study is to address: the fish habitat; electrical service and estimated load for the Borough subdivision; establishment of community
utility; business arrangement for selling power to the fish processor Ocean Beaut;, site control and land ownership, and FERC jurisdiction. It will include consideration of fish habitat
issues as it affects the cost, capacity, and energy output of the project and environmental licensing concerns. While the fish habitat study has been completed, the final reconnaissance
study has not been reviewed or accepted by the Authority. Because this study is not complete it provides no support for this application.
The applicant should also be aware that the Renewable Energy Fund has a strong public benefit purpose. An estimated 2 percent of the energy generated would serve the public, while 98%
would serve a private company. AEA encourages Haines Borough and Excursion Inlet to work directly with AEA staff to address the community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy
planning staff for direct assistance.
The application is not recommended due to incomplete prior phases of the project.
Edna Bay Community proposes reconnaissance of a 35-70 kW hydroelectric project on Survey Creek.
Edna Bay has no existing electric utility system and depends on individual privately owned generators for its local power needs. The proposal also requests funding to study the feasibility
of constructing a utility system power plant and distribution system.
AEA has the following concerns: the applicant suggests an Archimedes Screw hydroelectric technology may work, but this technology has not been constructed in the U.S. and limited access
to this remote site seems to make it a poor candidate to resolve application problems from an unproven technology; Survey Creek is listed as anadromous fish habitat by ADF&G; the proposed
site is in the Tongass National Forest and is subject to the Roadless Rule restrictions; and it is outside the scope of the Renewable Energy Fund to evaluate the need for a conventional
power plant and distribution.
AEA encourages Edna Bay to work directly with AEA staff to address the community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy planning staff for direct assistance.
The project did not pass the minimum Stage 2 score criteria.
The City of Chignik requests funding for permitting and final design of a hydroelectric project on Indian Lake and River to replace an existing 60 kW plant which is at the end of its
useful life.
The City received a Renewable Energy Fund Round 1 grant (#2195388) for $207,500 to perform a feasibility study, conceptual design, and cost estimate for a replacement hydroelectric plant.
Additionally, it was funded to enter into a MOU with Trident Seafoods to transfer the FERC license for the existing hydro to the City. The license has been transferred but the study
is incomplete.
AEA has the following concerns: The already funded feasibility study remains incomplete as of the date of application, with less than 45% of the grant funds expended. A preliminary 13
page report was submitted with the application but significant questions of project feasibility remain unanswered, including size of plant, project cost, project impacts to resident
and anadromous fish, economy of project, etc. The requested grant funding is very high and no information has been provided to support this large amount. Therefore, AEA recommends partial
funding of $500,000 to complete design and permitting.
Special provision: AEA must receive and approve the feasibility study before any grant funds for this phase be expended.
Southeast Island School District on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska requests funding for engineering design to build a low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party tested
cordwood heating systems for the following school buildings; gym, elementary, high schools, four teacher?s housing units, and a greenhouse. Plus the following plans; harvest/ forest
inventory, business and operation, monitoring and reporting.
Recommended funding:
1. Thorne Bay School ? Full Funding for Final Design and construction.
2. Naukati School ? Full Funding for Final Design and construction.
3. Whales Pass School ? Full Funding for Final Design and construction.
4. Hollis School ? Full Funding for Final Design and construction.
Recommend full funding for final design, permitting, and construction with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design, business/operational plant,
harvest plan, biomass storage, and inventory plan prior to the release of construction funds.
The Hydaburg City Schools in Hydaburg, AK on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska requests funding for engineering design to build a low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party
tested cord wood heating system for the school buildings: gym; elementary school; high school. The project has the potential to save the Hydaburg School District in excess of $500,000
over the life of the project.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project. AEA recommends partial funding of design and permitting to allow
the Hydaburg City Schools to make an informed decision about pursing biomass as a heating option.
Recommend partial funding for final design and permitting with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design and business/operational plan; biomass storage;
harvest/inventory plan, $125,000 .
CVEA requests $5,914,491 to construct a 6.5 MW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Allison Creek. The funds would be used to complete construction of the project. The project is expected
to offset up to 1.4 million gallons of diesel fuel annually.
AEA has the following concerns: A portion of the land the project will use will be purchased in the future from Alyeska Pipeline, however an agreement is in place to allow construction;
and a FERC license amendment is being sought to allow penstock to be installed below grade and a portion to be within a tunnel.
Despite these concerns substantial progress has been made over the last year to advance the project including: issuance of FERC license, completion of final design, Maximum Allowable
Construction Cost contract has been awarded, PM contract awarded, turbine-generator owner equipment has been awarded, and owner CM contract awarded.
AEA requires that the grantee obtain the FERC amendment prior to expending Round 7 grant funds.
The Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) on 1/7/14 advised AEA to recommend to the Legislature partial funding this project if funding is kept within the Governor?s budget
of $20M. REFAC further advised AEA to include the initial recommendation of full funding should the Legislature make available additional funds this year. One other hydro project,
Statson Creek Diverson, was also recommended for partial funding. The primary reason was to allow the funding of six additional projects in higher cost areas of the state.
AEA recommends partial funding of $4,764,652 (80% of request) if the Renewable Energy Fund Round 7 budget is limited to $20M, and recommends this project second in line for any additional
funding beyond $20M, up to the requested grant amount of $5,941,491.
Native Village of Tazlina (NTV) proposes final design and construction of a biomass boiler system to supply a small district heating system consisting of four buildings: Community Hall,
Clinic, Office and Shop. The system would consume approximately 116 cords per year and displace 8,078 gallons of fuel oil per year. Reconnaissance assessment through the Alaska Wood
Energy Development Task Group indicates a viable project. NVT selected the best biomass system for the existing structures as chips or cordwood.
AEA is concerned by the lack of a specific fuel supply plan and formal land usage agreement for the project. However, we recognize the existing fuel wood market in the Tazlina and Cooper
Valley area. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project. AEA recommends partial funding of design and
permitting to allow the Community of Tazlina to make an informed decision about pursing biomass as a heating option.
Recommend partial funding for final design and permitting with requirements that AEA must review and approve the final design, fuel supply plan, business/operation plan, biomass storage,
harvest/inventory plan, $125,000.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes to install an air source heat pump system as a part of a renovation of the Kettleson Library.
Although air source heat pump performance in southeast Alaska is not well documented, the planned renovation offers a good opportunity to replace the existing fuel oil boilers with an
air source heat pump system and could provide valuable data of the performance of newer air source heat pump models in southeast Alaska. While there is little doubt regarding the technical
feasibility of the proposed system, full project payback appears highly dependent on fuel oil prices.
Full funding recommended.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes to install an effluent source heat pump system in the waste water treatment facility to decrease reliance on the fuel oil boiler.
The proposal to use waste water effluent as a source for a heat pump system is a compelling use of an otherwise unused heat source, and could serve as a model for similar systems in
other parts of the state. The high temperature and availability of effluent would result in a higher heat pump COP than seen in ground or sea water source installations. Unfortunately,
a combination of high anticipated capital costs and low overall annual heat demand make the economics of the project less beneficial than in a location with year round heating needs.
If possible, AEA suggests incorporating other heating loads into the system in order to take full advantage of the proposed system?s capacity which would improve the project economics.
Full funding recommended.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes to install an air source heat pump system as a part of an extensive renovation of Centennial Hall.
Although air source heat pump performance in southeast Alaska is not well documented, the economics of the project appear favorable under a range of different conservative assumptions.
The planned renovation offers a good opportunity to replace the existing fuel oil boilers with an air source heat pump system and could provide valuable data of the performance of
newer air source heat pump models in southeast Alaska.
Full funding recommended.
The Craig High School District in Craig, AK requests funding for engineering design and construction to build a low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party tested biomass heating system
for the Craig High School. The project is estimated to displace 19,459 gallons of fuel/year and has the potential to save the Craig School District in excess fuel cost savings of $2.1
million - $2.6 million over 20 years.
This project is an example of good collaboration efforts among community organizations in an effort to provide low cost heating to the entire community of Craig and surrounding communities.
Also, the local community appears to be supportive of a district biomass heating project. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction
with this project.
AEA recommends partial funding of design and permitting to allow the Craig High School to make an informed decision about pursing biomass as a heating option.
Recommend partial funding for design and permitting with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design; biomass storage; business/operational plan with
heat sales agreement; harvest plan; inventory plan, $125,000.
The Nenana City School District in Nenana, AK (Interior Alaska) requests funding for engineering design to build a district wide heating system for the following buildings: Nenana City
School; Administration Building; Warehouse; Nenana Student Living Center; Nenana Native Council Day Care; City Water Plant; City Fire Department. The project is estimated to displace
87,800 gallons of fuel/year and has the potential to save the Nenana City School District in excess of $3,516,725 over the life of the project.
This project is an example of good collaboration efforts among community organizations in an effort to provide low cost heating to the entire community of Nenana. Also the local community
appears to be supportive of a district biomass heating project. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding for design and permitting with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design; business/operational plan with heat sales agreement;
biomass storage; harvest plan; inventory plan.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Chuathbaluk are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing power plant for heating the water
system. Existing unused heat trace piping will be used to transfer the heat from the power plant to the water treatment plant.
Although the Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project, it did not address the energy required
to pump the water through relatively small diameter pipes and for long distances.
We are concerned that the energy required to pump the heated water from the power plant to the water treatment plant through the unused heat trace piping will consume more energy than
that of the estimated savings of the project, creating an additional financial burden on the community. Additional information was requested on pumping costs but was never received.
The City and Borough of Juneau proposes to install a ground source heat pump system to heat the new Mendenhall Library.
While Juneau offers a favorable climate for ground source heat pump systems, the significant cost of vertical well loop field construction has a high impact on project economics. As
proposed, the Mendenhall Library heat pump system would incur high construction costs but use well below 20% of the system?s total capacity on an annual basis. Because of this, the
proposed system for the Mendenhall Library does not compare favorably on an economic basis to the fuel oil system used as a base case.
A similar system was proposed in Renewable Energy Fund Round 6; after consultation with the applicant, AEA recommended funding for a smaller GSHP system that relied on a supplemental
oil fuel boiler for peak demand. The project did not ultimately receive funding. This suggested design was not pursued in the current application; although the proposed design is
less economically attractive than it might have been, it remains technically feasible.
Full funding recommended.
The Naknek Electrical Association is proposing the feasibility, design, and construction of two Echogen stack heat recovery engines to power systems on the utility?s diesel generators.
The estimated power generation is 2.3MM kWh annually.
Echogen is proposing a modified Organic Rankine Cycle engine with supercritical carbon dioxide as the working fluid. The stated thermal efficiency is approximately 20%.
While AEA is interested in this concept, the modified Organic Rankine Cycle is still an emerging technology. This application would be better suited for the Emerging Energy Technology
Program.
AEA recommends the Naknek Electrical Association power systems be evaluated and included in AEA?s priority ranking list for Rural Power Systems Upgrade program assistance. Additionally,
AEA encourages NEA to work directly with AEA staff to address the community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy planning staff for direct assistance.
No funding recommended.
This application is a duplicate of 1085. Only 1085 will be scored.
Karluk Tribal Council submitted this proposal in Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 and again this year. The community of 37 people sits on the western coast of Kodiak Island along Karluk
Anchorage and Karluk Lagoon. The wind regime ranges from relatively calm winds in town to fierce and damaging winds on the ridge 1,100 feet above and along the coast toward Cape Karluk.
This project is challenging because the community electric load is so small when compared with available options for diesel generators and wind turbines. Finding an efficient diesel
generator that can handle wind energy penetration will be difficult. The high wind regime up on the ridge south of town is costly to develop given the size of the overall energy system.
In addition to measuring the wind resource up on the ridge, a second 10-meter tower should be installed closer to town to validate or modify the wind resource model at that location.
A class 4 or 5 wind resource next to town could be easier and cheaper to develop. The feasibility schedule looks aggressive, but doable. Wind resource studies and electrical/heat load
analysis should be complete and accepted by AEA prior to allocating money for the conceptual design review.
Karluk is encouraged to work directly with AEA staff to explore the possibility of integrating wind or other energy systems into their community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy
planning staff for direct assistance.
Did not pass minimum stage 2 scoring.
City of Saxman requests funds for the Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Project to provide for the following: revise final design and specifications, obtain permits for construction, review
ways to increase storage potential of project, update cost estimate, begin power sales negotiations and prepare a business and operational plan based upon power sales agreement. Additionally,
they request construction funding with no explanation of the source of the remaining $39 M in capital project costs.
AEA has the following concerns: the market for the power is uncertain, given it would be the last to be used in the SEAPA system, including the proposed additions of energy from Whitman
Lake Hydroelectric Project and the proposed Metlakatla - Ketchikan Intertie. Additionally, potential issues could result if the FERC license is reopened to reengineer the project.
The Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 application (#909) was recommended for partial funding of $500,000 but did not score within the funding limit. The project did receive a $200,000 FY14
legislative grant for pre-construction activities, but that work has only recently been initiated. Work to be completed under the legislative grant includes: a hydrology update, license,
market, operational, site, and financial reviews, design analysis, and an update of construction cost.
Given the current FY14 funding from the legislature, the project is moving forward to answer key questions; therefore, the project is not recommended for funding from the RE Fund at
this time.
Whitestone Power and Communications propose prototype construction and demonstration of a surface-mounted River In-Stream Energy Conversion (RISEC) device in the Tanana River. The proposed
technology is a compelling alternative to other competing RISEC designs and the project team has taken a deliberate approach to the design of the project. Significantly, the project
has also garnered the support of permitting agencies and holds key permits required for deployment. As can be expected with a demonstration project, the economics of initial deployment
do not appear to be favorable, but may improve with subsequent deployments in areas with a higher cost of energy.
The project applied for funding in the first round of Emerging Energy Technology Fund (EETF) but was not awarded funding. A proposal was not submitted to EETF Round 2.
Although reviewers see potential benefits of demonstrating the technology, the Renewable Energy Fund proposal was evaluated by criteria used for all applications, but did not score high
enough to pass Stage 2. Until the technology is proven, this type of demonstration and technology-advancing application is more appropriate for the EETF program than the Renewable
Energy Fund.
The Northwest Arctic Borough (NWAB) is requesting funds for project construction and commissioning of a 10kW array of photovoltaic (PV) modules in Kotzebue, Alaska. The array, located
on the roof of the NWAB building, would provide electricity for the building. Kotzebue Electric Association, the local electric utility, does not have a net metering policy but wrote
a 10/22/12 letter of support for the project that does not specify project capacity, integration details, or how KEA will view excess solar power on its grid (i.e. whether NWAB would
be compensated for it or whether it would be curtailed).
The applicant did not address how it would deal with excess solar power that occurs during periods that the office is closed, for example on weekends. The application did not provide
enough information to adequately analyze this project, and in response to AEA?s request for one year of utility bills the applicant provided one month?s utility bill. AEA recommends
this project for full funding with special provisions that the applicant provide detail regarding how the solar power will be used on weekends, holidays, and other periods of low demand.
$181,000 is a large amount of money to spend in an area with no validated wind resource. Both airport data and the statewide wind resource model suggest that class 1 winds are in the
region.
Not recommended for funding.
The Organized Village of Kake is proposing a feasibility assessment and conceptual design for a wood heating system and district heating loop for an office building and lodge owned by
the Organized Village of Kake (OVK), a federally recognized tribe. This project is estimated to displace a total 4,800 gallons per year of fuel oil; the fuel source will be determined
in the study. The application includes substantial support from the community and the endorsement from the Kake Community Energy Committee.
Recommend full funding for feasibility study/conceptual design.
Mentasta Village Council proposes final design and construction of a cordwood boiler system to supply a small district heating system consisting of the school, teen center, council building,
post office, and clinic. The system would consume approximately 220 cords per year and displace 22,000 gallons of fuel oil per year.
Reconnaissance assessment through the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group indicates a viable project. MVC is supplying a building to house the boiler (s) as a match.
AEA is concerned by the lack of a specific fuel supply plan for the project. However, we recognize the existing fuel wood market in the Tok area. AEA will work with the grantee to
ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with requirement that Mentasta provide a fuel supply plan and final design acceptable to AEA before construction funds are disbursed.
Technically, the project is feasible. This project does not degrade the economic benefit of the biomass project. Schedule and overall budget look reasonable. Contractor has experience
in this scope of work. AEA must accept design prior to construction funding.
Recommend full funding.
Technically, this solar photovoltaic (PV) project is simple to install and integrate within the Naknek power system. The key questions surround the accuracy of cost estimates for an
installed 50kW system along with how the power is valued for economic benefit. The standard maximum net metered system is 25 kilowatts of nameplate capacity. If Naknek Electric will
allow net metering for 50kW, then the benefit can be calculated using retail electrical savings. We would need a letter from Naknek Electric in support of this approach.
Other solar PV projects and heat recovery projects recommended for funding had provided initial drawings, calculations and cost estimates from a qualified contractor. The applicant
has not provided that level of detail. Without more information, it is risky to recommend for funding.
Not recommended for funding.
Chugach Electric Association, Inc. proposes to fund a feasibility study and conceptual design to assess the viability of a waste to energy plant. A portion of the municipal solid waste
that currently goes to the Anchorage landfill would fuel the plant.
AEA supports the concept of utilizing municipal solid waste as an energy source. The first step in accessing the viability of waste to energy is a thorough understanding of the resource
availability through a waste stream characterization study.
AEA recommends partial funding of $40,000 for a waste characterization study/resource inventory.
A 180 kW run-of-river hydroelectric project to offset 90% diesel generated electricity for Tenakee Springs; Will have excess hydro energy available to offset some heating needs. Prior
REF grants funded feasibility (#16) and permitting and final design (#895).
Special condition: No funds from this request are to be used for activities already funded from prior grants. No funds are authorized until all prior funded R4 grant activities have
been submitted and accepted by AEA.
The Native Village of Cantwell proposes a reconnaissance study of a 1.5 MW run-of-river project on Carlo Creek to sell power to GVEA through the AK Intertie. This is similar to the
Jack River hydro site now being studied in reconnaissance by NVC through the Renewable Energy Fund.
Partial funding recommended for reconnaissance study.
A recon study was completed in 2009 for the Knutson River Hydroelectric Project in Pedro Bay. Since then the school and clinic have closed and the village population decreased to 44.
A feasibility study has been drafted. Neither of these studies were funded by the Renewable Energy Fund. The proposed 150 kW r-o-r hydro project appears to be oversized for community
needs, especially since village is losing residents. Additionally, there is > 1 mile of Knutson Creek with anadromous and resident fish habitat which will be affected by the proposed
project leading to substantial licensing challenges. It is unknown if the project will be found jurisdictional by FERC.
Recommend special provisions as follows: (1) AEA to receive feasibility study and must review and approve its findings before any REF funds committed; and (2) project size to be re-evaluated
based upon current village population reduction.
The r-o-r project is located in high alpine terrain near Mi. 10 of the Eagle River valley. Ram Creek Valley LLC would sell Juniper Creek Hydroelectric power to MEA as an IPP. Several
different development options are proposed for the project from 250 to 1,300 kW, some of which involve private landowners not currently committed to the project. The project would
generate seasonally as proposed.
Given that no prior formal reconnaissance report has been prepared for this site, AEA recommends this report be prepared and the project scheme be explored before requesting funds to
advance into feasibility study.
Special conditions: In the course of conducting the recon study, explore and define the project scheme and obtain commitments from involved landowners.
AP&T proposes to perform a feasibility study, permitting and final design for a 124 kW run-of-river hydroelectric facility on Neck Lake to serve Whale Pass. The proposed plant would
be co-located adjacent to the SSRAA aquaculture facility on State lands. The project received funding in round 2 of the Renewable Energy Fund (#223) to perform reconnaissance study
and again in round 3 (#440) to perform feasibility study. AP&T later returned most of the round 3 grant after FERC jurisdiction was declared, however they now plan to utilize FERC?s
expedited small hydro licensing approach and have once again requested feasibility funds. SSRAA has a lease for the site and has expressed reservations about impacts to their operations
from the proposed project. The population in Whale Pass has declined from 58 in year 2000 to 31 today.
The application fails to pass Stage 2 due to low scores. In particular the benefit/cost ratio of 0.74 indicates that the project would cost more than the accrued benefits.
The reconnaissance-level geothermal exploration proposed is well-planned and reasonable and would contribute to the understanding of the region?s geology and geothermal potential. Use
of the area?s geothermal resources for power and/or heating for Elim has been the subject of considerable speculation due to the presence of numerous hot springs; a better understanding
of the potential capacity of the resource and a more detailed assessment of the costs to develop it could assist the community in its energy planning.
However, the estimated cost of transmission from the resource to the community, the small size of the community energy demand, and the distance to other possible communities makes the
economics of a geothermal project look poor under every scenario.
Not recommended for funding.
The wind resource is likely poor-to-marginal in the Akiak region. The initial data coming in from the Kwethluk and Akiachak met towers support the wind resource model estimates, which
show a poor wind resource, and the wind regime continues to drop off the further upriver one goes on the Kuskokwim. The economics look poor for developing either a class 2 wind site
near town or a class 3 wind site 4 miles east of town. The latter would involve a 4-mile transmission line across poor soils and involve an approximate half-mile span across the Kuskokwim
which would be very costly.
Not recommended for funding.
A reconnaissance-level investigation of the geothermal potential of the area could be a valuable addition to the work done to date based on recommendations from previous studies and
anecdotal reports of high surface temperatures. However, the likelihood of identifying a geothermal resource capable of powering a 250 MW plant is remote.
No work plan detailing the survey methods that would be used in the reconnaissance is identified in the application and no justification for the proposed budget is provided. The applicant
does not present supporting evidence indicating that a geothermal plant of any size could be economically favorable; without such evidence, funding exploration work is not justified.
Not recommended for funding.
The review team\'s concerns remain virtually unchanged from feedback in Renewable Energy Fund rounds 4 and 5. 1) A meteorological tower study and wind resource assessment have not been
completed at the proposed turbine location. 2) An acceptable conceptual design report that covers the planned diesel and wind generation and distribution systems has not been prepared
(see AEA CDR guidelines at http://www.akenergyauthority.org/programwindanalysisdata.html)
3) a more accurate electrical and heat load model is needed for the community 4) Final design and permitting need to be completed prior to approving construction funds. AEA offered
the community a met tower in 2012 through the state anemometer loan program.
AEA expects the funds from the 2009 Legislative appropriation to be spent on a met tower study, a wind resource analysis, a conceptual design report and final design and permitting activities
prior to requests for construction funds.
Not recommended for funding.
The lack of an accepted conceptual design prohibits awarding funds for design activity as AEA is unable to properly assess the viability of the wind resource, the powerhouse, the electrical
distribution system, community heat loads and the various wind turbine and integration options evaluated. The applicant should proceed with the feasibility and conceptual design work
already funded through round 4 of the Renewable Energy Fund.
Not recommended for funding.
A similar application was received and reviewed in round 4 of the Renewable Energy Fund. AEA?s comments at the time were as follows: "False Pass may need to do extensive feasibility
work to find the right solution given the wind resource, terrain, small population, avian and FAA issues. Alternatives from residential systems to high penetration should be considered.
Community may need additional funding to complete this work. B/C is difficult to calculate due to the variables. Estimating actual construction costs on a very hypothetical configuration
is difficult. Wind resources in the region warrant a feasibility and CDR and the budget looks reasonable."
AEA does not have a conceptual design to review prior to the submission of this REF round 6 request and thus we do not have enough information to decide whether to move the project forward
to the design phase. US F&WS requires more detailed study but the scope has not been quantified, and actual site selection (which may include additional met tower data collection if
the proposed turbine site is moved considerably relative to the terrain that is causing high turbulence) is still undetermined.
Not enough research has been conducted in the feasibility phase for this application to be reviewed for final design. Guidance on this step can be found at AEA?s web site under the
wind program: http://www.akenergyauthority.org/programwindanalysisdata.html
Not recommended for funding.
G&K Electric Utility proposes a Feasibility/Conceptual Design study for the implementation of diesel heat recovery at their existing power plant. The grant will be managed by the Aleutians
East Borough.
This Cold Bay utility is a good candidate for a heat recovery system as identified in the Alaska Energy Pathway. AEA has worked extensively with heat recovery feasibility studies in
the past few years. A feasibility study with sufficient information to qualify for Design and Construction funding through the Renewable Energy Fund should not cost more than $30,000.
Recommend partial funding of $30,000.
The Kokhanok wind project has been running in curtailment mode for more than a year. The equipment has all been installed. Wind turbines are functioning. Applicant is seeking funding
to complete the hybrid supervisory controller development. Applicant has not requested REF for this project in the past. If successful, Alaska turns a curtailed project into a successful
one. This project is gating other proposed high-penetraion wind systems. Until we have success and learning on the Kokhanok system, AEA is holding off funding for other proposed high-penetration
systems. Wind resource is very good.
Recommend full funding.
The Haines Borough is proposing final design and installation of pellet-fired boiler systems to heat Borough-owned buildings: sewage treatment plant; human resources/pre-school building;
Haines Borough School District vocational education building; swimming pool; Borough administrative offices; and visitor center. This project is estimated to displace a total of 30,745
gallons per year of fuel oil, using 263 tons of pellets per year. The project has completed feasibility/conceptual design phase work.
The application includes substantial support from the community and Borough. Haines Borough has already purchased and installed a pellet system at the Borough Senior Center. This project
will develop an anchor tenant for pellet supply in the Southeast Alaska region and will potentially support the development of pellet manufacturing infrastructure.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding, with requirement of AEA acceptance of final design, logistics plan, and operational plan.
The Haines Borough proposes feasibility assessment of two run-of-river hydro projects totaling 3 MW and 1.5 miles of transmission to connect to Ocean Beauty\'s fish processing facility
and residences in the non-organized community of Excursion Inlet. The processor and most residences are seasonal; population is 14. There is no community power system.
The project received a round 4 Renewable Energy Fund grant (#625) to perform a two-step reconnaissance study. The first step to determine the reach of anadromous habitat has been completed
and work on the second half of that study has begun. As the proposal notes "barriers to project development will include anadromous fish concerns.... Major concerns with protection
of these species include minimum flows below a diversion facility and the potential need for fish passage at the intake structures". The balance of that grant-funded work remains incomplete.
The reconnaissance study will address fish habitat, electrical service and estimated load for the Borough subdivision, establishment of community utility, business arrangement for selling
power to the fish processor Ocean Beauty, site control and land ownership, and FERC jurisdiction. It will include consideration of fish habitat issues as affects the cost, capacity,
and energy output of the project and environmental licensing concerns.
This application did not score high enough to pass Stage 2 review. Not recommended for funding.
The geothermal resource on Mount Makushin at the USGS ST-1 Test Well has been demonstrated to exist at a high temperature and high pressure. Significant access and transmission challenges
are posed by the remoteness of the location and the rugged terrain; these challenges complicate the economics of the project, particularly for the development of a smaller plant sized
to meet only the City?s load.
Successful development of the Makushin geothermal resource will require, at a minimum, agreement and participation between land owners, subsurface rights holders, and the City of Unalaska.
Failed negotiations over the past five years between the City, the applicant, and the land owners have prevented additional exploration and development; a 2008 legislative appropriation
of $1.5 million for additional geothermal exploration remains unspent due to failed negotiations.
Without the support of all parties or a clear indication of a forthcoming agreement, no additional funding is warranted.
Not recommended for funding.
The proposed budget is 30% larger than comparable wind feasibility studies. Recommended funding is capped at $143,000 in line with similar projects elsewhere in the state.
There may be an economic wind resource in the community if a developable wind resource is found. One 10-meter met tower should be placed at the same site as the original 30-meter met
tower. 10-meter met towers may need to be equipped with NRG dataloggers and sensors in order to quantify turbulence. Electrical load data should be collected at the powerhouse simultaneous
with the new met towers. A new wind resource study (that may include WAsP analysis) should be completed and accepted by AEA prior to allocation of funds for later-stage activities.
Conceptual design report should follow AEA guidelines for CDRs posted on the wind program Web page.
Recommend partial funding of $143,000.
The City of Atka has recently completed a hydroelectric project under the Renewable Energy Fund. A detailed understanding of the new electrical load demand and diesel demand is not
presently known. Work needs to be done to quantify the electrical load profile for Atka Pride Seafood (APS). Aleutian Pribilof Island Community Development Association (APICDA) has
already agreed to purchase and install a met tower near the community.
City of Atka is not current with Power Cost Equalization (PCE) reporting and this raises concerns.
Not recommended for funding. Wind program managers will work with APICDA to analyze met tower data using Windographer(TM) software and hourly electrical load data collected for the
city and for APS using HOMER(TM) software.
ORPC has demonstrated a commitment to a sustained presence in Alaska and has been a pioneer in hydrokinetic development in Alaska and in the country, and has a track record of hiring
local contractors. Significant work has gone into resource evaluation and permitting for what will be the first tidal installation in Alaska. ORPC has garnered significant local support,
including that of Homer Electric Association.
Initial costs are high and projected to drop for subsequent installations. The benefit/cost ratio increases as the project expands (roughly $4M for the first unit, and $4M for the next
3 units). However, according to AEA?s analysis, the B/C ratio remains below 1 even for a 100 MW plant.
Given the high risk associated with the installation of a new technology in Cook Inlet and the uncertainty surrounding costs, it is logical to wait for the results of the installation
of the first turbine before committing funds to expand the project.
Not recommended for funding.
The FNSB is proposing Phase II for the installation of pellet-fired boiler systems to heat Ticasuk Brown Elementary School. Phase I: Design and heat module procurement was funded through
State of Alaska Legislature Appropriation. This project is estimated to displace a total of 20,000 gallons per year of fuel oil.
The application includes substantial support from the community and the Borough. This project will develop an anchor tenant for pellet supply in the Interior Alaska region and will
potentially support the development of pellet manufacturing infrastructure.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project. Grantee requested AEA continue to manage the project. AEA concurs.
Recommend partial funding.
A class 5 wind resource is assumed and supported by the 30-meter wind resource model developed by AEA/NREL/AWSTruepower. This feasibility will provide data to confirm or revise that
assumption. Permitting plan, budget and schedule look reasonable, except that $23,750 is probably high for a geotech reconnaissance study. AVEC should collect village electric load
data simultaneously with wind met tower study.
AEA believes that this site is a class 5 wind regime as opposed to a class 6 proposed. AEA projects 31,298 gallons of diesel displaced and 1,268 gallons of heating fuel. The challenge
in the CDR phase will be to address concerns over possible village relocation.
Recommend funding with the caveat that the wind resource analysis and electrical load analysis be completed before allocation of remaining funds.
A class 5 wind resource is assumed and supported by the 30-meter wind resource model developed by AEA/NREL/AWSTruepower. This feasibility will provide data to confirm or revise that
assumption. Permitting plan, budget and schedule look reasonable, except that $23,750 is probably high for a geotech reconnaissance study. AVEC should collect village electric load
data simultaneously with wind met tower study. Later stage funding will remain unallocated until a met tower study and wind resource analysis have been accepted by AEA.
AEA agrees closely with power assumptions, although not all power in a 47% penetration system will be used to offset electricity. Some will need to be diverted to a heat load at a lower
economic benefit. AEA projects 26,216 gallons of diesel displaced and 760 gallons of heating fuel. The challenge in the CDR phase will be to find a turbine solution with good economic
payback.
Recommend full funding.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative is proposing the construction of an intertie between the communities of St. Mary?s and Pilot Station to connect to the renewable energy source of
the proposed St. Mary?s wind farm. AVEC has also filed applications for a wind project in St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point (#945-construction), and an intertie to Mountain Village (#954-design).
The size of the proposed turbine could serve two or all four communities.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that the St. Mary?s (#945) project be funded or constructed prior to the allocation of funds for this project.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative is proposing the final design and permitting of an intertie between the communities of Mountain Village and St. Mary?s. AVEC has also filed applications
for a wind project in St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point (#945-construction), and an intertie to Pilot Station (#955-construction). The size of the proposed turbine could serve two or all four
communities.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that a 35% design, including construction cost estimates, be accepted by AEA prior to the allocation of the remaining funds.
This proposal has the potential to conflict with two other REF projects that have already been awarded funds. The first, grant agreement 2195377 from REF 1 totaling $10.8 million, was
awarded to the Northwest Arctic Borough allowing up to $4 million in design and construction funds for Noorvik along with similar funding guidelines for Buckland and Deering. The second,
grant agreement #7040030 awarded $85,000 to AVEC in Round 5, provides for a feasibility study to evaluate the potential to upgrade/replace the existing AOC wind turbines in Selawik.
A draft conceptual design report has already been completed for Noorvik under the NWAB grant.
The economics on this project are difficult to pin down at this phase with many unknowns for the actual cost of interties and the wind energy potential at the proposed site. Presently,
there is a lot of value in the learning from this feasibility study, so a B/C ratio of less than 1.0 isn\'t a large negative at this phase of the project. These communities have few
options for renewable energy nearby, so wind from a centralized location with transmission lines may be their best option.
Recommend funding, but with the provision that the proposed site must complete a wind resource study prior to allocating the remainder of funds. The NWAB and key stakeholders in Noorvik
will need to be consulted to gain buy-in and consensus on this proposal since it creates a delay/change in the 2195377 project.
$233,000 is a lot of money to spend for an area with no validated wind resource. The ridge tops of the Cosmos Hills likely have strong winds, but the 1,500 to 2,500-ft elevation change
and steep terrain make these sites difficult to develop. Significant wind reconnaissance should be performed to find suitable project sites prior to expending more money. The communities
have great need due to their very high costs of power, but the high costs to intertie all communities represents a significant barrier.
Recommend partial funding of $40,000 to purchase, ship and install one 34-meter met tower and up to three 10-meter met towers to collect data for one year or longer (longer is advised
due to data from the wind model and airport) and write a wind resource analysis report. Hourly electrical load data should be collected in all three communities simultaneous with wind
data collection.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative proposes the design of a Wind-Diesel system in the community of Stebbins. The Stebbins Wind-Diesel system would supply power to St. Michaels via
a proposed intertie expected to be constructed in 2013. The design would be based on Conceptual Design work funded through RE Fund Grant #7040008.
The review team has the following concerns:
1) The applicant has not completed the minimum 12 month long meteorological "met" tower study at the proposed wind turbine site.
2) A complete Wind Resource Assessment has not been accepted by AEA.
3) A complete Conceptual Design Report has not been accepted by AEA.
Completion of RE Fund Grant #7040008 will address these concerns.
Not recommended for funding.
The review team is concerned that there is no developable wind site near Russian Mission. Our best estimate for in/near town is only a class 2 which would not result in an economically
viable project. In addition, the presence of tall trees around Russian Mission prevents the possible use of a low-cost 10-meter met tower. The closest potentially viable wind regime
is approximately 5 miles southwest. The cost of a transmission line would likely make the project economically infeasible. Since both the wind resource model and the airport data
reflect class 1 wind speeds, this project is deemed high risk and unlikely to produce an economically feasible project.
Not recommended for funding.
A class 4 wind resource is possible according to the wind resource model and is assumed for this analysis. This feasibility will provide data to confirm or revise that assumption. AEA
believes that the wind resource study and electrical load data collection should be completed prior to additional money being spent due to the presence of lower wind regimes in the
vicinity.
Permitting plan, budget and schedule look reasonable although $23,750 appears to be high for a geotech recon study. AVEC should collect village electric load data simultaneously with
wind met tower study. Applicant should ensure that the conceptual design report addresses all the factors listed in the Alaska Wind Program Guidelines for Conceptual Design Reports
http://www.akenergyauthority.org/Useful%20documents/Alaska%20Wind%20Program%20Guidelines%20for%20Conceptual%20Design%20Reports%20-%20Rev%202.docx
AEA agrees closely with power assumptions, although not all power in a 31% penetration system will be used to offset electricity. Some (~11%) will need to be diverted to a heat load
at a lower economic benefit. AEA projects 39,761 gallons of diesel displaced and 1,849 gallons of heating fuel.
Recommend funding with the caveat that the wind resource analysis and electrical load analysis be completed before allocation of remaining funds.
Even though Wales was known to have strong winds, which was the prime motivator for development of the original project, there are many aspects of a wind regime that must be quantified
- such as turbulence, severe winds, Weibull K distribution, and other factors - before an optimum wind-diesel system can be constructed. Further, study of the existing power system
and electric loads is needed to design a proper solution. The original intent of the Wales pilot project was to demonstrate the capability of running in diesel-off mode. To that extent,
the project was a success, but long term operation proved complex and some components were difficult to maintain. The system produced a modest amount of power in 2005/6 and only 1,198
kWh in 2009. The old system is in need of major repairs, plus at least one turbine foundation is compromised due to settling or frost jacking.
AEA supports the applicant\'s willingness to start over and pursue a new course in Wales with a wind resource analysis and conceptual design. Later stage funding will remain unallocated
until a met tower study and wind resource analysis have been accepted by AEA. AEA recommends funding of this feasibility project to the amount that the remaining Denali Commission funds
will not cover. Applicant requested $190,000; there is approximately $120,000 of Denali Commission funding remaining. AEA recommends $75,000 REF grant with a $7,500 match from the
applicant.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative proposes the design of a Wind-Diesel system in the community of Marshall. The design would be based on Conceptual Design work funded through a round
4 Renewable Energy Fund Grant (#7040021).
The review team has the following concerns:
1) The applicant has not completed the minimum 12 month long meteorological "met" tower study.
2) The Wind Resource Assessment submitted with the application is based on an incomplete met tower study.
3) The Conceptual Design Report submitted with the application is based on an incomplete Wind Resource Assessment and does not address a variety of wind turbine models and quantity
configurations as required by Grant #7040021.
Completion of RE Fund Grant #7040021 will address these concerns.
Recommend full funding with the following stipulation. A final Conceptual Design Report, which addresses all criteria laid out in the ?Alaska Wind Program Guidelines for Conceptual
Design Reports?, must be accepted by AEA prior to negotiating the proposed grant.
Even with the high fuel costs in Shungnak and Kobuk, the economics of this project as proposed are poor. A similar project in Ambler was cancelled due to poor economics driven in part
by the high cost of a triodetic mounting structure. Nationwide and worldwide, solar PV panels, inverters and mounting systems costs have dropped by more than half. Similarly, balance
of plant costs have dropped as installers adopt mounting systems that require less time to install.
While remote Alaska will always be more expensive to install energy systems, the significant drop in component costs should be seen in Alaska even when labor costs do not change. This
project proposed a cost of $13 per watt. Other solar PV projects have been proposed this year with costs in the $4 to $7.50 per watt range for top tier PV and inverter suppliers.
Those price ranges begin to make solar PV cost effective in areas of Alaska with the highest cost of fuel. AVEC\'s Kaltag (previously funded) and Upper Kalskag (not funded) proposals
came in at $10 per watt over the past two years.
While the proposal is feasible from a technical perspective, a less expensive approach is needed to improve the economics of this project.
Not recommended for funding.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) is proposing the construction of a Wind-Diesel system to serve the interconnected communities of St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point. AVEC has also
filed applications for interties from this St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point wind project to Mountain Village (#954-design) and to Pilot Station (#955-construction). The size of the proposed
turbine could serve two or all four communities.
AVEC is currently working on a 95% design for the proposed Wind-Diesel system under RE Fund Grant #7040017.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that the 95% design under grant #7040017 be accepted by AEA prior to allocation of construction funds.
The Alaska Village Electrical Cooperative and the Southwest Region School District are proposing to provide recovered heat from the existing New Stuyahok power plant for heating the
adjacent New Stuyahok High School, built in 2007.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment for the AVEC Power Plant and New Stuyahok School project was completed in 9/19/12.
Recommend full funding contingent on a heat sales agreement and accepted final design.
AEA will partially fund the completion of the final design, permitting, business plan, and power sales agreement.
The proposed energy recovery project is promising as it would be an addition to an operating waste incineration facility near Fairbanks, AK. Applicant proposes to generate electric power
(via a steam generator) for both on-site use and for resale to GVEA. Proposer indicates the upgrade will allow the business to operated year-round vs. present half-year. Project costs
(including construction) are estimated to be $3,258,000: funded half by an AEA grant and half through OIT (cash, revenue, and bank loans). Proposer indicates that reconnaissance, feasibility,
and conceptual design have been completed.
Prior to evaluating for funding of construction in future rounds, proposer will be requested to provide copies of:
? The feasibility study
? Conceptual design
? A loan approval letter from a bank (mentioned pg 16)
? A copy of OIT?s business plan
The business plan should address OIT?s operational history, long term contracts, a financial pro forma, SWOT discussion, and written confirmation from GVEA regarding the power purchase
rate and terms.
The Native Village of Tuntutuliak in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the design and construction a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the community power
plant to the water treatment plant and washeteria. This project is estimated to displace 6000 gallons of fuel oil.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2012. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding. Construction funding is contingent on AEA accepting the final design and the business/operating plan.
City of Noorvik in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the design and construction of a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the AVEC power plant to the water
treatment plant. This project is estimated to displace 87% or 18,600 gallons of the current fuel oil usage per year.
The heat recovery system will be operated and maintained through the Alaska Rural Utility Collaborative (ARUC) program.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2012. The fuel displacement is based on converting the existing diesels to marine jacketed configurations. A project is currently
underway to prove the viability of marine jackets on Detroit Diesel Series 60 generators. Without this conversion, the financial benefit of this project will be significantly less.
Recommend full funding contingent on the success of proving the viability of marine jacketed Detroit Diesel Series 60 generators. Construction funding is contingent on AEA accepting
the final design and the business/operating plan with heat sales agreements. AEA will also work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction
with this project.
The City of Marshal in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the design and construction a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the AVEC power plant to the Water
treatment plant and Community Store. This project is estimated to displace 100% or 7,700 gallons of the current fuel oil usage per year.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2012. The fuel displacement is based on converting the existing diesels to marine jacketed configurations. A project is currently
underway to prove the viability of marine jackets on Detroit Diesel Series 60 generators. Without this conversion, the financial benefit of this project will be significantly less.
Recommend full funding contingent on the success of proving the viability of marine jacketed Detroit Diesel Series 60 generators. Construction funding is contingent on AEA accepting
the final design and the business/operating plan with heat sales agreements. AEA will also work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction
with this project.
The Alaska Village Electrical Cooperative in collaboration with ANTHC and the community of Stebbins is proposing the design and construction a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered
heat from the community power plant to the new Water treatment plant, existing water treatment plant, washeteria, head start building, clinic, and school. This project is estimated
to displace 57,000 gallons of fuel oil out of an annual usage of 69,000 gallons.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2012. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding. Construction funding is contingent on AEA accepting the final design and the business/operating plan with heat sales agreements.
A reconnaissance study was funded in Round 4 of the Renewable Energy Fund. The conceptual model and economic analysis from the reconnaissance study are due after this review was conducted;
the final report from the applicant is due in June 2013.
As a low-temperature geothermal resource, Tenakee Inlet remains potentially promising and continued exploration would contribute to a greater understanding of geothermal resources in
Southeast AK. Development of a small-scale ORC (organic Rankine cycle) geothermal plant would help determine the viability of additional and possibly larger scale geothermal plants
in the region and in other parts of the state.
Tenakee Springs is currently pursuing construction funding for a run-of-river hydroelectric project which would supply 90% of the existing load. That project scored well in this Round
6 REF recommendation program and will be a recommended project. Pelican is in the midst of an AEA-managed upgrade of its hydro plant to cover 100% of its current load.
Transmission line costs, potential access routes, and SeaAlaska?s involvement/the development of tourism facilities are large unknowns which could significantly impact the economics
of the project; however, there is no clear indication that any of these factors will bring down project costs in the near future. Funding for the second phase of a project should be
justified by the results of the first phase. Because the first phase has not been completed?in particular the economic component?additional funding would be premature.
Not recommended for funding.
The Native Village of Quinhagak in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the design and construction a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the AVEC power plant
to the water treatment plant/combined utility and washeteria. This project is estimated to displace 62% or 14,200 gallons of the current fuel oil usage per year.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2012. The fuel displacement is based on converting the existing diesels to marine jacketed configurations. A project is currently
underway to prove the viability of marine jackets on Detroit Diesel Series 60 generators. Without this conversion, the financial benefit of this project will be significantly less.
Recommend full funding contingent on the success of proving the viability of marine jacketed Detroit Diesel Series 60 generators. Construction funding is contingent on AEA accepting
the final design and the business/operating plan with heat sales agreements. AEA will also work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction
with this project.
The City of Chuathbaluk in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the design and construction of a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the community power plant
to the water treatment water loop and water storage tank. This project is estimated to displace 1400 of the current fuel oil usage of 1834 gallons.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2012.
AEA is concerned that there is no preliminary heat sales agreement and there is no mention of the operations and maintenance plans for the new system.
Recommend full funding contingent of a heat sales agreement and an O&M plan. Construction funding is contingent on acceptance of the final design. AEA will work with the grantee to
ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
The Native Village of Atmautlaulk in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the construction of a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the community power plant to
the washeteria. This project is estimated to displace 4395 gallons of the annual fuel oil usage of 4800 gallons.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2011 and the design was completed in 2012. The project is ready to purchase long lead items and to proceed into construction.
Recommend full funding contingent on the successful negotiation of a heat sales agreement. AEA encourages the grantee to accelerate the installation so that the system can be operational
for the 2013 heating season.
The City of Savoonga in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the construction a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the AVEC power plant and an excess wind electric
boiler to the water treatment plant, water loop, and water storage tank. This project is estimated to displace 100% of the current fuel oil usage of 8800 gallons.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2011 and the heat recovery design was completed in 2012. The wind design of this project must be completed.
The heat recovery system will be operated and maintained through the Alaska Rural Utility Collaborative program.
Recommend full funding contingent on a heat sales agreement and accepted final design. AEA will also work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in
conjunction with this project.
The Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) requests funding for feasibility assessments and forest inventories in 7 communities to evaluate the potential use of biomass systems for
heating. This is the 3rd application for feasibility assessments. A project for 8 communities was funded through Round 4, and a project for 7 communities was recommended for funding
through Round 5, but was not funded. The proposed communities for this round are: Grayling, Northway, Beaver, Shageluk, Allakaket, Alatna, and Stevens Village.
IRHA has assembled a strong team with biomass energy and resource experience. AEA believes that the proposed approach is well-conceived.
Recommend full funding of $168,959 for feasibility and biomass energy resource assessment.
The Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) requests funding for the design and construction of wood biomass heating systems for three communities to be identified in the future from
feasibility studies that were conducted with funding from the Renewable Energy Fund Round 4.
Interior Regional Housing Authority was funded for the construction of three communities in Round 5. IRHA is currently selecting these communities.
AEA is supportive of small scale biomass heating systems in Interior Alaska that are economically viable within sustainable communities. The review team considered this application
premature and the applicant should wait for the completion of the next round of feasibility studies to assure that the proposed projects are economically viable and sustainable.
Not recommended for funding.
The Nenana City School District in Nenana, AK (Interior Alaska) requests funding for engineering design phase to build a district wide heating system for following buildings: Nenana
City School; Administration Building; Warehouse; Nenana Student Living Center; Nenana Native Council Day Care; City Water Plant; City Fire Department . The project has the potential
save the Nenana City School District in excess $3,516,725 over the life of the project.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design; business plan with heat sales agreement; harvest plan; inventory plan.
CVEA requests $6,114,000 to construct a 6.5 MW r-o-r hydroelectric power plant on Allison Creek. The funds would be used to purchase owner-furnished long lead items for the project.
The project is expected to defer (annually) over 4 million gallons of diesel fuel now used for power generation.
AEA has the following reservations with this request: the FERC license application is being processed but has yet to be issued; the final design documents and a final construction
estimate are not complete; the items to be purchased are not identified; CVEA already has $10M in state capital funds to purchase long lead items needed; the project development
schedule provided is quite aggressive;
Despite these shortcomings, it is a valid renewable energy project.
Special provision: Complete prior grant funded activities and acceptance by AEA for: final design documents, construction cost estimates, construction schedule and plan of finance
City was awarded a $200,000 grant (#887) in round 5 to complete permitting and final design for Waterfall Creek. These activities are underway at this time.
The City now requests construction funding to build the 1 MW run-of-river Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric project. AEA supports this request though notes that the final design and construction
cost estimate are not complete at this time and the City continues further discussion with ADF&G about the amount of stream flow reserved for resident fish.
Special conditions include completion of all grant requirements of Grant 887, resolution of amount of instream flow reservation, demonstrate site control, etc. before any round 6 grant
funds are disbursed.
This phase of the project is to complete a bathymetric survey and marine geological study to refine cable route needed to extend Kodiak Electric Associations feeder line to the City
of Ouzinkie. The extension will tie Kodiak Electric Association?s current electrical grid to Ouzinkie. The intertie ultimately will include a sub-marine cable of 1 to 1.4 miles in
length dependent upon the results of the survey and geological study.
AEA recommends full funding for this project conditional upon a letter of support from Kodiak Electric Association.
The City of Galena is proposing final design and installation of chip-fired boiler systems to heat its school district and the Galena Interior Learning Academy School (GILA). This project
is estimated to displace a total 230,000 of gallons per year of fuel oil, using tons 2,950 tons of chips per year. The technical feasibility phase of this project is complete, but the
harvest/fuel inventory work is still in process.
The application includes substantial support from the community, the Louden Tribal Council, Galena City School District, and Gana?A-Yoo Limited. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure
that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend partial funding for final design and permitting and business/operational plan to allow the project team time to successful complete this stage of the project.
Alaska Gateway School District proposes adding on a heat loop off the newly-completed wood-fired heating system at the Tok School to provide heat to ten (10) State-owned and Community
building-clusters. The project team would complete a final design phase and construction documents prior to construction.
This application is similar to the Round 5 submittal #866 that was recommended for funding, but below the $25MM allotment. This Round 6 application significantly increases the number
of buildings and the size of the proposed in the heat loop.
AEA is supportive of this project and continues to encourage the collaboration between the Alaska Gateway School District and the Alaska Power and Telephone biomass projects.
Recommend full funding with the provision that AEA approve the final design before construction funds are released.
The feasibility study for this application was received in December of 2012. A brief review of the study has identified the following concerns:
? Running various economic scenarios results in B/C ratios ranging from .66 to 1.49.
? The feasibility study assumes 100% displacement of electrical loads. Load following capabilities for biomass systems are a technical concern.
? There is no plan to utilize the waste heat. Without use of the waste heat, the plant will operate between 17.7% and 19.4% efficient.
While AEA supports this project, there are technical and economic questions that need to be answered before full funding for design and permitted is recommended. AEA will perform a
comprehensive review of the study in the following month and provide additional feedback to AP&T to address technical and economic questions.
Recommend partial funding of $400,000 to complete the conceptual design (35%) report, including identifying a use for the recoverable heat, further development of the capital estimate
and economic analysis, and selecting a technology that will meet the specifications of the project objectives. A detailed scope for this funding will be developed after the feasibility
study has been reviewed and accepted.
The Kenai Peninsula Borough School District is proposing final design and installation of pellet-fired boiler systems to heat three Seward schools ? the elementary, middle, and high
school. This project is estimated to displace a total of 120,600 gallons per year of fuel oil, using 1121 tons of pellets per year. The project has completed feasibility phase work.
The application includes substantial support from the community, USFS, and the local tribal council. This project will develop an anchor tenant for pellet supply in the Southcentral
Alaska region and will potentially support the development of pellet manufacturing infrastructure.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding, with requirement of AEA acceptance of final design prior to release of construction funding.
The Native Village of Afognak proposes to conduct reconnaissance, feasibility and conceptual design on the opportunity of installing a biofuel system at the Kodiak High School. The
system would provide fuel/heat to the school building utilizing waste from the Kodiak landfill and other biomass resources. The system would also provide a biofuel education service
through the Kodiak High School Career and Technical Program.
In the application, the Native Village of Afognak recommends pursuing gasification technology from Community Power Corporation (CPC) and hiring CPC to perform the technical analysis.
CPC is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Afognak Native Corporation.
AEA supports the project proposal for a reconnaissance, feasibility and conceptual design study for a biofuel system using municipal solid waste and other biomass resources, but requires
that the study be conducted by an independent consultant experienced in biofuel systems. The proposed study would have to consider all potential biofuels technologies and not focus
only on CPC technology.
Recommend full funding with the provision that AEA approve the selected consulting firm.
IPEC requests construction funds for Gartina Falls Hydro project. The project was previously funded for permitting and final design in round 3 (#462).
Schedule proposed is aggressive and adds to the project risk of construction cost overruns.
Special provisions: AEA must approve the deliverables from the prior grant #462 before any construction funds will be reimbursed:
1) Proof of site control, 2) FERC license and all permits, 3) site adapted final design plans and specs, 4) construction cost estimate, 5) project budget, 6) renegotiation to lower
management/PM fees and 7) schedule.
AVCP Housing requests funding to design and construct a Wood Biomass Heating System within its campus to reduce high energy costs. This project will heat 12 buildings including a 16
unit assisted living home, 3 large housing complexes, 2 warehouses, a dormitory, a maintenance facility, and office buildings. The fuel source will be pellets.
This project has the potential to positively impact Bethel and the surrounding communities by providing a logistical supply of pellets to the region.
A pellet distribution plan and the final design must be accepted by AEA prior to construction funding being released. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency
is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding.
THREA requests grant funds to assess feasibility study of a 1 MW storage or run-of-river hydro project at Walker Lake. The primary purpose of the project would be to supply IPEC?s Chilkat
Valley and Klukwan system with hydropower. THREA would be an independent power producer (IPP) selling to IPEC. IPEC applied for funding to study Walker Lake in Roundd 5 of the Renewable
Energy Fund (#829) but was not recommended. Since Round 5 application, in October 2011 IPEC has acquired the 600 kW Ten-Mile hydro project, which provides about 60% of the energy needed
for the IPEC?s service area. The balance of their power needs (700,000 kWh) is purchased from AP&T?s Upper Lynn Canal grid. That grid is 97% powered by hydropower, so the amount of
diesel to be saved by building Walker Lake is very limited (1,500 gallons per year).
Alaska Power Authority prepared a reconnaissance assessment for Walker Lake in 1988 with an estimated capital cost of $10.5M. Sealaska Corporation updated the assessment in 2005. Both
studies concluded that the project feasibility was marginal to poor. The project capital cost is not shown in this application.
The review team has the following concerns with this project:
1. The demand for the project power will be a fraction of the potential annual energy available from Walker Lake; given that the project will spill nearly year round.
2. While the application states that THREA will sell its power to IPEC for 7 cents/kWh, it is highly likely the cost of power from Walker Lake would exceed that purchased from AP&T.
3. There is no updated reconnaissance report available to ascertain if the project can be economically justified.
4. This project would displace very little diesel generation (approx. 1,300 gallons per year). 97% of the power purchased from APC (the load Walker Lake would satisfy) is generated
from the Lutak, Kasidaya, Dewey, and Goat Lake hydropower projects.
5. AEA has already committed funding for Connelly Lake, Schubee Lake, West Creek, and Burro Creek reconnaissance and feasibility assessment. These projects would compete to meet the
same loads as the proposed project.
Project fails to pass the minimum Stage 2 score and is not recommended.
Metlakatla Indian Community proposes construction of an intertie that connects Metlakatla to Ketchikan. AEA is providing $2 million in RE Fund rounds 1 and 4 (applications #20 and #656).
Additionally another $2 million in grant funds from the state have been awarded.
Currently the RE Fund round 4 grant is being negotiated. Conditions of the grant will support a step-wise approach to determine feasibility; conceptual design; and completion of all
preconstruction activities (including final design documents, final construction cost estimate, demonstration of site control, bathymetry, NEPA, and permitting) prior to construction
funding being awarded
AEA is assisting MIC in complying with these conditions; however this work remains in process. The review team believes it is premature to allocate construction funds.
Not recommended for funding.
The Borough and Municipality of Skagway (BMS) proposes feasibility and conceptual design of a 10-25 MW hydro project at West Creek to be connected to the Upper Lynn Canal (Haines-Skagway)
grid. West Creek is located near Dyea, 7 miles west of Skagway. The estimated cost of this project +$140 million. One most costly scheme would propose a 200? dam on West Lake with
a 2.5 mile power tunnel to a powerhouse on the Taiya River. The primary purpose of the project is to offset diesel generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway in the summer.
The secondary purpose is to supply power to the local grid during periods of shortfall in the winter. BMS applied for a similar project in rounds 2 (#262) and 5 (#800). AEA recommended
the project for partial funding but due to low scores and limited funding availability the project did not receive funding.
The AEA review team has the following concerns about this project:
1. BMS states that a major benefit of the project is the reduced air emissions from diesel generation by the cruise ships. However, when the EPA mandated change in cruise ship fuel
from bunker oil to ultra low sulfur diesel is implemented, the air quality issues associated with docking of cruise ships will decrease substantially. This, in turn, reduces the public
benefit of this project.
2. AEA has previously committed funding for Connelly Lake, Schubee Lake, and Burro Creek reconnaissance and feasibility assessment. These projects would compete to meet the same loads
as the proposed project.
3. Given that the chief aim of the project is to supply the shore-based cruise ship load, AEA questions the amount of public benefit to be received versus the high capital cost and high
technical, business, and regulatory risks of the proposed project.
4. Since the project would potentially affect the viewscapes and upstream waters of the Klondike Gold Rush National Park, there is significant permitting risk.
City and Borough of Sitka request funds for construction of an expansion to the Blue Lake dam. Construction elements include 83 feet raise of existing reinforced concrete arch dam,
new powerhouse with three new turbine-generator units totaling 15.9 MW capacity, a new intake and connection tunnel, and a new surge chamber.
The project construction bids came in higher than expected so the CBS is seeking additional state funding and planning to sell more revenue bonds to cover the new estimated project cost
of $145M.
Special provision: AEA will require finalized financial plan before any new grants will be put in place.
AEA recommends full funding.
The Hydaburg City Schools in Hydaburg, AK on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska requests funding for engineering design phase to build two cord wood heating system to the school
buildings: gym; elementary school; high school. The project has the potential to save the Hydaburg School District in excess of $500,000 over the life of the project.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding for design and permitting with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design.
Project is simple, low-cost and straightforward. It takes advantage of the worldwide drop in PV module prices and cost of installation. Technology is proven and Tier 1 suppliers are
selected.
The applicant may be underestimating the power output from the PV system as low temperature and ground bounce can increase the output along with improved inverter power-curve optimization
technology. Likewise, the applicant may be overestimating power output if snow is not removed in a timely fashion. The utility must ensure that snow is removed from the panels to
ensure the desired benefits.
Final design must be submitted to and accepted by AEA prior to allocation of construction funds. Post-construction, AEA requires the grantee to report the minimum loading of the diesel
gensets at maximum solar output.
Full funding recommended.
APC proposes additional three new environmental studies (feasibility), final design and permitting activities for a potential 12+ MW storage hydro project at Connelly Lake. AEA and
APC entered into a grant agreement for $585,000 to support feasibility and conceptual design for the project under round 4 application (#627).
Current funded work includes concept optimization, preliminary FERC notice of intent and preliminary application document, FERC scoping activities (documents and study plans), field
studies (stream gauge installation; seismic refraction surveys; fish, wildlife, botanical, wetland, and heritage surveys; water quality testing); and the final feasibility report.
This work was scheduled for completion in December 2012, but some snags in the licensing process have occurred and more studies are required.
APC has challenges with site control with access through the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve, Haines State Forest and across several private parcels. FERC has requested they demonstrate
this access to perform studies before FERC will devote any staff time on licensing for Connelly Lake. Environmental opposition to the project has been received in the past from some
Haines residents.
AEA believes additional grant funding for the 3 new environmental studies is warranted, but the request to fund final design and permitting is premature, given that several additional
years of data collection may be necessary and project feasibility is uncertain. AEA also finds the amount requested for the three studies is excessive and therefore recommends grant
funding be limited with a 20% cash match by applicant.
Recommend partial funding.
Project will add 5,500,000 kWh annually to Cooper Lake Hydroelectric project; project also provides environmental benefits for increase in : (1) water temperature and (2) increase
flows at upper reaches of Cooper Creek to enhance fish habitat.
Project bids were opened on 9/28/12; bid results to AEA are pending receipt, so bidding risk is low.
Construction of this project satisfies Settlement Agreement established in support of FERC re-license of the Cooper Cooper Lake Hydroelectric Power Project which, along with this diversion,
has annual energy of 47,500,000 kWh.
Recommend full funding
Hill east of the old airport appears to be the best place to start measuring wind. Budget is high for a reconnaissance study - especially $45,000 for cost of energy and market analysis.
The applicant only needs money to hire a contractor to purchase and install a met tower and power house monitoring and to analyze and write a wind resource report. The report should
include HOMER analysis of wind, diesel and solar against the seasonal load profile of Egegik. An RFP should be put out to see who can do this in the most cost-effective manner. Recommend
partial funding of $60,000 to collect wind, solar and electrical load data for a minimum of one year, write a wind/solar assessment report and perform some basic HOMER modeling.
While the existing wind resource model predicts only class 2 winds in Levelock, class 4 winds exist further south at the coast. There is no current wind data. The applicant proposes
a low-cost method to collect valid, usable wind data. A larger met tower would be needed for any future feasibility study, but the 10-meter configuration proposed will work well for
reconnaissance so long is the tower is placed in an area of minimal surrounding vegetation and away from buildings that might block the wind.
Even if only a class 3 wind site is discovered, the high cost of fuel in this community might allow for an economic medium-penetration project using a remanufactured turbine.
ull funding recommended.
F
Because a wind study has not yet been completed and a conceptual design has not been submitted for AEA to review and accepted prior to the review period for this application, it is premature
to award funding for design. Too many factors are currently unknown to assess the viability of the project. In addition, the class 2 wind regime indicated by the statewide wind model
would not provide enough benefit to produce an economic project.
Not recommended for funding.
The City of Saxman has requested funding to study the Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Project and provide for the following: revise final design and specifications, obtain permits for construction,
review ways to increase storage potential of project, update cost estimate, begin power sales negotiations and prepare a business and operational plan based upon power sales agreement.
The primary developers are a public/private partnership called Ketchikan Electric Company, whose partners are Cape Fox Corp., AP&T and City of Saxman.
The review team has the following concerns with this project: the market for the power is uncertain, given it is the last to be used in the SEAPA system, including after the proposed
additions of energy from Whitman Lake Hydro project and the proposed Metlakatla - Ketchikan Intertie, and proposed issues raised if the FERC license is re-opened to re-engineer the
project scheme.
The project appears to exhibit a high benefit/cost ratio if it can find a market for its hydropower. Partial funding for feasibility/conceptual design is recommended to reconfigure
the project to meet potential needs of SEAPA proposed call for power and accomplish the following: (1) perform field studies to support re-opening FERC license; (2) negotiate new license
terms; (3) revise engineering drawings in support of license changes; (4) negotiate power sales agreement, (5) prepare business, operational and finance plan; and (6) update cost of
power, construction cost and potential available power by month.
Partial funding recommended.
INNEC requests grant funding to study expansion of the Tazimina Hydroelectric Project thru replacement of the turbine-generators and controls from 824 kW (existing) up to 1.5 MW total.
The FERC license was issued for the larger units and the plant throughput was built with this in mind, but the smaller Francis turbine/generators were installed when the project was
built in 1996. Annual energy is expected to increase up to 2,600,000 kWh. New markets for this increase in energy may include new dispatchable heating systems in private businesses
and city governments at Newhalen, Illiamna and Nondalton.
If the study shows the project is feasible, procurement documents will be prepared from this phase grant funding for the replacement turbine-generators and control systems.
AEA recommends full funding.
This study will compare heating alternatives but the applicant states that they are leaning toward heat pumps (ground and air source). Smaller GSHP projects have been rejected due to
poor economics; the lower capital cost of air source heat pumps would likely make them more favorable for retrofits; AEA is currently funding a study of (residential) ASHP use in SE
AK.
A feasibility study that clearly considers the benefits of biomass, heat pumps, and oil-fired boilers is a logical step.
AEA recommends full funding.
City of Coffman Cove requests $175K in grant funds for permitting and final design, and construction of a 1.75 mile single phase line extension along existing roads within the City
to serve 91 privately-owned lots with renewable energy. The RE sources are from Black Bear Lake Hydro and South Fork Hydro.
Project design, permitting and construction to be by Alaska Power Company.
Special provision: Provide evidence of site control with stamped plans and recorded easement for the line extension.
A successful demonstration of hydrogen production, storage, and subsequent electricity generation could have widespread applicability if proved economically viable. However, no data
from existing hydrogen storage projects were provided by the applicant or found by AEA that indicate that the proposed project would have a breakeven B/C ratio. Furthermore, the seasonal
nature of the utility?s generation and load profiles appear to prevent full utilization of the benefits of a storage system; the hydrogen tanks would only likely be filled and emptied
once annually but require the same capital costs of a system that would have multiple charge/discharge cycles in a year.
Not recommended for funding.
The applicant has performed a life-cycle economic assessment of the proposed GSHP and a baseline diesel boiler (city policy prohibits installation of an electric boiler) which indicates
economics that are barely favorable; however, this analysis includes health benefits not included in AEA?s analysis.
The project benefits from other successful GSHP installations in Juneau, both REF projects and other projects. This application could be strengthened by supporting performance data
from the other GSHP projects (both are functioning successfully but have not produced a COP).
The proposed system would use approximately 12% of its capacity on an annual basis. A smaller heat pump system used in combination with an oil boiler could greatly reduce the capital
costs while still offsetting 80% of diesel use relative to a baseline oil-only system. AEA estimates such a system would cost roughly $500,000, an incremental cost increase of $179,000
above the baseline system.
Recommend partial funding of $300,000 to fund a smaller heat pump system with the following special provisions.
Special provisions:
1. Data from the Dimond Aquatic Center heat pump system must be provided to AEA before grant funded work can begin.
2. AEA must approve final system design prior to construction.
Project is technically feasible. Schedule and budget look reasonable. Recommend full funding.
The Village received a grant funded in round 4 (#606 ) for reconnaissance assessment of the project and has installed a stream gauge. The grant reconnaissance report is not available
at the date of this R6 application review.
Very little new information is provided in the application to support this request. A large number of questions are raised for this project, including the configuration of this project,
licensing jurisdiction, scale and cost, economics, power sales, utility organization, financing, etc. Even the need for the project can be questioned given the pending completion of
the 24 MW Eva Creek Wind Farm, re-start of 50 MW Healy Clean Coal Plant and the future 600 MW Susitna Watana project.
Despite the outstanding questions AEA supports this request for full funding.
Special provisions: AEA requires: 1) the completion and AEA acceptance of the reconnaissance study, and 2) results of the study indicate that the project should advance prior to award
of any new grant funding.
Given that the existing diesel gensets are not modifiable for electronic fuel injection which is needed for integration of wind power, there is much modeling to be done for both wind
and heat considerations. A new diesel generator must be chosen based on the results of the wind resource study and analysis of the electrical load (hourly data collection). The wind
challenge for this project may be finding a turbine that can survive the potential harsh environment of the ridge south of town, while still being sized appropriately for the electric
loads.
Due to the complexity of this system, the $81,300 requested would not be enough to complete both the feasibility and final design phases. Recommend partial funding of $70,000 for feasibility,
but not final design and permitting. Wind resource study and electrical load analysis should be complete and accepted by AEA prior to allocating money for the CDR.
Combined with proposal #839.
The Port Graham Village Council proposes construction of a wood-fired boiler to supply heat to the health and dental clinics. Currently the RE Fund is supporting final design and permitting
for the project with a grant of $75,000 matched by $25,000 in local.
AEA supports the initiative for developing a wood boiler project in Port Graham. However, given the high cost of the project as currently configured and the relatively low fuel displacement,
project economics are poor. Under the current grant-funded work, AEA believes that it is reasonable to assess options to lower the costs of the project, increase amount of fuel displaced
by supplying more loads, or do both.
No funding recommended.
9/21/2011 application withdrawn
Independence Power LLC proposes for permitting and final design for a 5.4 MW run-of-river hydro facility on Fourth of July Creek near Seward. This request builds on previously funded
grants in Round II (#86) for reconnaissance and in Round IV (#693) for feasibility. The grant award document indicates work began on the funded feasibility study in September 2011
and is expected to be completed in September 2012.
This round 5 request is contingent upon findings of a favorable outcome from this feasibility study with AEA review and approval of those results. However, those results will not be
available until late 2012. There is also a significant issue regarding how the project, estimated at $16.7-27M will be financed.
No funding recommended.
The City of Alakanuk proposes the reconnaissance, feasibility study, conceptual design, design, permitting, construction and commissioning of a stand-alone wind turbine to provide electricity
to the waste water treatment facility.
The City of Alakanuk is requesting funds for reconnaissance, feasibility study, conceptual design, design, permitting. The City of Alakanuk is requesting $14,650 for reconnaissance
and feasibility and $16,700 for design and permitting for a total of $31,350 from the RE fund. A non-monetary in-kind contribution of lodging and personnel assistance as required has
been offered. The total project cost is not provided.
Alakanuk is intertied with Emmonak and AVEC provides power to both communities via an existing wind-diesel system. The proposed Alakanuk wind turbine would be offsetting electricity
from AVEC?s wind diesel system at a cost of $.31/kWh to the City of Alakanuk.
AEA has the following concerns:
1) Alakanuk is situated between Nunam Iqua and Emmonak which have established wind regimes of low class 3 and class 2 respectively. There is no evidence that Alakanuk would have a
more productive wind resource.
2) The project is not coordinated with AVEC?s wind farm in Emmonak, or more generally the community power system.
3) The applicant?s budget is insufficient for the proposed scope of work.
AEA recommends that the City use a comprehensive approach for identifying cost-reduction options through the regional energy plan for the Yukon-Kuskokwim region, currently underway.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Angoon requests funds for reconnaissance study of two potential hydro sites located near Petersburg in Thomas Bay--Scenery Lake and Ruth Lake. The application indicates
that the projects would provide energy to Kake, Angoon, and Hoonah but does not address specifics of how the energy would be delivered to the communities. The City submitted separate
applications for reconnaissance assessment for these projects in RE Fund round 3 (#430,485).
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. The City of Petersburg has already prepared a reconnaissance assessment for a hydro project at Ruth Lake (#38) with funding from RE Fund round 1.
2. The RE Fund has already funded projects that would supply hydro energy to Kake, Angoon, and Hoonah that have higher likelihood of development and appear more economic.
3. At $2.4 million the project budget requested is excessive in relation to the likelihood of the project advancing.
In response to AEA\'s initial recommendation for no funding, the City of Angoon submitted a letter requesting reconsideration. Angoon asks that if AEA finds the City of Petersburg reconnaissance
study of Ruth Lake sufficient, then AEA should reduce the current request to a level that AEA believes is appropriate to support a reconnaisance study of Scenery Lake. AEA has reviewed
the round 1 funding allocated for the completed study of Ruth Lake, and on this basis believes that partial funding of $205,000 to support basic reconnaissance assessment of a hydro
project at Scenery Lake is reasonable.
As directed by the AEA executive director, staff continued Stage 2 technical review on the proposed project. The following describes rationale for the staff Stage 2 scores:
1. Project Management, Development and Operation
a. The proposed schedule is unrealistic in that it purports to accomplish $2.4M worth of field work and other activities in twelve months.
b. The cost savings estimated include 100% electric heating conversions for all in Wrangell, Petersburg and Ketchikan when the project is brought online. Staff believes this assumption
is unrealistic.
c. The application is silent on the team?s method of communication, monitoring and reporting development progress.
2. Qualifications and Experience
a. The applicant and partner have little or no experience and training in hydro development, utility business, and utility operations. The contractor to perform the studies is unnamed.
b. The project team does not appear to have staffing, time and other resources adequate to successfully complete the scope.
c. The project team has little technical or environmental expertise and the project has significant technical, economic and environmental barriers to contend with.
d. No local labor is proposed for the project.
3. Technical Feasibility
a. The reviewers believe the hydro resources at Scenery Lake and Ruth Lake are sustainable, but that project licenses, permits and other authorizations will require extraordinary
efforts to obtain.
b. The sites are not readily available, and suitability for hydro development is uncertain.
c. Project technical and environmental risks are high.
d. It is expected the two hydro sites could reliably produce energy as planned. It is doubtful the intertie system can be economically developed to serve the named communities.
e. This is not a demonstration project.
4. Economic Feasibility
a. The contracted economist estimates that the AEA benefit/cost ratio ranges from 0.87 to 1.37 and the applicant benefit/cost ranges from 8.17 to 9.09, indicating a wide disparity
of economic assumptions.
b. Analysis performed by Black and Veatch for the Southeast Integrated Resource Plan concludes that the life cycle costs of none of the nine transmission interconnections assessed
in the plan are lower than continued diesel generation in the load centers to be connected. Black and Veatch?s assessment excludes the cost of new hydropower generation.
c. Based on these factors AEA believes that a benefit/cost ratio cannot be reasonably estimated for this proposal.
Stage 2 review resulted in a score of 28.33--less than the minimum of 35 required for the project to be scored in stage 3. Funding not recommended. AEA will work with the proposer
through the AEA hydro program to address issues associated with the proposal.
The Iguigig Village Electric Company proposes a reconnaissance final design and construction to install hydrokinetic turbines on the Kvichak River.
The application would follow up feasibility and conceptual design work supported by RE Fund Round 2 (#265) funding of $707,250.
A reconnaissance report by EPRI in 2008, indicated that the Kvichak River near Iguigig was promising for hydrokinetic power due to suitable sites near the village and that the Kvichak
River is generally ice- and debris-free.
The application proposes to test multiple hydrokinetic devices (including ORPC and Whitestone device) in mid-2012 and 2013. The project proposes to continue development through FERC?s
pilot project stage, leaving commercial licensing until 2018.
A field study performed by Terrasond in 2011 under the Round 2 grant, located an area of interest that had depths of 2-3-meter depth, peak velocities near 2.5 m/s, and a highest average
velocity across one transect at 2.3 m/s. Terrasond also performed geotechnical studies on the areas of interest. These characteristics make it likely that the area would have a suitable
resource for hydrokinetic development.
The application includes in-kind contributions from ORPC, which will test a 150 kW unit near Nikiski with support of a RE Fund grant (#660). The application also proposes to fund the
completion, construction, and testing of the Whitestone Poncelet device, an undershot waterwheel under development by the Whitestone Community through assistance of a DOE grant.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. Assuming a $9.4 million project cost and $100,000/yr in fuel savings, economics are poor.
2. Given that the chief goal of this project is technology development and demonstration, the site is remote from logistical and technical support.
Since the application aims to fund completion of an experimental device with no working prototype and test several other devices, it appears the Emerging Energy Technology Fund would
be a more appropriate funding mechanism.
No funding recommended.
TDX Power requests funds to perform a feasibility study and conceptual design for hydroelectric development on Adak. This request builds on the reconnaissance study funded in Round
II (#315) which found several recommended hydro options. The most favorable scheme is a storage project on Lake Bonnie Rose with a penstock discharging to a powerhouse on Mitt Lake.
This option would offset much of the diesel generation for this community. A substantial consideration in this request is to review options on how to potentially integrate any new
renewable energy source with the existing diesel generation equipment which was designed for 30x the present population when the Navy ran the base.
AEA is moving forward with a statewide inventory of rural power systems expected to be completed February 2012. Adak appears to be a strong candidate for upgrade under the AEA-funded
Rural Power System Upgrade (RPSU) program.
The work scope proposed will need further adjustment to reflect need for stream gauging, analysis of existing dam, final report, etc. No REF funds can be spent on conventional diesel
system and electrical distribution issues.
Recommend full funding with the requirements that 1) TDX will work with AEA staff to revise the scope and budget before the grant award, and 2) work needs to be coordinated with RPSU
program-supported work.
Did not pass Stage 1
The Native Village of Nikolski requests funding to complete construction and commissioning of a 65-kW wind-diesel system.
In May 2006 AEA constructed a power plant with a total capacity of 180 kW. The community purchased a refurbished Vestas V15 wind turbine generator with a grant from USDA RUS and cost
share from APICDA in July 2007 ($474,475). In 2009, Nikolski received an RE Fund round 1 grant (#89) for $409,430 to integrate the wind turbine generator with a heat-recovery system
by installing boilers and thermal nodes. Most of the work was done by the community?s contractor TDX Power. Currently the wind system remains inoperable.
Given our experience with the project, AEA has the following concerns:
1. Proposed budget seems too high.
2. The wind turbine generator may need repair due to extended non-operation in a marine environment.
3. The power output from the wind turbine generator is too high for the village load and diesel power system.
4. The proposed solution has not been demonstrated to be functional in other Alaska wind systems and is thus not guaranteed to provide a working system.
Recommend full funding of $331,240 with a special provision that AEA will be directly involved in the management of this project. AEA staff will work directly with the community and
its contractors to establish a scope, design and budget for a functioning power system. The design portion of this project will not exceed $50,000. Construction funds will be unallocated
until the design, budget and schedule has been accepted by AEA. AEA notes that the round 1 grant recommendation requires a 5-year O&M agreement with an entity acceptable to AEA.
The Kodiak Island Borough proposes to construct a hybrid fuel oil-fired and ground-source heat pump system for the new Kodiak High School currently under construction. The hybrid system
would consist of 198 wells 316? deep and a 3,000 MBH (250-ton) heat pump.
The application provides a preliminary feasibility report including a detailed breakdown of project costs.
Since Kodiak is powered by hydroelectric and wind power, the GSHP would displace a significant amount of fuel oil (77,000 gal/yr). However the proposed GSHP uses a substantial amount
of electrical energy to run the system (1.9 million kWh/yr). Since savings are low compared to the high capital cost ($6.5 million) AEA is concerned that economics are poor.
No funding recommended.
The City applied for funding in a pre-RE Fund solicitation (?Round zero?) in 2008. AEA recommended against funding this proposal due to lack of demonstrated ability to sell the excess
hydro power. In the current application the City includes a MOU from Peter Pan Seafoods stating the company?s interest in purchasing a minimum of 800,000 kWh per year which will generate
extra revenue for the City over the life of the project. The Waterfall Creek project can reduce construction costs by expanding the existing powerhouse at Delta Creek and making use
of existing transmission lines from that project.
The City completed a preminary design for the Waterfall Creek project in 2007-9 as part of a rural power system upgrade.
The City is in negotiations with ADF&G over instream flows required to maintain Dolly Varden habitat. Flow issues may affect project economics. However the project economics are very
favorable and can offset some project cost increases.
Preconstruction activities, including permitting, site control, final design plans and specs, and final construction cost estimate, are expected to be complete in February 2013. Given
the significant preconstruction activities that remain, AEA is believes that it premature to allocate funds for construction at this time.
Recommend partial funding of $200,000 for final design and permitting.
Chitina Electric Inc. requests construction funding to build a high head, 300 kW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Fivemile Creek near Chitina. Two prior REF grants have been awarded
to CEI to date including $303,000 for feasibility study in Round II (#236) and $277,000 for permitting and final design in Round IV (#682). The site appears to be promising as a source
of hydroelectric power which can displace much of the current diesel generation of electricity. AEA constructed a new diesel powerhouse in 2008 near the proposed hydro power house
site near the airport about 5 miles from Chitina. This proximity will allow hydro/diesel integration issues to be minimal. AEA\'s Rural Energy Group is managing the preconstruction
phase of this project and is expected to manage the future hydro project construction phase as well.
However, progress on the preconstruction phases of the project has been limited to a feasibility study. Although permitting, site control, final design and construction cost estimate
were funded in round 2 and 4, they are not yet complete. Construction challenges for this project include a deeply incised stream at the proposed intake site, a highly erratic stream
flow, and shallow bedrock along the proposed penstock route. Because of these challenges AEA believes that the project construction risk is high and the project cost may be underestimated.
Further final design and permitting work will help identify current construction unknowns and reduce potential project risks.
Recommend no construction funding at this time.
Kipnuk Light Plant proposes the design, permitting, construction and commissioning of a high penetration wind-diesel system in Kipnuk. The project would include three Northern 100 turbines,
a five pole transmission line, secondary loads and a control module containing switchgear, metering and controls. The secondary loads would supply heat to the community center and
the new washeteria/water plant.
The proposed project is located in a possible class 5-6 wind regime and follows a community wide approach at addressing rising energy demands.
AEA notes that the power system will not support integration of wind turbines in its current state. Recently, in order to address reliability issues, AEA has provided two diesel gensets
and repaired the foundation of the powerhouse. Generation efficiency appears poor?11 kWh/gal in FY09 and 6 kWh/gal in FY10. AEA plans a statewide condition assessment of rural power
systems in early 2012 and expects that Kipnuk will rank high in priority for upgrade.
Kipnuk has received a $1.2 million in a legislative grant that is available for the proposed work, including conceptual design.
AEA has the following concerns:
1) A meteorological tower study and wind resource assessment has not been completed at the proposed turbine location.
2) An acceptable conceptual design report that covers the diesel and wind generation and distribution systems has not been prepared prior to the proposed final design and permitting.
3) While some upgrades to the existing power plant are progressing, a new power plant is needed and has been proposed by the community. This new power plant and any other required
system upgrades should be included in the system design through the conceptual design report process.
AEA will offer the community a met tower in 2012 through the state anemometer loan program.
No funding recommended.
Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council proposes to integrate a large solar hot water array with Heliodyne flat-plate solar collectors and related components to help offset about
20% of the current heating costs for the student dormitory. The applicant is requesting $300,000 from Round V funding. The total cost of the project is estimated at $340,000, $300,000
of which is capital costs. In-kind resources total $40,000.
Following initial review of this application AEA requested additional information regarding 1) solar energy availability and heating load that supports the estimate that the project
would displace 5,841 gallons of fuel oil per year, 2) performance data from the existing solar thermal panels, and 3) timing of design work to justify eligible match amount.
In response YRITWC submitted information indicating that 1) they assume that 100% of the heat available from the panels could be used to heat the building since the project would include
thermal storage and 2) data from the existing project is unreliable and contractor ABS was not able to get access to other data.
Since feasibility and conceptual design are not yet complete AEA believes that there is insufficient information available to conclude that the system is economically feasible. YRITWC
is not able to provide information on the operation of the existing solar thermal panels. AEA notes that a separate solar thermal project in McKinley Village funded in round 1 (#108)
that was substantially complete in 2009 has not provided data that confirms expected savings.
No funding recommended.
Chugach Electric proposes funding for construction of dual 34.5 kV transmission from the International Substation in Anchorage to Fire Island to transmit the power generated by the 17.6
MW Fire Island Wind Farm to the Chugach Electric system.
A special-purpose entity, Fire Island Wind LLC, a subsidiary of CIRI, will design and build the transmission line. Following completion and commissioning line ownership of the line
will be transferred to Chugach.
In processing the $25 million legislative grant for the project, AEA has reviewed the power sales agreement and approved the construction work plan for the project. The project appears
to be technically and economically viable.
Recommend full funding.
Mentasta Village Council proposes final design and construction of a three-Garn wood boiler system to supply a small district heating system consisting of the multi-use facility, council
building and post office, fire station, clinic and the community hall. The system would consume approximately 110 cords per year and displace 10,800 gallons of fuel oil per year?90%
of the facility loads.
Reconnaissance assessment through the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group indicates a viable project. MVC is not supplying a match.
AEA is concerned by the lack of a specific fuel supply plan for the project. However, we recognize the existing fuelwood market in the Tok area. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure
that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with requirement that Mentasta provide a fuel supply plan and final design acceptable to AEA before construction funds are disbursed.
Tanacross Village Council proposes final design and construction of a three-Garn wood boiler system to supply a small district heating system consisting of the multi-use facility, water/sewer
heating loop, fire station, and the community hall. The system would consume approximately 260 cords per year and displace 25,300 gallons of fuel oil per year?90% of the facility loads.
Reconnaissance assessment through the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group indicates a viable project. TVC is supplying match including materials for a boiler building and arctic
pipe system.
AEA is concerned by the lack of a specific fuel supply plan for the project. However, we recognize the existing fuelwood market in the Tok area. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure
that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with requirement that Tanacross provide a fuel supply plan and final design acceptable to AEA before construction funds are disbursed.
City of Tanana proposes funding for adding solar thermal to the existing wood-fired systems that supply the washeteria, tribal complex, and teacher housing buildings. The combined solar
and wood projects will meet most of the heating requirements of four public facilities.
The project includes $79,000 for system performance monitoring for demonstration purposes.
Although the project appears technically feasible, economics are poor to marginal with AEA?s standard assumption of a 20-year project life, even if the $79,000 cost is removed.
Recommend no funding.
AVEC proposes final design and permitting for four wind turbines that would supplement existing power systems in St. Michael and Stebbins. The grant also includes designing controls
for the power system in Stebbins. Additionally, AVEC has completed design and permitting for an intertie between St. Michael and Stebbins. If this grant is approved, AVEC will seek
funding for construction of the turbines and the intertie. Currently AVEC is working on feasibility and conceptual design of the St. Michael/Stebbins wind system with an expected completion
of December 2012.
The wind resource completed in Aug. 2011 shows class 5 winds. Turbulence is low at this site. Average system penetration would be 29%.
Given the very good wind resource, AEA believes that it is reasonable to allocate funding for the next phase of project development.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA accept feasibility and conceptual design before finalizing the round 5 grant agreement.
AVEC proposes to add two NW100 turbines to their 400 kW Emmonak wind farm, boosting capacity to 600 kW.
Although the first project was awarded in Round 1, a wind resource analysis report was not published until August 2010. This wind resource report estimates a capacity factor of only
18.7% for a NW100B at 80% turbine availability. This is substantially less than AVEC?s estimate (23.8% capacity factor corresponding to a total of 1,250,000kWh). Neither AEA nor AVEC
were aware at the time of the Round 1 proposal and award that the wind resource would result in the low capacity factors and wind power densities actually seen at this site.
Depending on energy production assumptions, the benefit/cost ranges from 0.61 to 0.69, thus appearing to be marginal at this point. A more accurate assessment of production will be
available after a year or so of operation of the existing 400kW wind system.
No funding recommended.
AVEC proposes to install a 10 kW solar array on the side of the existing power plant in Upper Kalskag. AVEC estimates an annual savings of 9,096kWh and 673 gallons of diesel fuel per
year to offset operating costs and station service. This equates to a capacity factor of 12.5%.
The proposed project is similar to the Kaltag Solar project that is funded from REF 4 (#877). That project scope mounts the PV array on a CONEX container instead of the AVEC building.
The CONEX model allows for lower costs through construction in Fairbanks with only minor assembly in Upper Kalskag. The Conex can be optimally oriented to capture the most solar gain
as opposed to the powerhouse orientation.
Economics appear marginal. AEA believes that the Kaltag project, which was funded as a demonstration project, should be on line long enough to assess performance and economics before
further funds are allocated to similar projects.
Recommend no funding.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to install a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy created by Gambell?s
existing 300 kW wind system. The recovered energy would be used for the water treatment plant space heating, drinking water loop circulation heating, and water storage tank heating.
AVEC is requesting funding for design and construction of the proposed project. This phase is expected to cost $252,905, of which $12,645 (5%) would come as an in-kind match provided
by ANTHC, provided through project labor and rest of the amount, $240,260, is requested from the RE Fund.
The project would result in a substantial amount of fuel displaced at the water treatment plant. The proposal represents a solid partnership between AVEC and ANTHC.
The highest benefit for wind power is to displace diesel generator fuel before heating oil. Based on HOMER modeling, AEA is concerned that, under the current system configuration, only
55% of the wind turbine output can be used to offset generator fuel, while 45% of the output is excess power and available for offsetting heating fuel. Including a smaller genset in
the diesel system will result in significantly greater amount of generator fuel being saved according to AEA?s modeling. Although the proposed project will result in economic payback,
additional savings could be achieved by optimizing the diesel generator configuration.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to install a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy created by Chevak?s
existing 400kW wind system. The recovered energy would be used for the water treatment plant space heating, drinking water loop circulation heating, and water storage tank heating.
AVEC is requesting funding for design and construction of the proposed project. This phase is expected to cost $252,905, of which $12,645 (5%) would come as an in-kind match provided
by ANTHC, provided through project labor and rest of the amount, $240,260, is requested from the RE Fund.
The project would result in a substantial amount of fuel displaced at the water treatment plant. The proposal represents a solid partnership between AVEC and ANTHC.
The highest benefit for wind power is to displace diesel generator fuel before heating oil. Based on HOMER modeling, AEA is concerned that, under the current system configuration, only
61% of the wind turbine output can be used to offset generator fuel, while 39% of the output is excess power and available for offsetting heating fuel. Including a smaller genset in
the diesel system will result in significantly greater amount of generator fuel being saved according to AEA?s modeling. Although the proposed project will result in economic payback,
additional savings could be achieved by optimizing the diesel generator configuration.
Full funding recommended.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Goodnews Bay. Wind resource is estimate as a class 4 based on the high-resolution wind map. AEA notes an area of class
5 resource near Goodnews.
The City of Goodnews Bay, in cooperation with ANTHC, has proposed generating wind power to heat the water treatment plant and the washeteria (#859). Although AEA is recommending against
funding the City\'s project, the current proposal provides a way of addressing the City\'s proposed assessment.
This application is one of two wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 5. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2-4 for feasibility assessment in 10 other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, 1) AVEC will prepare budgets for both round 5 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs, and 2) work with the City and ANTHC to include scope of work that addresses feasibility of heating the water treatment plant and washeteria.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Shishmaref. Wind resource is estimated as a class 5 based on the high-resolution wind map.
This application is one of two wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 5. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2-4 for feasibility assessment in 10 other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Due to severe coastal erosion the community of Shishmaref is considering moving.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for both round 5 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes final design and construction of a 200 kW wind farm to serve the community of Mt. Village. The project would include 5-7 miles of transmission between the turbine site
and the Mountain Village system.
The completion of this project would benefit the community through stabilized energy costs. AVEC would also improve the switch gear and add remote control to the system. The wind resource
appears to be very good, a class 5.
AVEC?s proposal included a HOMER model that assumed 100% turbine availability and 100% utilization of turbine generation at 35% capacity factor. Excess wind energy is not addressed.
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. AVEC?s assumptions on wind generation and utilization appear overly optimistic.
2. Given a high project cost of $4.2 million ($21,000/kW), which includes the transmission, economics are poor (B/C = 0.6 to 0.9). Benefit/cost may improve if the system is tied to
the St. Mary?s grid.)
3. AVEC does not provide a feasibility analysis and conceptual design with the proposal.
No funding recommended.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to install a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy created by Shaktoolik?s
existing 200 kW wind system funded in RE Fund round 2 (#303). The recovered energy would be used for the water treatment plant space heating, drinking water loop circulation heating,
and water storage tank heating.
The round 2 grant included a 260 kW electric boiler as a secondary load to be installed in the power plant.
AVEC is requesting funding for design and construction of the proposed project. This phase is expected to cost $252,905, of which $12,645 (5%) would come as an in-kind match provided
by ANTHC, provided through project labor and rest of the amount, $240,260, is requested from the RE Fund.
The project would result in a substantial amount of fuel displaced at the water treatment plant. The proposal represents a solid partnership between AVEC and ANTHC.
The highest benefit for wind power is to displace diesel generator fuel before heating oil. Based on HOMER modeling, AEA is concerned that, under the current system configuration, only
44% of the wind turbine output can be used to offset generator fuel, while 56% of the output is excess power and available for offsetting heating fuel. Including a smaller genset in
the diesel system will result in significantly greater amount of generator fuel being saved according to AEA?s modeling. Although the proposed project will result in economic payback,
additional savings could be achieved by optimizing the diesel generator configuration.
Recommend full funding.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to install a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy created by Mekoryuk?s
existing 200 kW wind system funded in RE Fund round12 (#72). The recovered energy would be used for the water treatment plant space heating, drinking water loop circulation heating,
and water storage tank heating.
AVEC is requesting funding for design and construction of the proposed project. This phase is expected to cost $278,378, of which $123,919 (5%) would come as a match provided by ANTHC,
provided through project labor and rest of the amount, $264,459, is requested from the RE Fund.
The project would result in a substantial amount of fuel displaced at the water treatment plant. The proposal represents a solid partnership between AVEC and ANTHC.
The highest benefit for wind power is to displace diesel generator fuel before heating oil. Based on HOMER modeling, AEA is concerned that, under the current system configuration, only
49% of the wind turbine output can be used to offset generator fuel, while 51% of the output is excess power and available for offsetting heating fuel. Including a smaller genset in
the diesel system will result in significantly greater amount of generator fuel being saved according to AEA?s modeling. Although the proposed project will result in economic payback,
additional savings could be achieved by optimizing the diesel generator configuration.
Recommend full funding.
AVEC proposes construction of a 300 kW wind farm to supply the St. Marys-Pitkas Point grid. The work would also upgrade the existing power line to the wind farm site from single to
three-phase. The wind resource appears to be class 6.
AVEC received $275,554 in round 4 of the REF for completing feasibility and final design and permitting (#645). Currently AEA is working with AVEC to put the grant in place. The current
application only includes the foundation design and electrical drawings for the turbine interconnect and transmission line. There is no geotech final report (only preliminary). A special
provision of the round 4 grant is that ?before final design funds are disbursed AEA accepts the feasibility and conceptual design report?.
In round 3 AVEC proposed final design, permitting, and construction of a 900 kW wind project and intertie to serve the communities of St. Marys, Mountain Village, Pitkas Point, and Pilot
Station (#516). In round 2 AVEC requested funding for feasibility assessment for this project (#298). AEA recommended both proposals for funding; however there was not sufficient funding
for either.
AVEC noted presence of icing during the met tower studies resulting in tower collapse in two locations.
Based on the work to date it appears that a wind farm to serve the St. Marys grid is viable. AEA believes that it is reasonable for AVEC to consider its original concept of tying in
Mountain Village and Pilot Station and upsizing the wind generation capacity.
Recommend full funding with requirement that round 4 work needs to be completed and accepted by AEA. Round 4 work should address the potential for tying the communities together.
ORPC Alaska 2, LLC, proposes the installation of three additional 150-kW TidGen power systems for the TidGen Array project at East Foreland, near Nikiski in June 2014. The proposal
is to fund the second stage of the tidal energy project that was funded under Round 4 of the RE Fund. ORPC received $2 million for the deployment of the first 150 kW TidGen power system
at the site. The four devices are expected to have a peak capacity of 600 kW.
ORPC has been active in Alaska for several years working on reconnaissance and feasibility projects at several sites around the state, including Cook Inlet. ORPC has received several
Department of Energy grants to perform research vital for their Alaska projects, including on Beluga whales and bearings that will survive the inlet?s high sediment load. The Round
4 project is expected to begin in January 2013, with installation of the first tidal turbine in June 2013. The technology is still under development. The first full-scale deployment
of the 150 kW unit is expected in summer 2012 in Maine with support of a USDOE grant.
The East Foreland site is estimated to have very fast tidal currents (12 knots, or 6 m/s maximum velocities), making it highly energetic and technically challenging. If the initial
deployment is successful in 2013, the next stage, proposed in this application, is expected to begin in January 2014, with the installation of the next three turbines expected in June
2014.
ORPC?s proposal includes letters of support from the university, Homer Electric Association, contractors, Kenai Peninsula Borough, Homer Electric Association and others. The application
makes a strong case that development of the project in Alaska will have significant employment, economic, and technology impacts in the state. HEA has signed a letter of intent with
ORPC to participate in the project.
However, given the State?s previous investment of $2 million through the Round 4 RE Fund and the pre-commercial nature of the technology, AEA believes that it is too early for the State
to invest further funds until more information is gained from the installation in Maine and the first turbine funded under Round 4 grant.
No funding recommended.
The Ivanof Bay Tribal Council proposes to perform a reconnaissance study to explore the geothermal potential of the Ivanof Bay region.
The plan proposes a stepwise approach: geological field work (geological mapping, geochemical sampling, Geophysical surveys, sampling of the Big River) to determine if there are any
developable geothermal resources in the Ivanof Bay region. The known geothermal resources referenced in the application?Port Moller, Kupreanof, and Aniakchak?are all at great distances
from the communities of Perryville, Chignik, Chignik Lagoon, and Chignik Lake (between 28 and >70 miles).
HDL provided cost estimates geothermal development at a number of known geothermal sites in Alaska. HDL?s Port Moller estimate ranged between $47 and $92 million for a 1 MW plant.
Total electricity generation of the communities of Perryville, Chignik, Chignik Lake, and Chignik Lagoon equals approximately 1.6 million kWh per year. Using this as the yearly energy
consumption, the levelized cost of energy would be $2 to $3.50/kWh assuming no operation and maintenance cost, a 25-year life, and a 3% real discount rate.
The project is expected to begin in August 2012 and be completed by December 2013.
DGGS comments are as follows: ?The proposal seeks to investigate the geothermal potential of the Ivanof Bay area and is based on fumaroles fields related to Kupreanof Volcano and a deep
oil and gas exploration well drilled in 1976-1977, the Big River A-01. The proposal will gather literature and thermal satellite images, and proposes to test geothermal prospecting
and exploration techniques including geochemical sampling, shallow temperature surveys using thermal probes, gravity and/or magnetotelluric surveys in select locations and evaluate
the Big River A-01 core. The proposal could be improved by providing a map showing the locations of the communities, fumarole fields, oil and gas well and be more specific in delineating
the areas where geothermal exploration will be conducted. The resource proposed for study is distant from the Chignik communities (~90 km, with at least some FWS Refuge land in between).
Although the Big River well encountered geothermally interesting temperatures (~190F) the depth was great (~12,000\') and the drilling log mentions significant hydrothermal mineralization
which would presumably have a large negative impact on reservoir characteristics. Significant spring systems suggestive of a shallower, more accessible, hydrothermal system do not
exist.?
AEA?s is concerned that
1. Due to the great distances to the known geothermal resources and the low likelihood of finding an unknown geothermal resource, the proposal carries significant risks for finding
a suitable resource.
2. Were a resource identified, the cost of developing it would be prohibitively high.
No funding recommended.
Alaska Gateway School District proposes adding on a heat loop off the newly-completed wood-fired heating system at the Tok School to provide heat to the detached multipurpose buildings
that house a hockey rink, shooting range and Zamboni garage. The project team would revise the existing design and construction documents prior to construction.
The application is largely the same as a round 4 submittal (#617) that was not recommended due to poor economics. Since last year the project team has reduced the capital cost from
$754,651 to $629,000 by decreasing mobilization and construction costs. At the same time the projected cost of fuel over the life of the project has increased. These changes have
improved the projected benefit/cost ratio from 0.47 to 0.85.
Recommend full funding.
The City of Elim proposes a reconnaissance and feasibility study of the geothermal resources near the city. The UAF?s Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) would be contracted to
perform the reconnaissance and feasibility work.
The nearest hot springs to Elim are Kwiniuk Hot Springs (41?C, 22gpm) and Clear Hot Springs (65?C, 230gpm). Kwiniuk can be accessed by a 16-mile road (estimated to take 1.5 hours),
but is 8 miles straight distance from Elim. Clear Hot Springs is not currently road accessible and is located 16 miles via a straight path.
No previous work has been performed on this project by ACEP or the City of Elim. The project is expected to begin in August 2012 and be completed by July 2013. Funded by AEA?s geothermal
program in 2009, HDL assessed the cost of a potential project installed in Elim at $38 to 52 million. However, the current proposal makes the case that the resource is more similar
to that at Manley Hot Springs and estimates an installed cost of $15 to 37 million.
DNR notes that the reconnaissance study approach is reasonable: Thermal imaging (utilizing techniques being used by ACEP at the Pilgrim Hot Springs project site), ground-based reconnaissance
(geological mapping, soil & water sampling), the creation of a conceptual reservoir model, and development of a preliminary design and cost.
AEA is concerned that, even if a geothermal resource were located, economics appear poor. Assuming a mid-point cost of the system at $26 million and O&M costs of $312,000/yr the benefit/cost
ratio is 0.14. Assuming a cost of $15 million and no O&M, the benefit/cost ratio is only 0.54.
No funding recommended.
The City of False Pass Electrical Utility proposes to perform a reconnaissance and feasibility Tidal Energy Study to determine the viability of installing and operating a 150 kW ORPC
TidGen hydrokinetic device. The Aleutians East Borough will manage the project for the city utility.
No previous work has been done on this project. The project would perform a resource assessment of the strait off Unimak Island by creating a circulation model and deploying acoustic
Doppler current profilers (ADCP). Using the resource data and acquired economic information about the system and the local community, a decision would be made to determine if the project
was economically viable.
The project is expected to begin in September 2012 and be completed by the end of March 2014.
AEA recognizes that a number of strong entities with experience in Alaska have agreed to partner on the reconnaissance and feasibility project.
AEA?s concern is that tidal power technology is still in a very early stage of development. The most recent cost estimates through 2030 for tidal energy by the UK?s Carbon Trust range
from $0.24-0.80/kWh in UK waters. Projects in remote parts of Alaska would be expected to have significantly higher costs. Results of ORPC?s demonstration in Cook Inlet should be
examined before further project development work is pursued in more remote areas. AEA will consider further extensive resource assessment similar to work being supported with NOAA
in Cook Inlet through the hydrokinetic program.
Not recommended for funding.
The City of Angoon, in partnership with ANTHC, proposes feasibility assessment of windpower supplying the water treatment plant.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance-level information, such as rough capital cost, installed capacity, wind resource, or fuel savings.
2. The high-resolution map indicates a class 1 (poor) wind resource.
No funding recommended.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance-level information, such as rough capital cost.
2. The proposal assumes a class 5 resource, while the proposed location is a class 3.
3. AVEC is proposing a feasibility study (#874) for a larger-scale project that could also assess viability of providing heat to the water treatment plant.
4. Economics appear poor based on AEA modeling for heat only.
A larger combined heat and power wind-diesel system would appear to be a better option for a cost-effective solution. AEA has recommended funding for AVEC?s feasibility study with
the requirement that AVEC work with the City and ANTHC to assess feasibility of providing heat to the water treatment plant. It is recommended that the City use a comprehensive approach
for identifying cost-reduction options through the regional energy plan for the Yukon-Kuskokwim region, currently underway.
No funding recommended.
City of Togiak, in collaboration with ANTHC, proposes to construct a waste heat recovery system to connect waste heat from AVEC?s generating station to the water treatment plant, clinic,
police station, City Office, and the ?Old School? Community Activity Building.
The project will displace approximately 13,700 gallons of diesel per year according to a 2010 Heat Recovery Analysis.
A feasibility and conceptual design has been completed. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding.
City of Savoonga in collaboration with ANTHC, proposes construction of a diesel heat recovery system that would supply the water storage, treatment and distribution systems. The system
would displace approximately 8,800 gallons of diesel per year.
The application includes a conceptual design and feasibility assessment for the project. A design is in progress.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal.
1. The study was done only considering the 499 kW Cummins unit instead of the Detroit Diesel, which is more efficient and the generator of choice with the wind system.
2. According to PCE figures, the existing wind farm has a capacity factor of 21%--less than the assumed 30% capacity factor from the wind report.
The final design should address these issues. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA accept final design before construction funds are disbursed.
The City of Shishmaref, in collaboration with ANTHC, proposes to construct a waste heat recovery system to connect waste heat from the AVEC generating station to the clinic, city office,
and the water treatment plant.
The project will displace approximately 7,900 gallons of diesel per year.
A feasibility and conceptual design has been completed. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency are addressed in conjunction with this project.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance-level information, such as rough capital cost or installed wind capacity.
2. There is a diesel and wind waste heat recovery system in use with lines stubbed out at the new water treatment facility. This was not addressed in the application.
3. AVEC operates a 300 kW wind system in Kasigluk. The application make no reference to the AVEC system or the possibility of increasing the size of that system to produce both heat
and power.
4. Economics appear poor based on AEA modeling for heat only. Assuming a class 6 wind resource, offsetting 4800 gallons/yr of diesel, $4.30/gal fuel cost and the lowest possible cost
of a remanufactured 65 kW, a wind system benefit/cost was 0.4. This reflects that the value of replacing heat is much less than the value of displacing electrical energy.
A combined heat and power wind-diesel system would appear to be a better option for a cost-effective solution. AEA recommends that the City use a comprehensive approach for identifying
cost-reduction options through the regional energy plan for the Yukon-Kuskokwim region, currently underway.
No funding recommended.
The City of Klawock, in cooperation, with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to assess feasibility of using biomass to heat the water and wastewater treatment plants.
While AEA believes that biomass projects have potential merit, we are concerned that the proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance level information, including biomass resource
availability and cost, estimated fuel displacement, a rough capital cost, and presence of other heat users, such as the school or other community buildings for AEA to review the application.
AEA believes that a systematic, uniform approach for identifying and assessing potential biomass projects for water and sewer systems will be more effective and less expensive. AEA
will work with ANTHC and other stakeholders to develop a process to support this work through the statewide heat recovery program and regional energy plans.
No funding recommended.
The City of White Mountain, in cooperation with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to assess feasibility of recovering heat from the community power system to supply the
water treatment, storage and distribution system.
While AEA believes that heat recovery projects have much merit, we are concerned that
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance level information, including estimated fuel displacement, a rough capital cost, and other heat users, such as the school or
other community buildings for AEA to review the application.
2. Based on AEA?s experience the grant request is high in relation to the amount of work that is required.
AEA believes that a systematic, uniform approach for identifying and assessing potential heat recovery projects for water and sewer systems will be more effective and less expensive.
AEA will work with ANTHC and other stakeholders to develop a process to support this work through the statewide heat recovery program and regional energy plans.
No funding recommended.
The City of New Stuyahok, in cooperation with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to assess feasibility of recovering heat from the community power system to supply the
water treatment, storage and distribution system.
While AEA believes that heat recovery projects have much merit, we are concerned that
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance level information, including estimated fuel displacement, a rough capital cost, and other heat users, such as the school or
other community buildings for AEA to review the application.
2. Based on AEA?s experience the grant request is high in relation to the amount of work that is required.
AEA believes that a systematic, uniform approach for identifying and assessing potential heat recovery projects for water and sewer systems will be more effective and less expensive.
AEA will work with ANTHC and other stakeholders to develop a process to support this work through the statewide heat recovery program and regional energy plans.
No funding recommended.
The City of Toksook Bay, in cooperation with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to assess feasibility of recovering heat from the community power system to supply the water
treatment, storage and distribution system.
While AEA believes that heat recovery projects have much merit, we are concerned that
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance level information, including estimated fuel displacement, a rough capital cost, and other heat users, such as the school or
other community buildings for AEA to review the application.
2. Based on AEA?s experience the grant request is high in relation to the amount of work that is required.
AEA believes that a systematic, uniform approach for identifying and assessing potential heat recovery projects for water and sewer systems will be more effective and less expensive.
AEA will work with ANTHC and other stakeholders to develop a process to support this work through the statewide heat recovery program and regional energy plans.
No funding recommended.
The City of Lower Kalskag, in cooperation, with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to assess feasibility of using biomass to heat the water treatment plant.
While AEA believes that biomass projects have potential merit, we are concerned that the proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance level information, including biomass resource
availability and cost, estimated fuel displacement, a rough capital cost, and presence of other heat users, such as the school or other community buildings for AEA to review the application.
AEA believes that a systematic, uniform approach for identifying and assessing potential biomass projects for water and sewer systems will be more effective and less expensive. AEA
will work with ANTHC and other stakeholders to develop a process to support this work through the statewide heat recovery program and regional energy plans.
No funding recommended.
Applicant proposes wind study to assess feasibility of wind-powered heating for the community sanitation facility.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. AVEC is funded in round 4 (#647) to assess feasibility of replacing the existing four AOC 65 kW turbines. Heat production from new turbines can be considered through this work.
2. Performance of the existing system indicates a class 2 wind resource.
3. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance-level information, such as rough capital cost, fuel displacement or revenue streams. The proposal did not address whether
or not there was an existing diesel heat recovery system to tie into.
4. With class 2 winds in the region, economics of a wind-for-heat project will be poor.
The proposal mentions that the dampers on the oil-fired system are missing or not operating correctly. These problems should be fixed before adding wind to the system. AEA recommends
that the City use a comprehensive approach for identifying cost-reduction options through a regional energy plan for the Northwest region.
No funding recommended.
Sleetmute Traditional Council, in collaboration with ANTHC, proposes to construct a waste heat recovery system to connect waste heat from the Middle Kuskokwim Electric generating station
to the water treatment plant.
The project will displace approximately 1,779 gallons of diesel per year according to a 2010 Heat Recovery Analysis.
A feasibility and conceptual design has been completed. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding.
The City of Scammon Bay requests funding for feasibility, permitting and final design of a hydroelectric project at Scammon Bay. AVEC participated in two reconnaissance and two feasibility
studies were completed in the 1980s for a river in Scammon Bay that also serves as the domestic water supply for the village. That site was found to be infeasible.
This application is based upon a 2003 feasibility study by Polarconsult of a 331 kW run-of-river hydro plant on Ekashluak Creek. This creek originates in the Askinuk Mountains and is
located 11 miles west of Scammon Bay and is inaccessible except by boat or snowmachine. AVEC commissioned that study and concluded the long distance to the village made the site unattractive.
The City proposes partner with ANTHC for project management; Hatch will be retained for the design of the hydro plant. The power system at Scammon Bay is owned and run by AVEC. AVEC
would eventually own the plant and AVEC has submitted a letter of support for the project.
There is limited discussion of the issues associated with integration of a new hydro plant in the existing diesel system. The application mentions new wind in several places; a Rd
IV grant will study wind generation at SB. There is mention of significant undersea cable required to connect an alternate hydro source on Ekashluak Creek, and the project appears
be located in a wildlife refuge. There is no mention of associated fish issues in this creek in the application or in the attached 2003 feasibility study, but there appears to be the
potential for fish habitat impact. The licensing jurisdiction is not identified, whether federal (FERC) or state. Given the uncertainty associated with these issues, AEA believes
it is premature to allocate funds for final design and permitting.
Recommend partial funding of $80,723 for feasibility and conceptual design (tasks 1-3) with requirement that grantee and AEA will revise scope and budget before grant is issued.
The City of Kotlik proposes feasibility assessment of wind-powered heat and power for the city water and wastewater facility.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance-level information, such as rough capital cost, fuel displacement or revenue streams. The proposal did not address whether
or not there was an existing diesel heat recovery system to tie into.
2. The class 4-5 wind resource is not indicated on the latest high-resolution wind map.
3. Economics of the project appear marginal even though the economist report assumes no boiler cost. Estimated cost of the feasibility work is half of the estimated construction cost.
A combined heat and electric system would appear to be a better option for a cost-effective solution. AEA recommends that the City use a comprehensive approach for identifying cost-reduction
options through the regional energy plan for the Yukon-Kuskokwim region, currently underway.
No funding recommended.
The City of Noorvik, in cooperation, with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to assess feasibility of recovering heat from the community power system to supply the water
treatment, storage and distribution system.
While AEA believes that heat recovery projects have much merit, we are concerned that
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance level information, including estimated fuel displacement, a rough capital cost, and other heat users, such as the school or
other community buildings for AEA to review the application.
2. Based on AEA?s experience the grant request is high in relation to the amount of work that is required.
AEA believes that a systematic, uniform approach for identifying and assessing potential heat recovery projects for water and sewer systems will be more effective and less expensive.
AEA will work with ANTHC and other stakeholders to develop a process to support this work through the statewide heat recovery program and regional energy plans.
No funding recommended.
City of Russian Mission, in cooperation with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes final design and construction of a heat recovery system that will supply the school and
teacher housing. The project will include a marine jacket retrofit on the prime genset, thus doubling available recoverable heat..
The project will displace approximately 12,000 gallons of diesel per year.
A feasibility and conceptual design has been completed. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding.
The Atmautluak Traditional Council in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the design and construction a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the community power
plant to the refurbished washeteria. This project is estimated to displace 4395 gallons of fuel oil.
The AEA-managed power plant replacement for the community is in the conceptual design phase with funding targeted for 2012. The power plant replacement is not required for this project
to be successful, but it could enhance the availability of recovered heat.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2011. AEA notes that the application narrative states that final design funding is requested for 2011, although funding would
not be available until July 2012. The budget form gives a later timeframe.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding.
The City of Golovin, in partnership with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to assess feasibility of utilizing wind turbines to generate power to provide heat for the existing
water treatment plant, water storage and water distribution system. AEA followed up with questions regarding the efficiency of the boilers, fuel consumption, heating season, and amount
of water that needed to be heated.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance-level information, such as rough capital cost, wind resource from high-resolution map, fuel displacement or revenue streams.
Data provided were not sufficient to perform even a very rough economic analysis. The proposal did not address whether or not there was an existing diesel heat recovery system to
tie into.
2. Economics appear poor based on AEA modeling for heat only. Assuming a class 4 wind resource, offsetting 4000 gallons/yr of diesel, $5.00/gal fuel cost and the lowest possible cost
of a remanufactured 65 kW wind system benefit/cost was 0.5 to 0.6. This reflects that the value of replacing heat is much less than the value of displacing electrical energy.
A combined heat and electric system would appear to be a better option for a cost-effective solution. AEA recommends that the City use a comprehensive approach for identifying cost-reduction
options through a regional energy plan for the Bering Straits region.
No funding recommended.
City of Kake is requesting funding for feasibility and conceptual design to evaluate various hydro resource alternatives at Kake dam and Cathedral Falls. The dam in Kake provides for
the city\'s water supply and supplies the fish hatchery. The City would use ANTHC for study lead with assistance from the firm Hatch.
AEA has the following concerns:
1. The City has not prepared a reconnaissance assessment that identifies a single alternative for the feasibility and conceptual design funding request.
2. Several previous studies have reviewed hydro resources near Kake and recommended no further pursuit of this type of resource. Kake receives roughly 1/4 of Ketchikan\'s annual precipitation,
so its hydro prospects are not compelling.
3. Funds are being requested by SEAPA for an engineering study of transmission to Kake in Rd V app # 811.
No funding recommended.
Applicant proposes final design and construction of a cordwood ?fired heating system to supply the water treatment plant facilities. Assessment for wood heating in Ambler, Shungnak,
and Kobuk was funded under two earlier projects: 1) Feasibility in round 1 (# 59) and 2) final design in round 4 to NW Inupiat Housing Authority (NWIHA) (#668). Work includes fuel
supply plan, business plan, and technology assessment.
The project would consume 35 cords of year harvested from NANA lands. A letter from NANA states its support. The system would operated through the Alaska Rural Utility Collaborative
and represents their first wood-fired system.
AEA is concerned that the economics appear marginal. They could be improved by identifying ways of reducing capital cost and/or increasing diesel displacement during the design phase.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
AEA is also concerned that the Kobuk Valley Electric is not participating regularly in the PCE program.
Recommend full funding with requirements that 1) The City must coordinate with NWIHA and their consultant in developing the project, 2) AEA must accept final design before construction
funding is disbursed and 3) wood supply contracts for 5 years must be in place before construction funding is disbursed.
Nome Joint Utility System proposes the design, permitting, construction and commissioning of a second EWT 900 turbine at the Banner Wind Farm.
In a second proposal (#898) NJUS requests funding to integrate existing 1875 kW and 3660 kW units into Nome?s Power Plant and reconfigure plant controls to reduce operating costs, provide
greater stability, and improve efficiency. The second proposal scope includes relocating the 1875 kW unit from a different building. AEA believes that this work is not consistent
with the intent of the RE Fund, therefore not eligible. Only the integration of a secondary load controller and resistive dump boiler, estimated to cost $325,000, are consistent with
the objectives of the RE Fund and eligible for funding.
For the purposes of review AEA will consider proposal #839 and the eligible portion of #898 as one application.
NJUSs? original proposal (#52) was for the construction of a 3 MW wind farm at a project cost of $13.5 million. The project was partially funded at $4 million and the scope reduced
to the installation of a single EWT 900 turbine. Of this cost, $69,000 is for conceptual design and feasibility, while $3,931,000 is for final design and construction. A RE Fund round
1 grant is in place for the design, permitting, construction and commissioning of a single EWT 900 turbine. A conceptual design report, which includes analysis of a wind-diesel system
with both one and two EWT 900 turbines, has been accepted by AEA.
NJUS is requesting funds for the design, permitting, construction and commissioning of the proposed project. The project is expected to cost $4,115,000, of which $411,500 would come
as matching funds provided by NJUS. NJUS is requesting $3,703,500 from the RE Fund in proposal #839.
The combined proposed project (#52, 839, 898) has a relatively low price per installed kilowatt and can lead to a significant drop in diesel usage for electricity in the community.
AEA is concerned that the current diesel configuration is oversized for the community and especially so for the installation of significant wind power. Integrating the smaller generators
will help to address this situation.
Recommend funding of $4,069,000 ($8,000,000 cap - $3,931,000 from the round 1 grant) with the requirement that 1) AEA accept final design and permitting, and 2) NJUS reconfigures the
existing diesel generators, (including the non-RE Fund eligible work) before construction funds are released.
The Chickaloon Village Traditional Council proposes construction of a pellet and solar heating system to supply heat to the shop and administrative building. The system would include
a solar thermal panel, a 200 MBH wood pellet-fired boiler, and an 8 x 12? addition to one of the buildings.
The applicant is requesting construction; however, a detailed final design has not been completed. Upon AEA request the applicant provided a rough conceptual design. Chickaloon?s submittal
did not include a final layout of the system, a detailed heating load assessment, a schematic of the control system, or other site-specific detail.
AEA supports the initiative for developing a heating project for Chickaloon Village Traditional Council. However, AEA is concerned about the high cost of the project as currently configured,
the relatively low fuel displacement, and marginal project economics.
Despite the lack of an acceptable final design, AEA recognizes that the proposed system is relatively simple. Before any state funds are disbursed, AEA believes that it is reasonable
to for Chickaloon to assess options to lower the cost of the project, increase amount of fuel displaced by supplying more loads, or do both.
Recommend full funding with requirement that Chickaloon provide a final design that is acceptable to AEA before any funds are disbursed.
9/21/2011 application withdrawn
Chignik Lagoon Village Council requests funds to construct a 177 kV hydroelectric project on Packers Creek. The project would displace 89% of the community?s electrical energy. An
RE Fund round 1 grant was made for permitting and final design (#14) for $150,000. The project would consist of a 9\' concrete dam penstock and powerhouse on Packer Creek and a 1,800
feet transmission line to connect to community power system.
AEA has reviewed the final design documents and has identified some additional work to be completed, including flood elevations and bridge foundations. Additionally site control has
not been obtained as of date of this review, although a letter from the village corporation indicates this will be provided. Water rights from ADNR, the Borough development permit,
and the ADF&G fish habitat permit remain to be issued. Integration of hydro with existing diesel power plant is not discussed in application. Discussion of interruptible power to
heat the school is mentioned but not designed or budgeted for in the project estimate. The construction manager is not identified. Given all these unresolved issues, AEA believes
the cost estimate for this construction project is low.
Despite these shortcomings, technical and economic feasibility of this project appear favorable, and the project has high potential for meeting most of community electrical needs. The
community?s distribution system was upgraded in 2003, while the power system was upgraded in the mid-1990s.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA must approve final design, permitting, financing plan, and construction manager before construction cost reimbursement.
The City of Ouzinkie proposes feasibility study and conceptual design to replace the existing timber buttress dam at Ouzinkie with a new facility that can impound 50% more water, thus
enabling the diesel generators to be shut off. The existing dam serves as a source for hydroelectric generation and for the community\'s water supply.
For the proposed project (which does not include repair of the existing project), the City proposes permitting and environmental review, geotechnical investigations and surveying, and
engineering evaluations of access road, penstock saddle dike and powerhouse with a final report.
In the near term, the City has stated it will spend $410k for repairing the old dam. This includes a DNR Periodic Dam Inspection, permitting and design for dam repairs, performing the
dam and access road repairs. As part of the project review, AEA requested information on the status of the repair. The City replied that they are working on improving the road to
the project, but to date they have not obtained funding for the repair.
AEA is concerned that the proposal does not address the tradeoff between repairing the existing timber buttress dam and building a new, expanded project. It is not clear that a new,
expanded project is justified if the existing project is repaired.
The economic review indicates marginal economics given limited market for energy from the expanded project. AEA is concerned that the cost of the proposed feasibility work is high.
The feasibility work may indicate that it makes more sense to repair the existing project instead of replacing and upgrading the dam.
Recommend full funding with requirement that the City prepare a preliminary report acceptable to AEA on the outcome of tasks 1-3 that addresses the issues of repair versus replacement
and sizing before proceeding to geotech field investigations and conceptual design.
The Kenai Peninsula Borough School District is proposing to feasibility, final design and installation of pellet-fired boiler systems to heat three Seward schools ? the elementary, middle,
and high school. This project is estimated to displace a total of 120,600 gallons per year of fuel oil.
The project has completed reconnaissance phase work. Given proximity of the three buildings the feasibility analysis will consider a district heating system to supply all three buildings.
The application includes substantial support from the community, USFS, and the local tribal council. This project will develop an anchor tenant for pellet supply in the Southcentral
Alaska region and will potentially support the development of pellet manufacturing infrastructure.
Given the proven performance of pellet systems and commercial availability of pellet fuel AEA is comfortable with recommending full funding with required approval of development phases.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding, with requirement of AEA acceptance of feasibility and final design phases.
Kenai Hydro LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Homer Electric Association, proposes final design and construction of a 4.5 MW hydro facility at Grant Lake. Recognizing that this project
would provide a significant amount of renewable energy to the Railbelt grid, AEA has previously granted Kenai Hydro $100,000 for reconnaissance assessment in the alternative energy
RFP and $816,000 in RE Fund round 1 (#34) and $1,184,000 in round 4(#635). The balance of the estimated $35,000,000 project would be financed and possibly include some public funds.
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. Final design funding would not be needed until March 2014 at the point anticipated for FERC licensing. For this reason it appears that final design funding is premature.
2. There is significant public opposition to the project.
3. It will likely cost more to mitigate impacts of features not yet anticipated in the cost estimate, such as i) relocation of the roadway and transmission line due to presence of Iditarod
Commemorative trail (currently permitted and under development), and ii) the cost of constructing a new tailrace pond.
4. We expect that in the FERC licensing process, there will be constraints on the operation of the project that will significantly impact the amount of energy that can be produced.
For instance, energy output will be reduced in order to maintain environmental stream flows and lake levels necessary to mitigate impact on fisheries.
5. KHL does not demonstrate site control at this time.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Kake is proposing to replace one of the existing boilers at the Kake School with a pellet boiler system, including an outdoor pellet storage silo. It is estimated that the
project will displace 42,495 gallons of fuel oil. The project team is in discussion with Sealaska to supply the pellets for this system.
The Kake School completed a reconnaissance assessment with the AEA and USFS-supported Alaska Wood Energy Task Group that showed viability of wood heat. The pellet system has been chosen
and it is a simple, low maintenance unit. The project would provide a pellet boiler and infrastructure demonstration in a rural Southeast community.
AEA is concerned that the application does not allocate sufficient resources for design and contingency. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is
addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with requirement that the applicant submit a final design and cost estimate acceptable to AEA before construction funding is disbursed.
Copper River Native Association requests funding for studying feasibility of wood-fired heating or combined heat and power to supply a planned ?multi-disciplinary combined facility?
(MDCF) to be funded by the BIA.
AEA and economics contractors were unclear on a number of issues including:
1. Status of the MDCF
2. Source, cost, and volume of biomass
3. The scale of the envisioned project?facility or grid-connected power system.
4. Clarification of the estimated project cost.
5. How the project fit with the Copper Valley Electric Association?s goals for renewable power generation and the Glennallen school?s proposed heating project.
These issues should have been addressed in a reconnaissance-level assessment that has not been done to AEA?s knowledge. The information was requested in two separate email messages,
but there was no response from the applicant.
In response to AEA\'s initial recommendation for no funding due to lack of response, CRNA requested reconsideration. Based on CRNA\'s recent clarification that the proposed project
is feasibility of a wood pellet-fired thermal system, AEA has concluded that it is reasonable to recommend the project for funding.
From the application, the equipment cost for the pellet boilers is estimated at $200,000. Based on previous projects, a feasibility study of this magnitude should cost approximately
$30,000.
Recommend partial funding of $30,000, with the requirement that AEA will work with CRNA to developed the revised scope.
IPEC requests grant funds to assess feasibility study of a 1 MW storage or run-of-river hydro project at Walker Lake. The primary purpose of the project would be to supply IPEC?s Chilkat
Valley system with hydropower. IPEC is in the process of purchasing the 600 kW Ten-Mile hydro project. IPEC currently purchases hydropower from AP&T?s Upper Lynn Canal grid. Thus,
currently all of Chilkat Valley?s power is from hydro sources.
The economic analysis performed for this project assumes that that the project will displace diesel generation of 1,950 to 2,800 MWh per year. Based on this assumption it estimates
a B/C ratio of 2.7 to 3.9. However, AEA believes that little to no diesel will be displaced by this project.
Alaska Power Authority prepared a reconnaissance assessment for Walker Lake in 1988 and Sealaska Corporation updated the assessment in 2005. Both studies concluded that the project
feasibility was marginal to poor.
AEA has the following concerns with this project:
1. AEA has already committed funding for Connelly Lk, Schubee Lk, and Burro Cr reconnaissance and feasibility assessment. These projects would compete to meet the same loads as the
proposed project.
2. Permitting conditions are adverse. The project would require a 6-8 mile transmission line to interconnect to Upper Lynn Canal grid passing through the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve.
The site has geotechnical issues. FERC would likely have jurisdiction due to salmon issues.
3. This project would not displace diesel generation.
No funding recommended.
Metlakatla Indian Community proposes construction of an intertie that connects Metlakatla to Ketchikan. AEA is providing $2 million in RE Fund rounds 1 and 4 (#20 and 656). Additionally
there is another $2 million in grant funds from the state.
Currently the RE Fund round 4 grant is not in place. Conditions of the grant will include the following as per the round 4 AEA comments: (1) Before any grant funds can be disbursed,
MIC is to submit to AEA for its review and approval, a power sales agreement between MIC and KPU which clarifies the terms, conditions, rates and amount of power for this intertie;
(2) MIC must demonstrate completion of all preconstruction activities including final design documents and final construction cost estimate; and (3) MIC must demonstrate project site
control, including required easements and Rights-of-way, NEPA requirements and all permits needed to construct have been issued.
AEA is assisting MIC in complying with these conditions; however this work remains in process.
AEA believes it is premature to allocate additional construction funds.
No funding recommended.
Combined with #825
Wrangell Light & Power requests funding for design and construction of a capacitor bank to correct voltage delivery issues in Wrangell.
The applicant asserts that the project would result in improved power quality and greater system stability, there is no indication in the proposal that renewable energy production is
increased. Instead the proposal appears to add system components to address operational issues.
No funding recommended.
Kootznoowoo Inc. proposes construction of a 1+ MW run-of-river hydroelectric project and 6.7 mi transmission project to supply the community of Angoon. Kootznoowoo has supplied separate
applications for each of the projects (#825 and 827). AEA is combining the two project proposals together for the purposes of evaluation.
AEA has a Round 4 (#670) grant to Kootznoowoo in the amount of $1,060,500 for permitting and final design with equal match from DOE. Although the application indicates that design and
permitting will be complete by September 2012, AEA believes this schedule is overly optimistic and that it is premature to allocate construction funds to this project.
AEA initially recommended against funding this project due to concerns that Kootznoowoo would not be able to complete design and permitting by September 2012. Kootznoowoo requested
reconsideration of this recommendation on the basis that ten months is sufficient time for them to complete design and permitting. In response AEA is willing to recommend funding for
construction, with the requirement that no construction funds will be granted until AEA accepts final design, Kootznoowoo completes current grant activities, and the project team demonstrates
that all permits have been issued and that project financing and power sales agreements are in place.
Full funding recommended with the above special provisions.
The North Slope Borough proposes to conduct a feasibility study to explore the possibility of using ground-source heat pumps (GSHP) and waste heat from the Anaktuvuk Pass?s diesel gensets
for district heating. The applications basic design for the GSHP is a 4,000 foot long trench, 3-4 feet wide, and 12-15 feet deep.
No previous work has been done on the GSHP side of the project. Waste heat recovery is currently being used to heat the Public Works building and fire station. The proposed project
would begin in August 2012 and be completed by the end of 2013.
AEA has the following concerns with this project:
1. We question the likelihood of achieving the expected coefficient of performance (COP) of 3 due to the very cold ground expected at Anaktuvuk Pass.
2. The electricity to power the GSHP would come from diesel gensets that are generating at around 30% efficiency. This indicates that little if any diesel would be offset by the project.
3. The cost of the feasibility assessment (~$187,000) is very high.
AEA believes that a more systematic, statewide approach for GSHP feasibility would be more efficient and less costly. This work was started by AEA, UAF and CCHRC and should be continued.
No funding recommended.
The Tatitlek Tribal Council proposes updating a 2006 mechanical design plan and construction of a diesel heat recovery system that will supply the Tatitlek Community Center, which houses
the Village IRA Council administrative offices, from the power plant, 50 feet away. The generating station and admin building were designed to accommodate this application when the
power plant was refurbished in 2006, and the only phase remaining for this project is construction and installation. The original designer would manage design and construction.
The cost estimate was developed based on an AEA field visit in July 2011. The project is estimated to displace 6,000 gallons of fuel oil. The technology is proven and the construction
complexity will be low. The operation and maintenance of the system will be performed by the current operator.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA accept the final design cost estimate prior to releasing funds for construction.
The Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) in collaboration with ANTHC requests funding for feasibility assessments and forest inventories in 7 communities to evaluate the potential
use of biomass systems for heating. This is the 2nd application for feasibility assessments. A project for 8 communities was funded through Round 4. The proposed communities for
this round are: Northway, Tanacross, Nenana, Circle, Eagle, Stevens Village, and Minto.
IRHA has assembled a strong team with a biomass energy and resource experience. AEA believes that the proposed approach is well-conceived.
AEA requested further information regarding why this project cost significantly more than a similar round 4 project (#637) that cost $154,477. IRHA replied that 1) they are hiring ANTHC
to conduct water and sewer energy efficiency and biomass feasibility analyses at a cost of approximately $88,000, and 2) they under-budgeted cost of resource analysis by Tanana Chiefs
last time. However end use energy efficiency work is not an eligible activity under the Renewable Energy Fund and has other sources of support. For the purposes of our recommendation
AEA will assume that 50% of the ANTHC work can be supported by the RE Fund ($44,172). AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction
with this project.
Recommend partial funding of $279,525 (requested amount $323,696 - $44,172) for feasibility and biomass energy resource assessment.
The Huslia Traditional Council in collaboration with ANTHC and IHRA is proposing the design and construction of a biomass heating system for the water treatment facility and the clinic.
The project is estimated to replace 21,736 gallons of fuel oil. The water treatment plant operator will be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the wood heating system.
The project will use approximately 254 cords per year
AEA has the following concerns about the proposal:
1. The application mentions that current residents supply cordwood for $350 per cord, but there is no mention of letters of intent to supply the wood resource.
2. There is no mention of a wood inventory analysis to guarantee a sustainable wood supply. State Forestry notes that land availability for harvest is not established.
3. Although a reconnaissance assessment has been prepared, there is not a comprehensive feasibility assessment of fuel availability and project alternatives.
Despite these concerns, economics appear favorable and AEA believes that partial funding is warranted to advance the project through final design.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend partial funding of $50,000 for completion of feasibility and final design, including fuelwood inventory and supply plan with the requirement that AEA accept the feasibility
report before funding is made available for final design.
The Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) requests funding to build three community wood heating systems to serve community facilities. Through funding from Round 4 of the Renewable
Energy Fund, IRHA is currently conducting a feasibility assessment of eight villages: Hughes, Ruby, Koyukuk, Nulato, Kaltag, Nikolai, Anvik, and Holy Cross. All of these communities
were identified for wood heating in the Alaska Energy Pathway. Following the assessments, three candidates will be selected.
For this analysis, a surrogate project, based on the Village of Huslia, was developed to model potential costs, savings, and biomass requirement. Actual capital costs will vary with
any of the three final candidate villages.
The project has the potential to benefit 3 remote communities with some of the highest cost of energy in the state while utilizing a wood supply from wildfire mitigation activities.
IHRA has assembled a team with a strong background in biomass projects. The project may use a modular wood-fired boiler, thus providing demonstration benefits.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with the requirements that 1) A wood resource analysis must be completed and reviewed by AEA and Alaska Division of Forestry to assure the sustainable supply of
wood for each chosen community; 2) AEA must accept the recommendations from the feasibility analyses of the three communities that will advance to design and construction, and 3) the
economic analysis B/C ratios of the chosen communities should average greater than 1.25 (the ratio that was assumed for the purpose of analysis.
Chugach Electric requests funding to complete final design and construction of a project to divert water from Stetson Creek into the Cooper Lake Reservoir and a related structure to
release environmental flows into Cooper Creek as a part of the FERC re-licensing of Cooper Lake hydro project in 2007. CEA agreed to spend up to $12.5 million (2009$) to construct
this project in order to enhance fish habitat in Cooper Creek by raising the stream water temperature. CEA received funding from the RE Fund (#674) for feasibility and permitting/final
design in Round 4. The cost of final design has increased, and the current proposal requests half of the funding for the increase.
In support of the relicensing effort CEA has funded a substantial amount of feasibility-level work. In 2007 the project was estimated to cost about $11 million. However, following
a 2009 constructability review, the capital cost estimate increased to $24 million due to requirements for tunneling and control structures for the diverted water and for the environmental
flows.
The main benefit of the proposed project would be the continued operation of the 19.4 MW Cooper Lake project. In addition the diversion adds water to Cooper Lake, resulting in a net
increase in hydropower. For the purposes of the economic analysis prepared for evaluating this application, only the additional costs of the diversion and benefits of the incremental
hydropower are considered.
By formal notice, CEA has to have design drawings completed and forwarded to FERC by August 2012. A schedule submitted with the application shows final design and permitting to be
completed by end of September 2012, with FERC approval by October 2012. Construction is to be bid by December 2012 and the construction contract award by May 2013.
An August 2010 CEA board resolution caps the CEA commitment to construciton at $12.5 million. CEA would need to offset the balance with grant funds.
Before RE Fund funding is allocated to construction, it is reasonable for CEA to 1) complete feasibility, permitting, and final design and 2) identify remaining project financing.
Recommend partial funding of $49,781 to complete final design.
Did not pass Stage 1
Copper Valley Electric proposes funding for construction of the 6.5 MW run-of-river hydro project on Allison Creek, estimated to cost $38,804,000. Specifically CVEA requests funds to
purchase long lead items. To date CVEA has been awarded $13,288,000 in various state grants. By SB 46 language, CVEA is limited in the amount of state funds to 50% of the project
costs.
CVEA submitted a license application to FERC in August 2011. Currently the project is in the final design and permitting stage. Final design and permitting is scheduled for completion
in early 2013.
Based on the work to date, the project appears to offer significant benefits, including
1. Substantial displacement of diesel generation--approximately 1.1 million gallons per year in fuel savings. CVEA?s hydro generation would increase from 52 to 68% hydro.
2. Substantial monetary savings in relation to the installed cost (high benefit/cost ratio).
3. Ability to supply hydro generation to seasonal industrial loads, such as the new expansion of the PetroStar refinery.
However, since final design and permitting will not be completed until 2013 at the earliest, AEA believes that it is premature to allocate additional construction funds to this project.
Currently CVEA has $10 million of fy12 state capital funds that may be made available for long lead time items.
No funding recommended.
The Copper River School District in collaboration with the Copper River Development Association proposes conceptual design, final design, and construction of a biomass boiler system
that will heat the Glennallen High School, the Elementary School, the Vocational Training Buildings, the District Office, and both Distance Learning and Rural Cap. The system will
displace approximately 63,350 gallons of fuel oil each year. The system would use approximately 1000 green tons of chips per year.
The project has begun conceptual design, and the application includes a conceptual cost estimate.
This project proposes to utilize the same boiler system as the Tok School and Delta Greely School, projects funded through the Renewable Energy Fund. Forest inventories have been completed
for the Glennallen area, and the required timber volumes for this project appears within the sustainable harvest limits. The local sawmill operator has signed a letter of commitment
for the chip supply for this project.
The project team includes engineers with experience developing the Tok and Delta projects with the intent of standardizing the design. The proposal shows excellent community support.
However the proposal does not include a match.
Given the standardized approach AEA is comfortable with recommending full funding with required approval of development phases.
AEA is concerned that long-term fuel supply for this 20-year project needs to be better established. As part of the completion of the feasibility and conceptual design AEA will require
preparation of a fuel supply plan. The final design phase should include a long-term fuel supply contract with a contingency plan. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building
energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding, with requirement of AEA acceptance of feasibility and final design phases.
Ketchikan Public Utilities requests funding for contruction of the 4.6 MW Whitman Hydro project. The project would benefit the local fish hatchery owned by the SSRAA by providing a
new water supply. Prior grants include a RE Fund round 1 (#37) for final design and permitting of $1.3M and a round 4 grant for construction (#620) of $700,000. The Legislature
provided $1 million in 2010, and $8.025 million in 2011. Total state funding available for construction is $8.73 million. KPU has obtained authority to issue a $15 million revenue
bond for construction.
Recently the cost estimate for the project was adjusted upwards from $16.5 million to $26.5 million due to FERC licensing conditions and escalation of costs over time.
AEA has recently learned that KPU must obtain an amendment to its power purchase agreement with SEAPA, without which KPU will be legally unable to use energy from the Whitman Lake project
for its ratepayers. At the time of this evaluation, this matter remains unresolved.
At a SEAPA board meeting in November SEAPA staff presented an analysis showing that under the latest load forecast (the SEIRP reference case) a substantial amount of energy from the
combined hydro systems would be spilled, thus significantly limiting public benefit.
AEA believes that additional funding for this project is unwarranted at this time.
No funding recommended.
AVTEC proposes to renovate, refurbish and upgrade the City\'s existing Marathon Hydro plant, currently unused. The application is largely the same as #657 in round 4. For that application
AEA recommended partial funding of $67,000 for final design and permitting. AEA and AVTEC entered into a grant agreement in July 2011 for this work, but little work has been completed
to date.
Since the design and permitting work is not yet completed, the scope of work, cost estimate, and schedule cannot be verified, and there is not sufficient basis to recommend funding at
this time.
Recommend no funding.
Southeast Alaska Power Authority proposes feasibility and conceptual design to assess impacts of delivering SEAPA power to Kake.
Currently there are three sources of funding for the 50-mile Kake-Petersburg Intertie focused on completing final design and permitting: 1) $2.99 million from RE Fund Round 1 (#29),
2) $500,000 grant from a 2008 legislative appropriation, and 3) $2 million grant from an additional legislative appropriation. Currently work under the KWETICO (Kwaan) grant has consisted
of conceptual design and environmental field studies for the two primary routes under consideration. An MOU between SEAPA, KWETICO, IPEC and AEA establishes ownership, maintenance,
and operation responsibilities for the project. AEA, the grantees, and SEAPA will enter into a project management agreement.
AEA believes that the work proposed under this grant will advance the Kake-Petersburg Intertie. However, AEA believes that the current work proposed can be accomplished using current
project funding. Existing grants require a project management agreement. AEA will require that SEAPA take the lead on this work under that agreement. AEA will work with its partners
to ensure that the proposed scope of work is accomplished as proposed.
No funding recommended.
SEAPA proposes feasibility of wind development in the Ketchikan area, including a meteorological tower on Gravina Island and permitting and environmental analysis. SEAPA is also requesting
funding for a more general reconnaissance study of wind development along the Ketchikan-Petersburg transmission corridor (#809).
Wind development may be attractive on this grid since it can be used to displace valuable dispatchable storage generation.
However AEA is concerned that site selection is not based on a systematic, reconnaissance-level approach. This work is proposed under application #809 and should preceed the work proposed
in this application.
Recommend no funding.
SEAPA proposes reconnaissance of wind development along the Ketchikan-Petersburg transmission corridor (#809).
Wind development may be attractive on this grid since it can be used to displace valuable, dispatchable, storage hydro generation.
Wind energy is planned to be part of the Southeast Integrated Resosurce Plan, identified as a resource that needs reconnaissance work.
Recommend full funding for reconnaissance assessment along the Ketchikan-Petersburg intertie corridor. Before grant is issued, the proposed scope needs to be revised to better match
wind reconnaissance standards.
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power and Telephone (AP&T) proposes funding for the transmission portion of the 5 MW Reynolds Creek hydropower project. Haida Energy,
a joint venture of AP&T and Haida Corp, would own the project and sell power on a wholesale basis to APC, the certificated utility on Prince of Wales (PoW) Island. The project is a
component of Reynolds Creek Hydro Project, which received $2M (App #104) in grant funding already. In Round 3, an application (#439) was submitted for transmission line construction
for Reynolds Creek. Although AEA recommended the project for funding there was insufficient funding appropriated to fund this project.
The following grant allocations totaling $6.1 million have been made for the Reynolds Creek project:
1) $100,000 of Denali Comm funds to Haida Corp through the Denali Commission / AEA alternative energy RFP
2) $1 million in RE fund round 1 funds to Haida Corp (#104)
3) $1 million in RE fund round 1 funds to Haida Power, a joint venture between APC and Haida Corp
4) $2 million in legislative appropriation to Southeast Conference
5) $2 million in RE Fund round 4 to APC (#629)
The project will be dispatched in conjunction with AP&T\'s existing Black Bear Lk and South Fork hydro projects. Previous applications state that Reynolds Creek hydro will only be used
after the existing hydro projects are fully dispatched. An extension of PoW transmission to the northern portion of island to serve Coffman Cove and Naukati has been funded by the
Denali Commission and RE Fund round 1.
AEA has the following concerns about this application:
1. The application provides a cost estimate of $18.6 million for the hydro project, including transmission. However the most recent budget information available to AEA indicates a
total project cost of $27.6 million.
2. While AEA agreed to reimburse up to $2 million in order to begin construction and preserve the FERC license, it was with the condition that Haida Energy provide an acceptable power
sales agreement and finance plan prior to additional reimbursement. Haida Energy submitted a finance plan with a Power Project Loan Fund (PPLF) application to AEA for $20 million,
at the limit authorized by the Legislature. However, AEA has rejected the proposed loan terms and asked Haida Energy to revise and resubmit with terms that conform to the PPLF statutes.
Because of these unresolved issues, AEA believes additional funding is not warranted at this time.
No funding recommended.
APC proposes final design and permitting activities for a potential 12 MW storage hydro project at Connelly Lake. AEA and APC entered into a grant agreement for $585,000 to support
feasibility and conceptual design for the project under round 4 application (#627).
Current funded work includes concept optimization, preliminary FERC notice of intent and preliminary application document, FERC scoping activities (documents and study plans), field
studies (stream gauge installation; seismic refraction surveys; fish, wildlife, botanical, wetland, and heritage surveys; water quality testing); and the final feasibility report.
This work is currently scheduled for completion in December 2012.
AEA believes that this schedule is optimistic and that funding for final design and permitting is premature.
AP&T has requested reconsideration of AEA\'s initial recommendation of no funding. AP&T states that "we agree with AEA that funding of the final design activities (i.e., the last three
of ... [the proposed] ...tasks) is premature. However, the other five tasks are basically continuation of our current work." AEA agrees with this observation and recommends partial
funding to cover the following feasibility phase tasks: additional environmental studies, permit preparation and processing, post-license activities, and additional stream gauging
data collection.
Recommend partial funding of $448,000.
AP&T proposes design and construction of transmission to link the hub community of Tok to Slana, Chistochina, Mentasta, Northway, Northway Junction, and Northway Village. Currently
AP&T is funded through RE Fund round 4 to assess feasibility of a 2 MW wood-fired combined heat and power system in Tok (#665). AP&T had partial funding through RE Fund round 3 (#438)
to construct the 1.5 MW Yerrick Creek hydro project, but decided not to proceed.
AEA recognizes the benefits of tying these communities together in a grid.
However AEA has the following concerns with this proposal:
1. The Tok wood-fired CHP is beginning the feasibility phase, while the Yerrick Creek Hydro project is on hold. Thus no renewable energy production is pending. Transmission of renewable
energy is required for this project to be considered eligible for funding under the RE Fund.
2. Economics of this project appear marginal given the distances and low loads to be tied in.
No funding recommended.
Alaska Power Company requests funding to complete reconnaissance assessment, feasibility analysis, and permitting and final design to construct a 17\' high x 100\' long rockfill dam
and spillway at the outlet of Black Bear Lake to raise the lake by 12\' and increase active storage from 2870 to 5290 acre-ft. APC asserts that the project would add 1.26 GWh per year
in annual generation by reducing spillage from BBL from 26 to 24%. The project will require a FERC amendment. The total development and construction cost is estimated at $3,040,000.
AEA is concerned that there may not be adequate market for hydropower on Prince of Wales after the 5 MW Reynolds Cr Hydro project is constructed. APC is one of the three partners of
Haida Energy that is developing the Reynolds Cr project. In its application, APC stated it would provide a study in fall of 2011 to determine how much additional firm generation will
be available from Reynolds Creek and whether the BBL storage increase is justifiable when Reynolds Creek is constructed. AEA requested a copy of the study and was informed it was not
available due to other APC staff commitments. Thus there is no confirmation of the need for power from this project.
No funding recommended.
Chugach Electric proposes final design, surveying, geotechnical assessment, and permitting of substations and switchyards associated with the transmission for the potential Mt. Spurr
geothermal project. AEA has budgeted funding for RE Fund round 4 feasibility and route selection for the transmission project (#615). That work is underway at the time of this review.
Currently Mt. Spurr geothermal developer Ormat remains in the resource assessment phase and AEA expects a report of the results of 2011 field work by the end of 2011.
Since the resource at Mt. Spurr is not yet proven and the Rd 4 feasibility and route selection remains to be completed, AEA believes that it is premature to support final design and
permitting work for the transmission line.
No funding recommended.
Kodiak Electric Association requests $8 million for 1) installation of three additional GE 1.5 MW SLE turbines and 2) addition of a 1 MWh energy storage system.
KEA is requesting funding for construction and commissioning of the proposed project. The project is expected to cost $23,150,000, of which $8,000,000 would come as matching funds provided
by KEA. An additional $7,150,000 will be spent by KEA but will be ineligible for match as the money will be spent prior to July 1, 2012. KEA received $4 million from a RE Fund round
1 grant (#103) for the construction and commissioning of three GE 1.5 MW SLE turbines.
KEA?s wind turbines have been the highest wind energy producers in the State. The proposed system changes will boost wind and hydro penetration to almost 100% and displace approximately
780,000 gallons of diesel per year.
Under the round 5 solicitation KEA is eligible for a total of $8 million in cumulative funding for the wind project.
The proposed battery system, estimated to cost $3.8 million, will provide system stability and a bridge between the more variable wind generation and KEA?s Terror Lake Hydro project.
The proposed battery system will increase the renewable output of the wind-hydro system. Although the battery system is proposed in the current application, AEA believes that the
battery system is not solely a component of the wind system, and is therefore not subject to the $8 million wind system funding cap. AEA notes that KEA has received $4 million in RE
Fund grants for upgrades to the hydro system (#401 and 653). In round 5 the total allocation of the wind and hydro system, including the battery system, should not exceed $16 million.
Recommend partial funding of $7.8 million ($4 million for the wind system and $3.8 million for the battery system).
The City of Petersburg proposes to construct a hybrid ground-source heat pump (GSHP) at the new public library that is being designed and constructed. The closed loop GSHP would consist
of six 315? deep wells and have a 10-ton capacity. The expected coefficient of performance (COP) is 3.
The new public library Construction for the GSHP is expected to begin in Fall 2012 and be completed and commissioned in June 2013. Since Petersburg is powered by hydroelectric, the
GSHP would be a very efficient use of electricity. The project team stated that it was committed to the project and would likely seek other funding to complete the project if not supported
by the RE Fund
The application provides a life-cycle economic assessment of a conventional electric boiler, ground source heat pump, and air source heat pump. The assessment does not include a comparison
of what AEA regards as the baseline alternative?a conventional fuel oil system. Given only approximately 3,100 gallons of fuel that would be displaced and the high capital costs of
the heat pump alternatives, the economics of heat pumps appears poor in this case (benefit/cost is less than 0.6) when compared against a conventional oil-fired system.
The RE Fund has provided grants to two larger GSHPs in Southeast (the Juneau Airport and Dimond Aquatic Center). Economics appear more favorable due to the larger amount of fuel displacement.
No funding recommended.
The Village of Cantwell proses feasibility and conceptual design of a storage hydro project in excess of 1 MW, with a power tunnel on the Jack River.
The Village and AEA have recently executed a grant funded in round 4 (#606 ) for reconnaissance assessment of the project and has installed a stream gauge. Recon work is scheduled to
be completed in June 2013. Therefore AEA believes that further funding for feasibility and conceptual design is premature.
No funding recommended.
The Borough and Municipality of Skagway proposes feasibility and conceptual design of a 6-26 MW hydro project at West Creek to be connected to the Upper Lynn Canal (Haines-Skagway) grid.
The estimated cost of this project $140 million. The primary purpose of the project is to offset diesel generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway from May to September. The
secondary purpose is to supply power to the local grid during periods of shortfall and to the Yukon Territory grid in the winter. The BMS applied for a similar project in round 2 (#262).
AEA recommended the project for partial funding and stated that an integrated resource energy plan would be needed to assess the project in the context of other potential projects.
Due to limited funding, however, the project did not receive funding.
The economic analysis performed for this project is based solely on cruise ship load over a period of 50 years. It estimates a B/C ratio of 1.5 to 2.1 assuming an average electrical
consumption of 18,900 to 27,000 MWh/yr.
The BMS states that a major benefit of the project is the reduced air emissions from diesel generation by the cruise ships.
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. AEA has already committed funding for Connelly Lk, Schubee Lk, and Burro Cr reconnaissance and feasibility assessment. These projects would compete to meet the same loads as the
proposed project.
2. Given that the chief aim of the project is to supply the shore-based cruise ship load, AEA questions the amount of public benefit to be received versus the high capital cost and
high technical, business, and regulatory risks of the proposed project.
3. Since the project would affect the waters of the Klondike Gold Rush National Park, there is significant permitting risk.
Based on the additional information that BMS provided regarding potential benefits of the project, AEA has reconsidered its original recommendation against funding. The additional information
more thoroughly expalined the benefits the projects would accrue from reduced cruise ship emissions and a potential intertie to BC.
Recommend full funding.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes a reconnaissance through conceptual design for a seawater heat pump that would provide heating and cooling for Centennial Hall and the Kettleson
Memorial Library. The recon assessment would be complete in September 2011, and the feasibility assessment/conceptual design would be completed by October 2011.
Although the preliminary economic analysis prepared for the REF review indicates marginal economics, further design work and refinement of assumptions may improve project viability.
Recommend full funding.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes a reconnaissance through conceptual design for an effluent heat pump to heat the city\'s wastewater treatment plant. Two 60-ton heat pumps would
transfer the heat in the effluent to heat the wastewater treatment plant. The expected coefficient of performance (the ratio of the heat output relative to the electrical energy inputted)
is 3-4. The project would also provide cooling by direct heat transfer. The current HVAC system has reached its useful life and needs to be replaced.
Although the preliminary economic analysis prepared for the REF review indicates marginal economics, further design work and refinement of assumptions may improve project viability.
Recommend full funding.
City and Borough of Sitka (CBS) proposes design and construction of a ground source heat pump for the historic Japonski Island boathouse, a 2500 sq ft building undergoing substantial
renovations. A capacity of 4-tons is expected for the GSHP system. The GSHP would be deployed horizontally within the tidal zone, with HDPE pipes buried four feet deep in 2000 sq.
ft. of Sitka Sound. The expected coefficient of performance (ratio of heat delivered to electrical energy input) is 3-4.
Design would be complete in October 2011. Construction would be completed by October 2012. The project is expected to cost approximately $90,000 more than a conventional oil-fired system.
AEA is concerned about the high project cost versus the relatively small amount of heating oil (2,700 gal/yr) that is being displaced. The applicant notes that that there may be permitting
delays due to staff shortage at DNR. DNR agrees with this point.
The project would provide a demonstration of a ground source heat pump in a prominent location. Given the small project size, AEA believes it is reasonable to fund both design and construction.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA accept final design and construction budget before any construction funds are disbursed.
Kwig Power proposes to install a 250-kW battery storage system as a component of their planned 450-kW wind-diesel system. The function of the proposed battery system is to maintain
power quality and stability by quickly supplying power to the system when load or wind energy supply changes quickly. This allows the system to run less diesel capacity to supply the
needed ?spinning reserve?.
The wind system in Kwig received a direct legislative appropriation of $1.6 million in July 2009 and RE Fund round 1 design and construction funding in March 2010 (#107). The system
is one of four projects under the auspices of the Chaninik Wind Group receiving state funding for wind construction:
1. Kongiganak ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
2. Kwigillingok ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
3. Tuntutuliak ($3.36 million of state funds allocated)
4. Kipnuk ($1.6 million of state funds allocated)
In addition to the total of $11.36 million in RE fund and direct legislative appropriation the projects are receiving $750,000 from the USDOE for residential thermal devices.
Construction is behind schedule on these projects chiefly due to integration and control issues. The concept of using distributed residential heating loads and smart meters for frequency
control has not been proven. Additionally the controllers for the Windmatic 17S turbines are under redesign and testing.
Since the wind-diesel system is currently under development and its operational characteristics are not yet fully understood, the economic evaluation of this application has a high degree
of uncertainty.
Until these projects are operational as currently scoped AEA does not support allocation of additional public funds for expanded scope.
Recommend no funding.
Tuntutuliak Community Services Association proposes to install a 250-kW battery storage system as a component of their planned 450-kW wind-diesel system. The function of the proposed
battery system is to maintain power quality and stability by quickly supplying power to the system when load or wind energy supply changes quickly. This allows the system to run less
diesel capacity to supply the needed ?spinning reserve?.
The wind system in Tuntutuliak received a direct legislative appropriation of $1.6 million in July 2009 and RE Fund round 2 design and construction funding in March 2010 (#273). The
system is one of four projects under the auspices of the Chaninik Wind Group receiving state funding for wind construction:
1. Kongiganak ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
2. Kwigillingok ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
3. Tuntutuliak ($3.36 million of state funds allocated)
4. Kipnuk ($1.6 million of state funds allocated)
In addition to the total of $11.36 million in RE fund and direct legislative appropriation the projects are receiving $750,000 from the USDOE for residential thermal devices.
Construction is behind schedule on these projects chiefly due to integration and control issues. The concept of using distributed residential heating loads and smart meters for frequency
control has not been proven. Additionally the controllers for the Windmatic 17S turbines are under redesign and testing.
Since the wind-diesel system is currently under development and its operational characteristics are not yet fully understood, the economic evaluation of this application has a high degree
of uncertainty.
Until these projects are operational as currently scoped AEA does not support allocation of additional public funds for expanded scope.
Recommend no funding.
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility was funded at $150,000 in round 1 of the RE fund for final design and permitting (app#14). The Utility submitted a proposal for construction in RE Fund
2 (#290). AEA recommended no funding since final design and permitting were not complete.
Final design and permitting are still not complete, although the Utility has made some progress. The Utility has completed a conceptual design and has submitted applications for water
rights, wetlands, and other coastal zone authorizations. The Utility has been in discussion with ADF&G for a fish habitat permit and with Chignik Lagoon Native Corp for obtaining
site control. Recently the Utility obtained a non-jurisdiction finding from FERC for the project.
AEA remains concerned that permits are not in place and final design and construction cost estimate are not yet complete. For this reason we cannot support funding for construction
at this time.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Palmer proposes final design and construction of a ground source heat pump to provide heating and cooling for the City?s ice arena. Construction would commence in spring
2012 and be completed fall 2012.
The current heating and refrigeration system is old, inefficient and needs to be replaced. In order to assess whether it is economically beneficial to support final design costing $120,000
the City would need to provide basic feasibility information comparing installed cost and O&M costs of a new conventional boiler and compressor system with costs of a ground source
heating pump system.
AEA requested this and other information from the City. The City provided only an electronic copy of the facility energy audit and indicated that the information was contained in the
report. The energy audit does not contain the information that AEA requested and does not serve the purpose of a feasibility phase report required in the request for applications.
AEA and its economic consultants are unable to assess viability of this project and whether it is reasonable to provide funding for final design.
No funding recommended.
Kipnuk Light Plant proposes final design and construction of 300 kW wind-diesel system, including a 250 kW battery storage system.
Kipnuk received a direct legislative appropriation of $1.6 million in July 2009. The system is one of four projects under the auspices of the Chaninik Wind Group receiving state funding
for wind construction:
1. Kongiganak ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
2. Kwigillingok ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
3. Tuntutuliak ($3.36 million of state funds allocated)
4. Kipnuk ($1.6 million of state funds allocated)
In addition to the total of $11.36 million in RE fund and direct legislative appropriation the projects are receiving $750,000 from the USDOE for residential thermal devices.
Unlike the other Chaninik projects, Kipnuk proposes to use Northwind 100 turbines. Similar to the other Chaninik projects, Kipnuk plans to use distributed residential heating loads
and smart meters for frequency control.
Kipnuk has not completed conceptual or final design. The existing legislative funding is available for these purposes.
Kongiganak, the first of the Chaninik projects, is behind schedule chiefly due to integration and control issues. The concept of using distributed residential heating loads and smart
meters for frequency control has not been proven.
Recommend no funding.
Akiak proposes
1. Community Energy surveys
2. Community Energy and resource monitoring
3. Wood Energy assessment
4. Wind and solar energy assessement
Following is text from Tanana (see #281) The work that the applicant proposes does indicate a particular type of project. While potentially valuable to Akiak, work is more effectively
accomplished using standard methods on a statewide and regionwide basis that builds on the work already done in the statewide energy report that was released after this application.
Failed Stage 1 review
Puvurnaq Power Company, owned by the Native Village of Kongiganak, proposes to install a 300-kW Powerstore flywheel as a component of their 450-kW wind-diesel system under development.
The function of the proposed flywheel is to maintain power quality and stability by quickly supplying power to the system when load or wind energy supply changes. This allows the
system to consume less diesel capacity to supply the needed ?spinning reserve?.
The wind system in Kongiganak has been under construction since spring 2009 and is funded, in part by RE fund round 1 (#110). The system is one of four projects under the auspices of
the Chaninik Wind Group receiving state funding for wind construction:
1. Kongiganak ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
2. Kwigillingok ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
3. Tuntutuliak ($3.36 million of state funds allocated)
4. Kipnuk ($1.6 million of state funds allocated)
In addition to the total of $11.36 million in RE fund and direct legislative appropriation, the projects are receiving $750,000 from the USDOE for residential thermal devices.
Construction is behind schedule on these projects chiefly due to integration and control issues. The concept of using distributed residential heating loads and smart meters for frequency
control has not been proven. Additionally the controllers for the Windmatic 17S turbines are under redesign and testing.
Since the wind-diesel system is currently under development and its operational characteristics are not yet fully understood, the economic evaluation of this application has a high degree
of uncertainty.
Until these projects are operational as currently scoped, AEA does not support allocation of additional public funds for expanded scope.
Recommend no funding.
Napakiak Ircinraq Power Company proposes reconnaissance through and design/permitting for a wind energy project for the Bethel-Napakiak grid. In summer 2010 AEA provided a met tower
for onsite wind resource assessment in Napakiak. Data collection is ongoing.
There are other significant energy planning and project development activities taking place in Bethel. The City of Bethel has been funded through the RE Fund round 1 for a 400 kW wind
project. To date the City and utility have not reached an agreement for power purchase or interconnection. Additionally Village Wind Power is funded under round 0 to assess feasibility
of a large scale wind power project. AVCP has submitted an application for final design and construction in round 4 for a 200 kW wind project to serve Bethel (#600). TDX, who state
that are assuming ownership of the Bethel utility in summer 2011, has proposed feasibility through construction of a 1+ MW wind system on the Bethel grid. Finally AVCP Regional Housing
Authority is proposing study of hydro at the Kiseralik and Chikuminuk Rivers in Round 2 of the RE Fund. Therefore, there is a need for a regional integrated resource energy plan in
the Bethel area to coordinate when and where energy projects should be developed. This proposal should be considered in the context of an integrated plan to assure proper sizing, timing,
and integration of multiple energy projects. AEA believes that such an overall plan for the Bethel power system should be developed before proceeding with any additional wind development.
AEA has met with City of Bethel, AVCP Rural Housing Authority, Yukon Kuskokwim Health Corporation, Calista Corporation and TDX to discuss regional energy planning, including wind and
hydro development. The group has agreed to pursue coordinated energy planning for the region and the Bethel grid.
AEA believes that Bethel?s large load provides the opportunity for deploying megawatt scale turbines with better economics than smaller-scale wind installations. TDX, as the major power
generator for the Bethel system, is the logical entity to lead feasibility assessment of wind generation in Bethel.
Recommend no funding through the RE Fund. However AEA will provide direct assistance through its wind resource assessment program to Napakiak for completing the current wind assessment
work in the community.
Municipality of Anchorage Solid Waste Services proposes recovering remaining landfill gas from the Merrill Field collection system and piping it to the Muni-owned Anchorage Fire Training
Center. Landfill gas would fire a central boiler for the 4-building facility.
The concept of using landfill gas for heating is sound. However, given that project would displace only 81,000 million Btus over the 15-year lifespan of the project, the payback of
the project is over 50 years.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Tenakee Springs proposes final design and permitting of a 120 kW run-of-river hydro project at Indian River. The City submitted a similar application under RE Fund round
3 (#447), but there was insufficient funding available. Funded by the DC/AEA alternative energy grant program, the City has completed a feasibility assessment for this project. Over
the last year the City has submitted permit applications and obtained LIDAR topo mapping of the project site using remaining feasibility funds. In general, the City has carefully managed
funding for the project.
The project would be located on state and city land. The project received a non-jurisdiction finding from FERC in May 2010.
In round 1 AEA recommended against funding final design and permitting before a subregional energy plan that addressed systems in Tenakee, Hoonah, and Pelican was prepared. Hoonah is
pursuing hydro development in nearby projects, while Pelican is upgrading its existing hydro project. In AEA?s RE Fund round 3 review, given these circumstances and the long distances
between these communities, AEA saw no reason to delay consideration of a hydro project in Tenakee further.
Recommend full funding.
Failed Stage 1 review
Independence Power LLC proposes conceptual design and feasibility assessment of 5.4 MW project on Fourth of July Creek near the Seward Correctional Facility. Independence Power received
a grant for recon assessment from RE Fund round 1 (#86). A similar proposal was submitted and recommended for RE Fund round 3 (#494), but insufficient funding was available.
Independence Power completed a final recon report in early October 2010. Generally AEA agrees with the report\'s conclusions that further study is warranted. AEA is concerned about
impacts of potential Fourth of July Creek torrents on proposed infrastructure.
Recommend full funding.
The Elfin Cove Utility proposes final design and permitting of a 50 kW run-of-river hydro project at Crooked Creek and a 150 kW storage hydro project at Jim?s Lake. Feasibility study
was already funded by the Denali Commission/AEA alternative energy RFP (#17). Elfin Cove submitted a similar proposal in RE Fund round 3 (#446) that was recommended but was not funded
due to insufficient funds.
The proposed project is sited on USFS land, indicating FERC license will be required. AEA has constructed a power and bulk fuel system under the RUS energy program. Elfin Cove expects
to deliver the feasibility report in December 2010.
Recommend full funding for final design and permitting with requirement that AEA approve the feasibility study before any funds are disbursed.
Glacier Fork LLC proposes reconnaissance assessment of a 75 MW hydro storage on Glacier Fork of the Knik River. This project was recommended in RE Fund round 3 (#493) but insufficient
funds were available.
Since last year there have been two developments related to this project:
1. The Railbelt Energy Integrated Energy Resource Plan has been finalized by AEA. The plan identifies the Glacier Fork as a potential large hydro generation site.
2. The Alaska Legislature appropriated $10 million in FY11 to AEA for Railbelt large-scale hydro planning, design, and permitting. These funds were for Susitna, Chakachamna, and Glacier
Fork projects. AEA will be managing the funded activities for these projects.
Given that funding support is already in place to study Glacier Fork, AEA does not believe that additional RE Fund allocations are necessary.
No funding recommended.
Eklutna Inc proposes recon assessment of a 6.5+MW hydro project on Hunter Cr. The project would include an extremely long penstock (13,000 ft cross-basin pipeline plus an 8,000 ft penstock),
and 11 miles of transmission. This proposal is a resubmittal of a round 3 proposal (#475).
DNR DMLW questions that Eklutna owns the land as stated in the application. If BLM owns the land this project falls under FERC jurisdiction. DNR also notes this is popular recreation
area and the project may garner public opposition. DNR DGGS notes proximity to Castle Mt Fault and potential earthquakes.
Recommend full funding.
The Village Council of Port Graham proposes final design and construction of a 1.45 mmBtu/hr cordwood-fired district heating system that will supply community facilities and residences.
The Council submitted an application (#488) in round 3 for construction of a wood-fired power generation system that AEA recommended against funding. As the basis for the round 3 application
the Council provided an assessment of local available wood along with other combined heat and power feasibility information.
Currently the community uses approximately 53,100 gallons/year of diesel to heat community facilities, while the cannery may consume an additional 25,000 gallons/year if it resumes regular
operation. Given the plentiful wood resources in the area, biomass district heating appears to be an attractive alternative.
The project budget appears excessive. Of the total budget of $845,805 approximately 20% is for tribal and Chugachmiut project management and administration salaries. According to a
email sent to AEA on 9/14 the travel budget of $80,065 was overestimated by $29,250. The budget includes work in support of a power purchase agreement totals over $61,000. Since this
is not a power project this item is in question. The budget for design consultants totals $228,600, approximately 27% of the total and substantially higher than similar projects, which
are usually around 15%.
Given these concerns with the budget it is premature to allocate funds for construction. Given experience with other cordwood boiler installations AEA estimates final design and permitting
costs approximately $50,000.
Recommend partial funding of $75,000 for final design and permitting.
The City of Pelican proposes completing construction of a 650 kW run-of-river hydro project. Design and construction has been supported by the Denali Commission through an AEA-managed
rural power system upgrade project. Other energy-related projects completed recently in Pelican by AEA include a bulk fuel plant and a new diesel powerhouse. The hydro project is
a rebuild of the 1940s era hydro project that supplied the fish processing facility and the community. The project is now approximately 60% complete and is scheduled for start-up in
2012. The fish processing facility has had financial problems over the last few years.
Site control for the project is not finalized. While the Pelican Utility District (PUD), owned by Kake Tribal Corp, holds a DNR easement for the hydroelectric project from the intake
to the power house, the City holds an easement on this same tract only for water and sewer improvements. The City is in discussion with the PUD to establish an operating agreement
for the power system. The City will obtain site control in conjunction with this agreement.
Recommend full funding with requirements that before construction funding is disbursed the City must obtain and demonstrate to satisfaction of AEA 1) site control for the hydro project,
2) FERC approval of revised construction plans dated 10/11/10, 3) final design and specifications for all grant-funded project elements, 4) a finance plan for the entire project, and
5) an updated business plan.
IPEC proposes construction of a diesel heat recovery system in Hoonah that will consist of jacket water heat recovery equipment and a piping loop that will supply heat to the school
complex and community buildings. The heat recovery system is estimated to displace approximately 57,000 gallons of heating fuel per year.
AEA is managing this project on behalf of IPEC under the Denali Commission-funded rural power system upgrade program. The power system upgrade may also include hydro projects at Gartina
and Water Supply creeks with average output of 340 kW. In the event that the hydro resource is developed, amount of recoverable diesel heat is expected to decrease to approximately
46,000 gallons/year.
IPEC is requesting supplementary funds above the $530,000 available for the heat recovery project that the Denali Commission is contributing. The project is scheduled for completion
in August 2012.
Recommend full funding.
Lake and Pen Borough proposes final design and construction of a 330 kW wind project in Port Heiden through a design-build process.
Lake and Pen Borough has supplied a very thorough feasibility study. However the report does not include conceptual design drawings or a geotechnical study.
AEA has the following concerns about the project:
1. Economic feasibility appears to require a high penetration system. AEA believes the construction cost estimate is rather low for a high-penetration project.
2. Based on the expected 50-year extreme wind speed for the site, the feasibility report recommends an IEC class 1 turbine. The only turbine that meets this condition is the Enercon
turbine. The Enercon turbine may not be available in the U.S.
3. Port Heiden has not received PCE since December 2009 because they have neglected to file an annual report with RCA. This raises questions regarding the community?s ability to support
a relatively complex energy project.
Given these considerations AEA believes that it is premature to allocate construction funding to this project. The design budget is configured assuming the design-build process. Assuming
that design and construction are funded separately and the work includes a geotech study, AEA believes that $250,000 is sufficient to complete design and permitting.
Recommend $250,000 for design and permitting.
The City of Napaskiak requests funding for reconnaissance and feasibility assessment of wind generation and heat recovery for the City power system. The Energy Pathways document notes
a class 5 wind resource. However the newly-revised AEA wind high resolution wind map estimates Napaskiak is a class 3 wind resource.
The recon phase budget includes $52,250 for land use permitting and environmental analysis. AEA believes that it is not justified to spend this large amount of money before the overall
wind resource is understood and the concept is validated.
Recommend partial funding of $61,225 with a required match of $2,800 for reconnaissance assessment.
The New Koliganek Village Council requests funding for feasibility assessment of wind generation and heat recovery for the community power system. Based on an AEA met tower in Koliganek,
the wind resource is a class 3.
Given a high expected project cost and energy production from a fair wind resource, project economics are marginal.
Recommend full funding.
Baker Hughes (BHI) proposes to develop new technology that would modify existing Baker Hughes Centrilift H Series pumps currently used in Cook Inlet oil and gas platforms to convert
hydrokinetic flow to electrical power. This application is similar to a RE Fund round 3 submittal that was recommended but which did not receive funding due to insufficient funds.
The team proposes to first develop a bench scale unit at UAF then test a 50 kW unit in the Tanana River. BHI would then use their own funding and resources to test a 500 kW unit at
the King Salmon Platform in Cook Inlet.
For the purpose of round 4 technical review AEA requested the following information:
1. Design and specifications for the project including dimensions, data and calculations to determine power output at given different water velocities
2. Explain how the high speeds for the device are produced and why this will be beneficial to power production and lower impacts to marine life.
3. Will the Baker Hughes CentriLift pump be under warrantee for the modified application as a hydrokinetic turbine?
4. What effect will the ?built-in aquatic life diverters? have on power output?
5. Please provide further information on the anchoring design.
6. Explain how the device will be deployed.
BHI provided technical specifications for the Centrilift pump, but did not provided any diagrams that clarify how the pump would be integrated into a power system. BHI did not respond
to questions 2-6.
The application does not include a letter of support from Chevron, owner of the King Salmon platform.
AEA understands that BHI is proposing to develop hydrokinetic technology that could be a very attractive use of oil and gas platforms. Given the substantial project risk and unknowns,
however, we believe that the newly established Emerging Energy Technology Fund is a more appropriate program for considering state support.
Recommend no funding.
Chitina Electric proposes completing final design, permitting, and construction of a 300 kW run-of-river hydro project on Five Mile Creek. The project received a $303,000 grant under
round 2 of the RE Fund (#236). AEA is managing the project on Chitina Electric?s behalf. AEA and Chitina expect to complete the conceptual design and feasibility in July 2011. AEA
and Chitina completed a diesel power system upgrade for the community in 2009.
The project would be located on lands owned by the Chitina Native Corporation, who has agreed to donate lands to support the project. All indications to date suggest no significant
land or environmental issues, and likely no FERC jurisdiction. There is an existing road for access to the proposed intake site. The hydro powerhouse would be located next to the
diesel power plant. The project would supply most of the community electrical needs.
Since the design is not complete and a construction cost estimate is not available, AEA does not recommend construction funding at this time.
Recommend partial funding of $277,000 ($580,000 for total feasibility/final design/permitting minus existing grant of $303,000) for completing permitting and final design.
Lake and Pen Borough proposes construction of community wood heating systems in Igiugig, Port Alsworth, Iliamna, and Kokhanok. This proposal follows up earlier feasibility and final
design work funded under RE Fund round 1 (#63).
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. Outdoor wood boilers (OWB) are proposed for deployment. Alaska experience to date indicates relatively low efficiency and substantial smoke from these units. New models have been
developed that have achieved EPA emission certification. AEA has contracted with a Biomass Energy Resource Center to assess emission and efficiency for Alaska application.
2. The projects would use approximately 20-30 cords per year. Little information is provided to confirm availability of a sustained fuel supply over the 20 year life of the projects.
3. Given relatively low diesel displacement economics appear marginal.
Recommend full funding with the following requirements:
1. Before any funds are disbursed the Borough must demonstrate to AEA a sustainable long-term fuel supply in each burn location.
2. Before OWBs are specified and purchased the Borough must demonstrate to AEA that efficiency and performance are reasonable.
G&K Electric Utility proposes recon and feasibility assessment of wind energy and diesel heat recovery in Cold Bay. The proposal is consistent with the recommendations from a general
energy assessment of Cold Bay, False Pass and Nelson Lagoon sponsored by the 2008 Denali Commission/AEA Alternative Energy grant program and AEA?s Energy Pathway publication. Airport
data and the Pathway indicate a class 7 wind resource.
Aleutians East Borough would manage the project.
Diesel heat recovery potential appears excellent. The power system is adjacent to several public facilities and the power plant has a manifold on the diesel cooling system.
Recommend partial funding for reconnaissance assessment, including a met tower.
Nelson Lagoon Electric Cooperative proposes recon and feasibility assessment of wind energy and diesel heat recovery in Nelson Lagoon. The proposal is consistent with the recommendations
from a general energy assessment of Cold Bay, False Pass and Nelson Lagoon sponsored by the 2008 Denali Commission/AEA Alternative Energy grant program and AEA?s Energy Pathway publication.
Airport data and the Pathway indicate a class 6 wind resource.
Aleutians East Borough would manage the project.
Diesel heat recovery potential appears excellent. The power system is adjacent to a storage building and harbormaster office.
Recommend partial funding for reconnaissance assessment, including a met tower.
The City of False Pass proposes recon and feasibility assessment of wind energy and diesel heat recovery in False Pass. The proposal is consistent with the recommendations from a general
energy assessment of Cold Bay, False Pass and Nelson Lagoon sponsored by the 2008 Denali Commission/AEA Alternative Energy grant program and AEA?s Energy Pathway publication. Raw data
from AEA?s met tower in False pass suggests a class 4-5 wind resource.
Aleutians East Borough would manage the project.
Diesel heat recovery potential appears marginal. The system is already supplying city shop near the power plant with heat. The next closest facility is the school, 600? away.
Recommend partial funding for reconnaissance assessment.
Applicant proposes reconaissance study of a hydrokinetic project in Akiak costing $350,000. Due to lack of geographic relief in the vicinity of Akiak, a run-of-river hydro project is
not feasible. RE Fund round 1 has performed site-specific assessment of hydrokinetic resources in nearby Kuskokwim villages. Results are not yet available. The current application
provides insufficient description of the type of system that is proposed and is very expensive. AEA feels that the current statewide approach for hydrokinetic resource, technology
development, and environmental analysis is a more effective use of state resources.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes recon assessment of a 1.45 MW run-of-river hydropower project at Eska Creek near Sutton. The project would include a very long (13,000 ft) penstock. Environmental
issues are undefined. DNR notes potential conflicts with other uses and proximity of the project to Castle Mt Fault.
Recommend full funding.
Chugach Electric Association, on behalf of the Bradley Project Management Committee, proposes preliminary design of diversion of Middle Fork Battle Creek into Bradley Lake. The work
would also include permitting, environmental and fish studies and preparation of an application to amend the Bradley Lake hydro project FERC license. BPMC would also provide matching
funds on a 1:1 basis. AEA staff would manage the project.
Work completed to date includes reconnaissance and analysis of environmental and energy production impacts. Stream gauging is in progress.
Recommend full funding.
Chugach Electric requests funding for feasibility, permitting/final design, and construction of a project to divert water from Stetson Creek into the Cooper Lake Reservoir and a related
structure to release environmental flows into Cooper Creek as a part of the FERC re-licensing of Cooper Lake hydro project in 2007. CEA agreed to spend up to $12.5 million (2009$)
to construct this project in order to enhance fish habitat in Cooper Creek by raising the stream water temperature.
In support of the relicensing effort CEA has funded a substantial amount of feasibility-level work. In 2007 the project was estimated to cost about $11 million. However, following
a 2009 constructability review, the capital cost estimate increased to $24 million due to requirements for tunneling and control structures for the diverted water and for the environmental
flows.
The main benefit of the proposed project would be the continued operation of the 19.4 MW Cooper Lake project. In addition the diversion adds water to Cooper Lake, resulting in a net
increase in hydropower. For the purposes of the economic analysis prepared for evaluating this application, only the additional costs of the diversion and benefits of the incremental
hydropower are considered.
Before RE Fund funding is allocated to construction, it is reasonable for CEA to complete feasibility, permitting, and final design.
Recommend partial funding for feasibility, permitting, and final design.
The Village of Atmautluak proposes final design and permitting for a 200 kW wind?diesel project.
The community has already completed a $45,000 feasibility study funded by the Denali Commission. Although the feasibility study is valuable, it did not include geotechnical assessment
and AEA notes the following limitations in the HOMER system modeling:
1. The model assumes the old Northwind 100a power curve instead of the new 100b model
2. The spinning reserve requirement is set too low
3. The fuel curve on one of the existing diesel gensets indicates higher fuel economy than manufacturer specs
4. Modeling did not evaluate use of excess windpower for heat
5. Analysis assumes 25 year life instead of standard 20 year life.
6. The report notes need for ?more detailed design, permitting/environmental studies, and economic analysis is warranted to confirm economic feasibility before funding can be secured
or a decision is made to proceed with construction
AEA thinks that the cost of a full feasibility study and conceptual design for a wind-including geotechnical analysis ranges from roughly $80,000-180,000.
Recommend partial funding of $100,000 for completing feasibility and conceptual design.
Alaska Electric Light and Power proposes final design and construction of one tower replacement, two tower structural modifications, and addition of snow diversion structures to two
towers on the intertie that connects the Snettisham project to Juneau.
AEL&P proposes a two-phase design and construction schedule. Phase 1 begins in late 2010 and ends in fall 2011. Phase 2 begins in late 2011 and ends in fall 2012. Round 4 funds are
available only for activities that take place after July 1, 2011 (Phase 2 work).
The project is eligible for funding under the RE Fund because it will reduce the likelihood of the number of outages occurring due to avalanches that necessitate diesel generation (e.g.
the major outages in the winters of 2008 and 2009) in addition to improving reliability of Snettisham hydropower.
Recommend funding of up to $2 million for activities that take place after July 1, 2011.
See project #670
Kootznoowoo Inc. proposes a 1+ MW run-of-river hydroelectric project and 6.7 mi transmission project to supply the community of Angoon. Kootznoowoo has supplied separate applications
for each of the projects. AEA is lumping the two project proposals together for the purposes of evaluation. These proposals are similar to ones submitted in round 3 (#517, 523) that
were recommended but not funded due to insufficient funding.
The application includes a letter of support from local utility Inlet Passage Electrical Co-op (IPEC) and others. Kootznoowoo has received a grant $1,110,500 from USDOE for preconstruction
activities.
Project appears to be a promising source of renewable energy for the community of Angoon. Special legislation (ANILCA Section 506) has granted Kootznoowoo, Inc. certain rights for
development of a hydroelectric facility at Thayer Creek and has simplified the permitting for the project. The project is only six miles from Angoon and closely matches Angoon\'s
energy requirements.
Recommend partial funding of $1,060,500 for completion of all preconstruction activities, including final design and permitting (culminating in the issuance of the USFS Special Use Authorization
for the project) with the provisions that prior to releasing any AEA grant funds: 1) Kootznoowoo and IPEC must provide a written joint report acceptable to AEA that documents the integration
of project design and operation with the needs of the existing IPEC system, 2) Kootznoowoo and IPEC must finalize an MOU that defines a viable business arrangement and will include
intent to sign a cost-based power sales agreement, 3) scope be must consistent with the recommendations of the Southeast Alaska IRP.
Akiakchak Native Corporation proposes reconnaissance and feasibility of a wind-energy system in Akiakchak. Akiakchak was recommended in round 2 (#212) for feasibility assessment, however
there was insufficient funding. Akaikchak has a met tower on site, but it is not erected and operational.
The geotech portion of the budget ($75,000) appears rather high, while conceptual design appears low.
Recommend full funding.
Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority proposes to follow-up ongoing feasibility assessment for building heating in Ambler, Shungnak, and Kobu funded in round 1 (#59). Based on outcome
of the assessment NIHA would choose one of the communities for final design and permitting.
The grant for the round 1-funded work was executed in August 2009. AEA is concerned that the project has been progressing slowly. The project is being managed by WH Pacific, a subsidiary
of NANA.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before any funds are expended, the applicant provide and AEA accept the feasibility and conceptual design report.
The City of Kotzebue proposes to study feasibility of converting paper and wood from the city waste stream into heat for the municipal water system. The City estimates 1,825 to 2,920
tons per year of paper and wood are produced in Kotzebue per year that could displace approximately 100,000 gal/yr of heating fuel.
The City submitted a round 2 application (#284) for a $15,000 reconnaissance-level study of adapting US Dept. Defense waste-to-energy technology for use in Kotzebue which AEA recommended,
but which was not funded due to insufficient funds.
For the current proposal the City is requesting funding for feasibility level assessment without submitting a reconnaissance level report that concludes that the project concept is viable.
Recommend full funding with requirement that the City will complete tasks 1-4 (permitting, resource analysis, equipment analysis, and environmental analysis) and conclude that is justified
to proceed to conceptual design and further stages. AEA must agree with this conclusion before more than $25,000 of grant funds are disbursed.
Project failed Stage 1 - capped out.
Alaska Power Company proposes feasibility assessment and conceptual design of a 2MW wood gasification power generation system to serve the Tok area power system. The system includes
a 30 mmBtu/hr Nexterra gasification system and GE Jenbacher reciprocating generators. An important component of the proposed project is demonstration of an innovative gas clean up
system.
APC applied unsuccessfully for a $10 million grant from USDOE for this project in early 2010. APC proposed to use USDOE funds and its own resources to complete feasibility/concept design
and permitting/final design during the first half of 2010. In round 3 APC requested construction funds from AEA (#479), but AEA recommended against funding the project. The current
proposal focuses on feasibility and conceptual design.
AEA is strongly supportive of demonstrating the Nexterra/GE technology in Alaska. This proposal is particularly attractive because
1. APC has a good track record as a well-operated utility and a leader in renewable energy development in Alaska
2. Tok, located on the road system, is an excellent site for demonstration of a wood-fired biopower project
3. The upper Tanana Valley has a substantial wood resource and a number of sawmills in operation.
4. The proposed technology has strong potential for application in other parts of the state.
AEA has concerns about the viability of integrating a wood-fired heat and power system into the Tok grid since
1. There is a hydro resource available at Yerrick Creek to serve the Tok grid currently under development that is also being funded by the RE Fund is (#438)
2. The RE Fund has already supported a significant wood energy project in Tok to supply the school with heat (#49).
Recommend full funding with provision that APC coordinate its feasibility assessment with the school heating project and Yerrick Creek hydro project.
The Village of Kwethluk proposes feasibility assessment and conceptual design of a wind energy system to be located on the old runway owned by Alaska DOTPF.
AEA\'s high-resolution wind map indicates a class 4 resource. Despite the location on the runway, some level of geotechnical assessment will be required. Geotech is not listed in the
proposal. At the same time, tasks 4-7 basically consisting of cost analysis and conceptual design are budgeted $114,000. AEA thinks this figure is rather high.
Recommend full funding with requirement that grant scope needs to include geotechnical assessment.
Applicant (Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority) proposes to develop a wood fired and solar heating system for the Ionia Renenwable Energy Training Center. The Trust intends to act
as grantee/sponsor for this project and accepts responsibilities under RFA section 1.4 for ownership and control of the facilities. This project was recommended for funding in round
3 (#480), but did not receive funding due to insufficient funding.
Ionia has successfully developed a similar wood fired system that supplies heat and domestic hot water for the Community Long House. Ionia has a very progressive focus in producing
energy and food using their own local resources.
However, the project would only result in displacing 4,200 gallons of diesel per year. Given a proposed grant of over $240,000 and a match of $33,000, this results in poor economic
returns. AEA notes that the economic analysis in round 3 was incorrect; the current B/C corrects the error.
Recommend no funding.
Gulkana Village Council proposes funding for wood pelletizing equipment as part of a densified wood business under development by the Council. The Council is in the process of obtaining
a pellet mill and a hammermill and of constructing a building to house the equipment.
AEA has provided a RE Fund round 1 grant (#2) to the Council for developing a cordwood ?fired district heating system the community hall, two office buildings and four duplexes. The
system is under operation.
AEA requested reconnaissance, feasibility, and design information as part of the review of this application. Specifically AEA asked to ?provide copies of the business and operation
plans. Your business plan should address long term raw material supply and operation, maintenance and fuel supply costs.?
In response the council provided only a brief tentative business plan that does not address long-term feedstock supply contracts, specific markets, or detailed operating and maintenance
activities and costs. DNR review raises concerns about feedstock demand versus availability and costs.
The Council has demonstrated substantial initiative in developing a biofuel business for the community. AEA strongly supports the Council?s initiative but concludes that the Council
has not provided sufficient information required by the RE Fund request for applications to serve as a basis for public funding.
No funding recommended.
The Turnagain Arm Tidal Energy Company\'s application is for a feasibility study of creating a tidal barrage energy system across Turnagain Arm. The barrage would be 1-2 miles in length,
120 feet wide at its base, and extend 15 feet above the high water line in the area between Fire Island to the Kenai Peninsula. It would include 50 to 120 La Rance-style low-head tidal
generators, each with a 10 MW capacity. The proposed system would have a maximum output of 500-1200 MW. Project to be started in 2011 and finished in 2017.
AEA has the following concerns about this application:
1) The application does not provide a clear description of the operation of the proposed barrage system. There is no analysis of average power output or total resource availability.
2) In order for the project to function similar to the La Rance project, a dam (barrage) would need to be constructed across Turnagain Arm. AEA questions the practicality of such a
project given the high costs and geotechnical risks, as well as likely impacts on fish and marine mammals.
3) Although an investor from Singapore (Singa Mas) is reportedly willing to supply $500 million in financing for construction, the current application includes no cash match.
Recommend no funding.
Ocean Renewable Power Corporation proposes permitting, final design and construction of a 600 kW array of proprietary cross-flow tidal instream electric conversion units for potential
scale-up to 100 MW. The units would use a gravity foundation on the bottom of Cook Inlet near Fire Island. ORPC?s technology is currently being tested in Eastport, Maine. Undersea
cable would bring power to shore. The project siting depends on being intertied to the Railbelt grid through transmission developed in conjunction with the planned Fire Island wind
farm.
The proposer states that the most substantial challenges will be impacts on beluga, migrating fish, and sediment flow. ORPC has received $600,000 in funding from USDOE to assess impacts
on belugas and $240,000 to assess impacts of sediment on device components. ORPC has obtained a preliminary FERC permit and would prepare a request to FERC for pilot project license
in late 2011. Other permits will include ADFG fish habitat, DNR water and subsurface use, Army Corps title 10, Coastal Zone, and Coast Guard navigational assessment. ORPC has developed
a team of specialists that they state will address technical and habitat issues.
ORPC will complete conceptual design and feasibility analysis by December 2011.
ORPC proposes to pay for almost all of the design and permitting. RE Fund dollars would support construction. While AEA remains concerned about the risks associated with deploying
new technology, we note that the Alaska-based developers have assembled a credible project team and have invested substantially in developing the technology. Alaska has most of the
nation?s potential for tidal energy and it is logical for the state to support ocean energy technology development.
Recommend full funding with provision that before any funds are released 1) ORPC must demonstrate to AEA?s satisfaction that, based on the Maine deployment, the technology is viable,
and 2) AEA must accept the conceptual design and feasibility assessment.
The City of Homer proposes reconnaissance assessment and feasibility analysis/conceptual design of a 1.2 MW hydrokinetic device in Kachemak Bay. This is a modified resubmittal of round
3 application #500 that was recommended for funding, but that was not funded due to limited funding. Homer has assembled a strong project team that includes a number of entities with
experience in assessing tidal energy feasibility and resources?NOAA?s Coast Survey Development Laboratory (CSDL), Kasitsna Bay Laboratory and Center for Operational Oceanographic Products
and Services; Homer Electric Association; the ADF&G and NOAA-supported Kachemak Bay Research Reserve, Native Village of Port Graham; City of Seldovia; and the Seldovia Village Tribe.
The application appropriately addresses potential wildlife impacts and includes the involvement of ADFG. NOAA commits to $680,000 in in-kind project support.
The proposed work would take place in two stages: 1) Following initial kickoff meetings, CSDL would create a model of Cook Inlet tidal current velocity and direction based on input
of bathymetry, salinity, temperature, river flow inputs, and other parameters. Work would take place between July 2011 and January 2013. Based on results the project team would decide
whether or not to proceed to the next phase. 2) Conceptual design of a tidal power plant, to be completed in June 2013.
Cook Inlet is known to have the second largest tidal variation in North America. It is also adjacent to Alaska\'s largest connected electrical load. The first phase of this project
would provide valuable baseline data on not only tidal power density, but also information useful for oil spill response, fish and wildlife habitat, and recreational and commercial
boating safety. For these reasons AEA will allocate other non-RE Fund funding to support the first phase of the project. Based on the results of the first phase the project team can
decide whether or not to proceed to conceptual design.
No funding recommended.
ACEP in partnership with Tanana Chiefs Conference proposes to follow up lab testing of 50 kW Electrotherm ammonia cycle engine that converts recovered heat to power. It is part of an
overall program funded by EPA and AEA to develop and perform independent evaluation of organic rankine cycle and similar technology for use in rural Alaska. Following completion of
lab testing in summer 2011 the unit would be moved to a suitable community power plant in the TCC region.
This project represents applied research that can provide immediate benefits to communities. Because it is not fully commercialized there is significant technical risk.
Recommend full funding contingent upon AEA accepting report from lab testing that indicates the technology is potentially viable for rural Alaska.
AVTEC proposes final design and construction to renovate the existing Marathon Creek 250 kW hydro project. The project was constructed in the 1980s but ceased operation in the 1990s
after an electrical system failure. AVTEC intends to use the project as a hydro training facility and sell power to the City of Seward Electrical Utility.
The business arrangement and site control for this project remains to be established.
Recommend partial funding of $67,500 for final design and permitting with the provision that the MOA between the City and AVTEC for site control be finalized before any funds are disbursed.
Metlakatla Indian Community proposes funding for constructing an 18 mile intertie that connects the Metlakatla and Ketchikan power systems. Permitting and design were funded by RE Fund
round 1 (#20). MIC submitted a round 3 application (#449) that was recommended but not funded due to insufficient funding.
The project cost is now estimated at $12.73 million, up from the previous estimate of $7.65 million. The estimated annual surplus hydro energy has decreased from 8.5 GWh to 6.0 GWh.
The application provides no indication of a power sale agreement with Ketchikan Public Utility.
MIC is requesting over $9.4 million for financing the balance of the project. The proposal does not recognize the maximum funding cap of $2 million and provides no other indication
of how the balance of the project would be financed.
Because the project would connect to the SEAPA grid that has numerous existing and proposed alternatives for generation and transmission, AEA concludes that there is insufficient information
provided to estimate a benefit/cost ratio.
AEA recommends funding in the amount of $1,180,000 ($2 million cumulative cap minus the $820,000 the project received in round 1).
AEA recommends special provisions be associated with this grant as follows: (1) Before any grant funds can be disbursed, MIC is to submit to AEA for its review and approval, a power
sales agreement between MIC and KPU which clarifies the terms, conditions, rates and amount of power for this intertie; (2) MIC must demonstrate completion of all preconstruction activities
including final design documents and final construction cost estimate; (3) MIC must demonstrate project site control, including required easements and Rights-of-way, NEPA requirements
and all permits needed to construct have been issued; and (4) the scope of work is consistent with findings of the Southeast Alaska IRP.
Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC) proposes assessing feasibility of a 4 MW storage hydro project at Triangle Lk. Improved access to the proposed hydro site by recent road construction
to Walden Point makes hydro development more reasonable to consider at this site. Project would be located on federal trust land. Major issue remains a market for power, which should
be assessed in a regional IRP. This proposal is similar to a Round 3 proposal (#450) that was recommended for funding, but which did not receive a grant due to insufficient funds.
Because the project would connect to the SEAPA grid that has numerous existing and proposed alternatives for generation and transmission, AEA concludes that there is insufficient information
provided to assign a benefit to cost ratio.
Recommend full funding with requirement that scope of work is consistent with findings of the Southeast Alaska IRP.
UAF proposes to assess geothermal resources at Pilgrim Hot Springs through refurbishing existing shallow wells and drilling deep wells. This is a resubmittal of a RE Fund round 2 proposal
(#258) and a partial resubmittal of a round 3 proposal (#466) that was recommended for funding, but which received only partial funding of $613,174 due to limited RE Fund appropriation.
USDOE funding will fund up to $4,274,792 (~69% of the project cost).
Land above the resource is now owned by Unaatuq LLC, a consortium of seven Native organizations.
The Nome Energy Study identified development of the Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal resource as the least-cost option for long-term power supply. The applications includes letters of
support from Nome Joint Utilities and Mary\'s Igloo Native Council (the owner of the adjacent land). DGGS indicates support for the project (see above).
Recommend full funding with the provision that prior to the disbursement of funds, UAF confirm legal access to the resource with the new landowner.
Kodiak Electric proposes construction funding for an additional 11.25 MW hydro turbine for the existing Terror Lk project. There have been two prior RE Fund grants, a round 2 grant
of $500,000 (#215) for feasibility and a round 3 grant (#401) of $248,160 for final design and bid documents.
During feasibility analysis, KEA has concluded that there will be no adverse impacts to stream flow by adding an additional turbine. This will likely facilitate acceptance by the resource
agencies during the required FERC license amendment process.
In November 2010 AEA received a draft FERC capacity amendment application that indicates energy production drops from 12.4 GWh/yr to 2.9 GWh/yr and project cost drops from $15.9 million
to $10.6 million. Although the project economics are somewhat poorer given these new estimates, they remain highly attractive.
The current schedule indicates equipment procurement would begin in January 2012, while site work would begin a year later. The project is scheduled for completion in July 2013.
Recommend partial funding of $3,751,840 ($4,000,000 cap minus $248,160) with provision that KEA provides AEA, and AEA accepts, final design, final construction cost estimate and bid
documents.
Ormat proposes to drill the first full-sized geothermal production well at Mt. Spurr. Prior to the award of this grant Ormat will have completed its exploration program funded in round
3 (#477) which has or will include 1) geophysical exploration, 2) surface mapping, 3) four temperature gradient wells, and 4) two slim holes. Ormat proposes to begin the construction
phase of the project in the summer of 2012 based on a go/no-go decision if the current work indicates a high likelihood of the presence of a high quality geothermal resource. This
decision would be made in August 2011.
Ormat\'s preliminary estimate for the net capacity of the project between 50 and 100 MW at a cost of $5,000-6,000/kW.
Although the proposed drilling work would not take place until summer 2012, Ormat needs to select contractors for the work in fall 2011. Ormat would mobilize the drill rig in spring
2012 at their own expense. Ormat will match state dollars on a 2 to 1 basis for the proposed work.
Recommend funding with the requirement that AEA, in consultation with DGGS, must concur with Ormat\'s decision to proceed with the proposed work before any funds are disbursed.
Naknek Electric Association requests funding for a 12,000 foot well as part of planned 25 MW geothermal project that would provide power to SW Alaska communities.
DGGS has the following comments on the project:
?The current information provided in this proposal, as well as that provided in previous proposals, fails to establish the existence of a robust geothermal resource capable of generating
the amount of electricity described. In fact, the current data outlined in the press suggests the temperature and flow rates in the initial well are insufficient to maintain the level
of electrical production stated as the goal of the project. In order to correctly evaluate the current proposal, the state will need additional information. This information should
include:
- Sustained down hole temperature profile from well G1
- Sustained and long term effective flow rates from Well G1
- Any down-hole geophysical information to substantiate water flow, porosity, permeability, and cement bond to casing (to determine level of fluid influx into wellbore and from what
horizon).
- Any additional observational or deterministic information that could be used to quantitatively evaluate the potential operational capacity of the geothermal system identified.
We will be unable to evaluate the proposal further until this information is provided.?
AEA requested this information from Naknek Electric on Oct 7 requesting a response by Oct 21. Later, AEA contacted the utility again and verified that Naknek had received the request.
Naknek Electric did not provide the requested information.
AEA has no record that a viable geothermal resource exists.
No funding recommended.
City of Chefornak proposes feasibility, final design and permitting of a community wind-diesel system. The system would include three Northwind 100 kW turbines, a Powerstore flywheel,
and an electric boiler at the school as a dumpload. This proposal is similar to a round 3 proposal for final design and construction (#424) that was recommended for partial funding
for feasibility but did not receive funding due to insufficient funds.
AEA and the City completed a powerhouse upgrade in 2004. The City has an AEA met tower stored in Chefornak. The City has not completed a full feasibility assessment including: detailed
energy resource analysis; assessment of design alternatives; geotechnical analysis and a final report with recommendations.
Given that the City has not completed conceptual design, AEA questions the basis of the proposed configuration. The feasibility tasks identified in the application do not address assessment
of design alternatives as stated in the RFA (sec 2.4). Given that the met tower is already onsite, the $49,750 budget for installing the met tower is too high. AEA thinks that $25,000
is a more reasonable figure for installing and collecting data for wind resource assessment.
Given the relatively high cost of the project under the proposed configuration, project economics appear poor, with a benefit to cost ratio that is significantly less than 1.
Recommend partial funding of $136,750 to complete feasibility.
Copper River School District proposes to construct a 1.8 MMBtu/hr wood pellet-fired heating plant to supply the Kenny Lake School. RE Fund round 1 (#46) provided funding for final design.
Upon request of the grantee AEA is managing the project.
Pellets would be purchased from the new Superior Pellets fuel facitlity in Fairbanks. Other potential supply is from Canada. Project is scheduled for completion in December 2011.
The project would represent the first instituional-scale pellet heating plant in Interior.
Recommend full funding.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Scammon Bay. This is a resubmittal of a round 3 application (#511) that AEA recommended for funding, but which did not
receive funding due to insufficient funds. Wind resource is estimated as a class 4-5 based on the state\'s high-resolution wind map. AVEC has some data available from a met tower
that is collecting onsite wind resource data. AVEC plans a 10-mile intertie connecting Stebbins and St. Michael and has prepared a conceptual design for a bulk fuel storage facility
that provides a cost estimate for adding wind to the system. Following the connection, the St. Michael power plant will be put on standby status. AVEC notes that the wind turbines
will provide a local landmark for navigation.
This application is one of seven wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in three other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
AVEC eliminates the cost of wind resource assessment in this application, due to the presence of a met tower.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of replacing the existing four 65 kW AOC turbines in Selawik with 100 kW Northwind turbines, or equivalent. Since the wind farm was constructed in
2002, AVEC has had problems with turbine downtime due to tip break failures. Additionally, it appears that the wind resource is mediocre, based on low energy production when operating.
Despite the presence of turbines in Selawik, AVEC does not provide any empircal wind resource data.
This application is one of 7 wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in 3 other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Scammon Bay. This is a resubmittal of a round 3 application (#514) that AEA recommended for funding, but which did not
receive funding due to insufficient funds. Wind resource is estimated as a class 5 based on the state\'s high-resolution wind map. AVEC notes that the wind turbines will provide a
local landmark for navigation.
This application is one of seven wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in three other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
AVEC eliminates the cost of wind resource assessment in this application, due to the presence of a met tower.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes final design, permitting and construction of a 400 kW wind project to serve the St. Marys-Pitkas Point grid. In round 3 AVEC proposed final design, permitting, and construction
of a 900 kW wind project and intertie to serve the communities of St. Marys, Mountain Village, Pitkas Point, and Pilot Station (#516). In round 2 AVEC requested funding for feasibility
assessment for this project (#298). AEA recommended both proposals for funding; however there was not sufficient funding for either.
In 2009 to 2010 AVEC has continued with onsite wind resource monitoring. Met towers between Pitkas and St Marys indicate a class 6 wind resource but also a potential problem with icing.
AVEC proposes to complete final design and permitting in February 2012 and complete construction in summer 2012.
AVEC has not completed a conceptual design for this project.
Recommend partial funding of $275,554 for completing feasibility, final design, and permitting with the requirement that before final design funds are disbursed AEA accept the feasibility
and conceptual design report.
AVEC proposes final design and permitting of a 300 kW run-of-river hydro project on the east fork of Mountain Creek near Old Harbor. AVEC is currently working on project feasibility
under an RE Fund round 1 grant (#73) which is expected to be complete by next summer. AVEC studied a project nearby in the late 90s but put the project on hold due to adverse economics
and fish habitat study requirements.
Current work indicates a promising project. The proposal is supported by local city government and Native corporation.
AVEC does not identify the project engineer. Portions of the project are on USFWS refuge and on an Exxon Valdez conservation easement.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before funding is disbursed AVEC must submit a feasibility report acceptable to AEA.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Marshall. Wind resource is measured as a class 4 based on ten months of met tower data. AVEC notes that the wind turbines
will provide a local landmark for navigation.
This application is one of seven wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in three other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
AVEC eliminates the cost of wind resource assessment in this application, due to the presence of a met tower.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Koyuk. Wind resource is estimated from the state?s high resolution map as a class 3. AVEC notes that the wind turbines
would provide a landmark for navigation in the area.
This application is one of seven wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in three other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes installation of a 10 kW low penetration photovoltaic-diesel system to supply station service power to the Kaltag system. Panels would be located on the Kaltag power house.
Project economics are marginal (B/C=0.67) given the minimal amount of fuel that the system will displace. However AVEC states that the main value of the project is to demonstrate performance
of a solar-diesel system in a utility environment.
Full funding recommended.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Elim. Wind resource is estimated from the state?s high resolution map as a class 3-4. AVEC notes that wind towers would
provide a landmark for navigation in Norton Sound.
This application is one of 7 wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in 3 other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Eek. Wind resource is estimated from the state?s high resolution map as a class 3. The applicant estimates wind resource
as a class 4 based on nearby Quinhagak?s measured resource. The community operates a single phase power system. The Northwind 100 turbines operates in three phase. AVEC has prepared
a recon- level wind power report for Eek based on regional wind data.
This application is one of 7 wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in 3 other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
Alaska Power & Telephone proposes to study and develop mitigation measures for river debris that impacts hydrokinetic devices, specifically the 25 kW New Energy Corporation?s Encurrent
device at Eagle.
The impact of debris is an important issue for developing river hydrokinetic devices in Alaska. Debris has caused serious disruptions and lower availability of power production in demonstration
projects in Eagle and Ruby. Debris monitoring and/or mitigation is addressed in the scopes of work of at least two other projects in Alaska?1) AEA?s grant to UAF for work at ORPC\'s
Tanana River site and 2) the Denali Commission grant to ORPC Inc which includes a component for debris monitoring and mitigation. Denali Commission is providing substantial support
(~$3 million) to support demonstration of hydrokinetic technology in Eagle.
Given the amount of work that is already funded to address debris mitigation, AEA believes that a statewide approach is a more effective means of accomplishing the objectives of this
proposal. AEA will coordinate with the UAF Alaska Hydrokinetic Energy Research Center to do this.
No funding recommended.
IRHA proposes to team with Tanana Chiefs Conference and UAF to perform reconnnaissance assessment and fuelwood inventory for community cordwood systems for Nulato, Ruby, Holy Cross,
Koyukuk, Anvik, Nikolai, Hughes and Kaltag. Communities were chosen based on 1) biomass energy development was indicated as an objective in the Alaska Energy Pathway and 2) community
councils passed resolutions of interest.
The application includes a strong project team and indicates substantial community buy-in.
Recommend full funding.
The SE Island School District proposes to construct a cordwood -fired heating plant that will supply the Thorne Bay K-12 school and school district office. SEISD submitted a RE fund
Round 1 proposal for $178,179 with a $42,000 match . The project team concluded that this was insufficient funding for the project and ,have spent the last year pursuing additional
financing. Under an existing grant from AEA SEISD is currently in the final design stage for the the project.
The school district is installing a similar system in Coffman Cove expected to be in operation in 2011.
School enrollment has been variable, but has managed to stay above the minimum level. USFS facilities are located near the campus and represent potential additional heating loads.
Management capability is very good.
Recommend full funding.
Kenai Hydro LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Homer Electric Association, proposes field studies/environmental assessment, preliminary engineering/project scoping, cost analysis, and
FERC license application for developing a 4.5 MW hydro facility at Grant Lake. AEA has granted Kenai Hydro $100,000 for reconnaissance assessment in the alternative energy RFP and
$816,000 in RE Fund round 1 (#34). Kenai Hydro proposes to provide a 20% match.
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. There is significant public opposition to the project.
2. We think it?s going to cost more to mitigate impacts of features not yet anticipated in the cost estimate, such as i) relocation of the roadway and transmission line due to presence
of Iditarod Commemorative trail (currently permitted and under development), and ii) the cost of constructing a new tailrace pond.
3. We expect that in the FERC licensing process, there will be constraints on the operation of the project that will significantly impact the amount of energy that can be produced.
For instance, energy output will be reduced in order to maintain environmental stream flows and lake levels necessary to mitigate impact on fisheries.
However, recognizing that this project would provide a significant amount of renewable energy, AEA recommends funding for continued feasibility to assist the applicant in developing
a low-impact project configuration that is economic, able to be licensed by FERC, and is acceptable to project stakeholders.
Recommend partial funding of $1,184,000 ($2 million cap minus the existing grant of $816,000).
Alaska Electric Energy Cooperative (AEEC), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Homer Electric Association, proposes to convert the existing 42 MW single-cycle combustion turbine into a 60 MW
combined cycle system utilizing recovered heat from the combustion turbine exhaust.
This project was considered in the Alaska Energy Authority Railbelt Integrated Resource Plan (RIRP), as a ?committed unit?, that is, a power generation project an individual utility
was planning, designing or constructing while the integrated resource plan was being developed.
The RIRP included an analysis of the cost impacts these committed units would impose on the Railbelt, if built outside of the regional planning process. While the RIRP analysis does
not capture the full incremental cost of utilities acting independently over the 50-year planning horizon, it does give an indication of relative cost differential. Cumulatively, costs
over the 50 years increase 5.6% from the least cost scenario of regional power portfolio development, if utilities pursue independent project development. (RIRP, p. 1-31)
The RIRP concludes: ??there are significant cost savings associated with the Railbelt utilities implementing a plan that has been developed to minimize total regional costs, while ensuring
reliable service, as opposed to the individual utilities working separately to meet the needs of their customers.? (RIRP, p. 1-32)
While the project appears to be economic as a stand-alone project, it was not selected as a regional plan generation facility, and its construction appears to increase costs for the
ratepayer. For this reason AEA cannot recommend this project.
No funding recommended.
Nushagak Cooperative requests funding for final design and construction of a 450 kW wind project.
Currently Nushagak has received a $100,000 grant from the Denali Commission under the Alternative Energy Grant program for wind feasibility. Nushagak has a grant to study hydro feasibility
for project(s) at Lake Elva and Grant Lake north of Aleknagik.
Nushagak?s proposal demonstrates impressive level of community support for developing a utility-scale wind project in Dillingham. The utility has performed a substantial amount of work
in preparation for wind development, including a reconnaissance level assessment of energy alternatives prepared by the University.
AEA has the following concerns regarding this proposal:
1. The feasibility information submitted is not sufficient to provide a basis for final design and construction. Specifically, it does not include a conceptual design.
2. Alternatives assessed were limited to small turbines. There is no discussion of the risks associated with deploying a new turbine model in the state.
3. The economics of this project are marginal and may be improved by considering other sites, equipment, and project size.
4. Nushagak has not yet completed a substantial portion of or drawn any conclusions from the wind feasibility work underway.
5. The proposed scheduled begins in October 2010 with design and permitting completed in May 2011 before funding from the RE Fund would be available.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant IPEC proposes a staged assessment of geothermal resources of Tenakee Inlet Hot Springs consisting of field work in 2010 followed by exploratory drilling in the summer 2011.
This application is identical to a round 3 application (#501) that was recommended, but which did not receive funding due to limited funds.
DGGS notes that the hot spring is one of the hottest in Southeast Alaska suggesting a reasonable chance of power outputs up to a few megawatts. The hot springs is located in a remote
location on Tongass NF land and would require a special land use permit. The hot springs is approximately 20 miles from Hoonah with no road access. Hoonah has also submitted an application
to construct a hydro project at Gartina and Water Supply creeks. The hot springs is approximately 10 miles from Pelican, which has a hydro resource that supplies all of its power.
DGGS agrees with the proposed two-phase plan outlined in this proposal?1) geological and geophysical studies followed by 2) site test drilling. However, DGGS states concerns regarding
IPEC?s approach to identifying the exact location of the sub-surface resource prior to drilling. Further DGGS notes that ?Additional clarification and details of the work plan, and
how the information will be used to provide drilling locations and/or indication of reservoir should be provided to fully evaluate the proposal. Additionally, if chosen for funding,
it would seem reasonable to provide the funds in a phased manner that coincides with the phases of the work: drilling to occur only after geological and geophysical fieldwork and economic,
environmental, and permitting issues are resolved favorably.?
The project represents an option for displacing the 350,000 gpy diesel consumption for power in Hoonah. At an estimated installed cost of $27 million not including transmission to Hoonah
or other infrastructure, however, project economics do not appear to be attractive.
AEA recommends partial funding for the initial phase of field work with the requirement that prior to any funds being disbursed for the field investigation IPEC will prepare a workplan
and project team satisfactory to AEA and DGGS.
Already has a $4 M grant from Round III; which is to be used for construction / Therefore, not eligible for additional grant funding for construction.
AP&T proposes funding feasibility of developing a 6 MW storage hydro project at Schubee Lake. This proposal is almost identical to a round 3 proposal for this purpose (#441) that for
which AEA recommended partial funding. However, insufficient funds were available to provide a grant.
As before, AP&T has not prepared a formal reconnaissance assessment of the project that meets requirements of the RFA. AP&T is responding to a level of public opposition to developing
another hydro site at Connelly Lk. AEA is recommending feasibility funding for Connelly Lk (#627).
AEA has the following concerns with Schubee Lk: 1) it is located on USFS lands and would be subject to FERC licensing, 2) it has a higher relative cost with less energy output than
Connelly, 3) it would require an expensive connection to the existing submarine cable connecting Haines and Skagway.
AEA recognizes the importance for the Haines Borough citizens to make informed decisions regarding development of alternative hydro locations. However we believe that sufficient information
for determining the development path can be achieved by more limited analysis.
Recommend partial funding of $80,000 for reconnaissance assessment with the provisions that 1) AP&T must provide a revised scope of work for approval by AEA before funds are disbursed,
2) scope of work is consistent with findings of the Southeast Alaska IRP .
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power and Telephone (AP&T) proposes funding for the transmission portion of the 5 MW Reynolds Creek hydropower project. Haida Energy,
a joint venture of AP&T and Haida Corp, would own the project and sell power on a wholesale basis to APC, the certificated utility on Prince of Wales (PoW) Island. The project is a
component of Reynolds Creek Hydro Project, which received $2M (App #104) in grant funding already. In Round 3, an application (#439) was submitted for transmission line construction
for Reynolds Creek. Although AEA recommended the project for funding there was insufficient funding appropriated to fund this project.
The following grant allocations totaling $4.1 million have been made for the Reynolds Creek project:
1) $100,000 of Denali Comm funds to Haida Corp through the Denali Commission / AEA alternative energy RFP
2) $1 million in RE fund round 1 funds to Haida Corp
3) $1 million in RE fund round 1 funds to Haida Power, a joint venture between APC and Haida Corp
4) $2 million in legislative appropriation to Southeast Conference
The project will be dispatched in conjunction with AP&T\'s existing Black Bear Lk and South Fork hydro projects. Previous applications state that Reynolds Creek hydro will only be used
after the existing hydro projects are fully dispatched. An extension of PoW transmission to the northern portion of island has been funded by the Denali Commission and RE Fund round
1.
Haida Energy has recently informed AEA that the project budget may need to be increased and has agreed to direct its engineer of record to update the project cost estimate. Also, Haida
Energy has informed AEA that it has redesigned the project to relocate the power house and to make other changes to improve constructability.
Recommend full funding with the following grant conditions: Before any construction grant funds are disbursed: 1) Grantee must secure an amendment to the existing project management
agreement to include this grant in the agreement, and to become a signatory to the agreement, 2) all final design documents, permits, rights-of-way, and FERC license must be in place,
3) completion of a revised project cost estimate by the engineer of record that is satisfactory to AEA and a revised project finance plan that demonstrates that the applicant has raised
all funds necessary to complete the project, 4) the grantee must establish a power purchase agreement acceptable to AEA, based on cost-based rate methodology that demonstrates that
benefits of public funds flow to the ratepayers, 5) ownership of the transmission line must be with Haida Energy, or Grantee must provide a transmission maintenance and operations agreement
giving control of the project to Haida Energy or an alternative business arrangement acceptable to AEA.
AP&T proposes final design, permitting, and construction of a run-of-river 124 kW hydro project at Neck Lake. The project would result in displacing virtually all of the diesel used
for power generation in Whale Pass. RE Fund round 2 (#223) provided $108,000 for feasibility analysis, scheduled for completion in 2011-12. AEA has allocated $90,000 in round 3 funds
(App #440) for permitting and final design to be completed by Summer 2013. Construction would begin in Fall 2013.
In November 2010, FERC ruled it has jurisdiction for licensing at Neck Lake. When contacted by AEA, AP&T announced they have decided to stop any further activity to develop a hydroelectric
power plant at Neck Lake.
Recommend no funding since on 12/6/2010 AP&T indicated it won?t pursue this project.
Applicant proposes feasibility study and final design/permitting for a 12 MW storage hydro project. An IRP is desirable for the Skagway, Haines, Klukwan area before proceeding to final
design and construction for these projects. AP&T is also proposing recon and feasibility study of Schubee Lk hydro project (#441) in response to local input. AP&T submitted a similar
proposal in RE fund round 3 (#437) that was recommended for partial funding, but did not receive a grant due to insufficient funds.
Existing recon study proposes a substantially smaller 6 MW project which impounds less water than the current proposal. Project may require intertie and road access across the Chilkat
Bald Eagle Reserve if it is not feasible to route through the Haines State Forest. Application includes March 09 letter from BLM indicating land has been transferred to State of Alaska,
thus reducing likelihood of FERC jurisdiction. Power sales/benefits limited to offset of diesel costs and air pollution during summer cruise ship landings in Haines and Skagway. Seasonal
power production would limit year-round availability.
Recommend $468,000 partial funding for Phase 2 feasibility study with scope per application with provision that 1) land issues and licensing jurisdiction question be resolved with go/no-go
points established 2) scope of work is consistent with findings of the Southeast Alaska IRP.
APC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Alaska Power and Telephone) proposes feasibility assessment, permitting and final design for a 300 kW hydro project at Carlson Cr. that would serve
Slana and Chistochina.
This is a continuation of a project reconnaissance assessment funded in round 2 (#226), now projected to be complete in spring 2013. As part of the current work APC will request a project
jurisdictional determination by FERC.
APC submitted a similar proposal in round 3 (#443) that was recommended for funding. However insufficient funding was available.
Work under the current proposal would not begin until fall 2013. It is reasonable for APC to complete current work and resubmit an application for funding after determining project viability.
Recommend no funding.
The Haines Borough proposes reconnaissance and feasibility assessment of two hydro projects totalling 3 MW and 1.5 miles of transmission to connect to the Ocean Beauty\'s fish processing
facility and residences in the community of Excursion Inlet.
As the proposal notes "barriers to project development will include anadromous fish concerns...." Major concerns with protection of these species include minimum flows below a diversion
facility and the need for both upstream and downstream fish passage at the intake structures".
The applicant does not indicate who owns the land on the projects would be developed. The processor and most residences are seasonal.
Recon study should address fish habitat, electrical service and estimated load for the Borough subdivision, establishment of community utility, business arrangement for selling power
to the fish processor Ocean Beauty, site control and land ownership, and FERC jurisdiction. Specifically, the recon work shall include consideration of fish habitat issues as it affects
the cost, capacity, and energy output of the project and environmental licensing concerns.
Recommend partial funding for reconnaissance study.
The City and Borough of Wrangell proposes assessing feasibility of using electric vehicles utilizing excess hydro from the southern Southeast electric grid. Specifically, as an output
of the project the City proposes to purchase an electric car and develop a charging station in Wrangell.
AEA supports the concept of displacing transportation fuel using renewable energy resources where shown to be economically feasible. AEA notes the benefit/cost ratio is 0.39 assuming
5 cent per kWh power over a 15 year project life. We are concerned that power may not be available at this rate for the long-term.
Impacts of conventional power consumption, heating conversions, and electric transportation are being considered in the Southeast Alaska IRP project, expected to be complete by the end
of 2011. For this reason we feel it would be useful to the IRP project for portions of this work to be done. Specifically, work that would be useful includes studies on the impacts
of electric vehicles on the City distribution system, incremental impacts that electric vehicles will have on the future energy consumption and power demand for the Wrangell system,
and opportunities for deploying smart grid technology.
Recommend partial funding of $25,000 for reconnaissance study that will be useful to the Southeast IRP project with requirement that scope must be developed in coordination with the
AEA-led IRP.
The Matanuska-Susitna Borough proposes design and construction of a cordwood-fired heating system for the Susitna Valley High School. The project would displace approximately 22,000
gallons of heating oil per year using approximately 250 cords of wood per year with a delivered cost of $200/cord.
The proposal is based on a detailed feasibility analysis completed in 2009 with support from a grant under the Denali Commission/AEA alternative energy grant program. The analysis considered
conceptual design of the wood boiler systems as well wood fuel availability and cost.
The proposal to heat the school has many attractive features, including creating jobs and enhancing educational opportunities of the local students, providing a research forest, and
demonstrating biomass energy in a relatively accessible part of the state. Based on the feasibility report there is an ample, sustainable wood supply and the school would save $20,000-50,000
per year.
AEA has received a letter expressing concern about the project impacts on the nearby forest, air emissions from the facility, and economic benefit versus cost.
AEA is concerned about the relatively high project cost and marginal economics using the standard 20-year project life assumption. The feasibility report runs sensitivity analyses and
concludes that project economics are attractive using only the most optimistic assumptions for heating load, wood consumption and price, and project cost. During the final design and
permitting stage, AEA strongly encourages the Borough to consider alternate combustion systems and construction methods to improve the economics of the system
Recommend full funding with the requirement that before construction funds are released for the project, the Borough prepare a final design acceptable to AEA.
Applicant Native Village of Eyak proposes assessing feasibility of heating buildings in Cordova with local wood and waste cardboard. The applicant also proposes to develop a community
energy audit protocol. The applicant requested funding for this project last year (#408) and AEA recommended partial funding. However, the project was not funded due to insufficient
funding.
Based on prefeasibility reports provided upon AEA request, the community may need to utilize local wood in addition to the burn pile.
The budget provided in the application does provide justification for what appears to be a very expensive feasibility analysis. Based on experience with other biomass thermal projects
in Alaska, AEA recommends partial funding of $75,000.
The City of Akutan proposes to complete final design and permitting of a geothermal power plan serving the City and Trident Seafoods. The City of Akutan began this project under a RE
Fund Round 2 grant (#246) and continued with partial funding under a round 3 grant (#470). In the summer of 2009, the City performed surface exploration work, including field mapping,
CSAMT and remote sensing, to help choose drill sites. In summer 2010 two wells were drilled with good results. The first well hit several shallow, hot aquifers (up to 359F at 585
ft). The second well was evidently less permeable and did not encounter much fluid, although an elevated geothermal gradient was recorded.
The City is proceeding with feasibility stage activities, scheduled for completion in June 2011. Pending are finalization of the resource assessment, conceptual design and project cost,
financial analysis, preliminary power sales agreement, and a draft operational and business plan.
DGGS finds that "Drilling at Akutan during the summer of 2010 confirmed the presence of a high-temperature geothermal resource at Akutan. This resource is comparable to that at Makushin,
and is in the tens-of-megawatts class.." The substantial geothermal resource combined with the substantial energy load of the fish processing plant and the City of Akutan indicates
promise for this project.
Recommend full funding with provision that before funds are made available for final design and permitting, the City must provide to AEA and AEA must accept a feasibility assessment
that justifies continued project development.
Ketchikan Public Utilities proposes to construct a 4.5 MW storage hydro project on an existing dam at Whitman Lake. KPU was funded at $1.3 million for final design and permitting under
RE fund round 2 (#37) and expects to complete this work by December 2010. KPU has reached a settlement agreement with DNR, ADFG, and the USFS on the project.
KPU plans to finance the $14.5 million balance of the project using unspecified grants, municipal bonds, or other options.
With legislative funding, AEA is currently developing a regional integrated energy resource plan for Southeast Alaska. Whitman Lake hydro appears to be a viable energy resource that
could be valuable in satisfying future energy and capacity demands for the SEAPA network at large. However, this cannot be confirmed until the Southeast IRP (SEIRP) project is complete.
One specific output from this plan is a preferred generation resource plan. Currently there is not sufficient information to serve as a basis for an economic analysis. This analysis
will be done as a part of the SEIRP.
Partial funding of $700,000 ($2 million cumulative cap for final design/construction minus $1.3 million granted in round 2) recommended.
Special provisions are as follows: (1) Grantee to demonstrate that all preconstruction activities (including those previously funded under Round 1 RE Fund grant) have been completed
in a manner acceptable to AEA, including resolution of all land and site control issues; (2) Before any funds can be paid out under this grant, grantee will submit a project financing
plan acceptable to AEA which describes the source and financial cost of all committed funds required to complete the entire Whitman Lake project and allow it to produce and sell power;
(3) Provide FERC notice to proceed with construction activities; and (4) Consistent with AEA policy, energy and capacity from this project must be available to all ratepayers on the
SEAPA network on an equal, non-discriminatory Basis; and (5) Scope of work is consistent with findings of the Southeast Alaska IRP. .
The City of Coffman Cove proposes to construct 55 kW project that would capture hydro energy from the penstock that provides water supply to the City of Craig Water Treatment Plant and
the Port St. Nicholas fish hatchery near Craig.
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. The RE Fund has already allocated funding to the 5 MW Reynolds Creek (RC) project and the Northern Prince of Wales Intertie that provides all electrical needs for the island for the
foreseeable future. The RC hydro project is expected to spill water over much of the next decade.
2. The application provides little to no reconnaissance, feasibility or design information.
3. Business arrangements are not described.
Recommend no funding.
CVEA proposes studies to address fish, wildlife, water use, geology, soils, cultural, recreational and other potential impacts of a 20-40 MW hydro project at Silver Lake. CVEA applied
for reconnaissance assessment funding in round 3 (#452) and were recommended for funding, however there was insufficent funding for the project. Since then, CVEA has funded a recon
study using their own resources. This recon report is to be completed in December 2010. CVEA has applied to FERC for a preliminary permit for Silver Lake, which is anticipated to
be issued in the near future.
CVEA has received $2,288,000 in round 1 funding and $1,000,000 in legislative funds for feasibility analysis of Alison Lake hydro. Given the current load of the CVEA system it is likely
that either, but not both Allison Lake and Silver Lake hydroelectric projects can be economically developed.
A significant factor in the feasibility of Silver Lake is development of a 20-mile transmission line through mountainous terrain from the proposed power house to Valdez. Silver Lake
was studied in the 1980s and 90s and was not pursued further due to poor economics and fish habitat issues. The project, however, would provide substantial amounts of energy, significantly
greater than the output of Alison Lake.
Recommend full funding with special provision that a CVEA -funded reconnaissance report that addresses Silver Lake\'s project economics and potential fatal flaws is provided to AEA,
and AEA concurs with the recommendations to proceed to further study of Silver Lake. Also AEA will want to see a thorough analysis of the land ownership issues associated with this
project in the feasibility stage since that will affect licensing provisions. (See DMLW comments).
Alaska Gateway School District proposes adding on a heat loop off the newly-completed wood-fired heating system at the Tok School to provide heat to the detached multipurpose buildings
that house a hockey rink, shooting range and Zamboni garage.
The new wood heating system at the Tok School is very promising. However, given that the project would displace 9720 gallons of heating fuel per year at a cost of $754,651, economics
are not favorable.
Recommend no funding.
GVEA requests funding for ordering wind turbines for a 24 MW project in the Healy area. AEA has provided $2 million toward feasibility and permitting in round 1 (#109). Turbines are
scheduled for purchase in summer 2011 following consideration of bids from turbine suppliers and EPC contractors by the GVEA board. Site work and turbine erection would be completed
in summer 2012. The project would be commissioned in summer 2012.
GVEA has received federal approval for CREB bond financing.
Recommend full funding.
Chugach Electric Association proposes a multiphased approach toward developing electrical transmission on the west side of Cook Inlet to carry power from potential geothermal project
at Mt Spurr and a potential hydropower project at Lake Chakachamna. Phase 1 (feasibility) consists of preliminary design, route selection, and assessment of permit requirements. Phase
2 (final design) would consist of permits and rights-of-way, geotechnical and survey work, and final design.
Chugach Electric would complete feasibility activities in June 2012. Following feasibility, Chugach would complete final design activities in June 2013. The proposal provides only
a general description of project tasks and costs.
Ormat is test drilling on Mt. Spurr four 500-1000\' depth core holes and plans to drill additional deeper slim holes in 2011 as part of round 3 grant #477. Additionally, Ormat has
applied for a round 4 grant (#652) to construct a test well. Chakachamna would involve a lake tap from Lake Chakachamna, a 10 mile power tunnel leading to an underground power house
in the McArthur River Basin. The two power generation projects have not been proven to be technically and economically viable and also may have environmental permitting challenges.
Railbelt IRP findings are favorable for both Mt. Spurr and Chakachmna projects. Under direction from the Legislature, AEA is undertaking additional analyses to determine the feasibility
of Chakachamna in relation to other large hydro projects on the Railbelt. The results of that study are not available on the date of this review.
Since the two energy generation projects remain in the feasibility determination phase, AEA believes it is reasonable to provide funding for the proposed transmission project to completion
of the feasibility.
Recommend partial funding of $600,000 with the requirements that CEA prepares a more detailed scope and budget for AEA approval.
The NW Arctic Borough proposes installing a total of 7 kW of photovoltaic panels in 10 communities (700 W/community). The purpose of the application is for energy cost reduction and
local education. The solar panels would be installed by a Fairbanks supplier.
AEA has the following concerns about this application:
1. Given a cost of almost $150,000 for all ten systems and total annual fuel savings of only 800 gallons per year, project economics are poor (B/C = 0.54).
2. Since the panels would be installed, not by local community members but by a contractor, education value would be limited.
No funding recommended.
The North Slope Borough proposes final design and permitting for a 300 kW wind project to serve the Wainwright grid. The Borough is currently working on a round 3 grant for conceptual
design (#412) and has completed onsite wind resource assessment which indicates a class 4-5 resource.
The proposed budget includes $160,000 for final environmental assessment and mitigation plans. The current work includes $102,000 for similar activities. AEA believes that it is reasonable
to reduce the budget for this on the basis of the previous award.
Since conceptual design is not yet complete, construction cost estimates are very approximate; However, unless the construction cost can be reduced economics for constructing the project
will not be favorable,
Recommend partial funding of $298,000 with requirement that before final design funds are disbursed AEA accept the feasibility and conceptual design report.
The North Slope Borough proposes final design and permitting for a 300 kW wind project to serve the Point Lay grid. The Borough is currently working on a round 3 grant for conceptual
design (#421) and has completed onsite wind resource assessment which indicates a class 4-5 resource.
The proposed budget includes $160,000 for final environmental assessment and mitigation plans. The current work includes $102,000 for similar activities. AEA believes that it is reasonable
to reduce the budget for this on the basis of the previous award.
Since conceptual design is not yet complete, construction cost estimates are very approximate; However, unless the construction cost can be reduced economics for constructing the project
will not be favorable,
Recommend partial funding of $298,000 with requirement that before final design funds are disbursed AEA accept the feasibility and conceptual design report.
The North Slope Borough proposes final design and permitting for a 300 kW wind project to serve the Point Hope grid. The Borough is currently working on a round 3 grant for conceptual
design (#413) and has completed onsite wind resource assessment which indicates a class 6 resource.
The proposed budget includes $160,000 for final environmental assessment and mitigation plans. The current work includes $102,000 for similar activities. AEA believes that it is reasonable
to reduce the budget for this on the basis of the previous award.
Since conceptual design is not yet complete, construction cost estimates are very approximate; However, unless the construction cost can be reduced economics for constructing the project
will not be favorable,
Recommend partial funding of $298,000 with requirement that before final design funds are disbursed AEA accept the feasibility and conceptual design report.
North Slope Borough proposes feasibility assessment of developing a wind-diesel system in Kaktovik. Currently the North Slope Borough is conducting similar feasibility analyses in Pt.
Hope (#413), Pt. Lay (#421), and Wainwright (#412).
NSB has completed onsite wind resource assessment and provides the wind resource report in the application. The report documents a Class 5 wind resource.
Recommend full funding.
The North Slope Borough proposes following up earlier feasibility work funded under the RE Fund round 2(#245) on developing a 70-mile transmission line connecting Atqasuk to the natural
gas-fired power plant in Barrow. AEA recognizes that renewable energy resource development is not viable, thus the project is potentially eligible for RE fund support.
NSB\'s feasibility report is due this winter. Work to date has identified concerns with steller and spectacled eider habitat, raising concerns for increased costs due to possible requirements
for underground construction. Additionally right-of-way issues will need to be resolved, including those associated with Native allotments. The current feasibility analysis (#245)
does not include conceptual design.
Recommend full funding with provision that AEA accept the feasibility report for the work currently underway (#245) before any funds are disbursed for the proposed project.
Louden Tribal Council proposes assessing feasibility of a combined wood-fired heat and power system in Galena. The project under consideration involves formation of a partnership with
the biomass owner (Gana-a?Yoo Native Corporation), purchasing and installation of the harvesting equipment, appropriate generation and heat recovery systems, and providing heat for
the existing utilidor and buildings occupied by the Galena City School District.
Louden is seeking funding from USDA for assessment and management planning for the local biomass resources. These funds, although important to the effort, are not assured.
Louden has contracted with WH Pacific for a reconnaissance study scheduled for completion in December 2010.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA accept the reconnaissance study before any funds are disbursed.
AVCP proposes refurbishing the existing 12 kW photovoltaic-diesel hybrid system in Lime Village. The system was installed in 1999-2001 with donations by British Petroleum and Siemens
for the PV panels. Although the panels are reportedly operable, the charger-inverter and control system does not work. The status of the ~100 kWh lead acid battery system is unknown.
AEA notes that the efficiency of the Lime Village power system is very low (7.88 kWh/gal).
Given the remoteness and very high cost of fuel in Lime Village, it makes sense to determine if and how the system can be reactivated before allocating funds for the task. $25,000 is
a reasonable estimate for system evaluation.
Recommend partial funding for system evaluation.
The Native Village of Cantwell proposes a reconnaissance study for a 1+MW storage hydro project on the Jack River located near Cantwell. The project would connect to the Railbelt Energy
Grid served by GVEA. AEA recommended funding for this project in RE fund round 3 (#402) but insufficient funds were available.
The proposal includes letters of support from Ahtna Inc, Denali Borough, Denali National Park, Golden Valley Electric, and Usibelli Coal.
DNR comments note proximity to the Denali Fault and dam safety issues.
AEA staff accompanied NVC and their potential consultant Polarconsult on a site visit in 2008 and concluded that the project may have merit. However insufficient information has been
collected and provided to justify funding for full feasibility and conceptual design.
Recommend partial funding of $30,000 for reconnaissance assessment.
Applicant proposes to purchase a chip fuel dryer and lease it to the Viking Lumber Mill which currently provides chip fuel to the city of Craig for use in the biomass boiler to heat
the pool and school for the community. Fuel could also be made available to other facilities on Prince of Wales Island and other locations.
The new biomass boiler currently has a fuel dryer as part of its system. The moisture content of the fuel has consistently been higher than design parameters. The new dryer would
allow for the fuel to be pre-treated before delivery to the school, and could potentially allow for the development of other chip customers for Viking Lumber.
AEA recongizes that there is significant public benefit from this project, however, it believes that there must be reasonable economic return to the public from the allocation of the
grant fund, while at the same time assuring that Viking recieves reasonable return.
Recommend full funding with the following special provision: Before funds are made available, AEA must approve the lease/operate/maintain business agreement between Viking and Craig.
TDX Power proposes feasibility, design, and construction of 1-2 MW wind energy project for Bethel.
TDX owns and/or operates three wind-diesel power systems in St. Paul, Sand Point, and Tin City. TDX states in their application that they will be assuming operation of the Bethel power
utility by summer 2011. Given these circumstances, TDX is an attractive and logical entity to develop a large-scale wind project in Bethel.
However there are other significant energy planning and project development activities taking place in Bethel. The City of Bethel has been funded through the RE Fund round 1 for a 400
kW wind project. To date the City and utility have not reached an agreement for power purchase or interconnection. Additionally Village Wind Power is funded under round 0 to assess
feasibility of a large scale wind power project. AVCP has submitted an application for final design and construction in round 4 for a 200 kW wind project to serve Bethel (#600).
Napakiak is proposing feasibility and design of wind generation (#697) along its intertie with Bethel. Finally AVCP Regional Housing Authority is proposing study of hydro at the Kiseralik
and Chikuminuk Rivers in Round 2 of the RE Fund. Therefore, there is a need for a regional integrated resource energy plan in the Bethel area to coordinate when and where energy projects
should be developed. This proposal should be considered in the context of an integrated plan to assure proper sizing, timing, and integration of multiple energy projects. AEA believes
that such an overall plan for the Bethel power system should be developed before proceeding with any additional wind development.
AEA has met with the City of Bethel, AVCP Rural Housing Authority, Yukon Kuskokwim Health Corporation, Calista Corporation and TDX to discuss regional energy planning, including wind
and hydro development. The group has agreed to pursue coordinated energy planning for the region and the Bethel grid.
AEA believes that Bethel?s large load provides the opportunity for deploying megawatt scale turbines with better economics than smaller-scale wind installations. TDX proposes a logical,
stepwise approach for developing large scale wind generation in Bethel.
Recommend partial funding of $213,690 for feasibility analysis and conceptual design with the requirement that TDX work with the City, the Housing Authority, the Health Corp, Calista,
Napakiak Ircinraq Power Company, and other entities in regional and community energy planning.
CB of Sitka requests additional funding for assessing feasibility of the potential 28 MW Takatz Lake hydro project. To date RE Fund round 1 has awarded partial funding of $1,152,134
to the project for this purpose. For this application CBS is requesting an additional $2 million.
Project is consistent with findings of the 2008 Sitka Power Supply Plan and would follow less expensive alternatives, including increasing capacity of the existing Blue Lk Hydro project,
in order to avoid more costly diesel generation. There is potential for developing road and marine facilities associated with the project that would provide access to the eastern Baranof
Island. FERC has issued a preliminary permit to Sitka to assess feasibility of Takatz. Given the widespread interest in linking major electric generation and loads in Southeast, development
of Takatz should be coordinated with the SE Alaska Regional Energy Plan.
AEA has recently determined that additional funding is available from round 1 funds to support funding this project at the original Rd 1 application amount of $2 million. This is also
the cap amount for feasibility for this project. The existing grant will be amended to increase its funding level to $2 million. No additional funding recommended due to the cap.
TDX proposes conceptual design and feasibility assessment of a hybrid renewable (wind, geothermal and/or hydro)-diesel system for Adak. TDX proposes to follow-up on an existing grant
for $85,835 matched by $6,470 to perform a reconnaissance report, monitoring, wind resource report, feasibility study, and conceptual design.
AEA has the following concerns about this application:
1. The existing grant was put in place in May 2010. TDX has made little progress on the existing grant and has not requested reimbursement or submitted any progress reports.
2.The proposed work is for feasibility and conceptual design. This work is already included in the scope of the current grant.
Recommend no funding.
Valdez Fisheries Development Association is requesting funding for permitting and final design of a system to convert recovered heat from the Petrostar Refinery to 630 kW of power to
the CVEA grid, refrigeration to a cold storage and fish processing facility, and tempered water to the Solomon Gulch Hatchery. VFDA submitted a related application in RE Fund round
2 (#207) that was not recommended for funding because it was for the entire cold storage facility, not the energy system. The VFDA submitted a second application in round 3 (#434)
identical to the current application, which limits the scope to the energy system design.
The project has substantial value for demonstrating a system that would aid development of fish processing and cold storage in coastal communities with access to recoverable heat.
However, AEA has the following concerns with this application:
1. VFDA has still not secured financing for the cold storage facility that justifies the absorption system.
2. During round 3 review AEA requested the feasibility analysis for the ORC (power generation) component of the system, but VFDA was unable to provide it. The current application still
does not include this analysis.
3. In round 3 AEA requested a breakdown of the $1 million design budget, but VFDA was unable to provide any detail. The current application still does not include this detail. Without
this detail that justifies this cost, AEA must regard this amount as excessive.
4. Similar to the last application there remains no indication they will purchase power from the project, a requirement of the IPP status that make the grantee eligible.
Recommend no funding.
AVCP Regional Housing Authority proposes to construct a 200 kW wind energy project to serve their campus in Bethel. AVCP would first purchase land from the City of Bethel for $670,000
in late 2011, and begin equipment purchase and construction in spring 2012.
There are other significant energy planning and project development activities taking place in Bethel. The City of Bethel has been funded through the RE Fund round 1 for a 400 kW wind
project. To date the City and utility have not reached an agreement for power purchase or interconnection. Additionally, Village Wind Power is funded under round 0 to assess feasibility
of a large scale wind power project. Napakiak Incinraq Power Company is proposing reconnaissance through design of a wind project. TDX, who state they are assuming ownership of the
Bethel utility in summer 2011, has proposed feasibility through construction of a 1+ MW wind system on the Bethel grid. Finally AVCP Regional Housing Authority is proposing study of
hydro at the Kiseralik and Chikuminuk Rivers in Round 2 of the RE Fund. Therefore, there is a need for a regional integrated resource energy plan in the Bethel area to coordinate when
and where energy projects should be developed. This proposal should be considered in the context of an integrated plan to assure proper sizing, timing, and integration of multiple
energy projects. AEA believes that such an overall plan for the Bethel power system should be developed before proceeding with any additional wind development.
AEA has met with City of Bethel, AVCP Rural Housing Authority, Yukon Kuskokwim Health Corporation, Calista Corporation and TDX to discuss regional energy planning, including wind and
hydro development. The group has agreed to pursue coordinated energy planning for the region and the Bethel grid.
AEA believes that Bethel?s large load provides the opportunity for deploying megawatt scale turbines with better economics than smaller-scale wind installations. TDX, as the major power
generator for the Bethel system, is the logical entity to lead feasibility assessment of wind generation in Bethel.
Recommend no funding.
Kootznoowoo Inc proposes a 1+ MW run-of-river hydroelectric project and 6.7 mi transmission project to supply the community of Angoon. Kootznoowoo has supplied seperate applications
for each of the projects. AEA is lumping the two project proposals together for the purposes of evaluation.
The application includes a letter of support from local utility Inland Passage Electrical Coop (IPEC). Kootznoowoo has received a grant $1,110,500 from USDOE for preconstruction activities.
Project appears to be a promising source of renewable energy for the community of Angoon. Special legislation (ANILCA Section 506) has granted Kootznoowoo, Inc..certain rights for
development of a hydroelectric facility at Thayer Creek and has simpliifed the permitting for the project. The project is only six miles from Angoon and closely matches Angoon\'s
energy requirements.
Recommend partial funding of $1,060,500 for completion of all preconstruction activities, including final design and permitting (culminating in the issuance of the USFS Special Use Authorization
for the project) with the provisions that prior to releasing any AEA grant funds: 1) Kootznoowoo and IPEC must provide a written joint report acceptable to AEA that documents the integration
of project design and operation with the needs of the existing IPEC system, 2) Kootznoowoo and IPEC must finalize an MOU that defines a viable business arrangement and will include
intent to sign a cost-based power sales agreement..
City of Ouzinkie proposes resource assessment, feasibility analysis, final design and permitting, and construction of a wind energy project. The applicant requests that AEA manage the
project. Currently Ouzinkie generates over half of its power from a hydro project with limited storage capacity that is used also for the community\'s water supply.
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. The wind resource in the proposed site near the old airport is class 3 at 50 m based on the high-resolution wind map. DOTPF-collected wind data in the community measures a class
1 resource. The proposed site is surrounded by 80 ft trees which will likely obstruct wind flow to a project. For a project of this size wind hub height would be approximately 80
feet.
2. Given limited storage potential and water supply constraints at the hydro project it will be difficult and costly to displace the remaining diesel generation.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes recon, feasibility, design and construction of a 375 kW tidal energy project near Angoon. Project would include 3 125 kW vertical axis turbines mounted in a steel
frame. Technology would be supplied by Blue Energy and is still in development. The application provides little detail about the technology. AEA notes that another company, Natural
Currents Energy Ser, LLC., currently holds a preliminary FERC permit for a tidal energy project in this location. The permit will need to renewed by 2/28/2010.
Local utility Inside Passage Electrical Coop (IPEC) provides a letter of support to the project. Angoon Native Corporation Kootznoowoo Inc has submitted another application that proposes
power supply to Angoon--Thayer Lake hydroelectric (#517 and 523).
The reconnaissance phase of the project would develop tidal, bathymetric, and fisheries information that would be useful for siting any tidal energy project. Given the proposed development
of the Thayer Lk project, AEA believes it makes sense to limit funding to recon studies to assess resources, impacts, and economics before proceding to more in-depth development.
Recommend partial funding of $193,200 for reconnaissance assessment.
The City of Atka proposes to install dispatchable hydro energy units for electrical heating of city and school buildings and potentially the fish processing facility. AEA is currently
providing funding to complete construction of a 170 kW run-of-river hydro project at Chuniisax Creek (#58). The project is likely to be completed in 2011. This current proposal is
to use excess hydro energy that would otherwise be lost. It is not clear that the City proposes upgrading the electrical system as part of this project, which AEA believes may be necessary
.
AEA believes that using excess hydropower for heating in Atka is good idea. However,given the slow progress of the project to date AEA believes it is prudent to limit funding to final
design and permitting.
Recommend partial funding of $80,000 for final design and permitting with the provision that the scope of work includes any necessary upgrades to the distribution system.
Kotzebue Electric Association proposes final design and construction of a 1.8 MW expansion to its current 1.14 MW wind farm. The project would include a Premium Power Transflow 2000
flow battery system with 3.7 MWh of storage and ability to produce of 500 kW of power. This application follows from a similar earlier RE Fund round 1 application that was capped at
$4 million (#85). The $4 million in round 1 funding remains allocated to the project.
KEA submitted HOMER optimization model with the application. The application did not provide an assessment of alternative integration/storage options or wind data obtained from onsite
measurement.
KEA has recently upgraded their power system with new SCADA. This project is attractive because it will upgrade Alaska\'s first large-scale wind farm to a high-penetration system.
Recommend full funding with the condition that prior to the release of construction funds, the applicant must provide detailed final design, detailed construction budget, and detailed
integration plans based on empirical load and wind resource data for AEA\'s acceptance.
Combined with # 523 - See it for score and recommendations
AVEC proposes final design, permitting, and construction of a 900 kW wind project and intertie to serve the communities of St. Marys, Mountain Village, Pitkas Point, and Pilot Station.
AVEC requested funding for feasibility assessment for this project in Round 2 (#298). AEA recommended this project for funding; however there was not sufficient funding.
In 2009 AVEC continued with resource monitoring. Met towers between Pitkas and St Marys indicate a class 6 wind resource but also a potential problem with icing. AVEC plans to locate
another met tower near Mountain Village at a lower elevation. AVEC proposes to complete final design and permitting in November 2010 and commence construction in summer 2011. In November
2010 AVEC requests $2.6 million in funding to procure four 225 kW Vestas turbines and other integration equipment.
Feasibility and conceptual design are not yet complete.
Recommend partial funding of $446,400 for completing feasibility, final design, and permitting with the requirement that before final design funds are disbursed AEA accept resource assessment,
feasibility and conceptual design report.
AVEC proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and conceptual design of a wind system to supply New Stuyahok. AVEC requested funding of $117,610 for a
similar project in RE Fund round 2 (#301). AEA notes that the current project request of $142,500 for feasibility costing $150,000 has risen substantially in the current application.
However the revised cost appears consistent with AEA\'s experience for a project of this nature.
Recommend full funding.
AVEC proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and conceptual design of a wind system to supply Scammon Bay. AVEC requested funding of $117,610 for a
similar project in RE Fund round 2 (#299). AEA notes that the current project request of $142,500 for feasibility costing $150,000 has risen substantially in the current application.
However the revised cost appears consistent with AEA\'s experience for a project of this nature.
Recommend full funding.
AVEC proposes final design, permitting, and construction of a 300 kW wind farm that will serve the communities of Teller and Brevig Mission. AVEC has received funding from the Denali
Commission for the intertie connecting the two villages and funding from RE Fund round 2 for resource assessment and feasibility (#297). A met tower was erected in September 2009.
Preliminary wind resource assessment numbers based on Tier 3 wind mapping program output estimate a gross capacity factor of 16%.
Recommend partial funding of $240,300 for final design and permitting with the requirement that AEA accepts that wind resource data collected to date justifies continued project development.
AVEC proposes resource assessment, conceptual design, feasibility assessment, final design, permitting, and construction of a 300 kW project in Kivalina. AVEC is also interested in
assessing a wind project up to 3.3 MW in capacity and an intertie connecting Kivalina to the Delong Mountain Transportation System.
If the larger project is viable AVEC proposes establishing a power purchase agreement with Teck Alaska. The proposal includes a letter of support from NANA.
Recommend full funding.
AVEC proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and conceptual design of a wind system to supply Stebbins and St. Michaels. AVEC requested funding of $108,691
for a similar project in RE Fund round 2 (#301). AEA notes that the current project request of $142,500 for feasibility costing $150,000 has risen substantially in the current application.
However the revised cost appears consistent with AEA\'s experience for a project of this nature.
Recommend full funding.
Village Windpower LLC proposes feasibility, final design and construction of a 1 MW wind farm near Slana. A met tower would be erected in summer 2010 and collect data for one year.
Construction is scheduled to be completed in late 2011. The project would serve Slana, Chistochina, and Mentasta currently or soon-to-be connected by intertie.
Locating a met tower on state land will require access over AHTNA Inc. lands, currently under negotiation. AEA\'s high resolution wind map indicates that proposed project location is
in a class 2-3 wind resource.
Given the questionable wind resource AEA believes it is reasonable to collect met tower data before proceeding with further project development.
Recommend partial funding of $60,000 for wind resource assessment.
Applicant Baker Hughes (BHI) proposes to develop new technology that would modify existing Baker Hughes Centrilift H Series pumps currently used in Cook Inlet oil and gas platforms to
convert hydrokinetic to energy. The team would first develop a bench scale unit at UAF then test a 50 kW unit in the Tanana River. BHI would then use their own funding and resources
to test a 500 kW unit at the King Salmon Platform in Cook Inlet.
BHI is pledging to match $400,000 in RE Funds with $560,000 in private funds for the prototype development and initial demonstration. A substantial portion of BHI\'s investment would
be in survey and environmental assessment at the Cook Inlet site--information that would be useful to other projects.Input from NMFS would be sought for developing an aquatic life diverter.
Since there is no existing prototype technology risk is very high.
Recommend full funding.
TDX proposes to assess feasibility of developing wind, hydro, and geothermal resources for the Adak power system. The work is follow-on to an earlier RE Fund round 2 grant for reconnaissance
study (#315) which is not yet complete.
44% of the proposed funding is for avian interactions with wind development.
Recently Adak Fisheries closed its plant. However the application states that the processing facility may resume operation.
Recommend full funding with the requirements that 1) before round 3 funds are disbursed AEA accepts recon assessment findings that justify further project development and 2) before funding
for avian study is disbursed grantee must identify that further wind development requiring such study will be pursued.
Tatitlek IRA Council/Tatitlek Electric Company proposes final design, permitting, and construction of a 100 kW high-penetration wind system in Tatitlek. Currently the applicant is funded
for resource assessment and feasibility by RE Fund round 2 (#316). Tatitlek has secured federal funding of $900,000 for project development. Feasibility, final design, and permitting
is scheduled for completion in May 2011. Construction would commence in summer 2011.
Given that round 3 funding would not be expended until summer 2011, the applicant can reapply for RE Fund round 4 support in 2010.
Recommend no funding at this time.
TDX Power proposes to conduct field inventories of fish and wildlife populations and habitat on the west side of Cook Inlet. Additionally TDX proposes to conduct onsite assessment
of wind resource on the west foreland. Work would support potential development of Mt. Spurr geothermal, Chakachamna hydro, Beluga in situ coal gasification, and wind development at
the foreland.
These power generation projects have not been proven to be technically and economically viable. AEA has received RE Fund round 3 applications for resource assessment and field studies
for Mt Spurr (#477) and for feasibility and design of transmission to west Cook Inlet (#491). AEA is recommending round 3 funding for both projects. Railbelt IRP findings are favorable
for Mt. Spurr and Chakchamna projects.
Given the potential for interaction and overlap among project development in the area, AEA believes that it will be important for the proposed work to be coordinated closely with other
work in the vicinity.
The proposal is very general. It does not identify particular geographic locations, fish and wildlife issues, or development schemes. TDX proposes to begin work after receiving grant
funds in March 2010 and complete the final report by November 2010. This schedule appears unrealistic given funding availability, time constraints, the scale of the work, and the need
to consult with multiple landowners and resource agencies. The proposer requests $5 million from the grant program despite the state cap of $2 million indicated in the RFA.
Recommend partial funding of $2 million with the requirement that TDX submit a revised detailed scope, budget, and timeline consistent with the funding level provided.
Applicant TDX proposes to team with Voith Hydro Wavegen to assess NOAA wave resource data to expand an earlier report and choose three sites for technical, economic, and environmental
assessment for the purpose of further development. The work will result in sufficient info for TDX to apply to FERC for licensing on viable projects.
Voith\'s technology has been in use in the Scottish island of Islay for 8 years and is performing well. Another 300 kW project is scheduled to be commissioned in spring 2010 in Northern
Spain.
Since TDX has not chosen sites their application does not provide any preliminary information on O&M, capaciity, tie-in to existing system, siting and land ownership, fuel displacement,
or transmission issues.
Recommend full funding.
TDX Corporation proposes design and construction of the interconnection and integration of TDX\'s 675 kW wind farm and the City of Saint Paul\'s power system. TDX proposes to work with
the City to resolve a longstanding impasse on sales of wind power to the City. The application indicates that if TDX and the City cannot secure an agreement on power purchase terms
and conceptual design of modifications to the City power system, no funds will be requested.
Recommend full funding with the requirement that 1) before final design and construction funds are disbursed TDX and the City must finalize an agreement that addresses power purchase
terms and 2) before construction funds are disbursed the TDX and City must finalize an agreement on the design of modifications to the City power system.
Ocean Renewable Power Corporation proposes to permitting, final design and construction of a 1 MW array of proprietary cross-flow tidal instream electric conversion units for potential
scale-up to 5 MW. ORPC will complete conceptual design and feasbility analysis in March 2010. The units would use a gravity foundation on the bottom of Cook Inlet near Fire Island.
Currently the technology is under development in Maine. The proposer states that the most substantial challenges will be impacts on beluga, migrating fish, and sediment flow. Undersea
cable would bring power to shore. ORPC has obtained a preliminary FERC permit and prepared a request to FERC for pilot project license. Other permits will include ADFG fish habitat,
DNR water and subsurface use, Army Corps title 10, Coastal Zone, and Coast Guard navigational assessment. ORPC has developed a team of specialists that they state will address technical
and habitat issues.
ORPC proposes to pay for almost all of the design and permitting. RE Fund dollars would support construction. While AEA remains concerned about the risks associated with deploying
new technology, we note that the Alaska-based developers have assembled a credible project team and have invested substantially in developing the technology. Alaska has most of the
nation?s potential for tidal energy and it is logical for the state to support ocean energy technology development.
Recommend full funding with provision that before any funds are released AEA must accept the conceptual design and feasibility assessment.
Applicant IPEC proposes a staged assessment of geothermal resources of Tenakee Inlet Hot Springs consisting of field work in 2010 followed by exploratory drilling in the summer 2011.
DGGS notes that the hot spring is one of the hottest in Southeast Alaska suggesting a maximum capacity of less than 10 MW. From a resource assessment standpoint DGGS recommends exploration,
but at a lower priority than other locations in Alaska. The hot springs is located in a remote location on Tongass NF land and would require a special land use permit. Exploration
will be covered by a programmatic EIS, but it is likely that permitting will be a significant effort.
The hot springs is approximately 20 miles from Hoonah with no road access. Hoonah has also submitted an application to construct a hydro project at Gartina and Water Supply creeks.
The hot springs is approximately 10 miles from Pelican, which has a hydro resource that supplies all of its power.
The project represents an option for displacing the 350,000 gpy diesel consumption for power in Hoonah. At an estimated installed cost of $27 million not including transmission to Hoonah
or other infrastructure, however, project economics do not appear to be attractive.
AEA recommends full funding.
The City of Homer proposes reconnaissance assessment and feasibility analysis/conceptual design of a 250 kW hydrokinetic device in Kachemak Bay. This is a modified resubmittal of round
2 application #282 that was recommended for funding, but that was not funded due to limited funding. Homer has assembled a strong project team that includes a number of entities with
experience in assessing tidal energy feasibility and resources?NOAA?s Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services, Terrasond, and Re vision. There are letters of support
from the Native Village of Port Graham and the Seldovia Village Tribe who are also interested in the project. The application appropriately addresses potential wildlife impacts and
includes the involvement of ADFG. NOAA commits to $650,000 in in-kind project support.
We are concerned that Homer Electric Association, the likely power purchaser or owner of a potential project, is not included in the plan for implementing the feasibility stage in a
more concrete way.
Recommend full funding of $547,611.
City of Napaskiak requests funding for recon, feasibility study, resource assessment and conceptual design of a wind energy system.
In their application the City provides preliminary wind resource data based on AEA high-resolution wind maps, identifies four potential turbine manufacturers/models, and a potential
project site. Work would be contracted out to Marsh Creek LLC and completed in 2011-12.
Recommend full funding.
Tuntutuliak Community Services Association Electric Division, proposes to install a 5 kWh/500 kW Powerstore flywheel as a component of their 450 kW wind-diesel system. The proposed
project is essentially identical to two other applications for flywheels in Kwigillingok and Kongiganak(# 487 and 484). The wind system in Tuntutuliak is currently under design and
construction and funded in-part by RE fund round 2 (#273). The function of the proposed flywheel is to maintain power quality and stability by quickly supplying power to the system
when load or wind energy supply changes quickly. This allows the system to run less diesel capacity to supply the needed spinning reserve.
The HOMER optimization model that the utility used as a basis for assessment of system benefits was loosely based on Kongiganak\'s power system. HOMER modeling has no ability to evaluate
power quality. Therefore the true economic benefit of the system is difficult to determine. Despite the uncertain economic benefit, AEA considers flywheels as a promising technology
to increase the value of high penetration wind power. AEA recommends that one of the three proposed flywheel projects be funded as a demonstration. The other flywheel projects should
be reconsidered after the technology has been assessed.
Kongiganak has been selected as the best site for demonstration given that this project is furthest along in development and shows the highest benefit/cost ratio of the three proposals.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes funding for the construction of a wood-fired boiler system for the Kenny Lake School, with project completion by December 2010. The project is follow-up to RE Fund
project #46 which is being managed by AEA, currently under feasibility and design. Based on project work to date, pellets or cord wood are the feasibile wood fuels being considered.
Recommend full funding with requirement that final design indicates a viable project.
Applicant proposes funding to conduct the feasibility and conceptual design of a wood-fired heating system for K-12 school building and pool. The proposal provides a practical phased
approach for feasibility, design, and construction. The school district proposes to choose a project manager with the assistance of AEA.
Icy Straits Lumber and Milling provides a letter proposing to supply chips and hog fuel at $60 per green ton and the USFS indicates a committment to supply timber for long term fuel
supply.
Recommend full funding.
Independence Power LLC proposes conceptual design and feasibility assessment of 5.4 MW project on Independence Creek near the Seward Correctional Facility.
Independence Power received a grant for recon assessment from RE Fund round 1 (#86). A 55-page draft recon report was delivered to AEA in early December 2009.
Generally AEA agrees with the report\'s conclusions that further study is warranted.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes reconnaissance assessment for a potential 75 MW storage hydro project in the Knik River valley near Palmer.
Given the large scale of this project and complexity involved in management and financing, a business plan will need to be prepared as a part of the reconnaissance study which details
involvement of railbelt utilities and private developers. Also to be included in study will be a
determination of licensing barriers specific to this project. FERC accepted the preliminary permit application filed by Glacier Fork Hydro LLC on November 10. 2008.
DGGS notes that geotechnical studies will be very important since the project is in the vicinity of several faults. DLWM notes that project lays within the legislatively designated
Knik River Public Use Area, receives heavy recreational use, and may be subject to significant public opposition.
The project was recommended for further study in the Railbelt IRP in December 2009.
AEA notes that the proposal requests substantial funding for reconnaissance but is not broken into sub-phases with decision points.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant award is finalized grantee prepares a detailed project budget with go/no go milestones acceptable to AEA for inclusion into
grant document. Additionally requirement that stream gauging to be accomplished by USGS.
Bering Pacific proposes conceptual design and feasibility assessment of a 1.7 MW run-of-river hydro project at Archangel Creek near Hatcher Pass.
AEA requested the reconnaissance study for this project. In response AEA received a two-paragraph document. The document did not provide the required elements of a recon study listed
in the RFP.
Recommend no funding.
Chugach Electric Association proposes a multiphased approach toward developing electrical transmission on the west side of Cook Inlet to carry power from potential geothermal project
at Mt Spurr and a potential hydropower project at Lake Chakachamna. Phase 1 (feasibility) consists of preliminary design, route selection, and assessment of permit requirements. Phase
2 (final design) would consist of permits and rights-of-way, geotechnical and survey work, and final design.
Chugach Electric would complete feasibility activities in June 2011. Following feasibility, Chugach would complete final design activities in June 2013. The proposal provides only
a general description of project tasks and costs.
The two power generation projects have not been proven to be technically and economically viable. AEA has received RE Fund round 3 applications for resource assessment and field studies
for Mt Spurr (#xxx) and Lk Chakachmna (#505). AEA is recommending round 3 funding for both projects. Railbelt IRP findings are favorable for both projects.
AEA believes that the Greater Railbelt Energy and Transmission Corporation (GRETC) should ultimately be the owner of new transmission infrastructure such as this.
Since the two energy generation projects remain in the feasibility determination phase, AEA believes it is reasonable to provide funding for the proposed transmission project to completion
of the feasibility.
Recommend partial funding of $600,000 with the requirements that CEA prepares a more detailed scope and budget for AEA approval.
Port Graham Village Council proposes final design and construction of a project that would convert local biomass into 1.5 MW of power.
The Council has provided two feasibility documents: 1) An in-depth biomass alternatives report by University of North Dakota EERC which concludes that biodiesel and indoor wood boiler
technologies appear most viable. The report also addresses biomass gasification for distributed power production. 2) A brief preliminary design package by rem Engineering in Atlanta
that provides a schematic of a village district heating system for Port Graham and a generic drawing of a steam engine generator. There is no clear tie between the two documents.
AEA has the following concerns about the proposal:
1. The proposal is inconsistent with the findings of the EERC feasbility report in that it requests funding for a system that provides power to individual households for space heating--not
district heating as concluded by the report.
2. The main electrical load for the project appears to be residential space heating. Given conversion losses, the fuel-to-heat efficiency is low. This and the high system cost results
in unfavorable economics.
3. As pointed out in the application, the current distribution system will not support the planned loads and will require a 3-phase upgrade. Although local utility HEA is interested,
there is no funding available for the upgrade at this time.
4. Project development costs are high. The RE Fund RFA caps Railbelt grants at $2 million, but the proposal is for $3.3 million.
Recommend no funding.
Kwig Power Company, owned by the Native Village of Kwigillingok, proposes to install a 5 kWh/500 kW Powerstore flywheel as a component of their 450 kW wind-diesel system. The proposed
project is essentially identical to two other applications for flywheels in Tuntutuliak and Kongiganak(# 497 and 484). The wind system in Kwigillingok is currently under design and
construction and funded in-part by RE fund round 1 (#107). The function of the proposed flywheel is to maintain power quality and stability by quickly supplying power to the system
when load or wind energy supply changes quickly. This allows the system to run less diesel capacity to supply the needed spinning reserve.
The HOMER optimization model that Kwig Power used as a basis for assessment of system benefits was loosely based on Kongiganak\'s power system. HOMER modeling has no ability to evaluate
power quality. Therefore the true economic benefit of the system is difficult to determine. Despite the uncertain economic benefit, AEA considers flywheels as a promising technology
to increase the value of high penetration wind power. AEA recommends that one of the three proposed flywheel projects be funded as a demonstration. The other flywheel projects should
be reconsidered after the technology has been assessed.
Kongiganak has been selected as the best site for demonstration given that this project is furthest along in development and shows the highest benefit/cost ratio of the three proposals.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Pilot Point requests funding for design and construction of a high penetration wind project consisting of one 100 kW Northwind turbine to be sited on City land. Pilot Point
has operated a 10 kW Bergey turbine for 6 years. The City has consulted with USFWS and an archeologist to assess wildlife and historic/archaeological issues. There no indications that
permitting will be an issue.
AEA completed a power system upgrade in 2008 which facilitates wind integration. A diesel heat recovery system supplies the school.
Recommend full funding.
The City of Angoon proposes to conduct feasibility and conceptual design for FERC pre-licensing work on Scenery Lake hydro. The hydro project, a significant distance from the City,
will not be connnected to the Angoon system within the foreseeable future. The City of Angoon has also submitted an application #430 in Round 3 to conduct feasibility and conceptual
design for FERC pre-licensing work on Ruth Lake hydro. That hydro project, a significant distance from the City, will also not be connnected to the Angoon system within the foreseeable
future.
AEA believes that in order for a project of this type to be successful, there needs to be demonstrated buy-in from all regional stakeholders, including the City, SEAPA, IPEC, and Kotznoowoo.
There is no indication that the stakeholders listed have agreed to this concept. In particular on p22 the application indicates the City would sell power to the utilities of Petersburg
and Wrangell. However, there is no indication that these communities would purchase power from the project, nor descritption of a mechnism to flow the benefits of the project directly
to the ratepayers of Angoon.
Kootznoowoo is has submitted a proposal for Thayer Lake hydro (#517 and 523) that would serve the Angoon system, indicates a direct path for benefits to flow to Angoon ratepayers, and
has the support of the local utility IPEC.
Recommend full funding with the provision that prior to release of any funds, the applicant must 1) convene an in-state stakeholder meeting, 2) secure letters of support from SEAPA,
Thomas Bay Power Authority, and the cities of Petersburg, Wrangell, Kake, and Ketchikan, and 3) develop a process acceptable to AEA for benefits to flow to all affected ratepayers equally.
Puvurnaq Power Company, owned by the Native Village of Kongiganak, proposes to install a 5 kWh/500 kW Powerstore flywheel as a component of their 450 kW wind-diesel system. The proposed
project is essentially identical to two other applications for flywheels in Tuntutuliak and Kwigillingok (# 497 and 487). The wind system in Kongiganak is currently under design and
construction and funded in-part by RE fund round 1 (#110). The function of the proposed flywheel is to maintain power quality and stability by quickly supplying power to the system
when load or wind energy supply changes quickly. This allows the system to run less diesel capacity to supply the needed ?spinning reserve?.
AEA requested the HOMER optimization model that PPC used as a basis for assessment of system benefits. HOMER modeling has no ability to evaluate power quality. Therefore the true economic
benefit of the system is difficult to determine. Despite the uncertain economic benefit, AEA considers flywheels as a promising technology to increase the value of high penetration
wind power. AEA recommends that one of the three proposed flywheel projects be funded as a demonstration. The other flywheel projects should be reconsidered after the technology has
been assessed.
Kongiganak has been selected as the best site for demonstration given that this project is furthest along in development and shows the highest benefit/cost ratio of the three proposals.
Recommend full funding.
Kipuk Light and Power of the Chaninik Wind Group requests funding for construction of a high-penetration 675 kW wind farm consisting of 3 V27 turbines, 20 residential heaters, three
commercial electric boilers, and a 500 kW flywheel.
Chaninik is currently funded by the RE Fund for construction of similar wind systems in Kwigillingok, Tuntutuliak, and Kongiganak. Construction in Kong is planned to be completed in
winter 2010-11.
AEA believes that it makes sense to first prove out the system design at smaller scales (Kwigillingok, Kongiganak and Tuntutuliak) before moving to the scale and expense of this project.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes an RE Fund grant of $4 million to assess feasibility of constructing a 2000 MW tidal flow generator at the mouth of Turnagain Arm. The project would include three
arrays of vertical axis turbines and submarine interties connecting to Pt Possession on the Kenai Peninsula and Pt. Campbell in southwestern Anchorage.
AEA has the following concerns about the proposal:
1. Applicant proposes to deploy 200 10MW turbines from Blue Energy Canada. Currently Blue Energy\'s technology is in the pre-commercial stage. Blue Energy itself is proposing through
the RE Fund to develop a 375 kW pilot project to test the technology near Angoon (#520).
2. At $2.5 billion, the project has an extremely high capital cost. The applicant indicates a Chinese firm will finance $500 million. The applicant proposes to use $200,000 of RE
Fund dollars to prepare an application to USDOE to finance the remaining portion of the project.
3. The applicant requests $4 million in a low cost energy area that is capped at a maximum of $2 million.
No funding recommended.
Applicant proposes installing a pellet boiler heating system at the Alaska Divison of Forestry in Tok. Pellets would be supplied from local supplier(s). The proposal is attractive
in that it demonstrates the use of local renewable fuels in a state office building.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant (Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority) proposes to develop a wood fired and solar heating system for the Ionia Renenwable Energy Training Center. The Trust intends to act
as grantee/sponsor for this project and accepts responsibilities under RFA section 1.4 for ownership and control of the facilities. The applicant provides an unsigned draft resolution
to this effect.
Ionia has successfully developed a similar wood fired system that supplies heat and domestic hot water for the Community Long House.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before any funds are disbursed the Mental Health Trust and Ionia enter into an agreement acceptable to AEA which addresses details of ownership
and operation of the facility.
Alaska Power Company proposes construction of a 2MW wood gasification power generation system to serve the Tok area power system. The system includes a 30 mmBtu/hr Nexterra gasification
system and GE Jenbacher reciprocating generators. An important component of the proposed project is demonstration of an innovative gas clean up system.
APC has applied for a $10 million grant from USDOE and expects to be notified of results in early 2010. APC proposes to use USDOE funds and its own resources to complete feasibility/concept
design and permitting/final design during the first half of 2010.
AEA is strongly supportive of demonstrating the Nexterra/GE technology in Alaska. This proposal is particularly attractive because
1. APC has a good track record as a well-operated utility and a leader in renewable energy development in Alaska
2. APC, Nexterra, Tok Community Umbrella Corp and GE are offering a substantial cash and in-kind match to the project
3. Tok, located on the road system, is an excellent site for demonstration of a wood-fired biopower project
4. The upper Tanana Valley has a substantial wood resource and a number of sawmills in operation.
However, AEA notes that
1. Conceptual design and feasibility and final design and permitting have not been completed as required in the RE Fund RFA
2. The RE Fund is funding a significant wood energy project in Tok to supply the school with heat (#49). The current proposal indicates that public involvement and local meetings will
be held in the Tok area during preconstruction phases. However at this point there is no indication of coordination between the two projects.
3. APC is applying for construction funding for Yerrick Creek hydro which would also serve the Tok area.
4. Grant funding has not been committed by USDOE as of yet.
AEA recommends no funding at this time.
Kodiak Island Borough proposes to assess options for ground source heat pump, photovoltaic, solar thermal, and wind systems in conjunction with a planned addition and renovation of the
high school. KIB proposes a phased approach--systems options would be identified and narrowed in the reconnaissance phase with completion by October 2010, followed by more detailed
analysis in the feasbility phase.
AEA recommends partial funding of $38,100 for reconnaissance.
Ormat proposes a staged recon and assessment of the geothermal resources on Mt. Spurr, consisting of aeromagnetic gravity, electromagnetic geophysical surveys, field work, mapping, geochemcial
sampling, and drilling four temperature gradient and two slim holes. Work will begin in spring-summer 2010 and be completed by fall 2011.
AEA recommended against funding Ormat until reconnaisance field work was completed in 2009. Since then Ormat has completed this field work and proposes follow-up activities.
Based on the results of the proposed work, Ormat will decide whether to proceed to drilling production wells and further commercial development. Ormat anticipates a minimum installed
capacity of 50-100 MW.
DGGS review indicates that Ormat is one of the most highly experienced companies in the world and that the proposed stepwise approach is the best way to move toward potential development
of the Mt. Spurr resource. The AEA-sponsored Railbelt integrated energy resource plan identifies Mt. Spurr geothermal, if feasible, as a beneficial component of the Railbelt energy
system.
REcommend full funding with provision that all information resulting from the project will be available to the public.
Applicant proposes funding to install a biomass heating source and solar panels for the Assisted Living Facility for elders in Tanana, the Tanana Tribal Offices and the Internet high
tech training center in Tanana. The project would replicate the successful wood fired boiler system at the washeteria.
The economics of the photovoltaic system are not favorable. AEA estimates that the $80,000 cost of the photovoltaic system would displace approximately 800 gallons of diesel per year.
Recommend partial funding of $412,642 for the biomass portion of the project.
Eklutna Inc proposes recon assessment of a 6.5+MW hydro project on Hunter Cr. The project would include a 13,000 ft cross-basin pipeline, 8,000 ft penstock, and 26 miles of transmission.
DNR DMLW questions that Eklutna owns the land as stated in the application. If BLM owns the land this project falls under FERC jurisdiction. DNR also notes this is popular recreation
area and the project may garner public opposition.
Recommend full funding.
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility proposes to construct a 190 kW run-of-river hydro project on Packers Creek. AEA has awarded $150,000 to the utility for feasibility and final design. Final
design and permitting is not yet complete, and is expected in "mid-2010".
Funding not recommended since final design and permitting are not yet complete.
Applicant proposes recon study of developing hydro projects in four side drainages of Resurrection Valley near Hope totalling 7 MW.
All projects would be on USFS land, likely require FERC licensing, and be located in an area used frequently for recreation. DNR DLWM expects substantial public comment during permitting.
Recommend full funding.
Bering Pacific proposes conceptual design and feasibility assessment of a 1.5 MW run-of-river hydro project at Eska Creek near Sutton.
AEA requested the reconnaissance study for this project. In response AEA received a one-paragraph document. The document did not provide the required elements of a recon study listed
in the RFP.
Recommend no funding.
Bering Pacific proposes assessing conceptual design and feasibility of a 1.2 MW run-of-river hydro project at Virgin Creek near Girdwood.
AEA requested the reconnaissance study for this project. In response AEA received a four-page document that included a vicinity map, a photo of the creek, a simulated flow duration
curve, and an estimated power output profile. The document did not substantially provide the required elements of a recon study listed in the RFP, including anticipated project alternatives,
barriers to project development, environmental screening addressing issues and impacts, land use restrictions, access to the site, adequately supported cost estimate, and basic economic
analysis of alternatives,
Recommend no funding.
The City of Akutan requests funding for continuing with geothermal resource assessment in Hot Spring Bay Valley. AEA awarded Akutan $2,595,000 of RE Fund round 2 funding geothermal
assessment (#249). Following quotes from drilling and helicopter contractors, however, Akutan has determined that their earlier proposal, based on AEA\'s statewide Geothermal Cost
Matrix was overly optimistic. The current proposal asks for additional funds for drilling up to four slim hole wells.
AEA has requested and received documentation of the additional costs of the drilling program and finds they are reasonable. DGGS recommends continued support.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant City of Akutan requests funding for repair of 105 kW hydro project at Town Creek. Work would include upgrading the existing access road, repairs to the intake, rebuilding
the hydro turbine, providing hydro maintenance equipment and storage building, and upgrading the system controls. AEA has awarded round 2 funding for final design and permitting and
notes that $64,000 has not been spent from the current grant.
Recommend full funding with the provision that any funds remaining after completion of permitting and final design from round 2 will be returned for reallocation to other grantees.
UAF ACEP proposes funding for 10 2.4 kW wind turbines to be located in Palmer, Kodiak, St. Paul, Pt. Hope, Dillingham, Togiak, Kwigillingok, Kongiganak, Unalakleet, and Gambell through
the NREL-organized Wind for Schools program.
The primary focus of the program is education--not power production. Through its wind energy development program AEA has pledged up to $36,000 for program activities in non-RE Fund
dollars to match federal funding if ACEP is awarded competitive grants.
While many of these communities have a good wind resource, the turbines are small and will be located near the school where wind resources tend to be poorer. It is expected that only
a portion of the power generated will offset diesel. Thus economics are expected to be marginal to poor.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes assessing feasibility of retrofitting existing coal-fired power system at UAF with biomass or biomass/coal fuel and studying other related waste to energy technologies.
AEA believes the proposal is viable for the following reasons:
- potential for substantial displacement of fossil resources with renewables.
- has potential to utilize unrecyclable waste, extending the life of landfills.
- applicant has the technical capabilities and resources to conduct a successful project.
Recommend full funding.
UAF proposes to assess geothermal resources at Pilgrim Hot Springs through refurbishing existing shallow wells and drilling deep wells. This is a resubmittal of a RE Fund round 2 proposal
(#258) that was recommended for funding, but which did not receive funding due to limits. In October 2009 USDOE notified UAF that the university\'s proposal for exploration was accepted
subject to negotiation. USDOE funding requires a minimum 20% nonfederal match for exploration and a 50% match for confirmation drilling.
The Nome Energy Study identified development of the Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal resource as the least-cost option for long-term power supply. The applications includes letters of
support from Nome Joint Utilities and Mary\'s Igloo Native Council (the owner of the adjacent land). DGGS indicates support for the project (see above). The application also includes
a support letter from landowner Catholic Church Diocese of Fairbanks. In December 2009 AEA learned that the Chuch plans to sell the land.
Recommend full funding with the provision that prior to the disbursement of funds, UAF confirm legal access to the resource with the new landowner.
Applicant Ruby Tribal Council proposes to partner with UAF to conduct assessment of Horner and Melozi hot springs geothermal resources using infrared imagery and aerial photos. The
sites are more than 30 miles from Ruby and located on the other side of the Yukon River from Ruby.
DGGS comments: "This study has the objective ?to determine the potential extent and amount of the energy resource that is available? at Melozi Hot Springs. However, the only data that
are proposed to be collected and analyzed are remotely sensed (satellite and airborne), along with ?limited field validation?. The proposal also outlines an economic feasibility study
of ?developing the resource?. Satellite and airborne visible and infrared data are necessarily restricted to surface evaluation, where emerging geothermal fluids cool by mixing with
surface waters and by conduction and convection. Surface temperatures underestimate reservoir temperatures by an unpredictable amount. For evaluation of the geothermal resource the
reservoir itself must be characterized in terms of volume, temperature, depth, porosity, and permeability (i.e. the temperature and sustainable rate of production of fluids need to
be known). This proposal should be considered a minimal first step in acquiring the data necessary to evaluate Melozi as a geothermal resource. Not recommended for funding at this
time."
No funding recommended.
AVCP Regional Housing Authority proposes to construct a 200 kW wind energy project to serve their campus in Bethel. AVCP would first purchase land from the City of Bethel for $670,000
in late 2010, and begin equipment purchase and construction in spring 2011.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. The feasibility study that is provided is not adequate as a basis for proceeding to design and construction. It does not include a conceptual design, detailed cost estimate, a conceptual
business and operation plan, or site-specific assessment of the wind resource.
2. The application appears to be structured based on net metering. The RFA requires that an IPP sell all of its power to the certificated utility. There is no indication provided
in the application that Bethel Utilities will purchase power from the project.
3. AEA notes that the City of Bethel has been funded through the RE Fund round 1 for a 400 kW wind project. To date the City and utility have not reached an agreement for power purchase
or interconnection.
4. The economics of the project are poor with a B/C ratio of less than 0.5.
Recommend no funding.
Yakutat Power proposes to collaborate with Electric Power Research Institute to perform final design / permitting of a 650 kW demonstration wave energy project. EPRI and Yakutat have
completed reconnaissance and feasibility work with their own funding. During the final design and permitting stage Yakutat proposes to conducting siting studies, cost optimization,
environmental studies and permitting, and prepare a detalied civil, mechanical, and electrical design. The team will utilize the Aquamarine Oyster technology.
AEA recommended funding for a similar scope of work in round 2. We remain concerned at the high cost and high risk of demonstrating new technology. However, Yakutat and EPRI have put
together a strong team and are conducting a logical, staged development that minimizes risk. Alaska has substantial potential for wave energy and it is logical for the state to support
ocean energy technology development.
Recommend full funding.
Inside Passage Electric Coop proposes final design and permitting and the initial construction phase for 1.3 MW of run-of-river hydro development at Water Supply and Gartina creeks.
IPEC anticipates that work will include FERC licensing and NEPA review.
Phase 3 final design and permitting is expected to be complete July 2012.
Recommend partial funding of $850,000 for final design and permitting.
Ugashik Traditional Village proposes to partner with Boschma Research Inc to deploy 1 kW residential-scale Stirling generators on heating systems of five houses and the community center.
AEA requested the feasibility analysis for the proposed project. In response BRI provided a one-page email message that provided links to generic technology description websites.
BRI indicates in the proposal that the proposed units are in the technology development phase.
Recommend no funding.
AVTEC proposes refurbishing the 100 kW Marathon Cr hydro project, currently mothballed, to serve as a hydro training facility for AVTEC. The City of Seward would transfer ownership
to AVTEC, an agency within Alaska Dept of Labor . AVTEC would not sell power to the Railbelt grid.
Recommend full funding.
The City of Kotzebue proposes a recon study of using TGER (Tactical Garbage to Energy Refinery) technology under development by the U.S. Army. The unit is packaged in a shipping container,
shreds garbage, soaks it in water, pumps sludge into a bioreactor, converts a portion of the waste stream into ethanol, and pelletizes the remaining solids. Pellets are in turn gasified.
Gas is fed into a recip diesel generator and converted into power.
AEA recommended $15,000 in funding for recon in Round 2, However, funding limitations resulted in zero dollars going to the project. Current proposal requests $1.6MM recon through commissioning.
The first phase of recon and feasibility requests $80,000.
Prototype testing in Iraq by the US Army was not continued. There are no other operating units of this technology. There has been no testing of the technology in the arctic, and there
is no O&M data.
This system is complex, and AEA questions whether there are more suitable, simpler systems that would achieve the same aims of waste reduction and energy (such as a modular incinerator
with stack heat recovery).
AEA believes that there is insufficient justification to assume that a prototype tested in Iraq can be successfully translated into an arctic environment without substantial research
and development. However, AEA recognizes the substantial need for systems to deal with waste in rural areas. Recommend partial funding for recon and feasibility for $80,000.
The applicants request funding for construction for a 4.8 MW expansion of a wind farm at or near the Tesoro refinery in Nikiski above the 9.6 MW that being funded by RE Fund round 2
dollars. The applicants are requesting $4 million in additional grant funds, twice the maximum funding that was stated in the round 3 request for applications.
As noted in AEA\'s round 2 comments, the project will affect not only HEA but other Railbelt utilities. The 14.4 MW project is included in the draft Railbelt Integrated Resource Plan
base case "preferred resource plan".
Recommend partial funding of $2 million with the following grant conditions: 1) applicant is required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic
rate regulation prior to release of construction funds, 2) establish a cost-based power purchase agreement with HEA or other public utility prior to release of construction grant funds.
Applicant proposes design and construction of a 10 kW modular biomass/solar thermal combined heat and power system. The system consists of a GARN WHS 1500 biomass boiler, solar thermal
collectors, and organic Rankine cycle units packaged in a shipping container to be located at Chena Hot Springs. The project is designed for potential use in rural communities.
Given the substantial project development costs, the proposal lacks sufficient design basis for AEA to recommend full funding for final design and construction.
Recommend partial funding of $67,325 with equal match for refinement of conceptual design and feasibility.
Chena Power is proposing funding for final design, permitting and construction of an ORC system utilizing waste heat from the North Pole Refinery to produce electricity for the refinery.
AEA requested the following information from the applicant:
1 Willingness of Chena Power to sell power from the project to the local certificated utility, GVEA. This is required in order for the proposer to be eligible as an IPP.
2. Detailed feasibility analysis
3. Comprehensive risk assessment
4. Letters of committment from Flint Hills for supplying waste heat from the refinery, or the status of reaching such an agreement
Chena Power indicated that it was willing to sell power to GVEA.
Chena Power did not provide AEA with a feasibility analysis that addresses the requirements of the RFA including conceptual system and integration design or comprehensive financial and
economic analyses. The applicant also did not address AEA\'s request for information on waste heat availability. AEA notes that Chena Power requested $3.907,500 in a Railbelt location
eligible for grant funding up to $2 million. Although AEA believes this project has substantial merit as a demonstration of promising technology, the applicant has not provided enough
information to justify proceeding to design and construction.
Recommend no funding.
Chenega Corporation/IRA Council propose final design and permitting of a 90 kW run-of-river hydro project on Anderson Cr. The feasibility study, completed by HDR Inc, was funded by
the Denali Commission under the joint AEA/Denali Commission Alt Energy RFP.
There is potential for construction cost-share with a penstock replacement for the water supply.
Recommend full funding.
Naknek Electric Association requests $15 million to match approximately $20 million of federal and local funds for geothermal drilling, characterization, and testing activities for developing
a 25 MW geothermal plant. Naknek plans to develop an Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) that would involve drilling two production wells, creating a fracture system and geothermal reservoir,
injecting surface waters through the hot, fracture rock and pumping the heated water to the surface.
This project represents a revised approach to a previous proposal to round 1 of the RE Fund (#8).
DGGS comments:
"This project has changed dramatically in presentation since Round I. The applicant now anticipates (quite correctly) a normal geothermal gradient and that the resource will be created
using EGS (Enhanced Geothermal System) techniques. EGS involves drilling into warm or hot rock and artificially creating a fracture system with sufficient volume to host a geothermal
reservoir; surface waters are then injected and heated by contact with the country rock; finally the heated waters are brought to the surface, the contained heat energy extracted and
used, and the waters reinjected. EGS is not a mature technology. There are a few developmental demonstration projects in the world, but none produce electricity in the megawatt range,
and none approach economic viability. (In addition, there are earth process which work against the probability of producing an engineered reservoir with the high volume, porosity and
permeability necessary to host a geothermal reservoir). Because EGS is unproven despite decades of investigation the probability of success of this project is extremely low.
Additionally, at the normal geothermal gradient that the proposers anticipate, temperatures of only about 300F are accessible at 14,000? ? lower than the 390F reservoir temperatures
at known high-temperature resources such as Makushin, yet higher than the temperature of fluids at Chena Hot Springs. The total amount of electricity that can be extracted from a geothermal
system is directly limited by the difference in temperature between the hot and cold reservoirs. It is unclear if the 25MW described can be produced from a single injection/production
doublet.
Finally, it is known that current activity at the proposed site is well under way and that a significant amount of new subsurface data has been gathered. These un-interpreted data would
be critical for the reviewers to make further determination of the geothermal potential and make a more informed decision. Nevertheless, given that EGS continues to be in a research
phase and is an unproven technology at the scale proposed for this project, and that no new information is presented by this proposal to substantiate the existence of a viable geothermal
resource at the proposed site, the reviewer suggests the current proposal should not be funded."
No funding recommended.
Applicant proposes seawater heat pump to supply Alaska Sea Life Center for space heating.
Application includes a complete feasibility analysis that assesses three options for heat pump systems. Denali Commission Emerging Energy Technology grant funds are providing $426,720
of the total project capital cost of $713,300. The project appears to be highly economic and a good demonstration of a technology applicable to coastal Alaska.
Recommend full funding.
CVEA proposes recon assessment of a 15 MW storage hydro at Silver Lake. Silver Lk was studied in the 1980s and 90s and was not pursued further due to poor economics and fish habitat
issues. The project, however, would provide substantial amounts of energy--4 times the output of Alison Lk hydro, currently under development by CVEA.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant is proposing a renewable energy recon, feasibility and conceptual design to utilize solar and wind energy within the Mat-Su Borough. The energy would supply existing and
planned public facilities in the borough.
Recommend funding the first step of the project to assess available renewable energy resources for commercial development and preliminary economics. Recommend partial funding only for
the "resource identification and analysis" portion of the project for $75,000.
Metlakatla Indian Community proposes assessing feasiblity of a 4 MW storage hydro project at Triangle Lk. Improved access to the proposed hydro site by recent road construction to
Walden Point makes hydro development more reasonable to consider at this site. Project would be located on federal trust land. Major issue remains a market for power, which should be
assessed in an regional IRP.
Because the project would connect to the SEAPA grid that has numerous existing and proposed alternatives for generation and transmission, AEA concludes that there is insufficient information
provided to do an economic analysis.
Recommend full funding.
Metlakatla Indian Community proposes funding for constructing an 18 mile intertie that connects the Metlakatla and Ketchikan power systems. Permitting and design were funded by RE Fund
round 1 (#20).
The application provides no indication of a power sale agreement with Ketchikan Public Utility.
MIC is requesting over $6.3 million for financing the balance of the project. The proposal does not recognize the maximum funding of $2 million and no other indication of how the balance
of the project would be financed.
Because the project would connect to the SEAPA grid that has numerous existing and proposed alternatives for generation and transmission, AEA concludes that there is insufficient information
provided to do an economic analysis.
While there appear to be few technical and permitting barriers for project development, market for hydropower remains questionable with the recent completion of the Swan-Tyee intertie.
AEA believes that an integrated energy resource plan is necessary for assessing generation and transmission alternatives in SEAPA grid communities and Metlakatla before allocating
additional public funds for phases 3 and 4--final design, permitting and construction in this subregion.
AEA recommends funding in the amount of $2,000,000.
AEA recommends special provisions be associated with this grant as follows: (1) Before any grant funds can be disbursed, MIC is to submit to AEA for its review and approval, a power
sales agreement between MIC and KPU which clarifies the terms, conditions, rates and amount of power for this intertie; (2) Demonstrate completion of all preconstruction activities
including final design documents and final construction cost estimate; and (3) Demonstrate project site control, including required easements and Rights-of-way, NEPA requirements
and all permits needed to construct have been issued.
The City of St Paul is proposing funding for the puchase and installation of a replacement generator and the extension of the existing heating loop for the utility facilities.
The replacement of the generator does not qualify for Renewable Energy Funding. See economist description of allocation between genset and heat recovery costs.
Recommend partial funding of $98,149 for the design and installation of the heat recovery loop.
The City of Tenakee proposes final design and permitting of a 120 kW run-of-river hydro project at Indian River. Funded by the DC/AEA alternative energy grant program, the City has
completed a feasibility assessment for this project. The project would be located on state and city land.
In round 1 AEA recommended against funding final design and permitting before a subregional energy plan that addressed systems in Tenakee, Hoonah, and Pelican was prepared. Hoonah is
pursuing hydro development in nearby projects, while Pelican is upgrading its existing hydro project. Given these circumstances and the long distances between these comunities, AEA
sees no reason to delay consideration of a hydro project in Tenakee further.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes final design and permitting of a hydro project at Crooked Creek. Feasibility study was already funded by DC/AEA alternative energy RFP. Project site on USFS land,
indicating FERC license will be required. AEA has constructed a power and bulk fuel system under the RUS energy program. Hiring engineering firm underway.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA approve the feasibility study now underway before any funds associated with this application are disbursed.
Applicant is proposing funding for the construction of a wood chip fired district heating system. The application includes a conceptual design report. There is an existing RE Fund
grant for final design work and business plan development.
This is a community wood heating system that combines wood harvest and transport, combustion, district heating and energy sales. AEA remains concerned about the project\'s complexity
and risks. However, these risks are somewhat mitigated by a strong project team and the project\'s phased development under AEA\'s oversight. It is very important that provisions
be included in the business plan to account for the operation and maintenance of the proposed system.
Recommend full funding contingent on completion of an acceptable final design and business plan.
AP&T proposes feasibility assessment, permitting and final design for a 300 kW hydro project at Carlson Cr. that would serve Slana and Chistochina. This is a continuation of a project
funded in round 2 (#226). AEA has concerns about long penstock and the potential for the project to match resource to load. Flashy stream may increase risk to long term success of
project.
Recommend partial funding of $240,000 for feasibility assessment (phase 2) with provision that AEA must approve of recommendations for continued development from recon report before
any funds are disbursed.
AP&T proposes recon and feasibility analysis of developing a 400 kW two-basin tidal energy project in Port Frederick to serve Hoonah.
Permitting risk appears high due to limiting inflow and outflow of the marine basins. Due to high estimated development costs and relatively low energy generation, project economics
are not compelling. Project would result in developing a single lane road and a submarine intertie to the project from Hoonah.
Recon would begin in summer 2010 while feasibility work would largely be completed during summer and fall of 2011.
Recommend partial funding of $64,000 for reconnaisance assessment.
AP&T proposes funding feasibility of developing a 6 MW storage hydro project at Schubee Lake. AP&T has not prepared a formal reconnaissance assessment of the project that meets requirements
of the RFA. AP&T is responding to a level of public opposition to developing another hydro site at Connelly Lk. AEA is recommending feasibility funding for Connelly Lk (#437).
AEA has the following concerns with Schubee Lk: 1) it is located on USFS lands and would be subject to FERC licensing, 2) it has a higher relative cost with less energy output than
Connelly, 3) it would require an expensive submarine cable.
AEA recognizes the importance for the Haines Borough citizens to make informed decisions regarding development of alternative hydro locations. However we believe that sufficient information
for determining the development path can be achieved by more limited analysis.
Recommend partial funding of $80,000 for reconnaissance assessment with the provision that AP&T must provide a revised scope of work for approval by AEA before funds are disbursed.
AP&T proposes to progress to final design, permitting, and construction of a run-of-river 124 kW hydro project at Neck Lake. The project would result in displacing virtually all of
the diesel used for power generation in Whale Pass. RE Fund round 2 (#223) provided $108,000 for feasibility analysis, scheduled for completion in Fall 2010. Permitting and final
design would be completed by Summer 2011, while construction would be completed in 2012.
The current application clarifies an earlier concern that the project was located on USFS land.
Recommend partial funding of $90,000 for permitting and final design with the provision that before funds are disbursed AEA must approve of feasibility recommendations for further development.
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power and Telephone (AP&T) proposes funding for the transmission portion of the 5 MW Reynolds Creek hydropower project. Haida Energy,
a joint venture of AP&T and Haida Corp would own the project and sell power on a wholesale basis to APC, the certificated utility on Prince of Wales (PoW) Island.The following grant
allocations totaling $4.1 million have been made for the Reynolds Creek project:1) $100,000 of Denali Comm funds to Haida Corp through the Denali Commission / AEA alternative energy
RFP2) $1 million in RE fund round 1 funds to Haida Corp3) $1 million in RE fund round 1 funds to Haida Power, a joint venture between APC and Haida Corp4) $2 in legislative appropriation
to Southeast ConferenceThe project will be dispatched in conjunction with AP&T\'s existing Black Bear Lk and South Fork hydro projects. Previous applications state that Reynolds Creek
hydro will only be used after the existing hydro projects are fully dispatched. An extension of PoW tranmission to the northern portion of island has been funded by the Denali Commission
and RE Fund round 1.For the purposes of proposal evaluation and management of all state funds, AEA considers the transmission and generation components of the project as one project.Recommend
full funding with the following grant conditions: Before any construction grant funds are disbursed: 1) APC, AP&T, Haida Corp, Haida Power, Haida Energy, and Southeast Conference
must enter into a master agreement that addresses overall fiscal responsibility for the project, disposition of all public grant funds, project debt and equity financing, and project
development, operation and maintenance responsiblities, 2) all final design documents, permits, rights-of-way, and FERC license must be in place, 3) all financing for the transmission
and generation portions of the project must be in place, 4) the grantee must establish a power purchase agreement acceptable to AEA, based on cost-based rate methodology that demonstrates
that benefits of public funds flow to the ratepayers, 5) project owner will be required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity.
AP&T proposes permitting, final design and construction of a 2 MW run-of-river hydro project at Yerrick Cr to serve the communities of Tok, Dot Lake, Tanacross, and Tetlin. Permitting
and final design would be completed in Spring 2010, before funding would be available from the current round of RE funding. The project would result in 20 miles of 3-phase transmission.
AP&T has received a total of $1.75 million from Denali Commission and RUS that will cover final design, permitting, and a portion of construction. If AP&T receives $4 million in round
3 RE Fund support, they would still need to find financing for the remaining $8.725 million.
AP&T is also requesting $4.5 million for construction of a wood-fired power system that would serve the same grid (#479). Similar to Yerrick Cr hydro, AP&T plans to complete final design
before state fy11 begins and round 3 RE funding is available. If AP&T receives $4 million in round 3 RE Fund support, they would still need to find financing for the remaining $16
million of the total project cost of $20 million.
In round 1 AEA recommended against funding this project because local land owner Tanacross Inc had indicated unwillingness to provide legal access for field investigations. Over the
last year AP&T reached a temporary agreement with Tanacross to allow field work. However there remains no permanent agreement with Tanacross to use Tanacross land for the project.
Doyon owns subsurface rights on non-state land.
Recommend funding for construction with provision that no funds are disbursed until AP&T provides evidence of ROWs and other development rights with Tanacross, Doyon, DNR and other resource
owners.
Applicant proposes feasiblity study and final design/permitting for a 12 MW storage hydro project. An IRP is desirable for the Skagway, Haines, Klukwan area before proceeding to final
design and construction for these projects. AP&T is also proposing recon and feasibility study of Schubee Lk hydro project (#441) in response to local input.
Existing recon study proposes a substantially smaller 6 MW project which impounds less water than the current proposal. Project may require intertie and road access across the Chilkat
Bald Eagle Reserve if it is not feasible to route through the Haines State Forest. Application includes March 09 letter from BLM indicating land has been transferred to State of Alaska,
thus reducing likelihood of FERC jusidiction. Power sales/benefits limited to offset of diesel costs and air pollution during summer cruise ship landings in Haines and Skagway. Seasonal
power production would limit year-round availability.
Recommend $428,000 partial funding for Phase 2 feasibility study with scope per application with provision that land issues and licensing jurisdiction question be resolved with go/no-go
points established.
Applicant proposes recon assessment and hydrological resource assessment of a hydro project at Tanalian River near Pt. Alsworth. Overall project site is within the national park, which
will result in permitting challenges. Letters of support from National Park Service, Lake and Pen Borough and others are included in the the application. However the letters refer
to a hydrokinetic type of project-- a significant departure from micro-hydro typeof project written in the application; this demonstrates some confusion. Application Project management
structure is not well-documented in the application and will require further clarification if this project receives funding.
Recommend full funding with the provision that AEA must approve further work after milestone 2 (Resource Identification and Analysis Report).
Nushagak Coop is seeking to develop a 2.7 MW hydro project at Grant Lake and a 1.7 MW hydro project at Lake Elva as part of their Nushagak Area Hydro Project (NAHP). Nushagak has submitted
two applications in earlier RE Fund rounds:
1) AEA has awarded $300,000 in round 1 funding for recon and feasibility assessment of the 1.7 MW Lake Elva project , and has allocated an additional $3.9 million for further development
activities (#6).
2) AEA recommended against funding permitting, final design and construction of Grant Lk (#204) because Nushagak did "not provide adequate justification to proceed to final design and
construction".
AEA has provided $25,000 to Nushagak toward an integrated energy resource plan (IRP) for the Dillingham and Aleknagik grid. The plan will address wind energy, hydro and other alternatives
for energy production. The Lake Elva grant requires that this IRP be completed and approved by AEA before funds are made available for permitting and final design.
The current application requests $20 million in funding for recon, feasibility, final design, permitting, and construction of the Grant Lake project and a 60-mile intertie to Aleknagik
and on to Dillingham. The proposed RE Fund request represents 40% of the $49.5 million Grant Lake portion of NAHP. AEA believes there remains inadequate justification for providing
funding for final design, permitting, and construction at this time.
Nushagak and their contractor have completed recon and preliminary feasibility work on the NAHP. Additional work needs to be done, including stream gauging, geotechnical assessment,
detailed economic and financial analysis of alternatives, and field studies to support future potential permitting activities.
Recommend partial funding of $700,000 for completion of feasibility activities with the provision that funds will not be disbursed until IRP is approved by AEA. AEA recommends that
$700,000 of the remaining round 1 funds be made available for these purposes.
Valdez Fisheries Development Association is requesting funding for permitting and final design of a system to convert recovered heat from the Petrostar Refinery to 630 kW of power to
the CVEA grid, refrigeration to a cold storage and fish processing facility, and tempered water to the Solomon Gulch Hatchery. VFDA submitted a related application in RE Fund round
2 (#207) that was not recommended for funding because it was for the entire cold storage facility, not the energy system. The current application limits the scope to the energy system.
VFDA has not yet secured financing for the cold storage facility that justifies the absorption system.
AEA contacted VFDA to confirm that it is willing to sell to the CVEA grid in order to be eligible as an IPP. AEA also requested confirmation that Petrostar will provide heat to VFDA.
VFDA did not provide the confirmation. VFDA provided a feasibility analysis for the absorption chilling portion of the project, but was unable to provide a similar analysis for the
ORC power generation component.
The project has substantial value for demonstrating a system that would aid development of fish processing and cold storage in coastal communities with access to recoverable heat.
Recommended full funding with the requirement that prior to disbursing funds, VFDA provide a more detailed breakdown of the design budget and a long-term agreement with Petrostar.
Applicant proposes feasibility, design, and construction of a 60 kW wind project in the vicinity of Seldovia that would be connected to the Railbelt grid.
Preliminary economic analysis indicates a low benefit to cost ratio. AEA does not find other significant public benefits that would result from project development.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes feasibility, design, and construction of a 30 kW wind project in the vicinity of Eagle River that would be connected to the Railbelt grid.
Preliminary economic analysis indicates a low benefit to cost ratio. AEA does not find other significant public benefits that would result from project development.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes feasibility, design, and construction of a 21 kW wind project in the vicinity of Tyonek that would be connected to the Railbelt grid.
Economic analysis indicates a low benefit to cost ratio. AEA does not find other significant public benefits that would result from project development.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Angoon proposes to conduct feasibility and conceptual design for FERC pre-licensing work on Ruth Lake hydro. The hydro project, a significant distance from the City, will
not be connnected to the Angoon system within the foreseeable future.
AEA believes that in order for a project of this type to be successful, there needs to be demonstrated buy-in from all regional stakeholders, including the City, SEAPA, IPEC, and Kotznoowoo.
There is no indication that the stakeholders listed have agreed to this concept. In particular on p22 the application indicates the City would sell power to the utilities of Petersburg
and Wrangell. However, there is no indication that these communities would purchase power from the project, nor descritption of a mechnism to flow the vbenefits of the project directly
to the ratepayers of Angoon.
Kootznoowoo is has submitted a proposal for Thayer Lake hydro (#517 and 523) that would serve the Angoon system, indicates a direct path for benefits to flow to Angoon ratepayers, and
has the support of the local utility IPEC.
Recommend full funding with the provision that prior to release funds beyond phase 1 work plan review and coordination, the applicant must 1) convene an in-state stakeholder meeting,
2) secure letters of support from SEAPA, Thomas Bay Power Authority, and the cities of Petersburg, Wrangell, Kake, and Ketchikan, and 3) develop a process acceptable to AEA for benefits
to flow to all affected ratepayers equally.
Delta Mine Training Center proposes the construction of a biomass gasifier and a 105kW Stirling generator system. Attached to the application are a number of system descriptions and
technology offers from Stirling DK based on European installations. Over the last year, DMTC has purchased property, built a road, begun construction of a building, and worked on connecting
to the grid.
However, except for one-line diagrams on the grid tie-in, the applicant does not provide conceptual or feasibility information, final system design, engineering cost estimate, detailed
economic and financial analyses, or final business and operational plans as a basis to justify construction funding.
Recommend no funding.
UAF proposes a three-year study of biomass production from short toation woody crops and impacts of land application of biosolids. The study includes potential species, soil impacts,
and nutritional needs.
The proposal represents a statewide collaboration including UAF ACEP, School of Nat Resources and Agriculture Sciences, Water and Environmental Resource Center; Chugachmiut, the Village
of Eyak, and Tanana Chiefs, and partners to be named in Nome and Bethel.
Recommend full funding.
UAF is proposing funding for expanding an EPA funded project that utilizes heat from the existing Galena power house heat recovery system for establishing a community greenhouse. This
grant application requests funding for assessing the success of utilizing the existing district heating loop for supplying the required heating load to the greenhouse in Galena, assessing
potential for establishing greenhouses in rural Alaska by performing a feasibility analysis for replicating the Galena system in 6 rural Alaskan communities, and providing summer job
for 6 high school students in the greenhouse.
AEA requested additional information on breakdown of construction line items. Based on the submittal, over 90% fo the RE funding would be used for greenhouse equipment, supplies and
freight; and greenhouse development and operation. The application does not provide engineering data on availability of recoverable heat or impacts on the existing system.
Although the proposal reflects an attractive way of using recovered heat and a strong project team, AEA believes that chief aim of the project is developing and operating a greenhouse.
Recommend partial funding of $34,070 for the heat recovery construction portion of the project consisting of 1) pre-, mid-, and final engineering reports, and 2) flow control valves
and related plumbing supplies.
UAF ACEP is conducting a project funded by AEA, EPA, and the Denali Commission that is testing small organic Rankine cycle (ORC) systems in the laboratory . This proposal would expand
this work to deploy the small ORC systems in Ruby and Galena. The units will be owned by Tanana Chiefs Conference. The proposal does not provide details on the business arrangements
among TCC, ACEP, Ruby or Galena or system integration.
Currently the RE Fund is providing almost $4 million to support deployment of larger ORC units in Kotzebue (#235), Unalaska (#271), and Cordova (#22) in 2010. Operational data from
these projects will be available in 2011. AEA believes that operational data from smaller units would be beneficial but recognizes the demonstration value of the proposed work may
be diminished given the amount of ORC development work in progress.
Recommend full funding.
Ketchikan Public Utilities proposes to construct a 4.5 MW storage hydro project on an existing dam at Whitman Lake. KPU was funded for final design and permitting under RE fund round
2 and expects to complete this work by November 2010. KPU has reached reached a settlement agreement with DNR, ADFG, and the USFS on the project.
KPU plans to finance the $14.5 million balance of the project using unspecified grants, municipal bonds, or other options.
Because the project would connect to the SEAPA grid that has numerous existing and proposed alternatives for generation and transmission, AEA concludes that there is insufficient information
provided to do an economic analysis.
While there appear to be few technical and permitting barriers for project development, market for hydropower remains questionable with the recent completion of the Swan-Tyee intertie.
AEA believes that an integrated energy resource plan is necessary for assessing generation and transmission alternatives in SEAPA grid communities and Metlakatla before allocating
additional public funds for phases 3 and 4--final design, permitting and construction in this subregion.
Full funding recommended.
Special provisions are as follows: (1) Grantee to demonstrate that all preconstruction activities (including those previously funded under Round 1 RE Fund grant) have been completed
in a manner acceptable to AEA, including resolution of all land and site control issues; (2) Before any funds can be paid out under this grant, grantee will submit a project financing
plan acceptable to AEA which describes the source and financial cost of all committed funds required to complete the entire Whitman Lake project and allow it to produce and sell power;
and (3) provide FERC notice to proceed with construction activities.
City of Chefornak proposes final design, permitting, and construction of a 300 kW wind-diesel system. The system would include a 5kWh/500 kW Powerstore flywheel and an electric boiler
at the school as a dumpload.
AEA and the City completed a powerhouse upgrade in 2004. The City installed a met tower in fall 2009. The City has not completed a full feasibility assessment including: detailed energy
resource analysis (met. tower data collection is ongoing); assessment of design alternatives; geotechnical analysis and a final report with recommendations.
There are other issues of concern as well. The proposed budget has $503,905 in currently unsecured funding. The economic evaluation shows a poor benefit to cost ratio that is significantly
less than 1.
With the project still in the feasibility stage, it is not developed to the point where funding for design and construction would be awarded.
Recommend partial funding of $151,025 to complete feasibility.
Applicant proposes funding for the feasibility and concept design of a hybrid thermal solar (with storage capability) and ground source heat pump to provide heating for City of Anderson
school.
Project team consists of GVEA, UAF, PDC Engineering, the City, and the Denali Borough. If successful this technology could be widely applicable in rural Alaska.
Recommend full funding.
GVEA proposes to modify control logic at its Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) in Fairbanks in order to integrate intermittent renewable energy generation on the GVEA grid. Currently
there are no significant intermittent renewable projects, such as Eva Creek wind, that would require the BESS modification.
GVEA proposes a reasonable stepwise approach to project development with go/no-go decision points.
Recommend full funding with the provision that GVEA demonstrate near-term needs for integrating intermittent renewable power systems prior to proceeding to control modifications (phase
4 construction.)
The City and Borough of Wrangell proposes final design and permitting of an intertie that would connect the Southeast Alaska Power Authority (SEAPA) grid to British Columbia Transmission
Corporation (BCTC) grid to facilitate export of Alaskan hydropower. This represents the next phase of the project.
There have been some recent positive developments in BC that may result in extension of the BCTC grid to within 60 miles of the border. The Canadian federal and provincial authorities
have agreed to cooperate on developing the Northwest Transmission Line (NWT) from Meziadin Jct to Bob Quinn. However there is no Canadian initiative to connect the northern end of
the NWT line at Bob Quinn substation to the Alaska border.
AEA considered this intertie under the AK-BC Export Intertie feasibility study and found that viability of export depended in part on the Canadians extending their grid to the border.
Additionally the question remains whether export of this power represents the highest and best use of this Alaskan resource. The best venue for considering these issues is through
a regional integrated resource energy plan. AEA will provide funding and other resources to assist SEAPA to complete this plan.
AEA believes there is not sufficient justification to move the project forward given these circumstances.
No funding recommended.
Applicant is proposing to extend the distribution system in the City of Wrangell to provide hydro power to an existing concrete and gravel business that is currently generating with
diesel.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant is proposing to replace overhead distribution with underground cable in the City of Wrangell. The intent of the project is to improve the visual aesthetics and reduce maintenance
cost; however, since the project will not result in an increase in the availablilty or utilization of renewable energy, AEA believes that there are insufficient benefits to justify
funding under the Renewable Energy Fund.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes reconnaissance study of the development of a hydro project on Sunrise Lk with the potential to serve as secondary water source for Wrangell. The proposal is an update
of a round 2 proposal (#228) for feasibility, design, and construction that was not recommended for funding.
Recommend full funding.
C and L Ranch LLC requests funding to complete feasibility through construction of a 1.8MW wind project in the vicinity of Delta Junction. The current wind resource estimate is based
on a 50m meteorological tower that is 3 miles away on a small ridge. The wind data provided in the application shows a poor wind resource and the High Resolution Wind Map from the
State show Class 1 winds at the site. Onsite wind resource assessment is required prior to proceeding to final design or construction phases. The application requests $30,000 for wind
modeling.
There are additional feasibility requirements that will need to be addressed prior to moving to final design. These include obtaining or demonstrating the likelihood of obtaining power
sales and interconnection agreements from GVEA, completing a thorough evaluation of permitting requirements including FAA permits, and completing a conceptual design and cost estimate.
Recommend partial funding of $30,000 for onsite wind resource assessment completed in accordance with statewide standards.
North Slope Borough proposes to complete feasibility assessment, final design and permitting, and construction of a 300 kW wind project in Wainwright. The Borough, which installed a
met tower in the community in June 2009, would finish feasibility and environmental analysis by the end of 2010. Final design and construction would be completed by 2011-2012.
The applicant notes that Wainwright has nesting areas for spectacled and steller eider as well as habitat for other sensitive migratory bird species.
AEA believes that it is reasonable to wait until feasibility is complete before allocating funds for final design and construction.
Recommend partial funding of $132,000 to complete feasibility assessment, including "resolution of land and regulatory issues" and "environmental analysis".
North Slope Borough proposes to complete feasibility assessment, final design and permitting, and construction of a 300 kW wind project in Point Hope. The Borough, which installed a
met tower in the community in June 2009, would finish feasibility and environmental analysis by the end of 2010. Final design and construction would be completed by 2011-2012.
AEA believes that it is reasonable to wait until feasibility is complete before allocating funds for final design and construction.
Recommend partial funding of $132,000 to complete feasibility assessment, including "identification/resolution of land and regulatory issues" and "environmental analysis".
North Slope Borough proposes to complete feasibility assessment, final design and permitting, and construction of a 300 kW wind project in Point Lay. The Borough would finish feasibility
and environmental analysis by the end of 2010. Final design and construction would be completed by 2011-2012.
The applicant notes that Pt Lay is in the USFWS-designated critical habitat for the spectacled eider.
AEA believes that it is reasonable to wait until feasibility is complete before allocating funds for final design and construction.
Recommend partial funding of $132,000 to complete feasibility assessment, including "resolution of land and regulatory issues" and "environmental analysis".
Applicant proposes reconnaissance and feasibility study of a geothermal project that would tap a resource of unknown quality and extent in the Lower Sustna Basin for heating in Anchorage.
See DGGS comments: Geothermal resource has not been demonstrated. Therefore, the concept of piping hot water from the Susitna Valley is questionable.
DGGS comments:
This project suggests the use of an unsubstantiated low-temperature geothermal fluids in the lower Susitna Basin (roughly, near Houston) to provide space heat for Anchorage. However,
the existence of these fluids has never been confirmed, and indirect evidence of their existence is equivocal. Nearly three decades ago exploration wells drilled in the area for oil
and gas and reported elevated bottom-hole temperatures. However, no attempt was made at the time of drilling to analyze or collect other pertinent data in order to record equilibrium
crustal temperatures and identify a geothermal resource. In fact, the area is an unlikely candidate for such a resource. A follow-up geothermal resource investigation in the 80?s was
unable to find direct evidence of geothermal fluids. Subsequent studies have also been unable to confirm elevated crustal temperatures. Finally, recent DGGS investigation of physical
samples from the exploratory holes has provided strong evidence that the elevated temperatures reported during drilling did not reflect crustal conditions. Given there is no direct
evidence that the ?geothermal resource? which underpins this proposal exists, and there are many reasons to doubt its existence, the primary activity in this area (if any) would need
to be resource identification and quantification. However, most of the proposed activities are not related to resource confirmation, they are instead various aspects of system design,
permitting, and land rights analysis. Even the geotechnical activities proposed in the pre-feasibility study at the end of the proposed work period will not, in themselves, provide
direct evidence of a resource. In short, this project and proposal make unwarranted assumptions about the existence of a geothermal resource to power a regional space heating system
and the proposal is not recommended for funding.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes to purchase a chip fuel dryer and lease it to the Viking Lumber Mill which currently provides chip fuel to the city of Craig for use in the biomass boiler to heat
the pool and school for the community. Fuel could also be made available to other facilities on Prince of Wales Island and other locations.
The new biomass boiler currently has a fuel dryer as part of the system; however, high moisture wood chip fuel has caused heat to be diverted from the elementary school to the dryer.
Fuel oil boilers in the elementary school kick-on to compensate for the diverted heat. The moisture content of the fuel has consistently been higher than design parameters. The new
dryer would allow for the fuel to be pre-treated before delivery to the school, and could potentially allow for the development of other chip customers for Viking Lumber.
AEA recongizes that there is significant public benefit from this project, however, it believes that there must be reasonable economic return to the public from the allocation of the
grant fund, while at the same time assuring that Viking recieves reasonable return.
Recommend full funding with the following special provision: Before funds are made available, AEA must approve the lease/operate/maintain business agreement between Viking and Craig.
Applicant proposes final design and construction of the ground source heat pump (GSHP) at the Gastineau Elementary School. The project is projected to displace approximately 28,000
gallons per year of heating oil. Additional pumping costs are expected to be approximately $23,000/yr.
The RE Fund provided grants to GSHP systems at the Juneau Airport and the Dimond aquatic center. GSHP systems on these projects will displace substantially more fuel oil than the proposed
system at Gastineau School. However, economics of the school GSHP appear reasonable
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes assessments of buildings in Cordova for wood heat facilities. This project will also develop a community energy audit protocol.
The budget includes $52,000 in indirect costs that are not allow under the REF program.
Recommended partial funding of $193,065 reflecting the reduction after the removal of the indirect costs.
Cordova Electric proposes to complete relocation and replacement of the intake structure for the Humpback Creek hydro project, inoperational after a fire and a flood in 2005 and 2006.
AEA has awarded $4 million in RE fund round 1 dollars for this work; however the installed cost of the project has increased by $5,431,000 since construction bids came in much higher
than expected. CEC has awarded a construction contract and the project is now on schedule for completion by November 2010. There is substantial support from the local Native tribe
Eyak and fish procesors, and cost share by FEMA. FERC has issued a license for the rebuild.
Eyak submitted a proposal to USDOE for stimulus funding for $4.85 million and expects to receive results by March 2010.
Despite a substantially increased project cost, project economics remain attractive. CEC has obtained debt financing in the event that no additional grant funds are secured.
Recommend full funding of $4,000,000 with the provision that AEA will decrease the grant to CEC by the amount that CEC receives in federal stimulus grant funding for the project.
Applicant is proposing funding for 11 photovoltaic systems in 11 schools to reduce the cost of electricty. This system will provide educational opportunities in renewable energy issues
for the students and the community.
Economics this project appear to marginal. The public benefit of the project will be educational in nature.
Recommend partial funding. Funding for 2 photovoltaic units in the amount of $135,000 will provide for comparison of site effects and will still provide the educational opportunities
over the proposed school website.
CB of Sitka requests funding for assessing feasibility of the potential 28 MW Takatz Lake hydro project. Due to funding limitations, RE Fund round 1 awarded partial funding of $514,684
to the project for this purpose. Sitka requests an additional $2 million in round 3 for this purpose for a total of $2,514,684.
Project is consistent with findings of the 2008 Sitka Power Supply Plan and would follow less expensive alternatives, including increasing capacity of the existing Blue Lk Hydro project,
in order to avoid more costly diesel generation. There is potential for developing road and marine facilities associated with the project that would provide access to eastern Baranof
Island. FERC has issued a preliminary permit to Sitka to assess feasibility of Takatz. Given the widespread interest in linking major electric generation and loads in Southeast, development
of Takatz should be coordinated with the SE Alaska Regional Energy Plan.
AEA is recommending additional funding of $637,449 in reallocated RE Fund round 1 funds for Takatz Lk feasibility consistent with Round 1 recommendations of up to $2 million.
AEA recommends the remaining funding of $1,362,551 in round 3 funding, ($2,514,684 minus $514,684 in original round 1 funds minus $637,449 in reallocated round1 funds).
Applicant proposes the construction of a combined heat and power system. The project includes assessment and management of the local biomass resources, formation of a partnership with
the biomass owner (Gana-a?Yoo Native Regional Corporation), purchasing and installation of the harvesting equipment, boiler, steam powered generator, and heat recovery systems including
Organic Rankine Cycle generators, and providing steam heat for the existing utilidor and buildings occupied by the Galena City School District.
Reconnaissance and feasilbility are not complete, and design and economics cannot be evaluated.
Contruction would not begin until spring 2011. The application does not provide an assessement of availability and delivered cost to the burn point of the wood energy resources, preliminary
assessment of permitting or environmental impact, an assessment of system alternatives, or detailed economic and financial analyses.
Recommend partial funding of $100,000 for feasibility and conceptual design.
Applicant is proposing funding for a wood pellet boiler system to heat the Division of Forestry main office, proposed addition and a warehouse/shop/maintenance facility. The funding
would provide design and construction for the boiler building, 2 wood pellet boilers and pellet storage.
Given the high project cost of $932,000 and a relatively small amount of fuel oil displaced project economics are poor.
Recommend no funding.
Native Village of for a reconnaissance study for a 1+MW storage hydro project on the Jack River located near Cantwell. The project would connect to the Railbelt Energy Grid served by
GVEA.
Recommend full funding of $194,540.
Applicant proposes to continue work toward developing a third turbine at Terror lake hydro. AEA currently has a RE Fund round 2 grant award to KEA for the FERC license amendment and
is working through this process.
According to the application KEA would complete final design and bid document development by June 2012. Following this work KEA would initiate the construction phase.
Recommend partial funding to complete final design and bid document development at $248,160.
Applicant requested funding of $2,868,000 in round 1 and was awarded funding of $2 million due to funding caps applied for the Railbelt (See proposal #112).
During 2009 the Delta SD hired a design firm, obtained a fuel supply commitment, and plans construction in late 2010. An associated school building envelop upgrade is 80% complete.
Recommend full funding.
Failed Stage 1
Failed Stage 1
AHTNA proposes grant funding for constructing a 35,000 ton per year wood pellet plant. AHTNA would harvest wood on public and private lands in the area for feedstock. The project also
includes a wood-fired power plant that would sell 250 kW of power to local utility Copper Valley Electric Association. The for-profit start-up company would sell bagged and bulk pellets
and briquettes within Alaska.
Although we support the concept of using a local, underutilized resource for creating jobs and displacing fossil fuels, AEA has the following concerns about the application: 1) the
application did not include or reference a detailed feasibility analysis that addresses feedstock supply, product market, power sales, construction cost, ramp-up time, or cash flow
and pro forma. The business plan that was submitted with the application was incomplete; 2) the application did not include a complete final design and preliminary power purchase
agreement, nor adequately address permitting; 3) We question whether or not it is the intent for the Renewable Energy Fund to publicly finance facility construction for private businesses
that will manufacture and market a fuel. We can only recommend providing grant assistance for preconstruction activities, i.e. feasiblity assessment. However, in this case, the applicant\'s
funding request did not break out feasibility assessment/conceptual design costs.
Recommend no funding at this time.
Failed Stage 1 review
Applicant proposes supplementary funding for a 1 MW wind energy project in Sand Point. Currently AEA has a grant to TDX for this project--$945,136 in USDOE funds, $528,864 in State
funds, and $437,900 in local cash $552,738 in local in-kind match for a total of $2,464,638. The project has been delayed for over two years due to federal NEPA review.
Additional funds are requested to cover across-the-board increases, mostly in the areas of freight and wind integration with the existing system. Applicant indicates that the revised
project will also include a dumpload in the high school that will provide facility heating.
Discussions with USDOE indicate that NEPA review is almost complete. No further permitting delays are anticipated.
Recommend full funding of $639,805 with the requirement that before grant funds are made available, AWE revise the existing draft power purchase agreement to address additional grant
funding being made available to the project as well as project cost increases.
Applicant proposes studying feasibility and assessing resources for hydro and wind development in Tatitlek. TDX Power will manage the project. Work would commence summer 2009 and be
completed by Nov 2010
Recommend partial funding for reconaissance and feasibility study (phase 1 and 2, tasks 1-6) of $138,210 (total cost of tasks 1-6 minus $10,000, since AEA will provide an instrumented
30 m met tower to the project.)
Applicant proposes to reconaissance study, feasibility, and design of a hydro-wind-diesel system. The project would develop valuable information on available renewable resources, and
establish feasibility and conceptual design for a new community power system.
Recommend partial funding of $85,835 through feasibility and conceptual design.
Applicant proposes assessing kind, quantity, and delivered cost of biomass near four communities--apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana, #314 McGrath. Methodology and objectives
are identical for the four applications. The proposed site-specific assessments are an important component of feasibility analysis for wood energy development in these communities.
However, of these comunities, only McGrath is proposing significant utilization of local wood for energy. Fuel prices are highest in McGrath. While Tanana has recently developed
a wood boiler for the washeteria, wood supply has not been identified as a major issue. While a larger scale chip boiler system is under development in Tok, wood supply is less of
an issue since it is on the road system. Funding only one of the four projects will be sufficient to show that the method is useful for biomass supply assessment.
Recommend full funding of $34,740 for the McGrath biomass supply assessment (app #314) with requirement that the project team coordinates with McGrath Light and Power and other project
participants in assessing harvest supply requirements and system.
Recommend no funding for apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana at this time.
Applicant proposes assessing kind, quantity, and delivered cost of biomass near four communities--apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana, #314 McGrath. Methodology and objectives
are identical for the four applications. The proposed site-specific assessments are an important component of feasibility analysis for wood energy development in these communities.
However, of these comunities, only McGrath is proposing significant utilization of local wood for energy. Fuel prices are highest in McGrath. While Tanana has recently developed
a wood boiler for the washeteria, wood supply has not been identified as a major issue. While a larger scale chip boiler system is under development in Tok, wood supply is less of
an issue since it is on the road system. Funding only one of the four projects will be sufficient to show that the method is useful for biomass supply assessment.
Recommend full funding of $34,740 for the McGrath biomass supply assessment (app #314) with requirement that the project team coordinates with McGrath Light and Power and other project
participants in assessing harvest supply requirements and system.
Recommend no funding for apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana at this time.
Applicant proposes assessing kind, quantity, and delivered cost of biomass near four communities--apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana, #314 McGrath. Methodology and objectives
are identical for the four applications. The proposed site-specific assessments are an important component of feasibility analysis for wood energy development in these communities.
However, of these comunities, only McGrath is proposing significant utilization of local wood for energy. Fuel prices are highest in McGrath. While Tanana has recently developed
a wood boiler for the washeteria, wood supply has not been identified as a major issue. While a larger scale chip boiler system is under development in Tok, wood supply is less of
an issue since it is on the road system. Funding only one of the four projects will be sufficient to show that the method is useful for biomass supply assessment.
Recommend full funding of $34,740 for the McGrath biomass supply assessment (app #314) with requirement that the project team coordinates with McGrath Light and Power and other project
participants in assessing harvest supply requirements and system.
Recommend no funding for apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana at this time.
Applicant proposes assessing kind, quantity, and delivered cost of biomass near four communities--apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana, #314 McGrath. Methodology and objectives
are identical for the four applications. The proposed site-specific assessments are an important component of feasibility analysis for wood energy development in these communities.
However, of these comunities, only McGrath is proposing significant utilization of local wood for energy. Fuel prices are highest in McGrath. While Tanana has recently developed
a wood boiler for the washeteria, wood supply has not been identified as a major issue. While a larger scale chip boiler system is under development in Tok, wood supply is less of
an issue since it is on the road system. Funding only one of the four projects will be sufficient to show that the method is useful for biomass supply assessment.
Recommend full funding of $34,740 for the McGrath biomass supply assessment (app #314) with requirement that the project team coordinates with McGrath Light and Power and other project
participants in assessing harvest supply requirements and system.
Recommend no funding for apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana at this time.
Ocean Renewable Power Corporation proposes to complete recon work currently underway and assess feasibility / prepare conceptual design of a 1 MW array of proprietary cross-flow tidal
instream electric conversion units for potential scale-up to 20+ MW. The units would be moored above the bottom of Cook Inlet near Pt. McKenzie but below ice. Currently the technology
is under development in Maine. The proposer states that the most substantial challenges will be impacts on beluga, migrating fish, and sediment flow. Undersea cable would bring power
to shore. ORPC has obtained a preliminary FERC permit and will submit a draft request to FERC for pilot project license in 3/09. Other permits will include ADFG fish habitat, DNR
water and subsurface use, Army Corps title 10, Coastal Zone, and Coast Guard navigational assessment. ORPC has developed a team of specialists that they state will address technical
and habitat issues.
AEA is concerned at the high cost and high risk of developing new technology. Estimated total cost of developing a 1 MW project is $7.9 million. Cost of the feasibility study is $2.4
million?75% of which is proposed to be borne by the renewable energy fund. However, the Alaska-based developers have assembled a credible engineering project team and claim to have
invested over $4 million in technology development to date. Alaska has most of the nation?s potential for tidal energy and it is logical for the state to support ocean energy technology
development. If state funding is approved for the project, substantial oversight will be required to continually assess for fatal flaws that will require curtailment of funding.
Recommend full funding of $1,787,476 with requirement that ORPC submit for AEA approval detailed project plan with go/no-go points during biological and physical site characterizations
before funds are disbursed. AEA will then incorporate the plan into milestones in the grant agreement.
Applicant proposes to recover heat from AVEC diesel generators and supply heat to the city water plant and washeteria. ANTHC would design and manage the project as part of the water
system improvements. Project completion would be in April 2010. The application does not include a letter of support from AVEC, however the app does refer to initial discussions with
AVEC that indicate general agreement price. The application provides a detailed preliminary design.
Recommend full funding of $435,000 with requirement that City and AVEC provide a heat purchase agreement to AEA before disbursement of funds.
Applicant proposes to install a 20 kW wind turbine and battery system that will serve the local public radio station in Sand Point. Station staff would operate the system. The system
is very small compared to the 1000 kW system that is currently under development and funded by State and federal funds.
AEA has a number of concerns with the application. No final design/permitting (phase 3) documentation was submitted or referred to in the app. The app does not specify the manufacturer
of the turbine system nor supply any backup to the claimed 50%+ of energy that the station will provide to the Sand Point grid at no cost. Since the wind system is small in relation
to the grid load, the system will operate as a low-penetration project and likely not need the battery system for integration. Applicants do not appear to have consulted with USFWS
on impacts of the guyed tower. There is no mention of a business arrangement with local utility TDX Power. Given the long-term nature of the project we are concerned that the radio
station can ensure consistent, long-term O&M of the turbine and battery systems.
Recommend full funding of $126,750 with requirement that 1) applicant provide final design and permitting documentation before funds are made available, 2) applicant demonstrates acceptable
business arrangement with local utility.
Stage 3 review update: Following discussions on regional funding allocation, no funding is recommended consistent with policy that not more than one project in a community that uses
the same renewable resource be funded for construction. In this case project #317 Sand Point Wind has a higher overall score.
Applicant proposes feasiblity study and final design/permitting for a 12 MW storage hydro project.
Interaction with other potential projects, including Burro Cr and West Cr. An IRP is desirable for the Skagway, Haines, Klukwan area before proceeding to final design and construction
for these projects.
Existing recon study proposes a substantially smaller 6 MW project which impounds less water than the current proposal. Project may require intertie and road access across the Chilkat
Bald Eagle Reserve if it is not feasible to route through the Haines State Forest.
Power sales/benefits limited to offset of diesel costs and air pollution during summer cruise ship landings in Haines and Skagway. Seasonal power production would limit year-round availability.
Recommend $428,000 partial funding for Phase 2 feasibility study with scope per application. Special provision that land issues and licensing jurisdiction question be resolved with
go-no go points established.
Applicant proposes assessment of geothermal resources in the Seward Peninsula. Although DGGS finds the work plan generally reasonable, they note weaknesses in the methodology. DGGS
indicates hot spring systems in the general area are small and of only moderate temperature, unlikely to produce megawatt scale electricity. In addition, they are in remote from communities
and would require long transmission lines.
Recommend no funding.
AVEC proposes a 200 kW medium penetration wind project consisting of 2 Northwind 100 turbines and electric boilers that would displace approximately 50% of the fuel used for diesel generation.
AVEC states that they have site control for the wind farm. USFWS and USACE would be consulted. USFWS states that Shaktool is close to spectacled eider molting areas but eiders are
not known to migrate through or around Shaktoolik. Onsite wind assessment indicates a class 4 resource.
Recommend for full funding of $2,465,664.
Applicant proposes final design/permitting and construction of a 800 kW wind farm and intertie to serve the communities of Emmonak and Alakanuk. The project team has substantial experience
in wind-diesel development. AEA provided a met tower for Emmonak in 2007. However, the proposal does not give detailed results of wind resource assessment, a general route of the
transmission line, or turbine production estimates, nor a detailed assessment of economic feasibility. The app does not address land ownership implications on transmission and wind
farm development. The project would be completed by 2010.
Recommend full funding of $9,670,361 with requirement that grantee provide feasibility assessment and conceptual design of the wind farm and transmission line for AEA review and approval
before any grant funds are made available.
Stage 3 review update: Stage 3 review update: Following discussions on regional funding allocation, project funding is capped at $2,000,000 per affected community for Railbelt and
lower energy cost Southeast communities and $4,000,000 for other communities. Since this project impacts both Emmonak and Alalanuk, funding recommendation is $8,000,000.
Applicant proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and conceptual design of a wind system in Stebbins. The proposal is reasonable and the project team
has substantial experience in this area.
Recommend full funding of $103,256.
Applicant proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and coneptual design of a wind system in New Stuyahok. The proposal is reasonable and the project
team has substantial experience in this area. The existing met tower erected by AEA and AVEC in 2003 indicates a class 3 wind resource. Due to relocation of the airport, however,
AVEC believes there is a location with a more prosing wind resource.
Recommend full funding of $117,610.
Applicant proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and coneptual design of a wind system in Scammon Bay. The proposal is reasonable and the project team
has substantial experience in this area. The City of Scammon Bay has contacted AEA in 2007 to request a met tower for the City to develop a wind project independent of AVEC.
Recommend full funding of $117,610.
Applicant proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and conceptual design of a wind system and possible transmission in the St. Mary\'s, Mountaina Village,
Pilot Station and Pitka\'s Point area. There are already two met towers near Pitka\'s Point that indicate class 6 wind resource. But there is also significant rime icing. AVEC feels
that further analysis is required to optimize wind resource against rime icing loss. The proposal is reasonable and the project team has substantial experience in this area.
Recommend full funding of $110,000.
Applicant proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and conceptual design of a wind system in the Teller and Brevig Mission area. The proposal is reasonable
and the project team has substantial experience in this area.
Recommend full funding of $117,610.
AEA Staff sent request for further information on January 26 2009 but received no response from the applicant. Applicant was also contacted by phone in February where the applicant acknowledged
receipt of the request for information but no responses were ever received.
Because no followup by the applicant was received by AEA, this application cannot be scored
Recommend no funding.
AEA staff requested further information on January 22 2009 but received no response from the applicant. Applicant was also contacted by phone in February where the applicant acknowledged
receipt of the request for information but no answers were ever provided.
Because no follow up by the applicant was received by AEA, this application cannot be scored.
Recommend no funding.
The City proposes feasibility study and conceptual design of a wood chip fired system that would provide heat to the Sitka hospital and a planned greenhouse and power to the Sitka grid.
Fuel would originate from USFS thinnings of forest plantations or sawmills in the region. Work would be contracted to an engineering firm by the City and be complete by October 2009.
AEA has concerns about availability and delivered cost of second growth thinnings. We expect, however, that this information will be a critical output of the study.
Recommend full funding of $30,000.
Applicant proposes feasibility and final design for stick-fired wood boiler systems to supply heat to school, school housing, and washeteria/water system. fuel savings over the 20-year
life of the project appear to offset high potential project cost. Recon assessments were done for this project by CATG in the summer of 2008 by JEDC and TR Miles in 2006.
Two important outstanding issues are supply of wood and reliable operation of the boilers. The feasibility assessment would address these issues before design commences. A local woodcutter
is currently providing residential supply. Sites are available for the boiler systems near the buildings. Feasibility and final design would be completed by the end of 2009. Since
proposed project manager Bill Wall is involved in numerous wood projects (Ft. Yukon, Upper Kobuk, McGrath, Chalkyitsik) we are concerned about staff resources.
Recommend partial funding for feasibility (task 1,2) at $32,500.
Chalkyitsik proposes feasibility and final design for stick-fired wood boiler and district heating systems to supply heat to school, school housing, water system, and the village tribal
office. The estimated project cost at $1.54 M is expensive. Recon assessment was done for this project by CATG in the summer of 2008. Bill Wall would perform the proposed feasibility
work. AEA is concerned that Wall will have sufficient time to perform this work since he is also involved in similar wood energy projects in Upper Kobuk, Ft. Yukon, and McGrath.
Recommend partial funding for feasibility (task 1,2) at $32,500.
Applicant proposes funding for a wood harvest, processing, storage, and delivery system in conjunction with a proposed biomass energy system (RE Fund Round 1 app #30).
AEA comments from Round 1 app are as follows: "Application refers to a feasibility study that has not been finalized. This is a community wood heating system that combines wood harvest
and transport, combustion, district heating and energy sales. The project will likely interact with proposal number 61-McGrath (diesel) heat recovery, but is expensive and appears uneconomic
as proposed. Since this is a large project with considerable risk and uncertainty, it should be developed in a stepwise manner with stakeholder input. AEA and MP&L jointly defined a
diesel heat recovery and wood heated district heating system project in 2001 that appeared economically viable. We recommend granting $225,000 to MP&L for feasibility andfinal design
(milestones 1-8) in conjunction with proposal 61. If the project is favorable, then ML&P can request construction funding from the RE Fund during round 3."
Since ML&P has not yet completed the work funded in Round 1, AEA recommends no funding at this time for the harvest equipment proposed in this application.
Chignik Lagoon was funded at $150,000 in round 1 of the RE fund for final design and permitting (app#14).
Recommend no funding this round. Lagoon can reapply pending successful outcome of the final design/permitting work.
Applicant requests $5.0 million for project reconnaissance, feasibility , permitting and design. AEA recommends funding limited to reconnaissance study and has concerns with the large
size of the funding amount being requested for that purpose.
Given the large scale of this project and complexity involved in management and financing, a business plan will need to be prepared as a part of the reconnaissance study which details
involvement of railbelt utilities and private developers. Also to be included in study will be a determination of licensing barriers specific to this project.
FERC accepted the preliminary permit application filed by Glacier Fork Hydro LLC on November 10. 2008.
Recommend partial funding of $500,000 with requirement that before grant is finalized grantee prepares a detailed project budget with go/no go milestones for inclusion into grant document.
Applicant proposes final design/permitting and construction of a 300 kW wind energy system to be connected to the existing St. Paul City grid.
The application makes no mention of the option of connecting to TDX Power\'s existing 675 kW wind farm. The City and TDX have so far been unable to reach an agreement to integrate the
existing turbines into the City system. AEA has allocated $174,500 in state funds to match $349,000 in USDOE funds to assist with the integration. AEA has requested that USDOE redirect
these funds from an earlier earmark for this purpose.
AEA recommends no funding. The City and TDX should reach an agreement on using existing energy assets in St. Paul before further funds are made available.
The proposed project is a 2MW wind farm near Tok. The turbines would be tied into the Tok, Tanacross, Dot Lake and Tetlin grids. The application is for resource assessment through construction.
The application lacks detail on reasoning for site selection, integration issues, interconnection of villages, plans for using excess wind energy, or current energy usage. Without having
an onsite wind resource assessment it is impossible to evaluate the viability of the project.
Recommend partial funding for wind resource assessment only.
The proposed project is a 2MW wind farm near Slana. The turbines would be tied into the Slana and Chistochina grid and potentially could be tied to Mentasta as well. The project would
be very high penetration. The application is for resource assessment through construction.
The application lacks detail on reasoning for site selection, integration issues, plans for using excess wind energy, or current energy usage. Without having an onsite wind resource
assessment it is impossible to evaluate the viability of the project. APC can request a meteorological tower from AEA?s met tower loan program to complete the resource assessment.
Recommend no funding.
The applicant proposes a 50MW wind farm near Delta Junction. The project will require a 20 mile tie line and 10 mile access road.
The applicant did not provide information that they had contacted GVEA and jointly determined that a 50MW wind farm could be integrated into the Railbelt System and the power could be
effectively used. The applicant has not secured the land rights needed to access, construct and operate the project. The project should be considered in a regional integrated resource
plan prior to commitment of state funds. Further the financing package through the Power Project Fund will require legislative review and approval.
Recmmend no funding.
The City of Kotzebue proposes a recon study of using TGER (Tactical Garbage to Energy Refinery) technology under development by the U.S. Army. The unit is packaged in a shipping container,
shreds garbage, soaks it in water, pumps sludge into a bioreactor, converts a portion of the waste stream into ethanol, and pelletizes the remaining solids. Pellets are in turn gasified.
Gas is fed into a recip diesel generator and converted into power.
This system is complex, and AEA questions whether there are more suitable, simpler systems that would achieve the same aims of waste reduction and energy (such as a modular incinerator
with stack heat recovery). This is prototype technology with little operating history in an arctic environment.
Recommend full funding of $15,000 for recon assessment with condition that University of Alaska Center for Energy and Power be included in the review team.
Failed Stage 1
The City of Homer proposes reconnaissance assessment and feasibility analysis/conceptual design of a 250 kW hydrokinetic device in Kachemak Bay. Homer has assembled a strong project
team that includes a number of entities with experience in assessing tidal energy feasibility and resources?NOAA?s Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services, Terrasond,
and Re vision. There are letters of support from the Native Village of Port Graham and the Seldovia Village Tribe who are also interested in the project. The application appropriately
addresses potential wildlife impacts and includes the involvement of ADFG. NOAA commits to $650,000 in in-kind project support.
We are concerned that Homer Electric Association, the likely power purchaser or owner of a potential project, is not included in the plan for implementing the feasibility stage in a
more concrete way. We are also concerned that the scope of work for reconnaissance phase of the project is inadequate. Instead of serving as a stand-alone, less in-depth study that
provides a go/no-go or focus for further work, the recon phase appears to be structured as the early phases of coordination of the feasibility stage.
Recommend full funding of $482,387 with condition that before any grant funds are disbursed Homer prepare a more detailed recon plan of work that is approved by AEA. Standard grant
conditions will require that AEA approve recon report findings before proceeding to feasibility study.
Applicant proposes to assess alternative energy resources of Tanana.
The work that the applicant proposes, while potentially valuable to Tanana, is more effectively accomplished using standard methodology on a statewide and regionwide basis that builds
on the work already done in the statewide energy report that was released after this application.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes to assess alternative energy resources of Perryville.
The work that the applicant proposes, while potentially valuable to the region, is more effectively accomplished using standard methodology on a statewide and regionwide basis that builds
on the work already done in the statewide energy report that was released after this application.
Recommend no funding.
Project concept is vague but there is local support. Overall project site is within the national park, which will result in permitting challenges.
Letters of support for this project from NPS and Borough are for hydrokinetic type of project-- a significant departure from micro-hydro type of project written in the application;
this demonstrates some confusion
Recommend partial funding for reconnaissance at $92,000. Special provisions include a requirement that applicant submit detailed project plan for approval by AEA with potential for
granting less funding if appropriate. First go - no go will be at $25k study level. Study should also address long term ownership and operation of any facilities and issues identified
in Stage 1 comments.
The Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority proposes to assess solar thermal resources, construct a model project on the NIHA headquarter or other building in Kotzebue that demonstrates
solar thermal systems functioning in an arctic environment, deploy the technology in regional communities, and provide O&M training and evaluation.
The project would have significant value for demonstrating a technology with substantial promise. Good project team including University of Alaska with appropriate technical, public
information, and project management expertise. Before proceeding to the relatively expensive deployment stage, AEA feels it is appropriate to complete a demonstration project.
Recommend partial funding of $101,000 for resource assessment and demonstration.
Applicant proposes final design and construction for recovering heat from the new diesel generating plant and pipe hot water to two school buildings. As part of the powerhouse project,
the utility has installed equipment for recovering both jacket water and stack heat. The utility has requested that AEA manage the project. Permitting is complete and project construction
would be complete within a year of funding.
Recommend full funding for $545,934..
Applicant proposes to prepare a detailed integrated energy resource plan (IRP) for southern Southeast. The study will be valuable for addressing cost, output, energy market and other
elements of projects under various stages of development in this subregion, a number of them being funded by the RE Fund (e.g. Kake-Petersburg Intertie, Whitman, Triangle, Ruth Lk hydro
development, Wrangell electric boiler).
Recommend full funding. AEA will assist in coordinating the IRP with other energy requirements in the Southeast region and may consider providing additional funding to do so. As with
other projects AEA will approve scope of work.
Application withdrawn by applicant
Applicant proposes wind resource assessment and feasibility study/conceptual design of residential size 7.5 kW wind systems for lighting in the harbors of Chenega and Tatitlek.
The Denali Commission/AEA have already allocated funds for a hydro study in Chenega under the alternative energy RFP. AEA is recommending funding for proposed feasiblity of wind and
hydro in Tatitlek in Round 2 of the RE Fund (app # 316). We feel it is more appropriate to focus on development of community-scale energy systems.
AEA recommends no funding.
This application is for installation of 450 kW of wind turbines in Tuntutuliak, upgrades to the existing diesel system, recovered heat at the washeteria and school, and smart meters
and thermal stoves in approximately 35 residences to displace fuel oil with excess wind energy. The project would be located on village corporation land, and the applicant states that,
based on discussions with USFWS, FAA, and Corps of Engineers, no further authorizations are needed. Connections to the existing system will be undergound. However USFWS has requested
further review due to the known or suspected presence of listed species in the area. Rights-of-way through Native allotments may be needed from BIA. Unlike a similar project in Kongiganek,
there is no onsite met tower data available.
The introduction of a high penetration system into a moderate-sized community that includes remotely controlled dumploads at the washeteria and 20 residences as well as a low load diesel
component brings along a significant level of complexity.
Recommend full funding of $1,760,000 with the following conditions that must be met before funds are disbursed: 1) AEA approval of final design and permitting, 2) the grantee establish
a five-year operation and maintenance contract with an contractor acceptable to AEA that has expertise in this area. Given the substantial demonstration value of this project AEA will
require close monitoring of system performance
Applicant proposes to recover heat from diesel generation plant to supply a 200 kW organic rankine cycle generator. Applicant would provide 32% of total project funding. Project would
be complete by summer 2010.
Recommend full funding of $1,300,000.
UAF proposes to install a 20 kW solar array on the roof of the Student Recreation Center at a cost of $370,000 and expects to displace $4,000/yr of fuel. Economic benefit of the project
is very low to installed cost. AEA judges the demonstration value of a solar array very modest. We note that the Cold Climate Housing Research Center has a larger tracking array in
the near vicinity.
Recommend no funding.
Not eligible applicant
Applicant proposes to recover unutilized heat from UAF\'s coal-fired power plant to operate an absorption chilling system on the University\'s West Ridge to replace existing electric
chillers located in each building. Proposal is based on a detailed feasibility analysis and conceptual design. Final design would begin following grant approval and take approximately
one year. Construction would last 24 months.
Although the project would reduce average electrical load substantially and reduce CO2 emissions, the project is expensive and the applicant\'s economic analysis indicates a payback
in approximately 30 years. Despite the applicant\'s strong design and management team, AEA does not think the demonstration value of the absorption chiller offsets the long payback.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes to construct two containerized biodiesel processing facilities that will convert waste vegetable oil and other feedstocks into biodiesel that will be marketed to displace
heating oil. Feedstock would be provided by an Anchorage-based firm and possibly by cruise lines. Potential customers would be one or more petroleum distributors. The applicant requests
$1.5 million in grant funds, $901,590 of which would cover the first year of operation.
Although we support the concept of using waste vegetable oil or fish oil from fish processing operations to displace heating fuel, AEA has serious concerns with this application: 1)
60% of the grant would be used for operation during the first year, thus calling into question the sustainability of the operation, 2) assumptions on feedstock supply and savings to
consumers have fundamental problems. (See economist notes.)
Recommend no funding.
Birch Creek Village Council proposes to install two 2750 Watt tracking solar arrays and a 35 kW diesel generator in Applicant estimates that the project will displace 11520 gallons of
diesel per year. AEA has recommended funding for one 50 kW utility-scale photovoltaic-diesel hybrid demonstration project in Northwest Alaska in round 1 of the RE Fund (ID #75) before
investing further. The applicants suggestion that 11,000 gallons of fuel per year will be displaced is not supported. KWh displaced by the solar arrays, according to their estimates
would displace only about 1000 gallons of fuel. At a more realistic estimated savings of $5000/yr the economics of the proposed project in Birch Creek are not compelling.
Recommend no funding.
The Igiugig Village Council proposes a multi-stage project to test and develop a river instream energy conversion (RISEC) device. The Village would continue collaboration with the Electric
Power Research Insititute and AEA on RISEC development. Phase 2 would perform a bathymetric profile of the Kvichak River, permitting and environmental analysis, and install two pilot
turbines to test performance (2009-11). Phase 3 would select a technology and complete final design and permitting (2012-13). Phase 4 would complete construction and commissioning
(2012-14).
IVC has assembled a strong team of experienced engineering, technology, and geotechnical specialists. The project is the logical follow-up to earlier work by EPRI and AEA, and will
provide valuable performance data on RISEC devices that is applicable throughout Alaska.
Recommend funding for Phase 2 at $718,175 with the requirement that grantee must coordinate with other ongoing RISEC projects in Ruby, Nenana, and Eagle.
Yakutat Power proposes to collaborate with Electric Power Research Institute to perform final design / permitting and construction of a 500 kW demonstration wave energy project. EPRI
and Yakutat are currently conducting reconnaissance and feasibility work expected to be completed by spring 2009. During the final design and permitting stage Yakutat proposes to develop
specifications and a solicitation package to be sent to known wave energy technology companies, perform site assessment and environmental permitting, work with the chosen technology
vendor on detailed design, and prepare a bid package for construction. Following construction the device would be operated and independently evaluated for at least 18 months.
AEA is concerned at the high cost and high risk of demonstrating new technology. Estimated design and construction cost for the project is $7 million. However, Yakutat and EPRI are
proposing a logical, staged development that would minimize risk. Alaska has substantial potential for wave energy and it is logical for the state to support ocean energy technology
development.
Recommend partial funding of $632,500 for phase 3 final design and permitting with requirement that no funds be disbursed until Yakutat and EPRI have completed feasibility report and
AEA concludes that further work is warranted.
Applicant proposes to assess alternative energy resources of communities served the Chugach SD--Whittier, Chenega Bay, and Tatitlek.
The work that the applicant proposes, while potentially valuable to the region, is more effectively accomplished using standard methodology on a statewide and regionwide basis that builds
on the work already done in the statewide energy report that was released after this application.
Recommend no funding.
Geology of upper West Creek Valley is unstable according to the application.
Project access and associated transmission lines would interact with Klondike Gold Rush National Historic Site and cross the Chilkoot Trail. Project has potential impacts on coho rearing
habitat. Overall project concept is not clear. Project may be configured as storage or run-of-river. Project capital cost and power generation will vary significantly depending upon
scheme selected. Applicant claims that FERC licensing would not be required due to pending land transfer out of federal ownership. Licensing jurisdiction remains with FERC until land
patent is issued.
Land status and licensing jurisdiction should be assessed in grant funded study along with other requested scope.
Interaction with other potential hydro projects for which RE Fund applications have been received include Burro Cr and Connelly Lk. Existing hydros include Goat Creek, Dewey Lakes,
Lutak, 10-Mile, and Kasidaya. An IRP is desirable for the Skagway, Haines, Klukwan area.
AP&T and the City would jointly manage the project, while AP&T would perform the work.
Recommend partial funding of $236,000 for feasibility (phase 2).
Applicant proposes to assess alternative energy resources of communities served the YKSD--Alakaket, Hughes, Huslia, Kaltag, Koyukuk, Manley Hot Springs, Minto, Nulato and Ruby.
The work that the applicant proposes, while potentially valuable to the region, is more effectively accomplished using standard methodology on a statewide and regionwide basis that builds
on the work already done in the statewide energy report that was released after this application.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant requests funding for recon, feasibility, and final design of wood-fired heating system(s) for the community of Kaltag\'s school and community buildings. AEA\'s heat recovery
system inventory indicates that AVEC\'s power system supplies a modest amount of heat to the school. The application does not supply information about fuel usage in buildings in Kaltag,
which uses 18000 gallons/year. There was not sufficent information in the application to assess project economics. Project management would be by the YK school district. Bill Wall
would perform the proposed recon and feasibility work. AEA is concerned that Wall will have sufficient time to perform this work since he is also involved in similar wood energy projects
in Upper Kobuk, Ft. Yukon, and McGrath.
Recommend partial funding for reconnaisance at $16,550.
The Tribal Council proposes installing 8 unspecified residential-sized wind turbines near tribal and municipal buildings. No onsite wind resource has been performed. AVEC proposes
locating met towers in the area and assess feasibility of wind development and interties in the St. mary\'s, Mountain Village, Pitka\'s Point, and Pilot Station. The current application
does not provide sufficient information on O&M measures and costs, turbine type and output, and permitting.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes to assess geothermal resources at Pilgrim Hot Springs through refurbishing existing shallow wells and drilling deep wells.
The Nome Energy Study identified development of the Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal resource as the least-cost option for long-term power supply. The applications includes letters of
support from Nome Joint Utilities, Mary\'s Igloo Native Council (the owner of the adjacent land), and the USGS, who indicates that they will make a drill rig available for this project.
Project team includes landowner Catholic Chuch Diocese of Fairbanks. DGGS indicates support for the project (see above).
Recommend full funding at $2,349,751 with requirement that AEA and DGGS find that there is adequate likelihood of a viable geothermal resource based on summer 2009 shallow well assessments
before funding is provided for drilling deep wells.
Ormat Nevada Inc, holds a lease from Alaska DNR for geothermal exploration and development in Mount Spurr (Geothermal Lease Sale No. 3). Ormat proposes to use its own funding to support
reconnaissance studies on Mt. Spurr in summer 2009, but requests RE grant funding of $4.5 million to perform geophysical surveys, rig mobilization and demobilization and drilling of
four temperature gradient wells in the summer of 2010.
AEA and DGGS believe that assessment of geothermal resources of Mt. Spurr is very valuable. Since the temperature gradient wells will not be funded until summer of 2010, we feel it
is reasonable to assess the results of summer 2009 recon work before allocating funds to the drilling program.
Recommend no funding at this time.
Did not pass Stage 1
Applicant proposes modeling the existing geothermal resource at Chena Hot Springs to determine why pressures and temperatures of the resource appear to be declining. They will make
use of data from a USDOE-funded deep well. DGGS states "the benefit for the State is not the additional information that will be gained about Chena, but the additional information
that will be gained about this class of system".
Recommend full funding at $198,168.
The proposed project is a run-of-the -river hydro whose power would feed the Railbelt Grid near Moose Pass.
This project would be located on federal lands of the Chugach National Forest and be subject to licensing by FERC. Discussion of potential fish issues is absent from the application
and may pose a risk to ultimate development. Victor Creek drains into Kenai Lake and may provide spawning habitat for anadromous fish.
Work should include determination of the fisheries impacts posed by this project and the liklihood of obstacles to acheiving a FERC license to construct.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes using excess geothermal energy to make hydrogen for use as a transportation fuel. The project would involve building a $1.6M hydrogen fueling system and retrofitting
four vehicles to use hydrogen at $50,000 each. Applicant estimates fuel displacement savings at approximately $90,000/yr. Although we recognize a technology benefit to demonstrating
the use of a stranded renewable energy resource as transportation fuel, there is limited benefit to the public at large.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes to do exploratory drilling and data collection on the Manely Hot Springs area geothermal resource for the purpose of producing heat and power for the community. The
Denali Commission has provided $725,000 through the alternative energy RFP and AEA has provided $215,000 in renewable energy fund funding to TDX Power for the Manley Hot Springs Geothermal
Plant project. TDX Power is the local certificated electrical utility. In the current proposal there is no mention of any involvement by TDX in the proposed project nor any indication
of power sales discussions. This proposal is by an entity other than TDX, which already has been allocated funding for geothermal development in Manley.
Becuase the application does not demonstrate coordination with the funded TDX work, we recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes assessment of geothermal resources in the eastern Aleutians including Akutan, Cold Bay, False Pass, King Cove, Sand Point, and Nelson Lagoon. DGGS states "In summary,
hot spring systems in the general area are small and of only moderate temperature, unlikely to produce megawatt scale electricity. In addition, they are in Wilderness Areas, and unreasonably
distant from communities (esp. Sand Point). Coupled with the flawed and vague proposed exploration program this makes for a very weak proposal." AEA concurs.
Recommend no funding.
City of Galena requests funding to assess river energy resource within the bounds of IPP Hydro Green Energy\'s preliminary permit from FERC for development hydrokinetic power in the
Galena area.
The Legislature has already approved $565,439 in RE Fund round 1 grant funding to University of Alaska for an extensive assessment of hydrokinetic resources in 24 sites along Alaskan
rivers (app #88). The river energy resources of the Yukon River in the Galena area can be addressed at least on a recon level during this effort. Based on these results the City can
refine its application for further RE Fund funding.
Recommend no funding.
Application does not provide an adequate basis for Phase IV construction request. AEA is concerned that the project is too expensive. Trident plant may be able to use excess energy,
but there is no indication of communication. A refined estimate of the total construction cost and energy capacity of the project is required.
AEA recommends partial funding for milestones 1 - 6 (system evaluation, permitting/environmental review and final design of all repairs and upgrades).
Existing reconnaissance study completed in 1989 indicates the proposed site may be a good prospect. Substantial load at Trident and letter of support has been provided by them.
With the existing 105 kW hydro repaired, this project will not be needed unless extra power can be sold to Trident to offset their diesel generation and provide income to City. Trident
should agree to purchase excess power before any future grants for construction funds be considered
Recommend full funding. .
Applicant proposes to assess geothermal resources of Hot Springs Bay Valley near Akutan through drilling to confirm temperatures suggested by earlier surface studies. DGGS (see above)
indicates there is high likelihood of significant geothermal resource and indicates that the resource is one of four stand-out high temperature resources in the state. The proposed
reconaissance project would be completed within a year.
Although the energy load in the City of Akutan is relatively small, the Trident plant nearby has a 6-7 MW electrical load most of the year. Trident provided a general letter support
for the project in the application. Infrastructure projects planned include a $75 million airport and transportation system, a $24 million Corps of Engineers harbor, and an $8 million
road connecting the harbor to the city.
Applicant has also submitted two other applications--#249 to repair the existing hydro system, and #248 to investigate feasibility of developing Loud Creek hydro resources. These projects
more closely match the City load, while the geothermal resources may assist in regional economic development.
Recommend full funding at $2,995,000 with requirement that prior to any expenditure of funds Trident enter into an agreement that states its intent to participate in the reconnaissance
project and make use of energy produced by development of the geothermal resources.
North Slope Borough proposes feasibility and final design of transmission linking Atqasuk to lower cost natural gas-fired power in Barrow. No discussion of permits required. ABR is
on study team to address bird impacts.
Potential demonstration of HVDC.
This transmission line was studied in 1981 by Jack West Assoc along with a secondary line to Wainwright. The 2008 cost equivalent of the Barrow to Atqasuk portion of this line was estimated
in that 1981 study to be more than twice the application estimate. Additionally costs to convert Atqasuk residences to electric heat were not included nor the impacts of line losses
over 70 miles of transmission nor other potential upgrades needed to Atqasuk distribution system.
Recommend Tasks 1 - 3 in the amount of $175,000 be funded at this time due to the above concerns which provides for concept design, construction cost estimate and economic analysis.
Applicant proposes to recover heat from jacket water of existing diesel generators and pump hot water to various public buildings. Applicant estimated recoverable heat available but
did not correlate availability with specific building heating load. Applicant also did not provide an estimate of amount of arctic pipe that would be required or heat loss from distribution.
Projected O&M costs appear low. This is an expensive project that requires a high level of engineering and construction expertise. Due to the project\'s arctic location there will
be a high cost for design, installation, and long-term operation.
Recommend partial funding of $395,912 for final design (task #1).
Applicant proposes to recover heat from jacket water of existing diesel generators and pump hot water to various public buildings. Applicant estimated recoverable heat available but
did not correlate availability with specific building heating load. Applicant also did not provide an estimate of amount of arctic pipe that would be required or heat loss from distribution.
This is an expensive project that requires a high level of engineering and construction expertise. Due to the project\'s arctic location there will be a high cost for design, installation,
and long-term operation.
Recommend partial funding of $300,000 for final design (task #1).
Applicant proposes harvesting beetle-killed spruce and other wood from Anchorage residential lots and public lands, transporting it to Russian Jack park, and burning it to displace natural
gas currently heating 1/3rd of the greenhouse.
The concept of thinning and beautifying the Anchorage-area urban forests in order to displace fossil fuel is very appealing. However the relative scale required to economically displace
natural gas is much larger than that of the proposal. As proposed the economics of this proposal are not attractive.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Pilot Point requests funding for design and construction of a high penetration wind farm consisting of one Northwind 100 turbines to be site on City land. Pilot Point has
operated a 10 kW Bergey turbine for 5 years and were in the process of adding another in November. The City has consulted with USFWS and an archeologist to assess wildlife and historic/archaeologic
al issues. There no indications that permitting will be an issue. Project manager would be Dennis Meiners, who is also involved with projects in Kwig, Kong, and Tuntutliak.
Recommend full funding of $910,180.
Applicant proposes to construct a 1 tph wood pellet production plant in the Kotlik area including a 1000 sf building; harvest enough willow, alder and other biomass in the area to produce
1040 tons per year or pellets; purchase 130 pellet burning appliances for local residents; and retrofit 130 houses to use pellet appliances. Later development phases, not proposed
here, would develop a pellet-fired combined heat and power system for the community and develop liquid fuels from biomass for transportation.
The application demonstrates a substantial commitment to addressing local energy needs in Kotlik. However, we have the following concerns about the proposal:
1. Given that the proposal is for construction, the applicant does not reference or adequately address feasibility or design requirements listed in the request for applications (pp
17-18), including
a. Yearly sustained yield supply, harvest methods, delivered cost, and handling and processing methods for feedstock for the pellet facility.
b. Identification and assessment of system alternatives; economic and financial analysis of alternatives; conceptual design of the recommended system.
c. Detailed site location of the proposed facility.
d. A draft operational and business plan
2. The applicant does not demonstrate a project team that has experience in larger scale harvest and regeneration of biomass, or in developing and operating a densified biomass fuel
facility.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes developing a hydro project at 5-mile Creek near Chitna. Project appears lower risk than previous study of hydro potential of O\'Brien Creek. AEA has prepared a conceptual
design, final design, and construction for the diesel power plant. Recon work was done in May 2008. Although applicant requests funding for recon, we would characterize it as feasibility
level work since it includes stream gauging, an investigation of penstock route and intake structure loaction. Applicant requests project management assistance from AEA.
Project would result in airport receiving power since it is nearby.
Recomm partial funding for milestones 1-4, 7 , 8 totaling $303,000 with requirement that AEA must approve "reconnaissance" feasibility report before additional funding provided.
Applicant proposes to install equipment that will recover unutilized heat from the diesel generator exhaust stacks for district heating and absorption chiller to make ice for the fishing
fleet. Utility has track record in heat recovery and high level of management expertise. Stack heat recovery is commercially viable.
Recommend full funding of $915,627.
Applicant proposes feasbility assessment, final design and permitting, and construction to retrofit the existing Knik Arm Power Plant (KAPP) to use local biomass as fuel to supply heat
and 5 MW of power to the Railbelt grid. The applicant requests $500,000 for feasibility assessment, $2,000,000 for final design and $12,500,000 for construction.
The applicant states that the facility would require 100,000 tons per year of primarily woody biomass fuel and that the project could receive a disposal fee of $10 per ton for material
that it receives. No reconnaissance level assessment was provided that justifies these figures.
Recommend no funding.
Crooked Creek Traditional Council proposes feasibility and conceptual design of a hydrokinetic energy device of undetermined capacity on the Kuskokwim River. Unlike river energy projects
proposed for funding in Igiugig and Ruby, this proposal does not demonstrate a sufficiently detailed work plan, a strong technical team, or statewide collaboration with others with
similar goals.
Recommend no funding.
Naknek Electric in partnership with the Bristol Bay Borough proposes to assess feasibility of developing a waste processing that recovering fish oil from salmon waste stream in the Naknek-Kvichak
fishery to be used as a fuel blend in the NEA power system. The project team would hire a consultant for $65,000 to quantify the estimated 26,000 ton per year fish waste stream from
13 local processors. The application refers to a recon study that NEA and the Borough have completed at a cost of $5000, however the study was not included with the application.
This application is the same as an earlier application submitted in round 1 (app #7) that did not pass stage 1 review due to an incomplete proposal (no cost and budget worksheet).
Recommend full funding of $75,000 with requirement that NEA submit and AEA review and approve recon study before funds are disbursed.
Applicant proposes final design and permitting of a hydro project at Crooked Creek. Feasibility study was already funded by DC/AEA alternative energy RFP. Project site on USFS land,
indicating FERC license will be required. AEA has constructed a power and bulk fuel system under the RUS energy program. Hiring engineering firm underway.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA approve the feasibility study now underway before any funds associated with this application are disbursed.
Did not pass Stage 1
The project proposes the installation of one NW100 wind turbine at the AVTEC. The wind turbine would generate very little power due to the poor wind resource at the training facility
however, the turbine would provide a significant training benefit for operators of wind-diesel systems.
The poor wind resource prevents this project from producing enough energy to fulfill the intent of the grant program. This project is not recommended for funding.
Applicant proposes to study the development of a 5 mile 8" submarine penstock to link Sunrise Lake to Wrangell, primarily to provide a water supply for Wrangell. The penstock would
need to convey 11.6 CFS of water to provide 1.7 MW of hydropower capacity. The stated penstock would be adequate to convey significantly less water (less than 1 CFS) thus reducing
available energy production by 90%.
The alternative would be to use larger capacity, high pressure penstock that will make the project economically infeasible for energy production. A study completed for the City of Wrangell
in 1998 by RW Beck for a larger 4 MW project connecting Sunrise Lake to Wrangell would cost $21M in 2009 dollars.
Recommend no funding.
AEA has considered this intertie under the AK-BC Export Intertie Project, and a recent study on the project, and meetings between AEA and the AK-BC Advisory Work Group has led AEA to
not pursue the project for the time being. One key determinate will be whether BC Transmission Corporation decides to construct an intertie link within BC to extend its network to
near the Alaska border. No such intertie exists now.
On this basis funding not recommended.
AEA has concerns about long penstock and the potential for the project to match resource to load. Flashy stream may increase risk to long term success of project.
Recommend $40,000 partial funding for Application\'s Phase 1 - Reconnaissance (stream gauging and reconnaissance study).
Improved access to the proposed Triangle Lk hydro site by recent road construction to Walden Point makes hydro development at more reasonable to consider. Project would be located on
federal trust land. Major issue is market for power. Will need to be determined in regional IRP.
Recommend full funding for feasibility.
Utility AP&T proposes, on behalf of Haines Assisted Living Inc, to assess temperature of groundwater in a test well ($100,000), prepare a final design and obtain permits ($85,486) and
construct a ground source heating system ($2,193,521) to displace 16,600 gallons per year of heating fuel for a assisted living facility under development. The test well would be completed
in April 2009. Final design permitting and material order would be completed in June, and construction would be completed in October.
AEA is concerned at the very high cost of the project compared to modest potential fuel displacement. Economics appear marginal and do not support applicants claims of cost savings
to residents. Although geothermal resources are generally sustainable, at this scale the project does not produce enough net benefits to be sustainable in the long term without some
form of subsidy.
Recommend no funding.
Project may interact with SSRAA smolt rearing and fish taking facility. Question whether AP&T will be able to access resource.
Recommend partial funding of $108,000 for Phase 2 - Feasibility (includes mapping, conceptual design, geotech and environmental surveys) with requirement that AP&T work closely with
SSRAA and provide for their involvement as a reviewer of the resulting feasibility study.
The applicants request funding for final design and permitting and construction funds for a 9 MW wind farm to be located at or near the Tesoro refinery in Nikiski. As noted in the application
this project will affect not only HEA but other Railbelt utilities.
Recommend full funding with the following grant conditions: 1) applicant is required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation
prior to release of construciton funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement with HEA or other public utility prior to release of construction grant funds.
Stage 3 review update: Following discussions on regional funding allocation, project funding is capped at $2,000,000 per affected community for Railbelt and lower energy cost Southeast
communities and $4,000,000 for other communities.
Applicant proposes biomass-fired CHP system in Kake which includes a Challenger gasifier in conjunction with a organic rankine cycle turbine-generator system. (Applicant submitted revised
information / see file. CCTHI Tribes of Alaska has withdrawn from the project and a letter requests that a new applicant, Agenor Resource TEchnolgies LLC take their place, thus leaving
the project with no Alaskan representation.) AIG Tribal Growth would provide project finance and budget reporting. AEA has the following concerns about the proposal:
1. No indication that the local certificated utility IPEC is involved or supportive of the project. Application simply states that the power would be sold local residents, without
regard to regulatory requirements.
2. 20-year fuel supply is not documented.
3. Budget includes $660,000 for "project finance advisory, project management, and engineering services for 12 months"
4. There are currently no biomass CHP systems operating in Alaska. AEA would like to see success of the RE Fund-supported Chena system on the road system near Fairbanks before investing
additional funds in a project in a more remote location.
Recommend no funding.
Kipnuk proposes design/permitting and construction of a high penetration 1.5 MW wind farm that would include 2 X 750 kW America\'s Wind Energy turbines, smart grid technology, electric
boilers at the school and water plant, and electric heaters at 180 residences to use excess wind generation. This project is a scaleup of similar systems in Kwigillingok and Kongigianek
that are being developed by Chaninik wind group. The turbine has not previously been installed in Alaska.
AEA believes that it makes sense to first prove out the system concept at smaller scales (Kwigillingok and Kongiganak) before moving to the scale and expense of this project. Not recommended
for funding.
Applicant proposes studying feasibility of using local wood and waste cardboard to heat public buildings including Cordova City Hall, the pool, the hospital, and schools. Applicant
estimates roughly 80,000 gallons per year of fuel usage in these buildings. The applicant does not provide a reconnaisance-level assessment, but does provide detailed information on
individual building fuel consumption. Project would be managed by the Native Village of Eyak and performed by a consulting engineer yet to be identified. Feasibility study would be
complete within 3-4 months of grant funding. There are support letters from the school district and the City. No sites are identified for boiler systems.
Recommend partial funding for phase 1--feasibility analysis at $50,000.
This application proposes a multistage wind energy program for the communities of Cordova and Eyak. The project includes a small scale regional wind resource assessment plan, wind farm
design and permitting, pilot scale wind projects, and construction of a community scale wind farm.
The application states that at this time it is unclear as to which entity, Cordova Electric Coop or Native Village of Eyak, would own the wind project. The wind site has not been selected
at this point. The pilot scale wind projects do not provide value commensurate with their costs. Recommend partial funding of $32,597 for the mobile anemometer wind assessment.
Kodiak Electric requests funding for a FERC license amendment and final design to add a 3rd turbine at Terror Lake. The turbine will interact with the power generated by the future
Pillar Mt. Wind project (under construction) to allow the combined system to meet the current peak load. No additional hydro annual energy will be generated by this additional turbine.
It will allow offsetting diesel generation to meet peak demand by providing spinning reserve for wind turbine backup.
Recommend full funding of $500,000.
Did not pass Stage 1 review
This request is for a reconnaissance study for the hydro electric plant for the Jack River located near the Native Village of Cantwell. The village is on the Railbelt Energy Grid served
by GVEA.
Recommend full funding of $194,540.
Applicant proposes feasibility through construction of a wind energy system of unspecified scale and location in Akiakchak. The applicant requests AEA to manage the project.
The application provides only a general description of the project. There is no detailed budget.
AEA recommends funding only onsite wind resource assessment at $15,000. AEA will supply an instrumented met tower.
Applicant proposes final design and construction of a stick-fired boiler system that would provide heat to the school in Thorne Bay. Wood would be supplied by sawmills in the industrial
park, landings, and small local wood cutters. A feasibility report was completed by TR Miles in 2006, followed by another report by JEDC. Contractors would be chosen based on existing
school district procurement policies, referenced in the app. School maintenance staff would operate the system.
Recommend full funding of $178,179 for final design and construction .
Applicant proposes recon and feasibility assessment of hydro projects that would serve the Bethel area. Although an engineering firm is not selected, selection would follow a formal
process. Storage hydro would be complementary with wind energy, under development in Bethel.
There may be significant permitting issues--see DNR comments. Substantial regional is demonstrated.
Recommend full funding of $250,000.
Applicant proposes to study feasibility of a two stick-fired wood boiler systems that would serve the school, other community buildings and a lodge. Wood would be supplied by local
sawmills in the Thorne Bay and Kasaan area. There would need to be a heat sale agreement between the tribal council and the City and/or other building owners.
Recommend full funding at $30,000.
Applicant proposes final design and construction of a stick-fired boiler system that would provide heat to the school in Coffman Cove. Wood would be supplied by local sawmills. A recon
assessment report was completed by JEDC in 2008. Contractors would be chosen based on existing school district procurement policies, referenced in the app. School maintenance staff
would operate the system. The applicant has requested that AEA manage the project. Project construction would be completed by summer 2010. The application includes a letter of support
from the City of Coffman Cove. The app also includes a letter stating interest by a local sawmill manager stating interest in providing slabs for fueling the boiler.
Recommend full funding of $341,056 for final design and construction .
APPLICATION WITHDRAWN BY SCHOOL DISTRICT
Valdez Fisheries Development Foundation requests funding for final design and permitting ($3.5 million) and site preparation ($2.5 million) for a $35 million cold storage facility that
would include cold and dry heated storage, a secondary seafood processing area, an office and loading docks. The project would also include equipment to recover 22.5 mmBtu/hr of heat
from the Petrostar Refinery and convert it into 45 million lb of -20 degree cold storage through a absorption chilling system and 450 kW of power through organic rankine cycle system.
The proposal budget does not separate out design engineering costs for the energy systems from those of the entire cold storage project. The energy system represents only a modest portion
of the entire project. Table 4 of appendix 7 estimates the installed cost of the absorption chilling system at $2.8 million, less than the grant request for final design. We were
unable to identify installed cost of the ORC units.
Recommend no funding.
This project has been licensed by FERC and is ready to construct. FERC licensing process has demonstrated need for project.
Recommend full funding of $12,020,000.
Stage 3 review update: Following discussions on regional funding allocation, project funding is capped at $2,000,000 per affected community for Railbelt and lower energy cost Southeast
communities and $4,000,000 for other communities.
Same as Stage 2 comments from Round 1 application #106.
Stage 3 review update: Following discussions on regional funding allocation, no funding is recommended consistent with policy that not more than one project in a community that uses
the same renewable resource be funded for construction in Rounds 1 and 2. In this case round 1 project #52 Nome Newton Peak Wind farm has a higher overall score and is recommended
for funding.
Nushagak Electric proposes final design and construction for Grant Lake hydro project. Feasibility analysis of Lake Elva hydro project was offered in RE Fund round 1 (project #6).
Applicant does not provide adequate justification to proceed to final design and construction, at this time. Recommend no funding.
FERC notice of competing preliminary applications is in process. Preliminary applications have been filed by the Petersburg Municipal Power and Light, C/B Wrangell, Cascade Creek LLC,
and City of Angoon.
Funding is not recommended at this time until the earlier funded reconnaissance study has been completed and found acceptable and a FERC ruling on the preliminary application found favorable
to City of Petersburg.
There are two entities planning wind energy projects in Bethel: 1) the City of Bethel (# 122) is proposing a 400 kW construction project in addition to a 100 kW project that was approved
by the AEA and the Denali Commission in the alternative energy RFP, and 2) Village Wind Power is proposing construction of up to 2 MW (# 67). Additionally AVCP Regional Housing Authority
is proposing study of hydro at the Kiseralik and Chikuminuk Rivers in Round 2 of the RE Fund. Therefore, there is a need for a regional integrated resource energy plan in the Bethel
area to coordinate when and where energy projects should be developed. This proposal should be considered in the context of an integrated plan to assure proper sizing, timing, and
integration of multiple energy projects.
Recommend full funding but require interconnection study and power purchase agreement to be finalized prior to releasing funds.
This application proposes a residential-sized system (4.9 kW photovoltaic and 1.8 kW wind) to serve the Ambler City Hall, washeteria, and the water plant. AEA requested, but did not
receive, information to support the claimed generation estimate of 25,000 kWh/yr (average 2.9 kW output).
Therefore AEA modeled system performance based on AEA\'s high resolution wind map (wind class 1--"Poor") and a federal solar database via National Renewable Energy Lab\'s HOMER model.
Results indicate a yearly output of 900 kWh for photovoltaic and 1700 kWh from wind based on HOMER modeling--a small fraction of Ambler\'s 1.3 million kWh/yr electrical load.
Given minimum impact on the community energy system and an installed cost that is high relative to the savings and displaced diesel, AEA does not recommend this project for funding.
The City of Napaskiak requested that AEA develop and manage a wind energy project. The application did not include cost estimate and budget, a schedule, or a project description sufficent
for evaluation.
AEA has proposed to the Denali Commission a conceptual design to be prepared as part of the Rural Power System Upgrade program. A meteorological tower should be installed as soon as
possible to provide data on which to base assessment of wind energy feasibility as part of the power system design.
Recommend no funding for this project through the RE fund because the project application does not provide suffient information to allow AEA to evaluate the application.
However, we recognize that the applicant contacted AEA staff repeatedly requesting technical assistance in assessing wind feasibility and support for filling out the RE Fund RFA application.
AEA did not have available staff time to assist the City. AEA will assess staffing priorities in March 2009 for providing met tower and wind energy planning assistance for Napaskaiak
and other communities in similar situations.
This project is linked to a previously funded renovation and energy upgrade of the Delta HS that includes the heating system and the external thermal envelop. Together the projects
will result in the development of a fully fuctional, energy efficient facility that uses local sources of renewable energy. There is substantial accessible biomass wood supply in the
upper Tanana from sawmills, two pellet mills in development, and state-owned forest land. Tok Umbrella Corp received a grant for a whole tree chipper which can potentially be used
to supply fuel for this project. Recommend.
Applicant proposes final design and construction of a ground source heat pump system at the Juneau Aquatic center. Project appears well-conceived and organized with relatively low risk.
Excellent technical analysis and detailed cost info.
Recommend for full funding.
This application is for installation of 475 kW of wind turbines in Kwigillingok, upgrades to the existing diesel system, recovered heat at the washeteria, and smart meters and thermal
stoves in 20 residences to displace fuel oil with excess wind energy. The project would be located on village corporation land, and the applicant states that, based on discussions
with USFWS, FAA, and Corps of Engineers, no further authorizations are needed.
The introduction of a high penetration system into a moderate-sized community that includes remotely controlled dumploads at the washeteria and 20 residences as well as a low load diesel
component brings along a significant level of complexity.
Recommend full funding with the follwing conditions that must be met before funds are disbursed: 1) AEA approval of final design, 2) the grantee establish a five-year operation and
maintenance contract with an contractor acceptable to AEA that has expertise in this area.
Given the substantial demonstration value of this project AEA will require close monitoring of system performance.
Applicant requests feasibility assessment, final design and permitting, and construction funding for a 24 MW wind energy project near Healy. Feasibility work would begin in 2009 and
be completed by March 2010. Final design and permitting would be complete by October 2011. Construction would complete by the end of 2012.
GVEA has performed substantial onsite wind assessment since 2003 and confidently estimates a capacity factor of 33-36%, indicating a good to excellent resource.
Since the project is not fully defined at this point, the proposal does not indicate who owns the land that the project would occupy, but lists a number of public and private landowners
in the project vicinity. Permit requirements include USACE wetland and river crossing, FAA, Alaska Railroad, and State DNR easements and historical/archaeological approvals. GVEA
has studied avian impacts in the area as part of the Northern Intertie. The project area has been identified as a major sandhill crane migration route and will require further study
for potential mitigation activities.
The proposal is for a major Railbelt energy project that would require substantial study for proper integration and operation. Development should be coordinated with the Railbelt Integrated
Resource Plan.
Recommend funding for Task 2--Detailed Feasibility, minus the initial wind turbine payment. Recommended amount is $6,770,260 - $3,770,260 (initial wind turbine payment) - $28,000 (grant
from Denali Commission/AEA alternative energy RFP for wind interconnection study) = $2,972,000. Since GVEA has committed to a 15% match in Task 2, we recommend 85% of $2,972,000, or
$2,526,200.
Golden Valley Electric Association proposes to develop a solar thermal system for the Denali Education Center owned by Denali Education Foundation. The project would save an estimated
32-36 MWh/yr and cost $190,000. At an educational center the project would demonstrate technology potentially applicable to other areas of Alaska.
In order to minimize risk of scalding and provide adequate energy storage this project will have to include significant O&M and controls costs.
Currently GVEA is working on a feasibility analysis, not yet complete. Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA approve feasibility analysis and conceptual design in progress.
This application is for installation of 475 kW of wind turbines in Kwigillingok, upgrades to the existing diesel system, recovered heat at the washeteria, and smart meters and thermal
stoves in 20 residences to displace fuel oil with excess wind energy. The project would be located on village corporation land, and the applicant states that, based on discussions
with USFWS, FAA, and Corps of Engineers, no further authorizations are needed.
The introduction of a high penetration system into a moderate-sized community that includes remotely controlled dumploads at the washeteria and 20 residences as well as a low load diesel
component brings along a significant level of complexity.
Recommend full funding with the following conditions that must be met before funds are disbursed: 1) AEA approval of final design, 2) the grantee establish a five-year operation and
maintenance contract with an contractor acceptable to AEA that has expertise in this area.
Given the substantial demonstration value of this project AEA will require close monitoring of system performance.
Independent power producer Banner Wind LLC has erected 18 Entegrity EW15 turbines providing installed capacity of 1,170 kW. Banner Wind LLC is owned by Bering Straits Native Corporation
and Sitnasuak Native Corporation. Nome Joint Utilities System has requested funding for the 2-mile intertie between Banner Wind farm and the Nome power system, completed in December
2008, through a separate proposal (Nome Banner Peak transmission #47). We also note there is a separate proposal for larger turbines on Newton Peak #52, consistent with the USDOE/AEA-supported
Nome Region Energy Assessment. The three proposals do not indicate coordination between wind projects, and AEA is concerned that this may result in unnecessarily high development,
integration, and operation costs.
NJUS is preparing a feasibility assessment for the Newton Peak project that will address the quality of the wind energy resource, wind system design and integration into the existing
power system, operation and maintenance, land ownership and other development issues. This study should provide valuable information for integrating the Newton Peak and Banner Peak
wind farms into the NJUS system.
Recommend full funding for expenses incurred after August 20, 2008 with the following conditions: 1) before any funds are disbursed NJUS provide to AEA, and AEA approves, a feasibility
assessment and conceptual design for the Newton Peak project that addresses integration of the Newton Peak and Banner Peak wind farms and other developent issues, 2) applicant required
to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation prior to release of construction funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement with
NJUS prior to release of construction grant funds.
This project is ready to go. Mechanical work to be awarded via bid process. Recommend.
AEA considered this project in the Denali Commission / AEA alternative energy RFP, and has offered $1.1 million in state and Denali Commission grant funds to the project. In addition
the Southeast Conference has received $2 million from the state legislature for this project. This appears to be a viable hydro resource that will benefit the Prince of Wales network
especially given recent funding allocated to an extension of the network to the northern portion of the island and load growth in the existing. This hydropower project will apparently
be dispatched in conjunction with AP&T\'s Black Bear Lk and South Fork hydros. The applicants state that the proposed project will only be used after the existing projects are fully
dispatched.
Recommend with the following grant conditions: 1) applicant joint venture will be required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation
prior to release of construction funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement with AP&T prior to release of construction grant funds. The recommended funding amount equals total
amount appropriated, offered, and requested from the state and Denali Commission ($13,600,000) minus amount already offered and appropriated ($3,100,000).
This application proposes to expand the planned Pillar Mt. windfarm from 1.5 MW to 4.5 MW, thus boosting renewable energy production from the current 80% to 91%, and displacing 1.2 million
gallons of diesel per year. The project development team is experienced, and project economics are favorable.
Recommend full funding. AEA has already allocated funding of $1 million of RE Fund dollars. Therefore, recommended additional funding is the proposed $9.65 million minus $1 million
= $8.65 million.
Applicant seeks funding for a 2 MW wind energy project in the Delta area. The project, as submitted, would install 20 Northwind 100 kW turbines. In a letter dated November 13, after
the submittal deadline, the applicant requested an amendment to the project that would result in substituting 2 Americas Wind Energy 900 kW turbines for eighteen of the Northwind 100
turbines, yielding a reduced cost. Since AEA received the requested amendment after the deadline, the evaluation here is based on the original submittal. AEA will evaluate the amended
proposal in Round 2 of the RFA.
The applicant has already received $801,500 in RE Fund funding from AEA for installation of NorthWind 100 wind turbines on the proposed site. The applicant\'s current proposal would
bring the total number of NorthWind 100 turbines up to twenty.
Based on AEA\'s high resolution wind map, the wind resource at the proposed location is Class 1 (poor). However the applicant provided 10 months of wind data that indicates a better
wind resource. For the purpose of this evaluation, AEA has assumed a Class 3 resource (fair).
Recommend partial funding with the following grant conditions: 1) AEA will require confirmation of an acceptable wind resource prior to dispersing funds to the project. 2) applicant
required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation prior to release of construction funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement
with GVEA prior to release of construction grant funds. The recommended funding amount equals total amount requested from the state ($6,269,750) minus amount already offered ($801,500).
This proposal requests $20.5 million for construction of a plant that would convert 33,000 dry tons/yr of sawmill waste into 1.63 million gallons/yr of liquid fuel and 33,600 MWh/yr
of power. Although the proposal references recon, feasibility, and final design as development stages, it lumps the development stages together and does not provide individual timelines
or budgets for development stages. Thus it is not possible to recommend funding for any intermediate stages.
We have the following concerns regarding the application: 1) No evidence of experience in projects similar to the one proposed, 2) No demonstration of local support or interest in the
developing the project or purchasing fuel and power from the project, 3) Little documentation of feedstock availability and delivered cost, 4) Overly optimistic timeline for preconstruction
activities, 5) No examples of facilities that the team has developed that use the proprietary fuel and power production processes.
Recommend no funding.
The applicants request funding for final design and permitting and construction funds for a 15-18 MW wind farm to be located at or near the Tesoro refinery in Nikiski. Because Tesoro
is a customer of HEA and, under this proposal, would purchase power from BQ Energy, the only member of applicant Kenai Winds, there appears to be regulatory implications. In the application
there is no indication that the plan has the approval of RCA. As noted in the application this project will affect not only HEA but other Railbelt utilities.
Recommend partial funding for final and design and permitting (phase 3 tasks 1-10 excluding task 11 the downpayment on wind turbines) with the following conditions: 1) Prior to the
release of funds applicant is required to submit, and AEA must approve, a detailed plan to obtain RCA regulatory approval of power purchase agreements and certification 2) Because
this project involves public funds AEA will require that all power produced by this project be sold to a public utility.
Applicant proposes resource assessment and feasibility analysis and permitting/deployment of a hydrokinetic device at Nenana. The project team appears well-qualified.
The primary benefit of this project to the State of Alaska is the demonstration and testing of a technology with significant potential in rural Alaska. However, project costs appear
excessive. At $975,000, (p13) cost of development and construction of the 30 kW ORPC generating unit is of concern, especially in regard to the potential for eventual technology commercialization.
Recommend partial funding for resource assessment (tasks 1-3).
The project file contains correspondence indicating lack of agreement and poor communication between the two critical stakeholders: the City of Unalaska as the certificated utility,
and KSLC LLC, the resource owner.
See DGGS comment above under DMLW.
The fish processors are not partners to this proposal, nor have they endorsed the concept which depends almost completely on their participation.
The project budget is too high.
Project appears to be championed by outside interests and has not adequately included the local community, government, or power utility. Project not recommended for funding because of
lack of communication, support, and coordination among stakeholders. Recommend prior to any state funding that critical stakeholders determine project development approach and leadership
in order to ensure state funds benefit residents of the State of Alaska.
This wind energy project would supply most of its output during the winter months, when load is greatest. Applicant Alaska Wind Energy is a partnership of Cook Inlet Region Inc. and
renewable energy developer EnXco Development Corp. The project would be located on CIRI land. The project would tie into the HEA system at the Anchor Point substation. A 10-mile
24.9 kV line would connect the wind turbines to the substation. The final location of the line is not yet established. The line may cross CIRI, Native Village of Ninilchik, Kenai
Borough, and State land.
The applicant references a number of existing project feasibility analyses, but does not provide the analyses or their content in detail. The application includes a letter of support
from local utility Homer Electric. Project risks indicated in the application are the ability to obtain a power purchase agreement with HEA and powerline right-of-way with land owners.
By December 2009 the applicant proposes to obtain all permits and rights-of-way, complete all necessary field studies, complete a design-build package, finalize design, and substantially
complete construction.
Given the uncertainty of obtaining necessary permits and rights-of-way, allocation of construction funding for the project appears premature. Recommend partial funding for Final Design
and Permitting with requirements that before the disbursement of grant funds that AEA review and approve feasibility studies.
In the application there is no indication that the plan has the approval of RCA. As noted in the application this project will affect not only HEA but other Railbelt utilities.
Recommend partial funding for final and design and permitting (phase 3 tasks 1-10 excluding task 11 the downpayment on wind turbines) with the following conditions: 1) Prior to the
release of funds applicant is required to submit, and AEA must approve, a detailed plan to obtain RCA regulatory approval of power purchase agreements and certification 2) Because
this project involves public funds AEA will require that all power produced by this project be sold to a public utility.
The proposer offers a significant match and claims monetary benefits to the Muni of Anchorage; however there is no discussion of power purchase agreement in section 4.4.3 (Power Purchase/Sale)
although a 6 cents/kWh is indicated in Section 2.5.5. Primary hurdles for the applicant are the lack of gas purchase agreement, land for project site, and power purchase agreement.
Proposal 68-Anchorage Landfill Gas Electricity Construction submitted by the Muni requests funding to do similar work. While both proposals have technical and economic merit, the application
by the Muni may simplify the project. Under project 68 the Muni could work with Alaska Wind Energy LLC or another IPP to develop and operate the project.
We recommend that either proposal 68 or proposal 93 be funded, but not both For the purposes of funding allocation we are recommending funding for project 68.
Applicant proposes a 2.7 kW photovoltaic / battery system that would cost approximately $123,000. Assuming a capacity factor of 15% the project would displace approximately 350 gallons
per year, thus saving about $2,100 per year.
This proposal does not account for inverter losses or roundtrip battery storage efficiency. An efficient diesel generator and heat recovery system would provide more economic benefit.
AEA recommends that the applicant pursue a powerhouse project, which appears to be more applicable to the applicant\'s goal of re-establishing the village of Napaimute. Depending on
available resources, AEA can provide assistance identifying potential funding sources and preparing grant application materials.
Not recommended for funding.
This application proposes a 225 kW high penetration wind system that would serve the St. George power system, including a new lodge and fish processing facility to be developed by APICDA.
The project would be located on St. George Tanaq Native Corporation land. The City and Corporation have not yet come to formal agreement on using the land, but the application states
that there are no problems with site ownership, and the Corporation submitted a support letter for the project.
The introduction of a high penetration system into a moderate-sized community that includes remotely controlled dumploads brings along a significant level of complexity. Successful
performance will require commitment to providing skilled and timely operation and maintenance.
Recommend full funding with the following conditions that must be met before funds are disbursed: 1) AEA approval of final design, 2) the grantee establish a five-year operation and
maintenance contract with an contractor acceptable to AEA that has expertise in this area.
This project would result in a medium penetration wind project in a community with very high diesel prices. AEA completed a new power plant in 2006. TDX Power installed a 65 kW wind
turbine on behalf of the utility in 2007 using USDA RUS grant and APICDA funding, Currently the turbine is wired to the power plant but not connected. This proposal would provide
funding to integrate the turbine into the power system and develop a heat recovery system in the existing power plant and provide for electric boilers in the lodge and school to use
excess wind energy.
Nikolski is very remote and difficult to access at times due to weather, has a harsh environment, and the proposed wind-diesel system is technically complex.
Recommend with condition that prior to AEA providing grant funds, the grantee establish a five-year operation and maintenance contract with an contractor acceptable to AEA that has
expertise in this area.
Applicant proposes to assess hydrokinetic resource in 24 Alaskan locations. Proposal includes an excellent use of university resources and good training for Alaskan students in alternative
energy technologies that may be deployed in Alaska.
The proposal is not clear on how will sites will be chosen. AEA project manager will assist the project team.
Recommend full funding.
AEA considered this project in the Denali Commission / AEA alternative energy RFP, and has offered $553,071 in state grant funds to the projects. This appears to be a viable hydro resource
that will benefit the Railbelt network. At 2 MW, the project\'s relatively small capacity and energy output will likely not impact regional planning.
Recommend with the following grant conditions: 1) applicant required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation prior to release
of construction funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement with MEA prior to release of construction grant funds. The recommended funding amount equals total amount requested from
the state ($2,242,961) minus amount already offered ($553,071).
This proposal seeks complete development funding for a hydro resource that, while promising, is currently undefined. The proposal does not include reconaissance-level analysis that
would justify further stages of development. However the rough assessment provided is sufficient to justify funding reconnaissance level assessment.
Recommend partial funding for reconnaissance study (task 1).
NOTE: On Jan 9, 2009 scoring was adjusted in light of information from a November 18, 2008 press release on VRB Power Systems\' website. The press release revealed that the company
was unsuccessful in seeking offers for the merger, sale, refinance or other strategic alternatives for the company. As a result VRB Power Systems has laid-off or given notice terminating
most of its employees, and has ceased accepting new orders. AEA was unsuccessful in contacting VRB Power Systems by phone. Based on this information a VRB flow battery will likely
not be part of the Kotzebue Wind Farm Expansion Project. Alternate storage and/or integration options will need to be considered.
This project is attractive because it will result in a high penetration wind farm in Alaska\'s first large-scale wind farm. There are two other proposals for wind development in the
Nome (52) and Unalakleet (50) utilities that are proposed be developed jointly--e.g. potentially sharing turbine purchase and cranes.
Due to the issues with the proposed energy storage system (VRB Flow Battery) and its role in mantaining power quality under increased wind penetration, more assessment and modeling
will be required to define system architecture and potential performance.
Because of the importance of the project and its relationship to the projects in Unalakleet and Nome, we recommend full funding with the condition that prior to the release of construction
funds the applicant must provide for AEA\'s review and approval detailed final design, detailed construction budget, and detailed integration plans based on emperical load and wind
resource data.
The short-term economics of this project are moderately beneficial, however its primary value is as a pilot project to prove the technical feasibility of this technology.
The technology is just recently migrating into the commercial realm and has significant potential in rural Alaska.
The applicant team has proven its competence in the 2008 season.
Recommend full funding.
NOTE: On Jan 9, 2009 scoring was adjusted in light of information from a November 18, 2008 press release on VRB Power Systems\' website. The press release revealed that the company
was unsuccessful in seeking offers for the merger, sale, refinance or other strategic alternatives for the company. As a result VRB Power Systems has laid-off or given notice terminating
most of its employees, and has ceased accepting new orders. AEA was unsuccessful in contacting VRB Power Systems by phone. After reconsidering the project AEA is no longer recommending
funding for this project for funding.
The following text shows AEA\'s original comments:
[The applicant states that there will be a 15% reduction in diesel peak power which will directly lower the cost of electrical generation while allowing for a higher level of wind penetration.
AEA\'s review suggests limited economic benefits without installing more wind capacity, but there will be significant field demonstration benefits that could facilitate field deployment
of the flow battery technology.
The applicant\'s modeling effort, which was based on HOMER, focused on economic dispatch and did not address critical power quality and stability considerations. Both economics and
power quality/stability should be addressed under this project.
This project is attractive because it demonstrates a promising mass energy storage technology. The application is related to a separate proposal (85) for an identical energy storage
system that includes 3MW of wind capacity.
NREL prepared a technical review of proposal 85 for AEA. They conclude that the system is technically viable, although "...still in its deployment infancy."
We recommend full funding for either this proposal 83 (flow battery only) or proposal 85 (battery and additional wind generation), but not both.]
Applicant proposes demonstrating an energy storage technology that has potential to increase the value and use of intermittent and stranded renewable energy resources such as excess
hydro, wind, tidal, and wave. Project participants are credible. Introducing the uncertainty and risk of a pre-commercial ammonia production process (SSAS) does not benefit the primary
goal of this proposal, which is to demonstrate ammonia production and storage from a renewable energy resource in Alaska.
Recommend full funding with the requirement that prior to funding, project participants prepare a technical and economic assessment acceptable to AEA that confirms viability of approach.
.
This proposal includes four components: 1) Final design and construction of a natural gas-fired combined heat and power (CHP) plant, 2) final design and construction of a thermoelectric
generator (TEG) using heat from the CHP plant, 3) final design and construction of a 125 kW microhydro plant at California Cr. and feasibility through construction of microhydro at
Virgin Cr., and 4) reconnaissance through construction of wind and solar power generation.
We exclude from consideration the combined CHP /TEG facility, since it is fueled by natural gas in an area that has viable renewable energy resources. We exclude the wind and solar
plants because the application did provide enough information to evaluate the component of the project. We limit consideration to California Creek microhydro, since this is the only
component of the application that is defined in suffient detail for meaningful evaluation.
California Cr. hydro appears to be a valid stand-alone project. However, the feasibility analysis does not adequately address interconnection with Chugach Electric, permitting, land
use agreements, and resource availability. Recommend partial funding for reconaissance.
Applicant proposes to install 50 kW of photovoltaic in the existing Shungnak power system. Resulting project would be the largest hybrid PV-diesel system in the state. PV system would
generate an average of 5 kW. AVEC submitted virtually identical proposals for Ambler, Noatak, and Shungnak (#75, 76, and 77). The project would be the largest utility scale photovoltaic-diesel
hybrid project in Alaska.
O&M costs, which were assumed to be zero in the application, may include panel cleaning, rreplacement of broken panels, electrical component replacement (inverters, controls, relays),
snow removal from panels and twice annual panel angle adjustment. During rare periods of peak PV output and miminum electrical loads AEA questions whether there will there be system
stability issues and whether the diesel genset efficiency and reliability of the smallest genset will be adversely affected.
Installed cost of the project is high relative to the estimated savings. As an arctic utility PV-diesel hybrid application, however, the project has demonstration value above its modest
economic return. For this reason we feel it is reasonable to support funding one of the three PV-diesel proposals as a demonstration.
Recommend full funding for either project #75, 76, or 77 at the choice of applicant.
Applicant proposes to install 50 kW of photovoltaic in the existing Noatak power system. Resulting project would be the largest hybrid PV-diesel system in the state. PV system would
generate an average of 5 kW. AVEC submitted virtually identical proposals for Ambler, Noatak, and Shungnak (#75, 76, and 77). The project would be the largest utility scale photovoltaic-diesel
hybrid project in Alaska.
O&M costs, which were assumed to be zero in the application, may include panel cleaning, rreplacement of broken panels, electrical component replacement (inverters, controls, relays),
snow removal from panels and twice annual panel angle adjustment. During rare periods of peak PV output and miminum electrical loads AEA questions whether there will there be system
stability issues and whether the diesel genset efficiency and reliability of the smallest genset will be adversely affected.
Installed cost of the project is high relative to the estimated savings. As an arctic utility PV-diesel hybrid application, however, the project has demonstration value above its modest
economic return. For this reason we feel it is reasonable to support funding one of the three PV-diesel proposals as a demonstration.
Recommend full funding for either project #75, 76, or 77 at the choice of applicant.
Applicant proposes to install 50 kW of photovoltaic in the existing Ambler power system. Resulting project would be the largest hybrid PV-diesel system in the state. PV system would
generate an average of 5 kW. AVEC submitted virtually identical proposals for Ambler, Noatak, and Shungnak (#75, 76, and 77). The project would be the largest utility scale photovoltaic-diesel
hybrid project in Alaska.
O&M costs, which were assumed to be zero in the application, may include panel cleaning, rreplacement of broken panels, electrical component replacement (inverters, controls, relays),
snow removal from panels and twice annual panel angle adjustment. During rare periods of peak PV output and miminum electrical loads AEA questions whether there will there be system
stability issues and whether the diesel genset efficiency and reliability of the smallest genset will be adversely affected.
Installed cost of the project is high relative to the estimated savings. As an arctic utility PV-diesel hybrid application, however, the project has demonstration value above its modest
economic return. For this reason we feel it is reasonable to support funding one of the three PV-diesel proposals as a demonstration.
Recommend full funding for either project #75, 76, or 77 at the choice of applicant.
NANA has prepared a regional plan for this area, that recommends further work in hydro development for this subregion. The applicants propose detailed hydro assessment work in the area
near Ambler, Kobuk, Shungnak, and Kiana.
There are no far north utility hydroelectric projects currently in operation in Alaska. Because of this there are risks with hydro development in this region.
The economic analysis shows little savings compared to project cost assuming the hydro development serves only local communities. If the project were to serve a large load, such as
a mine, project economics would likely improve.
Recommend.
Applicant proposes feasibility and design of a 300 kW hydro system in Old Harbor. Proposal will follow up earlier federally-sponsored project development work in 2001-03 that concluded
in shelving the project due to high costs compared to displaced fuel. New configuration will assess adding flow from a nearby creek. Recommend full funding.
Proposal is well thought out and permitting risks appear low because of previous USFWS consultation. Construction budget is detailed and realistic. The project appears to result in
high wind penetration, but the proposal does not provide detailed information regarding integration of wind into the existing system. Given a fuel displacement of 29,000 gallons and
a project cost of $ 3.5 million, net monetary benefits over the life of the project appear to be less than project cost.
Prior to release of construction funding AEA requires the applicant to produce detailed integration documentation and dispatch strategy for the wind-diesel system.
Proposal is well thought out, and given existing turbines in Toksook, permtting risks are low. Construction budget is detailed and realistic. The project appears to result in high
wind penetration, but the proposal does not provide detailed information regarding integration of wind into the existing system. Given a fuel displacement of 11,000 gallons and a
project cost of over $1 million, net monetary benefits over the life of the project appear to be less than project cost.
As a part of final design AEA requires the applicant to produce detailed integration documentation and dispatch strategy for the wind-diesel system.
Applicant proposes design and construction of a 300 kW wind farm in Quinhagak. Proposal is well thought out and permitting risks appear low because of previous USFWS consultation.
Construction budget is detailed and realistic. The project appears to result in high wind penetration, but the proposal does not provide detailed information regarding integration
of wind into the existing system. Given an annual fuel displacement estimated at 46,223 gallons and a project cost of $4.3 million, present value of net monetary benefits over the
life of the project appear to be less than the project cost.
Recommend full funding with provision that prior to release of construction funding AEA requires the applicant to produce detailed integration documentation and dispatch strategy for
the wind-diesel system.
Given overall Muni of Anchorage support and extent of matching funds we expect successful power sales agreement negotiations. Note proposal 93 - Anchorage Landfill Gas Electricity
requests funding for Alaska Wind Energy LLC to do similar work. While both have technical and economic merit, the application by the owner of the landfill may simplify the project.
Under this project the Muni can work with an Alaska Wind or another IPP to develop and operate the project. Additionally the Muni proposes 50% match.
We recommend that either proposal 68 or proposal 93 be funded, but not both.
.
There are two entities planning wind energy projects in Bethel: 1) the City of Bethel (# 122) is proposing a 400 kW construction project in addition to a 100 kW project that was approved
by the AEA and the Denali Commission in the alternative energy RFP, and 2) Village Wind Power is proposing construction of up to 2 MW (# 67). Additionally AVCP Regional Housing Authority
is proposing study of hydro at the Kiseralik and Chikuminuk Rivers in Round 2 of the RE Fund. Therefore, there is a need for a regional integrated resource energy plan in the Bethel
area to coordinate when and where energy projects should be developed. This proposal should be considered in the context of an integrated plan to assure proper sizing, timing, and
integration of multiple energy projects.
A 2 MW wind project will likely impact system reliability and stability of the existing diesel power system. However there is no allowance in the proposed work plan and budget to integrate
the project into the existing network to ensure continued reliability. Without the integration work the viability of the project cannot be assured.
On the basis of our integration concerns, AEA recommends not awarding funding for construction.
Applicant proposes to study impacts on raptors and migratory birds of a potential 40-50 MW wind farm near Delta that would tie into the GVEA grid. Proposal follows onsite wind measurement
at two sites, for 9 and 21 months that estimatesa 30% capacity factor. Applicant is an IPP that includes AP&T as a partner.
Recommend full funding with the requirement that applicant will be required to cooperate and share data, including interconnection study analysis and outputs, on a non-confidential basis
with the ongoing AEA-sponsored Railbelt Regional Integrated Resource Plan project.
The City of Tenakee has received funding for assessing feasibility of this project under the DC/AEA alternative energy grant program.
Recently AEA has learned there is potential for a regional power solution that would interconnect Tenakee, Hoonah, and Pelican. It would allow hydro (and possibly geothermal) resources
to be shared. This proposal, while well-conceived from the standpoint of serving only Tenakee, may not be optimal for a regional solution.
AEA does not recommend funding for this proposal. AEA will work with Southeast Conference and other stakeholders to move toward a regional power solution.
Applicant proposes to assess feasibility of and prepare conceptual designs for potential wind systems in Pedro Bay, Port Alsworth, Egegik, Iliamna-Newhalen-Nondalton, Port Heiden and
Pilot Point. The major outcome of the work would be a set of bid documents for a regional design-build package for wind systems in suitable locations. Recommend specialized experts
to consult in wind-diesel integration work.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes final design of small, efficient wood-fired boilers that would use local beetle-killed wood to heat school buildings in Pedro Bay, Newhalen/Iliamna, Nondalton, Kokhanok
and Port Alsworth displacing approximately 40,000 gallons of heating fuel per year.
Recommend full funding.
Note that app# 14 Chignik Lagoon hydro, app# 62 Chignik hydro/wind feas, and app#40 Chignik Hydro all address the same subregion. Because all three proposals request feasiblity assistance,
the proposed wind/hydro integration/transmission budget is too large. Milestones 7 to 13 are final design and permitting activities that should only be undertaken if a decision is
made to interconnect the three communities. Recommend that feasbility milestones 1, 3-6 be funded at this time and that the three applicants be required to coordinate on data collection,
study and milestones.
Proposal includes a new 456 kW genset in addition to the exhaust and jacket water heat recovery system. Recommend partial funding for the complete heat recovery system development,
but excluding the genset and associated freight. The genset is not considered an element of the "waste heat recovery" system eligible for funding under the RE Fund legislation.
Proposal number 30 requests funding for development of a community wood heating system that would likely interact with this proposal. Proposal 30 refers to integration with a water
project with Village Safe Water and refers to future coordination with this project. We note there are different engineering teams supporting the two projects. On this basis we require
coordination of design of both projects.
Technology demonstration appears valuable, however the demonstration project is not defined well enough to assure that the construciton project will be successful. Reconnaisance and
feasibility work is not finalized and incomplete. There is no evidence of a technology review and selection process. There is no detailed assessment of delivered biomass fuel cost
and long-term availability. There is no detailed budget for equipment and contractual.
Because the concept appears promising, recommend partial funding for design, NEPA permitting, and resource selection. Prior to granting any funds, the applicants will be required to
submit a detailed budget for these activities.
Applicant proposes reconnaissance and feasibility assessment of stick- or chip-fired community wood heating stems in Kobuk, Shungnak and Ambler that would displace around 130,000 gallons
of fuel oil. While economics of the project remain in question, feasibility study will result in the development of valuable biomass resource and utilization information for three
communities with high fuel costs and limited options.
Recommend full funding.
This project is approximately 45% complete and has received funding support from Deanli Commission through AEA\'s rural power system upgrade program. Currently the project is halted
due to insufficient construction funding. There are no other major barriers to development.
While the project did not indicate a particular team, the application describes a process underway with EDA for selection of a design and construction team.
AEA recommends full funding with the following conditions before funding is made available: 1) City of Atka provide a revised and detailed project schedule, including outstanding permits,
and budget, 2) submit management team resumes for approval by AEA, 3) submit revised final design and cost estimate for AEA approval.
This appears to be a viable hydro resource that will benefit the Railbelt network. At 1 MW, the project\'s relatively small capacity and energy output will likely not impact regional
planning.
Recommend with the following grant conditions: 1) applicant required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation prior to release
of construction funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement with MEA prior to release of construction grant funds.
Recommend with conditions.
It is likely that viable projects with proposed energy savings can be completed. Recommend full funding with requirement that prior to disbursement of construction funding applicant
submit feasibility and final design documents acceptable to AEA that indicate viable project.
Applicant requested proposal be withdrawn.
Applicant proposes a high-efficiency cordwood-fired boiler to supply heat to a community building in Galena. Project appears well-conceived and economic. Project management and development
team is strong.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes construction of a 400 kW (net) biomass (wood and paper)-fired combined heat and power plant in the North Pole area. The project would include two 250 UTC Pure Cycle
ORC units; a biomass boiler; fuel processing, storage, and handling equipment; cooling pond; controls and grid tie-in. As a small biomass-fired CHP system the project holds considerable
value as a demonstration project for rural heat and power production. Note that $1 million of the requsted $2 million has been approved for RE Fund funding already.
Recommend with the following grant conditions: 1) applicant required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation prior to release
of construction funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement with GVEA prior to release of construction grant funds. The recommended funding amount equals total amount requested
from the state ($2,000,000) minus amount already offered ($1,000,000).
The 3 MW Newton Peak wind project proposed by local utility Nome Joint Utilities Systems (NJUS) represents substantial additional wind generation capacity for the Nome system. It
is consistent with the Nome Regional Energy Assessment findings. It is part of a joint effort to coordinate a bulk purchase of large turbines within the region. The separate 1,170
kW Banner Peak Wind project (proposal #106) has recently been constructed in a different area. NJUS has requested funding for the intertie that connects the Banner Peak project to
the Nome system (proposal #47). The three proposals do not indicate coordination between wind projects, and AEA is concerned that this may result in unnecessarily high development,
integration, and operation costs.
The application states NJUS is preparing a feasibility assessment for the Newton Peak project that will address the quality of the wind energy resource, wind system design and integration
into the existing power system, operation and maintenance, land ownership and other development issues. This study should provide valuable information for integrating the Newton Peak
and Banner Peak wind farms into the NJUS system.
Recommend full funding with the condition that before any funds are disbursed NJUS provide to AEA, and AEA approves, a feasibility assessment and conceptual design that addresses integration
of the Newton Peak and Banner Peak wind farms and other developent issues.
This project represents substantial additional wind generation capacity that directly integrates into the utility. It is part of a joint effort to coordinate a bulk purchase of large
turbines within the region Recommend monitor current power system upgrade and coordinate final integration design. Recommend up to full funding $8,770,080.
There is substantial accessible biomass wood supply in the upper Tanana from sawmills, two pellet mills in development, and state-owned forest land. Tok Umbrella Corp received a grant
for a whole tree chipper which can potentially be used to supply fuel for this project.
Recommend.
For economic viability this project will likely need to be interconnected to the Railbelt grid. Recommend project team evaluate technical and regulatory issues associated with interconnection.
Recommend.
This project, scheduled for completion in December 08, provides transmission from Banner Wind (proposal #106) to the Nome electrical system. We note there is a separate proposal for
larger turbines on Newton Peak #52, consistent with the USDOE/AEA-supported Nome Region Energy Assessment. The three proposals do not indicate coordination between wind projects, and
AEA is concerned that this may result in unnecessarily high development, integration, and operation costs.
NJUS is preparing a feasibility assessment for the Newton Peak project that will address the quality of the wind energy resource, wind system design and integration into the existing
power system, operation and maintenance, land ownership and other development issues. This study should provide valuable information for integrating the Newton Peak and Banner Peak
wind farms into the NJUS system.
Recommend full funding for expenses incurred after August 20 with the following conditions: 1) before any funds are disbursed NJUS provide to AEA, and AEA approves, a feasibility assessment
and conceptual design that addresses integration of the Newton Peak and Banner Peak wind farms and other developent issues, 2) Banner Wind LLC has petitioned RCA for a certificate of
public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation prior to release of construction funds, 3) a power purchase agreement for the Banner Peak project is in place with NJUS
prior to release of construction grant funds.
AEA will manage project. Given relatively small fuel displacement chip-fired system is too expensive. Recommend partial funding for feasibility assessment and final design (tasks 2
and 3) to consider options with higher B/C ratio.
Applicant proposes studying feasibility of a potential 500-2000 kW hydro project at Burro Creek on private land near Skagway. Project would supplement other hydro projects that serve
AP&T\'s Haines-Skagway grid. Recommend for full funding.
The Haines Borough proposes to study feasibility of a wood chip fired system located downtown that would serve the K-12 school, two other school buildings, and the town library. As
currently configured the system cost appears rather high compared to expected annual savings in fuel oil. However, alternate configurations to be assessed in the conceptual design
will likely improve economics. Recommend for full funding.
Note that app# 14 Chignik Lagoon hydro, app# 62 Chignik hydro/wind feas, and app#40 Chignik Hydro all address the same subregion. Recommend this proposed feasibility study be funded
up to $207,500 and that the three applicants be required to coordinate on data collection, study and milestones.
We note that Trident Seafoods holds the FERC license for the current project and the applicant proposes to negotiate the use of Trident\'s license to expand the hydro project and generate
electricity for the community at large. Recommend that an agreement that ensures access to the resource be signed by City and Trident before expenditure of any grant funds.
The project has merit in that it demonstrates the use of a local fuel, for which a local producer is willing to sell at $100/ton. However, at $831,203, project is too expensive for
relatively small benefit.
This project would serve the Southeast Alaska Power Authority (SEAPA) area. Note that SEAPA is projected to come into existence in early 2009 in restructuring the Four Dam Pool PA.
A private company, Cascade Creek LLC, currently holds a preliminary permit on this project from FERC that expires on 1/31/09. [ref FERC webpage status of preliminary permits]. The
applicant proposes to file a preliminary permit on 2/1/09.
This project would interconnect with an existing power network that serves Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg. There are proposals to expand this network to include Metlakatla and Kake.
There are other projects being proposed for this network and potential load increases on the network. There is a need to integrate these projects. On this basis we recommend approval
of the proposal to assist the integration process.
Design documents would be useful in the preparation of a regional integrated resource plan for the southern Southeast network. An integrated resource plan should be prepared before
significant construction funding is provided to projects to be interconnected to this network. If the project receives state funds, AEA will require as a grant condition that ratepayers
of all connected utilities receive equal generation and transmission rate treatment.
Recommend.
Recommend full funding for design and permitting.
This project would interconnect with an existing power network that serves Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg. There are proposals to expand this network to include Metlakatla and Kake.
There are other projects being proposed for this network and potential load increases on the network. There is a need to integrate these projects. On this basis we recommend approval
of the proposal to assist the integration process.
Design documents would be useful in the preparation of a regional integrated resource plan for the southern Southeast network. An integrated resource plan should be prepared before
significant construction funding is provided to projects to be interconnected to this network. If the project receives state funds, AEA will require as a grant condition that ratepayers
of all connected utilities receive equal generation and transmission rate treatment.
Following detailed review by project manager, we conclude that the project is not adequately defined. The proposer would investigate ways to utilize heat recovered from diesel generation
or biomass combustion. The stated goal of this project is to prove concepts that have been already been demonstrated.
Applicant proposes to install 200 kW of wind turbine at $2.2 million to displace 16,000 gallons per year of heating fuel at the Hooper Bay water treatment plant. Given modest savings
in fuel AEA has concerns that the project is not optimized to maximize diesel displacement for community heat and power. For this reason we recommend that applicants consult with the
community and power utility to integrate the project into the community energy system. We recommend funding be limited to feasibility analysis that matches heating load profile with
resource availability, and develop alternate scenarios. Develop two scenarios--1) interconnected with utility grid, 2) stand alone for water treatment plant only.
Recommend partial funding of $80,000 under task 6 to prepare feasibility assessment and conceptual design as above.
AEA is providing $100,000 for reconnaisance assessment under the DC/AEA Alternative Energy RFP. Recommend full funding for feasibility and FERC permit preparation with requirement that
AEA approve recon study indicating project viability before any AEA funds are expended.
Applicant proposes design and construction of cordwood-fired heating systems for four 4-plex housing units. Project offers good potential savings over heating oil and provides a demonstration
project for southeast Alaska. Recommend.
The proposal is somewhat unclear as to who will manage the project. Sec 3.1 applicant states "A construction manager will be hired through AEA..." We assume that the applicant will
manage the project.
This project was configured using stick-fired combustors under the application received by AEA and the Denali Commission. Chip-fired systems proposed are more complex and costly. We
question whether they are appropriate for a remote community.
Application refers to a feasibility study that has not been finalized. This is a community wood heating system that combines wood harvest and transport, combustion, district heating
and energy sales. Since this is a large project with considerable risk and uncertainty, it should be developed in a stepwise manner. Economics appear favorable, and there has been
considerable federal investment in the project (DC and USDOE). Recommend funding to final design and permitting (stages 1-8) only because applicant has not yet established final design
concept.
Recommend at lower funding level.
Application refers to a feasibility study that has not been finalized. This is a community wood heating system that combines wood harvest and transport, combustion, district heating
and energy sales. The project will likely interact with proposal number 61-McGrath (diesel) heat recovery, but is expensive and appears uneconomic as proposed. Since this is a large
project with considerable risk and uncertainty, it should be developed in a stepwise manner with stakeholder input. AEA and MP&L jointly defined a diesel heat recovery and wood heated
district heating system project in 2001 that appeared economically viable. We recommend granting $225,000 to MP&L for feasibility and final design (milestones 1-8) in conjunction with
proposal 61. If the project is favorable, then ML&P can request construction funding from the RE Fund during round 3.
Recommend at lower funding level.
This project is structured as an integrated road-intertie project in a 300\' right-of-way through USFS land that was previously granted to DOT/PF through federal congressional action.
The project will address both the road and intertie in a cost-effective manner. Savings for intertie construction are calculated to be $8 million if projects occur together. The
intertie would result in lowering Kake power costs significantly. AEA expects DOT/PF to fully participate in the project.
Design documents would be useful in the preparation of a regional integrated resource plan for the southern Southeast network. An integrated resource plan should be prepared before
significant construction funding is provided to projects to be interconnected to this network. If the project receives state funds, AEA will require as a grant condition that ratepayers
of Kake and its distribution utility IPEC receive generation and transmission rate treatment equal to other distribution utilities on the network.
Recommend.
This project would result in significant savings to the Hoonah ratepayer but the project has a very high capital cost. According to the brief economic analysis completed as part of
AEA review, the project has a benefit to cost ratio over 1 if it is assumed that hydropower is available from the Alaska Electric Light and Power system. The estimated capital cost
has risen from $37 million to over $40 million. Other factors that might influence economics are decreased availability of potentially recoverable heat in Hoonah if diesel generation
is curtailed, and the existence of other potentially viable hydro and geothermal projects in the Hoonah area.
If the project receives state funds, AEA will require as a grant condition that Hoonah residents receive rate treatment equal to Juneau residents.
If the intertie connects to Hoonah, the Two-County Rule introduces considerable uncertainty in the tax-exempt status of the Snettisham Hydro project, the main generation source for the
Juneau area. AEA understands that, although there have been attempts to resolve the issue, at present there is no resolution. Therefore, the continuing uncertainty of the intertie
on the Snettisham project?s tax exempt financing is considered in AEA?s review of this proposal.
AEA does not recommend that this project be funded because: 1) the high capital cost of the project, 2) continuing uncertainty of the impact of the project on Snettisham financing,
and 3) the existence of other potentially viable hydro and geothermal projects in the Hoonah area.
Applicant proposes feasibility assessment and final design/permitting for a hydro project at Allison Lake that will result in up to 4 MW added capacity and energy production of 20.5-24.7
GWh/yr. Recon work indicates substantial benefit, and utility Copper Valley Electric has demonstrated track record in hydro development and operation.
Recommend full funding.
Project appears to be well-conceived and a practical way to use a local energy resource. We are concerned about efficiency of the current residential woodstoves and possible health
impacts from increased smoke. We do not recommend funding for processing and distributing the firewood. Recommend funding for only firewood processor equipment and freight as quoted
($147,720).
Recommend at lower project cost.
The powerhouse, access road, and a portion of the penstock would be located on Tanacross Inc. land. AEA contact with village corp president Bob Brean indicates potential controversy.
Feasibility analysis funded through DC/AEA Alt Energy RFP is pending. AP&T has $1.675 million from USDA Rural Utilities Service for the project. Recommend no funding at this time.
Following completion of design and permitting, including resolution of land use authorizations with Tanacross Inc., AP&T can apply to the RE Fund for construction funding.
Applicant proposes to construct an intertie from southern to northern Prince of Wales Island, thus providing hydropower to Naukati and Coffman Cove, currently generating with diesel.
Balance of project funding $2,402,838 is provided by the Denali Commission under the Energy Cost Reduction Program announced in 2008.
Recommend up to full funding of $3,752,181.
Project appears viable but proposer does not provide adequate level of detail on design, cost estimate, ORC equipment and integration, and schedule. Recommend full funding and careful
review of final design by AEA project manager prior to release of construction funds.
Cordova Electric proposes to relocate and refurbish the existing Humpback Creek hydro project, currently inoperational after a fire and a flood in 2005 and 2006 thus doubling the life
of the project and increasing energy output by 60%. 90% design is complete, and there is substantial support from the local Native corporation and fish procesors, cost share by FEMA.
FERC has issued or soon will issue a license for the rebuild. Construction schedule indicates completion by end of 2009. Recommend full funding of $5,500,000.
This project would follow an existing road and require a short submarine cable to interconnect the hydro resources of Metlakatla with the Ketchikan electric system. With the completion
of the Swan-Tyee intertie this would extend the southern Southeast electical network to Metlakatla. This project is one of a number of transmission and generation projects that would
interconnect with the existing network. Because the Swan-Tyee intertie is expected to go into operation in late 2009, substantial excess Tyee hydro power will be available to Ketchikan.
Therefore the Metlakatla-Ketchikan intertie may not be needed in the near term.
Permitting and design documents would be useful in the preparation of a regional integrated resource plan for the southern Southeast network. However, an integrated resource plan should
be prepared before significant construction funding is provided to projects to be interconnected to this network. If the project receives state funds, AEA will require as a grant condition
that ratepayers of all connected utilities receive equal generation and transmission rate treatment.
Recommend partial funding for design and permitting (tasks 1-3).
The proposal is detailed and there is significant interest in tidal energy development for Alaska.
However, Gustavus will have hydro by 2009, Wrangell already has hydro, Angoon has an undeveloped hydro resource with the potential to provide excess and baseload power, and Nikiski has
relatively cheap railbelt grid power as well as other alternatives (wind and hydro) that are commercial technologies. Although this is a demonstration project, the sites selected are
less than optimal.
The recon portion of the project could be useful for gathering energy planning data.
Not recommended for funding.
The major weakness of this application is the lack of evidence of a geothermal resource, per the DGGS opinion. For this reason we cannot assess economic feasibility or other benefits.
Other aspects, including the proposed team, are impressive and would bode well for a successful project.
AEA does not recommend this project for further consideration.
Agree with DGGS comments regarding access and the pre-existing rights of Ormat at Mt. Spurr. Applicant has limited background in geology and development of geothermal powerplants.
No economic analysis was prepared for this project. Not enough information is available to justify funding.
Project is low risk and potentially very beneficial. Long term wood supply is reliable and sustainable. However at $839,000 the project is expensive compared to wood heating installations
in Tanana and Ionia, so B/C is poor.
AEA would manage project per request in proposal. AEA Project manager thinks this project can be built for $500,000. Wood storage may not be required and bulding cost at $150/sf, not
$350/sf, is appropriate. Project can be coordinated with Gulkana for economy.
Recommended. At lower cost.
Note that app# 14 Chignik Lagoon hydro, app# 62 Chignik hydro/wind feas, and app#40 Chignik Hydro all address the same subregion. Recommend this proposed feasbility study be funded
up to $150,000 and that the three applicants be required to coordinate on data collection, study and milestones.
This proposal requests substantial funding for reconnaisance work in assessing application of proprietary pre-commercial technology. It is one of five very similar proposals that request
funding for solid waste-to-energy conversion in Anchorage, Palmer, Fairbanks, Juneau, and Ketchikan. The project team has technically competent staff. We have the following concerns
about supporting demonstration of the proposed technology: 1) installed and O&M cost estimates are inadequate, 2) little information on what form of energy would be produced and who
would buy it, 3) since no evidence is provided that PWR\'s technology has been demonstrated at either a pilot or commercial scale, technical and environmental risk is substantial. 4)
the budget of $35,220 for travel, meals, and Per Diem appears excessive, 5) the remaining budget of $65,400 for contractual services is unspecified and no technical consultant is identified.
This proposal requests substantial funding for reconnaisance work in assessing application of proprietary pre-commercial technology. It is one of five very similar proposals that request
funding for solid waste-to-energy conversion in Anchorage, Palmer, Fairbanks, Juneau, and Ketchikan. The project team has technically competent staff. We have the following concerns
about supporting demonstration of the proposed technology: 1) installed and O&M cost estimates are inadequate, 2) little information on what form of energy would be produced and who
would buy it, 3) since no evidence is provided that PWR\'s technology has been demonstrated at either a pilot or commercial scale, technical and environmental risk is substantial. 4)
the proposal does not tie-in with the ongoing Juneau Solid Waste Management Strategy and would likely duplicate existing efforts., 5) the budget of $25,500 for travel, meals, and Per
Diem appears excessive, 6) the remaining budget of $64,500 for contractual services is unspecified and no technical consultant is identified.
Proposal requests assistance for recon assessment of alternatives in Cold Bay, False Pass, and Nelson Lagoon.
The proposal plans to look at current and tidal potential; these options should only be covered briefly in the study since there is little chance of immediate help from these emerging
technologies.
Recommend full funding with condition of AEA review and approval of RFP and consultant before AEA disbursement of grant funds.
This 800 kW hydro project is 90% complete but needs additional funding for completion. Recommend full funding.
This project would retrofit heating systems of public buildings in Wrangell to utilize interruptible power for resistance heating.
AEA has concern that widespread use of resistance heating will exhaust available hydro capacity and energy. However we recognize value of this project for demonstration.
Therefore, recommend full funding with the following provisions: 1) Prior to final design analyze relative merits of heat pump vs resistance heating design concepts, 2) Make results
available in near future for regional integrated resource plan.
Applicant proposes reconaissance and feasibility study of a geothermal project that would tap a resource of unknown quality and extent in the Lower Sustna Basin for heating in Anchorage.
See DGGS opinion above: Geothermal resource has not been demonstrated. Therefore, the concept of piping hot water from the Susitna Valley is questionable.
The applicant\'s CEO, Magnus Johanneson, resigned as of 11/7/008.
Recommend no funding due to lack of evidence that a geothermal resource is available.
Applicant did not provide feasibility and final design documentation to justify proceeding to construction. Project would have interacted with No. 55 - Bristol Bay Health Corp Wind
project, now withdrawn. Recommend providing feasibility funding for Lk Elva project. Given scale of project and potential interaction with other projects, however, cooperative planning
approach is needed between applicants, utilty and community. Recommend partial funding of $300,000 for "comprehensive feasibility assessment and ongoing consultative support" referenced
in section 6 of the grant application.
This proposal requests substantial funding for proprietary pre-commercial technology. It is one of five very similar proposals that request funding for solid waste-to-energy conversion
in Anchorage, Palmer, Fairbanks, Juneau, and Ketchikan. The project team has technically competent staff. We have the following concerns about supporting demonstration of the proposed
technology: 1) installed and O&M cost estimates are inadequate, 2) little information on what form of energy would be produced and who would buy it, 3) the project manager Mr. West
is the managing member of Alaska Recycling Energy, president of WFT Management Company, and advisor to Plasman Waste Recycling (PWR). We are concerned that with these executive duties
that he will have adequate time to manage the project. 4) since no evidence is provided that PWR\'s technology has been demonstrated at either a pilot or commercial scale, technical
and environmental risk is substantial. 5) at a $100 million project cost the applicant\'s project savings of $1.5 million/yr do not appear to predict an economically viable project.
This proposal requests substantial funding for proprietary pre-commercial technology. It is one of five very similar proposals that request funding for solid waste-to-energy conversion
in Anchorage, Palmer, Fairbanks, Juneau, and Ketchikan. The project team has technically competent staff. We have the following concerns about supporting demonstration of the proposed
technology: 1) installed and O&M cost estimates are inadequate, 2) little information on what form of energy would be produced and who would buy it, 3) the project manager Mr. West
is the managing member of Alaska Recycling Energy, president of WFT Management Company, and advisor to Plasman Waste Recycling (PWR). We are concerned that with these executive duties
that he will have adequate time to manage the project. 4) since no evidence is provided that PWR\'s technology has been demonstrated at either a pilot or commercial scale, technical
and environmental risk is substantial. 5) at a $60 million project cost the applicant\'s project savings of $1million/yr do not appear to predict an economically viable project.
This proposal requests substantial funding for proprietary pre-commercial technology. It is one of five very similar proposals that request funding for solid waste-to-energy conversion
in Anchorage, Palmer, Fairbanks, Juneau, and Ketchikan. The project team has technically competent staff.
We have the following concerns about supporting demonstration of the proposed technology: 1) installed and O&M cost estimates are inadequate, 2) little information on what form of energy
would be produced and who would buy it, 3) the project manager Mr. West is the managing member of Alaska Recycling Energy, president of WFT Management Company, and advisor to Plasma
Waste Recycling (PWR). We are concerned that with these executive duties that he will have inadequate time to manage the project. 4) since no evidence is provided that PWR\'s technology
has been demonstrated at either a pilot or commercial scale, technical and environmental risk is substantial. 5) at a $200 million project cost the applicant\'s project savings of $2
million/yr do not appear to predict an economically viable project., 6) while the applicant indicates informal discussions with the Anchorage Solid Waste Service (SWS), there is no
formal support and, in fact, SWS is proposing a different method for recovering energy from the city waste stream.
Funding not recommended.
Project is low risk and potentially very beneficial. Long term wood supply is reliable and sustainable. However at $898,000 the project is expensive compared to wood heating installations
in Tanana and Ionia, so B/C is poor.
AEA would manage project per request in proposal. AEA Project manager thinks this project can be built for $500,000. Wood storage may not be required and bulding cost at $150/sf, not
$350/sf, is appropriate. Project can be coordinated with Gulkana for economy.
Recommended. At lower cost.
CB of Sitka requests funding for assessing feasibility of potential 28 MW Takatz Lake hydro project. Project is consistent with findings of the 2008 Sitka Power Supply Plan and would
follow less expensive alternatives, including increasing capacity of the existing Blue Lk Hydro project, in order to avoid more costly diesel generation. There is potential for developing
road and marine facilities associated with the project that would provide access to eastern Baranof Island. FERC has issued a preliminary permit to Sitka to assess feasibility of
Takatz.
Given the widespread interest in linking major electric generation and loads in Southeast, development of Takatz should be coordinated with the SE Alaska Regional Energy Plan. Recommend.
S2 Reconsideration
Accepted
Rejected
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Requested
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Rejected
Requested
Requested
Accepted
Requested
Accepted
Requested
S3 Evaluator 1
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Warren
Stromberg
Traylor
Traylor
Stromberg
Stromberg
Traylor
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Plentovich
Stromberg
Traylor
Ott
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Stromberg
Baldivieso
Plentovich
Stromberg
Stromberg
Craft
Craft
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Craft
Vail
Reiche
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Baldivieso
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Traylor
Traylor
Traylor
Ott
Ott
Warren
Traylor
Plentovich
Trayolr
Traylor
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Warren
Ott
Ott
Traylor
Stromberg
Ott
Ott
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Ott
Ott
Baldivieso
Ott
Baldivieso
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Ott
Stomberg
white
Plentovich/Traylor
White
White
White
Ott
White
Ott
White
Stromberg
Ott
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Strandberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Stromberg
Calfa
Calfa
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Calfa
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Calfa
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Ott
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
White
Stromberg
White
Ott
white
white
White
Stromberg
White
White
Ott
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Jensen
McMahon
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Ott
McMahon
Ott
McMahon
Jensen
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Stromberg
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich, Brown
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Plentovich
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Ott
Stromberg
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Jensen
Ott
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Jensen
Ott
McMahon
Jensen
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich/Brown
McMahon
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Jensen
Plentovich/Brown
McMahon
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Jensen
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Landis
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich
Plentovich
Ott
Jensen
Landis
Jensen
Landis
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich/Brown
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Landis
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Jensen
Jensen
Landis
Brown/Kerr
Lenny Landis
Landis
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Landis/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Brown
Brown/Kerr
Ott
Reiche
Jensen
Jensen
Landis
Lenny Landis
Ott
Lenny Landis
Landis
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Landis
Landis
Lenny Landis
Landis
Lenny Landis
Ott
Landis
Brown/Kerr
Landis
Landis
Reiche
Landis
Landis
Crimp
Ott
Landis
Ott
Landis
Landis
Jensen
Ott
Landis
Landis
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Brown/Kerr
Jensen
Reiche
Reiche
Jensen
Brown/Kerr
Ott
Brown/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Ott
Repeat of round 1 #106
Ott
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
Lockard Butch #2 & # 6
Jensen & Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
Lockard Butch #2 &# 6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
This application failed Stage I review
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
Butch #2 & #6
lockard Butch #2 & 6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 &
Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & # 6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen,Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
WITHDRAWN Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Crimp
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Butch #2 & #6, Jensen
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
This application failed Stage I review
This application failed Stage I review
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Crimp
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
Crimp
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch#2 & #6
Lockard, Butch #2 & #6
Butch #2 & #6
Lockard, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Ott//Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch / #2 & #6
Ott Butch / Match & Local Support
Stage 3 Score Total
50
32.56
66.29
62.99
49.74
64.87
52.33
73.24
70.85
44.52
71.64
37.73
29.18
43.63
66.29
78.62
29.78
54.19
74.17
55.74
51.71
40.58
40.98
16.46
29.36
32.84
79.7
44.09
68.28
57.96
65.59
64.59
42.58
52.7
50.95
47.86
65.75
52.79
58.97
51.75
59.46
56.37
44.87
35.63
48.27
56.12
32.69
55.69
31.9
28.87
64.38
50.44
0
54.686666666659
16.75
67.5799999999881
61.3266666666595
69.176666666654
8.88
45
48.376666666664
20
49.7366666666664
69.6933333333169
34.0899999999981
14.54
59.5466666666591
59.1933333333169
54.4699999999856
34.4933333333324
50.45
31.9233333333304
61.123333333321
60.6699999999919
48.8899999999969
65.7799999999845
38.5633333333324
54.5133333333331
25.35
47.98333333333
52.8099999999969
54.013333333331
45.51
69.0699999999896
59.14
61.689999999993
56.383333333328
56.783333333327
52.48
41.826666666666
66.6966666666561
53.3966666666571
69.4966666666525
60.7733333333255
44.6733333333324
56.1533333333194
66.6999999999855
69.35666667
71.975
57.32666667
61.95166667
68.52166667
48.33
49.25833333
51.68166667
45.88
70.54333333
8
48.315
54.54166667
66.21166667
66.06666667
62.19666667
54.175
62.43333333
72.21166667
70.25833333
52.31666667
60.35166667
0
14
54.76666667
70.94
61.89666667
18.625
3
62.76666667
12.81666667
44.49833333
66.665
73.69333333
47.92166667
8
52.26833333
42.22666667
77.39833333
61.67
64.24666667
80.61666667
67.41333333
55.38666667
65.21
68.15666667
62.12666667
68.74333333
83.36
5
2
55.34333333
67.28833333
67.92666667
52.43666667
19.44166667
52.135
70.62666667
85.03666667
68.19833333
26.55
59.95333333
53.32833333
67.54833333
10
25.24166667
43.61833333
64.71333333
63.94666667
68.43166667
53.39
59.52666667
51.82666667
72.39333333
55.77166667
48.69333333
10
52.02166667
12
8
11.60833333
20
20.45833333
45.845
0
32.54965
62.15160417
75.6525125
65.40843125
27.37525
38.23439583
82.26435625
37.29033333
72.69166667
54.26772917
44.80946042
30.6685625
27.5625
19.62583333
37.93420625
40.751475
29.6548125
74.05496667
82.46666667
58.92284375
16.84166667
26.38955
56.12083333
47.052275
27.880125
51.07366667
0
53.32601458
55.42282292
57.14166667
54.1875
59.61666667
59.41666667
36.1001125
34.8601125
58.65096875
65.41851667
49.04875833
48.25
63.375
76.79927083
58.12366667
65.27916667
72.30838333
70.13209167
73.73344583
39.84013125
71.53445208
63.85
70.60833333
70.98936458
64.3875
37.71875
60.76533333
67.5175
68.34913125
60.91199792
73.25833333
49.81871042
58.81037708
60.91839583
41.26597917
75.96513125
56.01878958
44.27058125
6.4629375
45.75617708
69.89225
62.343375
72.06482292
54.33117708
68.0260625
79.03333333
72.85833333
46.75
49.49627083
79.30410417
47.8129375
61.90644375
19.5379375
53.65164583
50.83242083
46.82366667
47.925
10.5
18.6875
0
20.9375
26.5
33.72916667
50.25
62.20833333
7.25
60.45833333
12.875
73.275
36.875
35.125
22
54.9625
55.21666667
62.0875
31.3125
55.6
36.75
33.8125
68.02916667
69.90416667
50.2125
59.63333333
36.3125
67.90416667
67.40416667
59.675
26.6875
45.75
49.19583333
0
0
39.125
39.4375
12.5
38.0625
33.0625
75.59166667
65.86666667
75.33333333
34.1875
20.6875
44
37.4375
36.3125
36.3125
39.8125
77.75833333
69.07916667
32.8125
40.125
67.41666667
65.91666667
39.4375
37.3125
70.925
67.9
26.575
9.75
71.23333333
48.72083333
56.62916667
5.6875
65.1125
0
37.55
25.625
17.125
24.0625
12.0625
71.8875
33.1875
72.75416667
53.08333333
55.60833333
65.97083333
47.90416667
0
25.125
28.875
8
40.46666667
20.375
15.1875
24.75
16.125
30.50833333
22.75
47.67916667
35.75
20.5
16.1875
70.875
18.125
17
42.94166667
29.95833333
29.69166667
54.475
28.625
29.59375
28.625
15.28125
37.40625
21.6875
29.1875
36
18.71875
61.35208333
9
57.42083333
56.65208333
19.90625
42.33125
41.98958333
62.60416667
76.55416667
63.72916667
59.9
47.925
19.71875
60.9625
61.03958333
68.96666667
53.9
45.90833333
21.6875
38.39791667
68.12916667
52.27708333
56.77083333
63.06875
13.1875
68.64583333
49.12916667
73.65208333
56.85833333
31.1875
68.36041667
56.15833333
22.1875
10.1875
18.71875
46.78541667
29.1875
61.23541667
50.87916667
35.41666667
25.61666667
75.08333333
68.79791667
60.29375
36
50.6875
39.62916667
56.65625
51.43541667
52.92291667
58.79583333
66.76666667
54.15625
50.81041667
53.17083333
50.17916667
56.25416667
21.09375
58.02291667
71.6375
52.19166667
31.9375
31.46875
27.8
41.59375
39.26666667
51.39791667
30.59375
46.63333333
29.3125
31.65833333
30.525
40.63125
44.46875
49.74375
56.61666667
22.15625
66.05208333
29.59375
63.68333333
58.51041667
34.75
38.72916667
36.72916667
36.99583333
38.3375
53.52083333
58.61041667
57.975
30.575
57.89791667
68.26458333
26.675
24.28125
20.1875
35.78125
51.9875
27.40625
7.28125
28.00416667
78.68541667
72.325
13.1875
55.37708333
52.52916667
52.37291667
54.92083333
63.81458333
50.40625
30.87083333
23.25
41.54375
53.73958333
45.75
23.69375
34.725
71.79166667
54.46041667
31.77916667
48.7375
4
48.225
26.59375
32.62083333
40.92916667
60.4875
46.46458333
18.28125
39.26041667
18.34375
0
30.28125
27.1875
47.3
29.17916667
56.0875
36.40625
4.71875
57.89375
53.9625
36.15625
45.29791667
63.82708333
64.35833333
46.37291667
27.625
38.33541667
18.28125
17.71875
60.93541667
64.18541667
30.03541667
32.34166667
62.95833333
25
35.78125
35.16875
68.1375
9
24.52083333
34.35833333
54.22083333
45.01666667
26.25
66.94375
38
65.8125
46.10416667
39.87291667
26.28333333
36.90833333
64.04166667
58.85208333
51.86041667
64.60833333
13
52.82708333
45.12916667
45.16666667
61.66041667
60.46458333
72.61458333
54.88333333
34.0625
69.16041667
42.45416667
20.28125
20.28125
18.5
30.57916667
19.25
37.59375
44.20208333
49.225
56.66666667
52.37083333
52.78333333
16.25
57.84166667
7.125
22.125
49.15833333
20.125
21.19166667
23.725
36.89583333
38.92083333
36.39583333
25.71875
60.55625
50.63541667
45.46041667
80.70208333
50.75833333
53.225
60.28541667
5.25
29.025
69.74791667
35.63333333
82.774583334
69.100000004
74.60833333
68.8925
52.882083337
73.866666667
67.441249996
59.999166667
65.158749997
62.52458333
58.197916663
54.92708333
60.853333336
59.20833333
64.185833337
42.592916667
74.39166667
75.13333333
33.032916663
47.90208333
53.78541667
51.634583334
47.065833333
53.341666663
72.1725
52.528333337
72.366666664
77.24041667
62.845833337
50.97583333
56.9325
50.334583333
49.41708333
32.183750003
58.067916663
52.785833334
55.652499997
49.9125
78.566666664
62.883333336
59.058333336
59.650000003
72.970833337
73.38541667
48.809166667
59.783333336
67.269999997
37.60583333
73.600833334
61.334583336
60.26958333
53.03625
68.906666663
41.450416666
51.333333333
61.845416667
79.928333336
46.778750003
58.005833337
61.25041667
73.02833333
42.31333333
63.86125
72.658333337
64.446666664
42.346666667
71.783333337
59.25041667
59.513333336
68.91208333
65.306666667
60.84666667
56.334583333
43.71333333
64.13458333
71.54791667
72.4
46.86666667
62.881250003
52.160416667
62.71875
71.766666663
31.027916667
53.412916663
64.848333336
65.628333336
67.233333336
55.330416666
62.372500003
60.378750003
56.883750003
61.475416663
69.014583336
58.28
75.771249997
67.355
71.37916667
81.22583333
62.409166667
75.316249997
82.566666663
65.647916667
62.081249997
77.425000003
63.713333336
65.817083337
60.729999997
71.53541667
51.87958333
61.08375
46.05083333
61.565833333
54.7325
63.9125
62.049583337
63.305833337
39.120416666
60.734583334
63.065833337
64.71708333
67.7925
74.505833337
65.25083333
70.036249997
83.941666667
76.436250003
78.069583336
57.039166663
63.37666667
56.746250003
65.264999997
70.75875
51.910416666
61.775833337
35.117499997
38.425000003
S3 Cost of Energy
7.91
24.02
29.09
7.91
21.24
35
29.85
32.38
34.82
13.12
7.62
27.67
28.24
27.44
18.23
31.98
23.19
35
5.82
28.04
18.37
7.91
8.09
29.85
28.04
5.07
27.02
5.07
35
16.09
6.56
6.56
4.02
26.69
17.53
30.17
11.36
26.22
35
35
18.37
26.3
27.06
27.56
31.06
26.24
21.68
29.72
26.07
27.53
27.52
25.59
11.36
29.85
17.53
17.01
7.99
11.36
25.61
5.25
5.25
21.68
5.25
4.88
7.04
24.06
27.14322931
0
28.4375
6.610625
12.25546875
6.777894375
6.777895819
22.4521325
22.09375
6.610625
21.45572625
27.72563938
12.4425
28.4375
24.43182
35
26.140625
25.5540075
21.59682
24.42453125
23.79960625
22.05109375
25.20984375
19.03125
25.98859375
22.4521325
24.10515625
23.33041375
32.50527438
32.37426938
35
35
4.59375
0
22.00880063
23.1875
21.45536313
22.07442563
6.5625
6.5625
24.644375
29.86921875
24.28708319
35
21.59682
26.40640625
21.19286313
23.43978875
0
18.26853875
4.4629375
30.2640625
28.60848813
4.228805
4.14225
25.78515625
8.630155625
8.3243125
9.807
9.807
21.45572909
30.69791681
27.14322931
27.2059375
4.471477806
4.4714775
9.633385563
0
0
20.80604181
17.8583825
10.51020688
12.4425
12.4425
4.14225
4.14225
4.14225
12.49075625
9.807
35
5.2933125
22.07442694
28.4375
26.25
4.4714775
9.807
18.26853875
0
32.54965
27.0099375
29.3775125
31.23343125
22.12525
6.2260625
30.16435625
9.807
35
6.2260625
26.16779375
25.6685625
27.5625
12.4425
25.18420625
33.501475
22.4048125
31.3383
35
9.52284375
0
19.63955
24.0625
30.802275
8.630125
9.807
0
25.79268125
25.45615625
22.75
24.9375
27.125
32.375
24.3501125
23.8601125
25.77596875
28.10185
22.265425
35
21.875
27.2409375
9.807
28.4375
27.00005
22.265425
24.3501125
27.09013125
23.65111875
35
30.625
21.48103125
28.9625
28.21875
9.807
12.4425
11.59913125
18.12033125
24.5
21.25204375
21.25204375
8.4100625
8.3243125
27.09013125
22.23545625
27.12058125
4.4629375
9.52284375
4.14225
10.343375
25.84815625
9.52284375
6.2260625
35
30.625
35
4.4629375
26.0124375
4.4629375
19.88144375
4.4629375
5.2933125
18.2490875
9.807
26.25
0
7.4375
0
7.4375
22.75
24.0625
35
35
0
26.25
7.875
11.375
25.375
21.875
8.75
5.6875
27.125
16.1875
29.3125
23.625
22.75
22.3125
23.1875
24.0625
20.5625
26.25
22.3125
24.0625
25.8125
25.375
7.4375
35
17.0625
0
0
23.625
23.1875
0
24.0625
20.5625
25.375
19.25
26.25
23.1875
9.1875
31.5
24.9375
22.3125
22.3125
25.8125
35
24.0625
22.3125
25.375
21.875
30.625
24.9375
24.0625
35
15.75
6.125
0
17.5
17.0625
7.4375
5.6875
24.0625
0
9.625
16.625
4.375
24.0625
4.8125
24.0625
6.5625
24.0625
25.375
22.75
27.5625
5.6875
0
9.625
9.625
0
9.625
4.375
7.4375
12.25
4.375
4.375
12.25
17.0625
24.5
12.25
5.6875
7.875
4.375
8.75
9.625
2.875
2.875
2.875
15.625
16.59375
15.625
5.28125
20.40625
19.6875
17.1875
25
4.71875
9.21875
0
3.9375
16.34375
4.90625
5.28125
6.28125
13.5625
13.1875
17.8125
18.75
15.625
4.71875
16.5625
22.65625
20.125
23.125
16.25
19.6875
5.28125
6.1875
4.71875
24.1875
3.46875
13.1875
13.1875
19.6875
24.96875
14.5
6.1875
16.59375
16.25
6.1875
6.1875
4.71875
4.71875
6.1875
17.59375
3.9375
2.875
2.875
11.5
4.78125
4.71875
13
20.3125
6.1875
19.03125
20.46875
19.40625
18.5625
19.5
19.53125
19.71875
19.6875
18.6875
21.9375
20.09375
21.65625
18.5625
5.5
6.1875
14.46875
12
16.59375
6.625
10.03125
13.59375
6.625
16.3125
6.625
4.125
5.28125
10.34375
10.09375
3
6.15625
10.34375
16.59375
5.25
4.71875
21.75
4.6875
4.6875
4.6875
4.6875
4.6875
17.59375
25
5.25
6.15625
16.78125
2.875
22.28125
6.1875
16.78125
13.1875
11.40625
5.28125
13.1875
23.96875
14.5
13.1875
19.09375
19.6875
19.40625
22.9375
22.65625
19.03125
16.3125
5.25
4.71875
22.28125
23.75
4.71875
6.375
14.375
4.71875
13.1875
6.1875
0
18.75
16.59375
6.1875
13.1875
3.9375
5.28125
5.28125
4.71875
14.34375
0
6.28125
17.1875
15.625
13.1875
17.1875
20.40625
4.71875
16.59375
6.1875
12.15625
4.78125
4.71875
20.75
5.28125
15.625
4.71875
5.28125
4.71875
10.09375
10.09375
13.96875
5.25
11.5
25
16.78125
10.84375
13.1875
0
3.9375
14.5
6.1875
5.25
5.25
13.59375
13
3.9375
6.1875
5.28125
2.875
2.875
14.375
9.21875
16.34375
16.75
0
15.34375
13.1875
6.625
13.59375
6.15625
12.15625
6.625
19.9375
14.46875
6.1875
6.28125
5.28125
5.5
13.1875
5.25
10.96875
17.59375
24.125
3
20.3125
5.25
5.25
5.25
4.125
4.125
4.125
4.125
4.125
5.25
4.6875
4.6875
4.6875
4.71875
6.15625
3.46875
10.34375
10.34375
14.5
2.875
17.59375
5.25
5.25
4.78125
5.25
28.395
18.0675
4.63875
23.5125
22.84125
28.5
28.875
22.7925
6.48375
18.46875
21.34875
3.34875
22.395
6.48375
30
22.84125
8.6325
3.2325
17.65875
18.19125
18.73125
19.29375
20.22
18.075
21.0525
4.76625
4.76625
3.92625
28.125
30
22.7925
19.34625
4.76625
24
18.46875
27.945
6.48375
13.51875
6.375
5.20125
21.34875
22.5
26.3325
18.375
22.9725
4.395
6.48375
28.5
19.5
22.5
20.37375
6.48375
6.48375
6.48375
6.375
28.125
22.6125
19.9425
16.3125
8.6325
29.26875
19.00125
17.4975
11.88375
4.76625
6.375
6.48375
5.20125
6.48375
22.5375
12.1125
14.925
19.5525
19.5525
12.1125
30
21.45
17.625
17.625
6.48375
6.375
3.34875
18.75
21.42
21.9375
13.51875
4.76625
29.05875
8.5425
15.75
6.48375
5.20125
3.945
3.945
24.57
3.7725
8.6325
24.6675
5.20125
22.9725
3.34875
12
11.93625
11.93625
0
7.14
3.92625
6.48375
22.5
9.67875
22.395
9.67875
22.66875
4.63875
3.7725
11.88375
8.5425
4.395
22.395
30
22.5
7.98
4.06125
20.625
7.98
7.98
18.75
11.88375
7.98
9.67875
7.14
7.98
3.7725
5.20125
7.98
29.05875
20.37375
5.20125
3.84375
0
29.05875
13.78125
22.5
15
5.08125
3.39375
13.51875
30
13.51875
4.06125
15
15
4.64625
27.615
28.395
30
23.16375
17.2725
18.07875
14.58375
18.70875
5.08125
22.395
7.98
20.25
25.57125
23.655
23.5125
22.7925
19.9425
24.11625
20.7
5.08125
19.48125
8.5425
14.925
7.98
11.88375
3.39375
12.63
18.46875
4.64625
11.88375
6.2175
4.245
4.64625
5.08125
8.6325
8.6325
23.5125
7.98
4.61625
3.7725
15
17.85375
5.20125
8.6325
15
16.98375
22.7925
22.9725
22.9725
6.2175
11.93625
8.6325
18.46875
22.575
11.93625
11.93625
3.7725
15.3675
13.3575
7.98
3.87
25.71
19.34625
3.7725
4.13625
21.465
28.75875
4.14375
3.87
13.3575
8.5425
6.48375
4.76625
3.34875
6.2175
4.125
S3 Funding Resource
10
9
11
15
13
7
11
13
13
15
11
15
0
15
6
15
7
6
6
6
9
9
11
0
15
7
15
10
15
7
9
7
15
0
15
6
11
6
6
9
9
11
15
0
0
15
9
11
11
9
15
11
7
0
11
11
0
15
5
15
15
15
6
6
9
11
11
11
15
6
9
11
0
7
6
0
15
0
6
6
9
9
6
6
9
6
7
11
6
9
9
11
8
7
7
9
15
7
7
7
7
9
15
15
11
15
11
13
11
15
13
11
15
11
15
7
7
6
15
15
15
15
9
6
11
15
6
11
6
6
13
6
9
9
7
7
7
7
0
11
13
6
6
7
0
7
0
9
11
13
6
6
9
9
6
9
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
11
11
0
0
15
15
15
15
7
9
11
11
7
11
15
7
9
6
7
0
11
7
15
6
15
9
15
11
7
6
11
7
6
6
15
7
6
0
9
8.25
12
5.25
10.5
9
6
5.25
11.25
9.75
0
0
0
12.75
5.25
5.25
5.25
5.25
6.75
5.25
6.75
5.25
11.25
14.25
0
6
6
9
6.75
6
6
6.75
6
6
6
6.75
8.25
9
5.25
14.25
5.25
6
5.25
6
0
6
5.25
5.25
5.25
0
7.5
6
15
12.75
9.75
6
6
6
6
0
5.25
7.5
6.75
0
11.25
14.25
9
9.75
10.5
15
7.5
6
9.75
14.25
9.75
9
0
3
10.5
0
3
0
7.5
8.25
10.5
3.75
0
11.25
0
5.25
8.25
14.25
10.5
11.25
8.25
13.5
0
12
0
6
9
7.5
6
6
6
6
9
6
6
9
14.25
6.75
2.25
10.5
11.25
7.5
9
7.5
6.75
6.75
6.75
6
7.5
7.5
7.5
9
9
9
6
5.25
7.5
9.75
6.75
0
10.5
8.25
8.25
9
0
9.75
10.5
8.25
6
0
0
6
6
12.75
5.25
12.75
6.75
8.25
0
9.75
9
15
13.5
14.25
6
0
15
6.75
7.5
6.75
6
10.5
10.5
11.25
8.25
7.5
15
9.75
5.25
9.75
12
12
13
11
11
8
10
15
0
10
9
12
11
9
15
11
13
13
14
13
17
14
8
8
15
9
16
8
8
8
0
12
18
20
7
14
13
8
9
10
20
11
11
11
2
10
20
18
2
2
14
0
18
20
19
18
9
2
8
10
8
12
8
8
8
10
8
8
1
0
13
14
14
12
0
20
13
14
14
14
11
7
10
7
7
12
20
13
16
11
20
9
8
11
11
11
10
11
0
7
8
18
14
0
0
11
14
0
16
0
0
13
18
0
13
8
8
12
8
8
0
16
19
0
18
0
11
12
19
0
17
0
0
10
0
0
15
13
13
8
0
0
19
10
12
0
10
16
0
10
11
19
18
19
13
13
10
13
13
13
10
10
0
0
13
0
14
0
11
9
0
0
20
18
19
13
20
18
15
9
0
9
14
11
11
15
13
14
14
13
14
14
20
14
0
20
14
14
15
13
0
14
0
0
0
20
8
13
8
13
0
16
15
14
0
0
12
12
12
18
18
14
7
19
7
12
7
0
7
20
0
23
10
16
17
21
14
18
19
16
17
10
10
10
10
10
12
18
18
0
0
19
23
0
10
15
18
22
21
11
11
20
11
0
0
18
0
0
0
18
14
14
11
16
21
20
15
19
0
19
25
11
13
23
10
16
18
23
12
20
20
19
0
21
22
21
10
22
20
19
21
20
24
25
7
25
24
15
1
24
25
19
10
0
25
15
15
15
13
15
16
16
16
24
18
18
18
18
19
14
23
23
24
12
20
24
24
17
12
19
23
15
10
17
15
0
18
19
0
19
15
22
23
23
19
23
24
24
25
13
10
0
21
1
12
25
0
2
S3 Comments Funding
$ 126,209 offered
$10,000 offered
$22,000 offered
$809,000 offered
$420,680 offered
$60,252 offered
$66,300 offered
$126,044 offered
$1,545,000 offered
$61,996 offered
$125,000 offered
$210,000 offered
None offered
$4,014 offered
after further assessment Grantee has provided more than 100% match from dam reconstruction.
$6,884 offered
$ $423,275 offered
$ 25,000 offered
$3,050 offered
6,566 offered
$4,277 offered
$201,782 offered
$44,000 offered
$64,448 offered
$2,600,000 offered for design and construction but application if for recon and feasibility
$210,000 offered
$277,000 offered
$2,500,000 offered
875528
$3,000,000 offered
$8,000 offered
$283,943 offered
$57,500 offered
$2,925,000 offered
None offered
$213,193 offered
$25,000 offered
$39,000 offered
$4,916 offered
$3,083 offered
$54,799 offered
37,200 offered
$113,000 offered
$100,000 offered
None offered
none offered
$15,000,000 offered
$62,500 offered
$98,800 offered
$100,000 offered
$10,000 offered
$750,000 offered
$240,000 offered
$70,000 Local Contributions
nothing offered
$ 79,300 Local Contribution
$76,780 Local Contributions
Nothing offered
$30,000 Local Contribution, including $20K for biomass inventory.
$280 Local Contribution
$403,900 Local Contribution
$1,061,000 Local Contribution
$10,497,695 Local Contributions
$1,000 Local Contribution
$2,968 Local Contribution
$29,650 Local Contributions
$61,890 Local Contribution
50673
$50,673 Local Contribution
$75,000 Local Contribtuion
3050
$124,708 Local Contribution
$875,528 Local contribution
nothing offered
4000
$7,563 Local Contributions
Nothing offered
$ 105,773 Local Contribution
Nothing offered
7500
$25,164 Local Contribution
$201,782 Local Contribution
$44,000 Local Contribution
$34,450 Local Contributions
$5,000 local contribution
$250,000 Local Contribution
$7,538 Local Contribution
$40,000 Local Contribution
$74,004 Local Contributions
$6,989 Local Contribution
$296,500 Local Contribution
$62,500 Local Contributions
$89,990 Local Contribution
$53,796 Other Grant
$ 26,439 Local Contribution
$515,00 Local Contribution
$ 92,296 Local Contribution
$11,000,000 Local Contribution
$27,036 Local Contribution
$33,980 Local Contribution
$ 6,500 Local Contribution
$57,500 Local Contribution
$537,460 Local Contribution
$314,381 Local Contribution
$266,592 Local Contribution
$64,448 Local Contribution
$600,000 Local Contribution
$43,000 local support
$186,850 Local Support
$ 97,800 Local Support
$10,593,934 local support
$300,000 Local support
$ 108,400 Local match
$81,842 Local Contribution
$113,000 Local Contribution
$1,250,000 Local Match
$15,000 Local Match
$20,000 in kind match offered
$ 13,669 In kind match offered ANTHC.
$12,000 Cash $23,750 in kind match offered.
$1,900,000 Cash match offered
$13,591,226 cash match offered
$ 100,000 Cash match offered.
$ 5,000 in kind match offered.
$ 10,000 in kind match offered.
$ 25,802 cash match offered
$11,500,000 cash match offered
$ 11,000 in kind match offered.
$ 14,000 cash $ 16,000 in kind match offered
$ 9,000 cash match offered
$ 9,000 cash match offered. NEED RESOLUTION 11/5/13
Sean updated score to count match, which is expected and will be written into the grant if awarded.
$ 20,000 cash $10,000 In kind match offered
$ 9,000 cash match offered
$ 141,000 cash match offered.
$ 474,953 cash, $33,000 in kind match offered
$18,000 cash match offered
$ 6,500 cash match offered
$ 18,600 cash match offered
$57,500 Cash match offered
No match offered
$120,000, in kind match offered.
$ 137,820 in kind match offered
$20,677 in kind match ANTHC
$ 14,933 in kind ANTHC match
$ 75, 000 cash $ 75,000 in kind match offered
No match offered
$ 25,000 in kind match offered
No match offered
$25,000 in kind match offered
$25,000 cash $ 24,290 in kind match offered
$153,000 in kind match offered
$4,000 cash Match offered
$5,000 in kind match offered.
$ 201,782 cash match offered
$ 44,000 cash match offered
$ 47,302 in kind match offered
$ 10,000 in kind match
$ 9,687 In kind ANTHC match offered
$ 5,954 in kind ANTHC Match offered
$ 22,057 In kind ANTHC match offered
ANTHC to provide in-kind match of $ 8,663
$ 16,765 in kind ANTHC match offered
ANTHC to provide $ 21,941 of in-kind support
$30,000 cash, $95,000 in kind match offered
$296,936 cash, $56,286 in kind match offered
$ 470,000 cash, $50,000 in kind match offered
No match offered
No match offered
$ 905,000 cash $25,000 in in kind match offered
$ 278,800 in kind match offered
$411,835 in kind match offered
$1,900,000 cash match offered
$11,250 in kind match offerd
$ 6,000 in kind match offered
$14,000 cash, $15,800 in kind match offered
$ 20,289 Cash match offered
$25,000 Cash match offered
$ 125,000 in-kind match offered
$ 8,813,869 cash offered
$ 8,356 cash $3,456 in kind offered
$ 86,448 cash, $51,000 in kind
$10,000 cash
$ 500 cash, $3,000 in kind offered
No match offered
$ 40,000 cash, $137,825 in kind offered
$4,000 cash, $40,000 in-kind
$ 5,914,491 Cash Match offered
$ 11,000 in-kind offered
$ 379,947 cash and $192,891 in-kind offered
$113,000 Cash match offered
$2,035,476 Cash match, $1,021,393 in-kind
$ 82,550 in-kind $10,000 cash match offered
$ 25,800 in-kind match
$6,770 ANTHC pleage of in-kind support
$165,000 cash match offered
$97,000 in -kind offered
$ 13,669 in-kind match offered
$300 in-kind match offered
$ 4,000,000 of cash match offered
In Kind Match of $120,000
$50,000 of in-kind not eligible. $5,900 determined to be allowable match
$1,500,000 identified by applicant as cash match is funds from another State of Alaska grant.
Match offered not acceptable. In-Kind is not part of the project expenses.
No matching offered.
Cash - 5, % - 2, Amount - 3 = 10
Inkind - 5, % - 4, Amount - 2 = 11 (Inidirect costs for Chugachmuit ($14,268) and Port Graham ($38,978) were not included in calculation. Also need to remember to lower grant amount
by $38,978; as this amount was included as being funded by grant funds. New grant total = $387,855
Application withdrawn
Inkind - 5, % - 6, Amount - 3 = 14
No match offered, however language in the report mentions housing offered and local labor; therefore 5 for type.
No match offered or considered 0
Cash & in-kind - 5, % - 6, Amount - 4 = 15 Needed to reduce match to $1,414,756 as matching funds from Round II included.
No match offered = 0
Inkind - 5, % - 1, Amount - 1 = 7 FAILED Stage 1
Cash & inkind - 5, % - 4, Amount - 2 = 11
Info requested 11/17
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 10 Amount 4 = 19
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, Amount 3 = 14
Other SOA Grants 3, % 8, Amount 4 = 15 Need to know about the State grants offered
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 2 = 11
SOA appropriation 3, % 10, Amount 5 = 18
No matching amount identified
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 8, Amount 3 = 16
Match offered is not really match = 0
cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 =
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, amount 3 = 12
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4 Amnount 1 = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 3 = 12
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Caash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 3 = 12
$ 4,696,494 Actual Matching amount.
Cahs and In-Kind 5, % 10, amount 4 = 19
Cash and in-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 2 = 9
Any kind referanced 1, % 1, Amount 1 =3
Failed Stage 1
Failed Stage 1
CAsh and In-Kind 5, % 6, Amount 3 = 14
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 8, Amount 2 = 15
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, amount 1 = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, amount 1 = 12
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 1, = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 2 = 9
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 2 = 9
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 2 = 9
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 1 = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 1 = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 1 = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, amount 1 = 12
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, amount 1 = 12
CAsh and In-Kind 5, % 6, Amount 1
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 1, amount 1 = 7
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 1 = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, Amount 2 = 13
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 2 = 9
Washeteria is not allowable match.
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, amount 2 = 13
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 2 = 11
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, amount 2 = 11
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, amount 3 = 12
Administrative Indirect NOT considered allowable match
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, amount 2 = 13
Cash and In-kind 5, % 6, amount 3 = 14
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, amount 2 = 11
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 1, Amount 2 = 8
No matching funds provided
No actual match provided
Did not pass Stage 1
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Match $500k Denali, $2m SOA total match $2.5m $2,500,000/12,725,000 = 19.65%
SOA grant 3, % 10, amount 4 = 13
Match amount $ 872,402 Project amount $ 4,372,402 Match=19.95%
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, amount 3 = 14 Combined with #825
Other Private (Trident Seafood) 4, % 2, Amount 1 = 7
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 8, Amount 4 = 17
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, amount 2 = 9
3 men for 40 days @ $75 = $ 9,000 not $10,800. $20,000 Excivating, lifting and hoisting equipment. Total match =$ 29,000. 29,000/265,000 = 10.94 %
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, amount 2 = 11
No match provided
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, Amount 2 = 13
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 3 = 12
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 10, amount 5 = 20
FAILED STAGE 1
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 10, Amount 3 =18
Fed Grant 4, % 10, Amount 5 = 19 Grantee may not be able to apply for all they have requested because of the cap.
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 1, amount 2 = FAILED STAGE 1
Type 0, % 0, Amount 0.
Cash and in-kind 5, % 10, Amount 5 = 20
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, amount 2 = 9
Cash & in-kind 5, % 4, Amount 1 = 10
Cash - 5, % - 2, Amount - 2 = 9
Cash - 5, % - 2, Amount - 1 = 8
Cash & in-kind - 5, % - 6, Amount - 3 = 14
Cash & in-kind - 5, % - 6, Amount - 3 = 14
Cash - 5, % - 6, Amount - 4 = 15
Cash - 5, % - 4, Amount - 2 = 11 Only counted $39,500 of match; as the other $40,000 is shown being expended in 2011.
In-kind - 5, % - 2, Amount - 3 = 10
Cash & Loan - 5, % - 10, Amount - 5 = 20
Local cash - 5, % - 6, Amount - 2 = 13
In-kind - 5, % - 1, Amount - 1 = 7
(appears to be in-kind, application not specific)
Cash - 5, % - 6, Amount - 2 = 13
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 6 @ 12
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 6 @ 12
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount (some costs may have already been incurred) = 2, % = 6 (same comment) @ 13
Need additional info to accurately assess match offered. Per Ona Brase only $100,000 available for match. Type (federal grant) = 4; Amount = 3; % = 4 @ 11
Need additional info to assess match offered / Per Ona Brase, only $100,000 actually available for match. Type (other federal grant) = 4; Amount = 3; % = 4 @ 11
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 1 @ 8
Need additional information to assess match offered. Requested 10/7/10; nothing received to date. Type (unidentified) = 1; Amount = 3; % = 6 @ 10
Type (other State grant) = 3, Amount = 4, % = 8 @ 15 / Need additional info to accurately assess match. Score stands per applicant?s representative (Ona Brase)
Failed Stage 1 review
No match offered = 0
Type (other State grants) = 3, Amount (grants not specifically identified, so unsure how definite this amount is?) = 3, % = 4 (same comment) @ 10 Score stands per comments from applicants
representative ( Ona Brase).
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2 @ 9
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 4 @ 12
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Failed Stage 1 review
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2 @ 9
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 8 @ 15
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2 (though the application mentions more inkind services to be provided), % = 4 (same comment) @ 11
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6 @ 13
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6 @ 13
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Type (federal grant) = 4, Amount (only $500,000 available per budget sheet) = 3, % = 6 @ 13
Type (federal grant) = 4, Amount = 3, % = 10 @ 17
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (unidentified) = 1, Amount = 4, % = 10 @ 15 (Requested clarification, nothing provided by applicant.)
Only $500,000 eligible, as the remaining amount is a previous RE Fund grant (not eligible as match) Type (land) = 2, Amount = 3, % = 4 @ 9
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 8 @ 16
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
No match offered = 0
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 6 @ 12
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 10 @ 18
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 5 (though not all in place, only approximately half appears currently available, still gets maximum points) 5, % (same comment) = 10 @ 20
Need additional info to assess match.
Match = $25,000 / Type (unidentified) = 1; Amount = 2; % = 4 @ 7
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Score #670--not this proposal--Unless Doug/Audrey find something different between hydro gen and TX proposals.
Type (other Federal grant) = 4, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 13
Need additional info to assess Match, per review there is only $5,000 offered - not $15,000; scored on the $5,000 amount. No response received for clarification.
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2 @ 9
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 4 @ 10
Type (cash [debt]) = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10 @ 20
However, project failed Stage 1 review
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
No match offered = 0
The $99,000 noted was incurred prior to the eligible date (7/1/2011), therefore not eligible as match, but worth 2 points as previous investment in the project = 2
No match offered for this stage of project = 0
(Though the application budget sheets do note match to be provided.) If this match is to be considered, then:
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 2 @ 10
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10 @ 20
Type (other grants and local funds, highest scoring type considered) = 5; Amount = 3, % = 10 @ 18
None listed in application, but budget sheet lists $613,106 in other State and federal grants. These funds will be spent before eligible date (7/1/11) per UAF; so go to ?previous investment?.
= 2
Funds listed have already been expended, therefore not eligible as match, but worth something as a previous investment towards project completion = 2
Type (other State and federal grants) = 4, Amount = 4, % = 6
The Round I grant ($820,000) is listed as match, not eligible as match. Need to check on remaining match, per applicant only $2,070,000 now eligible as match.
No match offered = 0
Type (other federal grant funds) = 4, Amount = 4, % = 10 @ 18
(Though the application seems to infer this match is tentative - see page 19)
Type (cash / bonding) = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10 @ 20
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 4, % = 10 @ 19
Type (other federal grant) = 4, Amount = 4, % = 10 @ 18
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2 @ 9
Land offered for the site, but no matching dollars or inkind = 2
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 4 @ 10
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 4 @ 12
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 4 @ 10
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
No match offered; but AP&T did offer the use of their facility during the project?s work period = 1
No match offered = 0
Type (Cash & Inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6 @ 13
Type (Cash and other grants, benefit for the higher value) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 4 @ 12
No match offered = 0
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10 @ 20 Failed Stage 1 review - already has a grant from Round III for $4,000,000.
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6 @ 13
Type (cash or loan proceeds) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14 12/6/2010 AP&T indicted it won?t pursue this project
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 1 @ 7
Type (cash) = 5 , Amount = 1, % = 4 @ 10
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, %= 1 @ 7
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 1 @ 7
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 4 @ 12
Type (bonding) = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10 @ 20
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6 @ 13
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 8 @ 16
$560,000 listed, but not budgeted - appears to be amount offered for Round I grant. Will need to receive updated budget before these funds can be counted as match.
$60,000 is for wood stockpiled - per FAQ #2 not eligible as match
$500,000 is for wood processor purchased previously, not eligible as match / need to confirm this.
Per school district (Scott McManus) they will now provide $75,000 in cash. Therefore:
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (cash & financing) = 5, amount = 5, % = 10 @ 20
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2 @ 9
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (cash) = 5, amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (cash) =5, amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (cash) = 5, amount = 1, % = 4 @ 10
Type (cash) = 5, amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Per the application, costs of $25,000 have already been incurred; therefore not eligible; the remaining $24,300 is to come from a federal grant not yet obtained = 0
Type (inkind) = 5, amount = 1, % = 1 @ 7
Type (unidentified, but probably inkind) = 5, amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (in-kind labor & materials) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 10 @ 18
Type (cash) = 5. amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
No match offered @ 0
No match offered = 0
$356,000 offered; however, only $206,000 allowable as the other $150,000 has already been incurred - thererfore not eligible.
Amount = 3, Type (land) = 2, % = 6 @ 11
Type (cash) = 5, amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
To be considered as one applicaton with #517
match source unidentified Therefore unable to score
land and building offered as inkind Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 8
no match offered
Match source unidentified Therefore, unable to score
cash & inkind offered as match Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 6
other federal grant offered as match Type = 4, Amount = 4, % = 10
To be considered as one applicaton with #523
match source unidentified Therefore unable to score
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 4, % = 4
(CoE = St. Mary\'s @ .594 + Pilot Station @ .632 + Mountain Village @ .606 / 3 = .611)
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 1, % = 2
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 1, % = 2
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 4
(Coe = Teller @ .715 + Brevig @ .753 / 2 = .734)
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 1, % = 2
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 1, % = 2
match offered = \'as needed to complete\'; unidentified Therefore unable to score
(CoE = Slana)
cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 8
(CoE = Delta Junction)
cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 4, % = 10
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
no match offered
inkind offered as match Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 10 However, the grant also has received another federal grant = $900,000 for this project, so their match really is significantly
higher. Scores reflect this additional grant funding.
no match offered
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
Inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4
(CoE = .204 [Statewide rate])
$1,500,000 of this match is for turbines in place; therefore only $200,000 counted as match.
Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 4
cash offered as part of match Type = 5, amount = 4, % = 10
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
no match offered
(CoE = Hoonah)
other fed grant offered as match Type = 4, amount = 3, % = 10
(CoE = Homer)
no match offered
no match offered / application referenced possible future land donation
other State grant for match Type = 3, amount = 3, % = 4
no match offered land previously offered for project
no match offered aplication referenced possible future land donation
cash & inkind offered as match Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 8
inkind & cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 6
(CoE = MEA rate)
inkind offered as match Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 6
(CoE = MEA rate)
inkind offered as match Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 1
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
no match offered
no match offered
inkind & loan offered as match Type = 5, amount = 4, % = 10
Other State grant offered as match Type = 3, Amount = 3, % = 4
Cash & Inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 4
$411,060 match offered, however only $205,000 is really identified and from the narrative it appears this amount was already incurred, so not eligible; but could go to readiness? Therefore,
unable to score
$166,137 match offered/other State grant Type = 3, Amount = 3, % = 4
federal grant source of match Type = 4, Amount = 4, % = 8
(will need to determine if these match dollars have already been spent before awarding grant)
no match offered
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 1, % = 4
(state budget source of cash)
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4
cash and other federal grant offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 4, % = 10
(This score does NOT include the federal grant-unable to determine if it is place.)
(CoE = Tok @ .531 + Tetlin @ .197 + Tanacross @ .531 + Dot Lake @ .295 / 4 = .389)
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 10
(part of school district\'s budget for renovations)
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 4, % = 10
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
inkind and land offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
(CoE = MEA rate)
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 2
($150,000 grant from Round I also awarded for this project, can NOT be counted as match)
inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
in kind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 2
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 2
no match offered
no match offered
(Narrative states there will be $17,524 in staff support/should go to readiness?)
federal grant offered as match Type = 4, Amount = 3, % = 6
(applicant has applied for it)
(CoE = Nome)
no match offered
(CoE = Ruby)
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
other federal grant (not yet applied for) offered as match not counted as match
federal grant offered as match Type = 4, Amount = 3, % = 4
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2
no match offered
no match offered
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10
(CoE = HEA rate)
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 10
(CoE = GVEA rate)
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 4, % = 10
(CoE = GVEA rate)
inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
cash and other federal grants offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10; thou some of the match may not be in place yet
(CoE = Naknek Electric rate)
Match = federal grant and City funds Amount = 3, Type = 5 (some City funds), % = 10
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 8
(CoE = CVEA rate)
inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2
(CoE = Palmer)
no match offered
(CoE = Metlakatla)
$820,000 of match is RE Fund grant from Round I/not counted; therefore match = $500,000. Match scored using this amount
other fede grant offered as match Type = 4, Amount = 3, % = 2
(CoE = Metlakatla)
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4
other fed grant offered as match Type = 4, amount = 3, % = 8
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
(Coe = Chistochina @ .459 + Slana @.522 / 2 = .491
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
(CoE = Whale Pass)
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6(CoE = Craig & Hydaburg)
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10
(CoE = Tok @ .531 + Tetlin @ .197 + Tanacross @ .531 + Dot Lake @ .295 / 4 = .389)
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 6
no match offered
cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 5, % = 10
$350,000 match offered, though $125,000 may have been incurred prior to eligible date (7/1/2010) ? Therefore, match scored at $225,000 Type = 5 (land purchase), Amount = 3, % = 6
$150,000 offered, as cash and other grants? Type = 5, amount = 3 % = 6
$80,000 cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 8
(CoE for Eagle River used)
$40,000 inkind offered Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 6
$402,610 offered, however only $95,000 is really identified and from the narrative it appears this amount was already incurred, so not eligible; but could go to readiness? Therefore,
unable to score
(CoE = Angoon)
Capital (cash) offered as match, per application the grantee will need to raise this
Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
Will need to document this amount of match before a grant could be offered
(CoE = Delta Junction)
no match offered
No match offered, but application states possibility of additional university funding-should go to readiness.
12/09 requested info on match, grantee said no match but it appears there may be some
(CoE = Ruby @ .980 + Galena @ .563 / 2 = .772)
Cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10
In-kind = $15,000 and $80,000 for land (?) seems high; land value will need to be confirmed if grant to be considered.
Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 1
Cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
$72,000 match offered Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 1
$45,000 match offered Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 6 Cash and inkind offered
no match offered
$102,602 match offered Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 8 Inkind support offered for truck to be used and funds from another federal grant in place
$42,123 match offered Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 8 Inkind offered for construction and installation costs
$255,744 match offered Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 6 Inkind offered is for removing overhead lines and admin of the project?
no match offered
simply identified, no evidence presented that application actually made for funds. Further concern, the use of the Minnesota Flip Model will raise questions about ownership-the RFA
was specific about this. So I am reluctant to move this project forward.
(CoE = Delta Junction)
$350,641 match offered Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 4
$350,641 match offered Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 4
$350,641 match offered Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 4
$261,680 match/ cash & inkind Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 10
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
$250,000 Match offered Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 10 (federal grant applied for, so counts as match with the inkind offered)
$250,000 match offered Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
$3,000 Match offered Type = 5, amount = 1, % = 1
$13,031,000 offered as match, but $4 M is a RE Fund-Round I grant; therefore match = $9,031,000
Type = 4 (federal grant), amount =5, % = 10
$12,500 offered as inkind Type = 5, Amount = 1, % = 1
(Used Kotzebue\'s energy cost for #1)
Type of match = 5, amount = 3, % = 4
$49,300 of the $7,187,738 actually in hand-remainder simply identified per Phil Kootz with Louden Tribal Council. Therefore, only that amount reflected here Amount = 2, Type = 4 (fed
grant) %= 1
No match offered
cash & inkind source of match Type = 5, amount = 1, % = 1
Cash offered of over $8,000,000. Type = 5, Amount =5, and % = 10
Match consists of Round I RE Fund grant. No points awarded for this.
Failed Stage 1
Failed Stage 1
Failed Stage 1
Type (federal grant and local funds; take higher valued item) = 5; % = 15; amount = 3
Type (local inkind) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (local) = 5; % = 8; amount = 3
type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 1
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 13; amount = 1
Type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 1
Type (local) = 5; % = 13; amount = 3
Type of Match (federal grant) = 4; % = 8; amount = 2
Type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 3
Type (inkind and cash) = 5; % = 8; amount = 3
Type (cash and inkind) = 5; % 8; amount =4
Type (cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 6; amount = 1
Type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type of match (local in-kind and federal grant, take higher value)= 5; % of grant = 15; amount = 3
no match offered
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 6; amount = 3
No specific match offered
Type (cash) = 5; % = 13; amount = 1
Type (multiple; took highest ranked-local) = 5; % = 15; amount = 3
Type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
No match offered
Type (local funding) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 8; amount = 2
Type (local) funds = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Application withdrawn by applicant
Type of match (local) = 5; % = 13; amount = 2
type (application says local funds, it is believed the source of these funds is a State grant) = 3; % = 15; amount = 4
Failed Stage 1
Type (local funds) = 5; % = 13; amount = 3
Failed Stage 2
Not eligible applicant per Mike Mitchell
Type (local) = 5; % = 15; amount = 4
Failed Stage 2
Type (local_ = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 4; amount = 2
Type (cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 2
No match noted
Type (local_ = 5; % = 11; amount = 4
Type (inkind and local cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 2
No match offered
No match offered
Type (cash) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type (local cash & inkind) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
No match offered
No match offered
No match offered
Type (lcoal) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type (local funds) = 5; % = 6; amount = 3
Type (local cash) = 5; % = 6; amount = 3
Type (inkind) = 5 % = 4; amount = 2
City commits the local utility to provide items?
Type (land) = 5 (will need to confirm value posted for land if grant awarded); % = 8; amount = 3
Type (inkind, took higher valued item) = 5; % = 13; amount = 3
No match offered = 0 Failed Stage 1
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 13; amount = 2
Type (local) = 5; % = 8; amount = 2
Failed Stage 1
Type (AP&T cash) = 5; % = 11; amount = 3
No match offered
Type (other federal grant) = 4; % = 15; amount = 3
Type (AP& T funding) = 5; % = 11; amount = 3
Type (cash) = 5; % = 15; amount = 5
Applicant submitted revised information
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 4; amount = 3
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 4; amount = 2
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 6; amount = 2
Type (cash) = 5; % = 15; amount = 3
Failed Stage 1 review
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Same as 203 / only this one (212) is to be scored.
(Match actually is $650,000; but the additional amount does not change the score; per the match matrix.)
Type (other grant and inkind; item with higher value used) = 5; % = 8; amount = 3
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type (Inkind offered as match) = 5; % = 15; Amount = 3
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 6; amount = 1
APPLICATION WITHDRAWN BY SCHOOL DISTRICT
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (local) = 5; % = 6; amount = 3
Type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 4
11 for %, 4 for ammount, and 5 for the type of match offered
The source of the $18M Other Funds listed on the Budget Summary is "Federal funds to be solicited"
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
no match offered
no match offered
Applicant basically asked for AEA help and to complete a feasibilty study
no match offered
13 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 3 for type of match offered (State grant per call to Harvey Paul, manager Kong Power)
11 for %, 5 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
4 for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 3 for type of match offered (State grant per call to William Igkurak, manager Kwig Power)
11 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
Grant request is really only $10,500,000
13 for %, 4 for amount, and 4 for type of match offered
PCrimp: Added $6,645,000 to Other Funds and increased Total Grant Costs so that match amount/score consistent.
11 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
13 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
Applicant requested to lower request to $3,450,00 and a match of $2,825,000 to be provided. (Match score changes to 24 with this change - 15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match
offered.)
11 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 5 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
4 for %, 2 for amount, and 1 for type of match offered
Match offered is a \'reduced\' rate for overhead - this application also budgeted for indirect costs which are not eligilble.
no match offered directly - reduced royalties offered as match
Match of $17,588,400 shown in the application / need to determine if this is for this phase
15 for %, 5 for amount, and 5 for type
PCrimp: Added $17,588,400 to Other Funds and increased Total Grant Costs so that match amount/score consistent.
Match of $6,157,850 documented in the application / need to determine if this applies to this phase
15 for %, 5 for amount, and 5 for type
PCrimp: Added $6,157,850 to Other Funds and increased Total Grant Costs so that match amount/score consistent.
8 points for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
no match offered However, the application does discuss a lower rate for certain studies and staff time as a match too
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 5 for amount, and 5 for type
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
This match is not confirmed and partially composed of a $2,000,000 bond which has not yet been issued.
Budget worksheet amounts do not match the grant application amounts; application amounts used.
4 for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
Amount of match should be = $586,000
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
no match offered
15 for %, 5 for amount, and 5 for type (land)
This amount of match ($7,000,000) is an estimate and not firm at all; at least $6 Million is in future \'donations\'.
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
6 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 3 for amount and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
11 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
11 for %, 2 for amount, 5 for type of match offered
4 for %, 3 for amount, and 4 for type of match offered (other federal grant)
11 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered (in-kind)
11 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type (in-kind) match
11 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type (in-kind)
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type
6 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type (multiple types, but cash is part of the match)
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 4 for type (other federal grants included)
Application and budget worksheet have different amounts. Application amounts used.
15 for %, 4 for amount and 5 for type of match
4 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match
11 for %, 4 for amount and 5 for type of match
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered (land) Match source(s) were not clearly identified - will need to make sure of this if this becomes a grant
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type
8 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
4 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered (in-kind for part of the match)
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
no match offered; however value of land offered, but no amount was provided. Therefore, minimum given for Amount (1) and % (4) and 5 points given for land as in-kind.
11 for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
No match offered
no match offered; however in narrative it dicuss grant administration at no cost, therefore eligible for 1 point as some match was offered
11 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match
no match offered
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match (in-kind)
13 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match
13 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 4 for type of match (other grants)
4 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match
15 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match (in-kind)
11 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match
15 for, % 5 for amount, and 5 for type of match
6 for %, 3 for amount, and 4 for type of match (federal grant)
11 for %, 3 for amount, 5 for type of match
Concern: Application\'s budget has indirect costs in certain areas / these costs are not eligible
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match
4 for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type of match
no match clearly identified for 1st phase
4 for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
no match offered
no match offered
no match offered
15 for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
no match offered However, previous investments were counted
4 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type
11 for %, 2 for amount, & 5 for type of match
15 points for %, 5 points for amount, & 5 for type of match
no match offered
no match offered
6 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for Type
No matfch offered
Previous investment taken into account
S3 Stage 2 Project Feasibility
0
0
9.11
5.44
1.72
11.22
2.94
6.5
11
0
14.39
0
0
0.22
7.17
14.44
0
3.22
10.83
4.83
12.67
6.06
0
0
0
0
11.89
5.56
8.67
4.17
10.56
9.5
0.61
11.22
6.94
6.56
3.33
1.56
6.5
3.06
0.17
10.83
6.56
7.33
14.22
5.72
0
7.72
0
0
13
6
0
7.666666666659
0
0
11.8899999999881
7.1666666666595
12.666666666654
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.666666666664
0
0
0
0
0
0.276666666666389
16.4433333333169
1.88999999999811
5.33
0
7.55666666665911
16.4433333333169
0
14.3899999999856
0
0.94333333333239
13.06
2.94333333333039
12.333333333321
0
8.10999999999189
3.10999999999689
15.4999999999845
0
0
0
0.94333333333239
0.223333333333111
2.56
3.33333333333
0
3.10999999999689
0
2.333333333331
0
10.3899999999896
6.44
6.999999999993
5.333333333328
6.333333333327
11.94
0.666666666666
10.5566666666561
9.55666666665711
14.1666666666525
7.8333333333255
0
0
0.94333333333239
13.9433333333194
14.4999999999855
0
0
14.76666667
16.26666667
14.63333333
14.23333333
18.86666667
12.3
9.266666667
10.46666667
8.733333333
11.66666667
9.166666667
9.333333333
14.83333333
9.4
12.83333333
9.5
13
16.66666667
15.83333333
10.43333333
11.26666667
8.566666667
17.53333333
11.53333333
5.5
10.6
7.066666667
11.53333333
13.53333333
17.53333333
11.96666667
14.83333333
13.16666667
17.6
9.3
16.03333333
17.03333333
17.03333333
14.03333333
17.06666667
16.6
12.56666667
16.86666667
17.26666667
0
10.96666667
13.86666667
11.63333333
13.36666667
7.066666667
12.2
17
16.56666667
14.6
7.8
16.23333333
18.06666667
17.7
7.866666667
10.43333333
15.33333333
15.56666667
17.86666667
12.9
12.23333333
11.53333333
16.1
13.26666667
10.93333333
9.866666667
4.233333333
7.833333333
9.2
12.1
16.4
11.46666667
9.133333333
16.1
7.9
9.566666667
12
5.766666667
0
5.433333333
16.46666667
14.8
17.06666667
5.966666667
9.6
17.43333333
10.86666667
11.13333333
10.43333333
9
9.366666667
8
11.83333333
12.4
8.533333333
12.33333333
17.93333333
15.06666667
14.3
15.76666667
16.53333333
17.46666667
7
16.8
11.93333333
14.73333333
16.3
15.3
16.83333333
15.86666667
16
12.5
16.3
8.4
13.1
17.8
11.4
15.66666667
12.2
5.9
8.4
18.5
18
15.13333333
12.1
18.8
14.53333333
13.4
9.866666667
18.33333333
12.76666667
15.4
6.2
15.23333333
12.33333333
11.6
5.633333333
0
5.666666667
13.33333333
8
0
18.4
13.9
12.46666667
14.4
11.6
15.96666667
15.96666667
11.4
12.46666667
15.96666667
14.96666667
10.8
13.13333333
0
16.8
15.86666667
16.5
0
0
0
0
0
15.96666667
13.76666667
0
15.83333333
15.5
12.63333333
16.56666667
7.2
15.73333333
11.03333333
17.4
14.96666667
10.8
11.36666667
5.5
16.73333333
12.83333333
8.9
12.2
11.96666667
12.3
8.466666667
8.866666667
18
0
9.9
10.33333333
10.06666667
14.6
0
0
16.13333333
15.06666667
10.43333333
11.63333333
8.5
13.33333333
17.86666667
12.33333333
14.56666667
10.63333333
15.73333333
6.8
16.46666667
11.06666667
10.53333333
10.53333333
18.06666667
11.43333333
11.5
17.93333333
15
11.06666667
14.93333333
13.56666667
16.26666667
12.53333333
7.566666667
15.43333333
18.06666667
8.333333333
9.866666667
17.33333333
17.26666667
15.03333333
10
13.9
12.83333333
9.8
12.76666667
12.9
15.93333333
12
11.46666667
12.06666667
11.86666667
11.4
16.2
15.2
12.56666667
3
6.8
10.26666667
9.366666667
10.13333333
7.533333333
9.4
11.26666667
11.33333333
11.9
13.7
16.33333333
0
15.76666667
17.66666667
10.66666667
10.66666667
10.93333333
11.4
14.66666667
14.93333333
9.266666667
7.2
13.2
15.4
11.46666667
14.46666667
7.566666667
16.8
15.03333333
12.2
11.46666667
11.96666667
10.73333333
14.53333333
12.16666667
6.766666667
7.866666667
14.83333333
9.1
8.6
18.66666667
12.53333333
9.133333333
11.13333333
14.1
11.93333333
11.86666667
16.8
12.43333333
12.66666667
10.13333333
5.2
11.56666667
15.3
15.4
8.766666667
14.9
14.4
13.13333333
9.366666667
17.13333333
16.46666667
9.566666667
12.8
14.83333333
11.36666667
17.2
8.333333333
9.066666667
10.86666667
9.933333333
17.6
16.33333333
11.83333333
8.133333333
10.53333333
11.2
16.16666667
15.13333333
9.766666667
12.23333333
11.23333333
9.066666667
12.66666667
14.4
16.1
15.16666667
12.8
6
12.4
9.933333333
4.6
12.66666667
10.56666667
11.26666667
13.83333333
10.43333333
12.86666667
17.13333333
13.53333333
9.4
8.016666667
10
10.9
10
13.9
15.33333333
12.2
18.73333333
11.63333333
16.26666667
12.9
7.066666667
16.96666667
13.13333333
17.6
13.26666667
13.73333333
13.6
11.86666667
13.2
11.93333333
13.7
14.33333333
12.33333333
13.13333333
11.13333333
13.46666667
14.13333333
14.96666667
12
12.26666667
12.13333333
12.93333333
13.93333333
10.26666667
10.6
8.233333333
10.13333333
17.2
13.46666667
13.03333333
16.86666667
12.06666667
10.53333333
12.8
9
16.53333333
10.86666667
16.53333333
14.9
16.93333333
16.8
13.73333333
12.26666667
12.26666667
13.06666667
16.36666667
17.86666667
8.933333333
12.86666667
11.53333333
15.33333333
12.1
12.96666667
15.33333333
12.1
17.93333333
7.133333333
6.333333333
17
14.86666667
11.26666667
17.06666667
12.86666667
15.13333333
6.933333333
7.6
13.83333333
17.8
14.36666667
16.63333333
8.533333333
13.86666667
11.86666667
14.86666667
17.73333333
18
11.86666667
6.1
12.8
11.73333333
11.6
14.93333333
16.2
7.466666667
15.76666667
15.4
11.86666667
17.46666667
13.6
13.7
11.93333333
8.566666667
11.8
10.93333333
11.06666667
11.06666667
11.06666667
8.333333333
14.76666667
12.46666667
12.46666667
11.93333333
18.26666667
12.56666667
15.8
11.4
14.53333333
11.2
12.36666667
17.93333333
12.3
11.53333333
17.53333333
18.4
12.43333333
18.66666667
14.06666667
15.26666667
14.43333333
14.06666667
10.73333333
14.2
12.33333333
14.6
12.6
17.4
9.066666667
18.26666667
18.86666667
4.133333333
9.266666667
16.2
18.26666667
10.73333333
9.333333333
11.86666667
11.3
18.53333333
14.93333333
16.13333333
18.2
16.66666667
18.46666667
17.93333333
5.533333333
6.4
1.8
13.66666667
17.06666667
4.666666667
4.2
10.13333333
19
17.1
5.6
10.56666667
7.133333333
6.866666667
6.866666667
12.73333333
13.96666667
S3 Project Readiness
4.33
5
1.5
3.5
2.33
2.67
1.5
5
2.33
4
3.5
1.83
3.33
4
2.5
4
3
3
3
3
2
3.33
3.83
2.5
4.5
1.83
4
3
3.5
2.5
2.17
4.5
4.33
5
4
1.67
2.5
1.83
3.33
2.5
3.33
2.83
2.33
2.33
3
1.17
2.5
1.33
1.83
2.17
3.67
4.5
2.5
2.33
3
4
2.33
3
2.5
2
3
2.5
3
3
1.67
2
1.5
4
3.17
3.83
3.33
3.33
0.5
2.67
2.83
3
2.5
0.67
1.67
4.5
2
3.833333333
2
2.833333333
5
0
2.5
3.833333333
3
3
3
2.833333333
2.833333333
2.5
2.833333333
3
5
3
2.5
2.5
2
2.5
4
4
2
4.5
2
3
4
2.5
3
3.833333333
1.333333333
3.833333333
4
3.833333333
5
3
5
2
3.666666667
5
4
3
4.5
3.5
1.5
2.5
5
2
3
2
3.833333333
3.5
3
3
4
3
5
5
5
3
3
4
4.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
6
6
6
0
4
8
8
6
4
6
6
6
4
4
4
0
6
6
5
6
6
4
4
0
3.666666667
4
6
5.666666667
6
4
6
5.666666667
4
6
2
10
4.666666667
3.333333333
2
4
4
4
2
2
2
5
4
8
6
1
2
6
6
1.666666667
0.666666667
6
4
5.666666667
7.666666667
6
8
4
4
4
4
4
5
4.333333333
8
2
9
3.666666667
4
8
1
6
8
5
3.666666667
4
4
4.666666667
5
1.666666667
2.333333333
4
4
4
7.666666667
7
1.333333333
4.333333333
2.333333333
6
6
6
2
4
5.333333333
2.333333333
8
4
4
4
10
3.333333333
1
0.666666667
4.666666667
9
3
4
6.666666667
6
6
6
2.333333333
6.666666667
4.666666667
6
6
6
10
6
6
2.666666667
6
6
7.666666667
6
4
2
5
6.333333333
5.666666667
6
0
4.333333333
5.666666667
4.333333333
4
4.666666667
6
7.333333333
4
10
4.333333333
7
2.666666667
1.666666667
4
4
4
8.333333333
2.333333333
4
10
7
4
3
2
6
5
4.5
4.5
5
5
4.5
4
2.333333333
4
4.5
3.5
4
4.5
4
4.5
4.5
5
3.833333333
3.833333333
2.833333333
2
4.5
4.166666667
1.5
3.5
5
5
3.666666667
4.333333333
4.166666667
3.666666667
4.333333333
3.5
5
5
4.5
5
4
4.5
3.666666667
3.833333333
3.833333333
4.5
4.166666667
4.5
3.666666667
3.333333333
4.5
4.5
4
3.333333333
5
4
4.5
2.833333333
2
5
4.333333333
5
4
1.666666667
2.5
5
5
4.5
4.166666667
4.5
4.5
1.666666667
4.833333333
3.5
4.5
4
3.333333333
5
4
4.166666667
5
5
3.5
1
3
5
4
2.5
5
5
5
4.333333333
5
5
5
4.166666667
4.833333333
4
4.5
5
3.833333333
5
1.833333333
5
4.833333333
4
3.666666667
5
4.5
4.666666667
4.666666667
5
4.5
5
5
4.666666667
5
3.5
5
5
1.833333333
5
5
2.5
2.5
3.5
5
4
4.5
4
4.833333333
5
4.833333333
4.833333333
5
5
4.333333333
4.333333333
5
4.833333333
S3 Benefits
6.63
2
2
13.25
10.25
11.75
12.12
12.25
0.63
4.13
12.25
6.5
9
1.88
12.87
0.75
1.62
12.5
4.13
3.75
1.13
12
8.5
0.75
12.12
1.13
8.63
3.75
1.75
4.13
5
5.13
5.5
0.38
1.75
8.5
7.13
6.38
0.63
11.37
6.5
4.5
1.75
11.5
10
12.38
1.88
1.25
6.38
0.5
7.25
14.5
5.63
2.37
6.25
13.13
9.63
0.63
13
3.75
11.75
7.13
0.75
14.5
0.75
1.75
6.12
0.75
0.75
6
0.63
11.75
5.5
8.5
2.63
4.75
12.87
7.13
12.63
5.25
13.88
7.5
5.88
12.12
9
1.13
12
10.125
11.25
7.625
12.875
8.25
0.375
4.125
0.75
11.25
6.375
2.125
12.375
0
10
4.125
4.5
11.625
11.625
1.5
5.375
0.75
12.5
1.25
1.125
4.5
0.75
4.875
8.875
12.5
3.375
12.375
4
14.125
9
9
11.25
11.25
4.5
12.5
10.25
6
13
11
0
0.5
5.375
5.25
3.25
0.375
11.625
12.5
12
11.625
3.75
11.25
13.125
12.625
8.375
4.875
9.75
13.5
12.125
6.25
1.75
0.75
10.75
6.375
1
0.625
0.375
0.625
0.375
1.375
12.625
0.375
8.875
11
1.25
11.875
8.125
0.125
0
1.75
10.5
12.25
12.75
3.625
1.375
13
0
0
1.125
0
1.125
0.375
3.375
3.75
0
4.5
12.875
12.5
7.125
10.875
12.75
12.75
1.75
12.75
1
6
11.625
9.625
13.125
12.375
12
4.875
12.625
1
7.625
12.875
11.875
12.125
1.75
0.5
8.25
13
13
9
11.375
13
8.5
4.5
11.75
12.375
9.75
11.625
1.875
11.125
0.25
11.75
0.375
0
1
2.375
4.125
0
13.25
1.875
6.625
11
1.375
11.375
11.375
0.75
5.25
11.375
9.125
2.5
1.75
0
12
12
12
0
0
0
0
0
8.625
12.5
0
8.625
6.625
2.375
11.75
0.75
12
1.375
13.125
13.25
1.125
12.375
12.375
11.875
3.375
2.875
8.375
1.25
3.875
1
1.25
12
0
8.5
0.75
0.75
10
0
0
12
11.75
4.875
8.25
1.375
9.375
12.5
8.25
8.25
1.5
7.5
2.25
12.375
0.375
0.625
6.75
11.875
1.125
3.75
12
12.125
0.375
12.75
10.125
13.5
4.875
1.5
12.875
13.375
0.375
0.375
13.75
12.75
6.375
0.375
3.375
2.625
0.5
2.25
2
10.5
1.125
1.125
0.75
1.125
0.75
7.5
9.375
7.125
6.75
1.5
0.375
5
1.375
1
1
2.25
2.625
2.75
2.25
11.875
0
8
14.125
0.375
0.375
0.375
0.75
12
14.25
1.375
0.625
3.375
11.75
2
12
0.75
12.75
9.625
1.75
0.375
1.5
0.75
7.125
1.875
0.625
2.125
7.125
2.375
0.75
14.25
2.375
1.625
1.75
3.875
2
2.375
12.75
9.25
2.875
0.375
1.125
3
7.5
7.875
2.25
6.375
6.375
11.625
8.25
13.875
12.125
1
2.625
8.125
2.125
11.75
0.75
2.125
1
2.5
12.75
12.375
1.75
1.125
0.375
1.5
12
10.5
3.75
6.625
3.75
1.375
4.875
7.5
12.875
12.125
6.625
0.625
12.125
3.5
1.125
2.625
2.875
1.5
2.5
0.625
5.5
12.625
2.5
0.5
6.125
0.375
1.5
0.375
6.5
7.5
2.75
12.625
2.125
12.25
14.125
0.375
12
3.25
8.166666667
5.666666667
4.333333333
4
4
6.166666667
7.5
7.166666667
5.666666667
5.166666667
5.833333333
3.5
6.833333333
6.5
7.166666667
4
6
6
7.5
8
4.333333333
3.5
4.5
3.333333333
7.5
4.666666667
6.666666667
8.666666667
4.5
3
6.5
2.5
9
1.833333333
7.5
7.166666667
8.5
8.833333333
8.166666667
6.833333333
6.833333333
6.5
8.5
9.5
4
6.5
4.5
7.5
5.166666667
5
8.5
6.333333333
9.333333333
6.333333333
2.5
8.666666667
9
2.5
8.166666667
7.833333333
7.833333333
1.666666667
5.5
5.5
9
7.666666667
8.166666667
2.666666667
7.166666667
6.833333333
6
8.166666667
9.166666667
5
4
5.5
5
7.5
7.166666667
10
1
8
7.666666667
5
7.833333333
7.5
7
4.833333333
2.5
4.5
5.5
2.333333333
2.333333333
2.333333333
3.833333333
6.333333333
3.833333333
3.833333333
3.833333333
9.833333333
8.333333333
9
4.5
7.5
4
7.666666667
9
7.666666667
3.5
9.666666667
9.166666667
5.5
9.833333333
8.833333333
7.333333333
7.333333333
6
4.5
8.333333333
4.5
8.333333333
4.5
9.666666667
2
9.166666667
9.666666667
1.333333333
3.833333333
8.666666667
9.166666667
6
3.666666667
4
4.833333333
9.5
9.166666667
9.166666667
9.666666667
9.833333333
9
9.333333333
1.5
0
0.833333333
4.166666667
9.166666667
2.666666667
3.166666667
2
10
8.333333333
1
7.666666667
3.166666667
3.166666667
3.166666667
4.166666667
6.5
S3 Comments Benefits
Potential regional fishing benefits from hydropowered ice making and other development in Elfin Cove to supply the fishing fleet.
Trail development and possible tourism benefits.
Learning about 2-stage hydro.
trails, water supply possibilities in future
The grant request is to augment existing funding to reduce the new debt applicant requires to complete the project. The project recently completed the first phase of construction and
is expected to resume construction in the first half of 2016. The additional funding request would cover project costs that are above the original estimates. As the overall project
cost has increased and the benefit has remained constant the B/C ratio has declined to slightly less than 1.0. If grant funded the applicant anticipates that the grant will reduce energy
costs to residents by $0.13 per kWh.
The applicant requested funding for final design. The B/C ratio is based upon initial findings from a draft feasibility study that had not yet been finalized at the time of evaluation,
nor accepted by the applicant or AEA. Once the final feasibility study is finalized, the B/C ratio may change up or down. AEA’s issuance of the final design grant is contingent upon
acceptance of the feasibility study that demonstrates a technically and economically feasible project.
Roads and infrastructure (penstock)
Economic development
Improvements to water system
Potentially improve salmon habitat, hatchery potential
Less noise and air pollution due to diesels off operation
Information on a new PRV replacement system.
Will coordinate with new powerhouse design and build, possibly allow opening of hatchery
Demonstrating heat loop for heat pumps, piping infrastructure
Water supply (but have that already)
Economic sustainability
The applicant has recently reconstructed a failed dam which provides drinking water for the community. That project was funded through water project funding sources. The REF application
seeks design and construction funding to rebuild the end-of-life penstock and hydro turbine to provide electricity. AEA’s economic evaluations capture the full cost of each project.
In this case the full cost of the dam is counted as a cost, and the full benefits of all hydro power displacing diesel generation is counted as the benefit. This method, while fair
and consistent to all applicants, may be a conservative approach due to the dam construction having been completed with other funding. If only the turbine costs and the full hydro benefit
are used in the model, the economics are very good. The AEA B/C ratio of 0.73 provides information about the net value of the overall project (drinking water and energy) over its lifetime.
1. Additional income for AVEC
2. Redundant heating systems for the facilities served
3. Infrastructure for heating
4. Sustainability for the Water treatment plant by lowering costs to maintain. There are significant health benefits from properly maintained WTP and Washeteria.
Technical learning on bridging, and possible diesels off.
Low load diesel demonstration.
Potential water system improvements
New trail/road
1. Additional income for AVEC
2. Redundant heating systems for the facilities served
3. Infrastructure for heating
4. Sustainability for the Water treatment plant by lowering costs to maintain. There are significant health benefits from properly maintained WTP and Washeteria.
5. ANTHC partnership with VSW.
1. Additional income for AVEC
2. Redundant heating systems for the facilities served
3. Infrastructure for heating
4. Sustainability for the Water treatment plant by lowering costs to maintain. There are significant health benefits from properly maintained WTP and Washeteria.
The applicant requested design and construction funding. AEA recommends funding only the final design. AEA believes that cost saving measures can be identified during the final design
phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
High quality power, CO hazard reduction, trails/roads potential, redundancy of electric source, Fiberoptic line to be included, learning from fiberglass reinforced poles in tundra conditions
Cold climate experience/learning and variable speed controller. Roads.
The applicant requests funds for final design for wind project. The budget is high due to arctic conditions but the application scored well elsewhere in the evaluation and wind may be
the community’s only renewable energy option.
1. Diversion of combustible waste from the landfill2. Could potentially increase recycling of combustible waste.3. Job creation4. Useful information
New roads and infrastructureEconomic development: Long term increase in jobs; local employers may stay open more of the year if energy costs are lower.Public information.- The project
will reduce the handling of diesel fuel and lubricants in the community, reducing thepossibility of a spill, which could contaminate the Copper River and cause significant downstreameconomic
impacts.
Trail, road, bridge contemplated. Potential to unconstrain Kenai Peninsula transmission.
The applicant requested funding for the feasibility stage. The B/C ratio could potentially increase based on site specific meteorological data once it is available for analysis. The
state-wide wind model often under-predicts the wind resource on the west coast of Alaska. Wind measurement at the specific targeted site through the requested feasibility study will
increase the confidence of the project economics.
Infrastructure of piping that could be used for other heat sources
Income to utility
benefits to generator operation
Trails/roads
Waterfall creek hydro: This project is currently under construction however project costs have exceeded the original budget. The applicant is seeking additional grant funding to offset
additional loans to reduce energy costs for ratepayers.
Roads and trails.
Long term economic development.
The applicant requested funding for final design and construction of an air source heat pump to replace existing oil-fired boilers that are nearing the end of life. The project would
replace 100 percent of their heating oil by efficiently using hydro-powered electricity through an air source heat pump to heat the low-income multi-family complex. The economics are
challenged by the high renovation costs to allow for lower temperature emitters in the building.
1. Utilize a local fuel source that is currently a waste product
2. Every school on POW will be heated with wood when this project is complete.
3. Multiple fuel sources so that the school system can use the most cost effective fuel.
4. Supporting local jobs.
5. Opportunity for Greenhouse addition
Learning regarding barge/fly logistics, intertie upgrades would be needed and would provide other benefits, landmark for navigation
1) Use existing local biomass fuel source
2) Local jobs to wood harvest and processing and boiler O&M.
3) Development of a cordwood infrastructure and economy of scale for other project development.
4) Energy Independence
The applicant requested design and construction funding. AEA recommends funding final design only with an emphasis on improving the project economics before committing to construction.
If constructed, the project will save the community an estimated 8,474 gallons of fuel per year and would provide local wood fuel jobs. Many of the costs in the B/C ratio would remain
in the local economy for wood harvest and biomass plant operator jobs.
1. Additional income for AVEC
2. Redundant heating systems for the facilities served
3. Infrastructure for heating
4. Sustainability for the Water treatment plant by lowering costs to maintain. There are significant health benefits from properly maintained WTP and Washeteria.
1) Use existing local biomass fuel source
2) Local jobs to wood harvest and processing and boiler O&M.
3) Development of a cordwood infrastructure and economy of scale for other project development.
4) Energy Independence
Roads, infrastructure.
Jobs
cold climate hydro learning
Demonstration of effluent heat pump, redundant heating system.
Generation of a feasibility report that is public.
The project is recommended for partial funding as AEA believes the feasibility can be completed at half of the applicant’s estimated total phase cost. The feasibility study will help
determine the project economics, including possible use of federal incentives.
Redundant heat sources, redundant fuel sources
Local or nearby (Prince Rupert) sourced fuel.
Local labor from forestry to wood processing and maintenance.
Use for Tongass Stewardship Contracts.
Trails, roads.
transmission extension
Learning from cold climate operation
Jobs: add hydro, don't take away diesel jobs
Hatchery support, economic development, possible reduction of self-generating buildings.
Trail, economic benefit
Information generated with statewide applications
Wood harvest jobs, operational jobs, district heating infrastructure, heating redundancy, test case of heat utility (in future phases), waste from sawmill, possible greenhouse.
Fiberoptic line to be included, learning from fiberglass reinforced poles in tundra conditions
Redundant heating system, extra income for public electric utility.
Demonstration and information for other communities, solving a waste stream issues including full dump, jobs, economic development.
Local jobs, energy expenses for fuel stay in the community, wildfire mitigation, cordwood infrastructure benefits to other cordwood systems,
Redundancy of heating source for water system, cost savings to water utility, additional revenue for electric utility.
Redundant heating of water system, lower water treatment costs, revenue to electric utility
Development of understanding of hydro in cold climate
Road, learning from logistical challenges of the location, verification of wind map
Upgrade intertie to 3-phase
Employment for turbine operations and maintenance
Visual landmark for local navigation
Economic development, local and regional; pellet delivery infrastructure development; first of its kind in Alaska.
Water supply, improvements to existing hydro resources, improved access to lake area,
Use of waste wood, local jobs, potential greenhouse, reduced emissions from decking and burning waste wood.
Local jobs, economic development, information gained through first microchip system in Alaska,
Hatchery support, economic development, possible reduction of self-generating buildings.
Additional value of knowing wind in SE AK
Demonstration of effluent heat pump, income for public electric utility, reduced fuel cost for water utility, redundant heating system.
Enhanced fish habitat, continued operation of low cost hydro.
Possible pollution prevention improvements, less traffic on highway, jobs
Possible evaluation benefits to vertical axis,
Bat study
Information value, heat benefits direct to residents
Demonstration value
Demonstrating Aeronotica turbines.
Could be first Northwind 24M blade NPS100*24
Economic development, road to powerhouse
Information
Would support economic development
Local employment, funding staying in community, coordinates with other energy projects.
Powerline is closer to Wainright, useful info through permafrost pole design, conversion to electric heat based on natural gas rather than distributing heating oil.
Local jobs, fuel money staying in local economy, possible roads, improved services and lower costs to GILA, possible improved heating distribution infrastructure, possible habitat improvements.
Additional benefit of redundant heating source for circulating water system. Future possible use of water piping for other purposes.
Infrastructure, sanitation.
Landfill impacts, local jobs, dollars circulating locally.
Local fuel used. wood fuel is a waste product.
Road building, excess heat for school,
demonstration
Harvest jobs, winter stoking jobs, fuel money stays in local economy,
Demonstrating performance of GSHP in an area where not much data is available, and demonstrating a hybrid heating fuel system.
Demonstration, potential integration of more wind, improved port operations, extend battery life,
Road improvements, economic development due to rate reductions,
Water supply improvements
Information on wind resource in SE, improvements to wind model, adding energy in winter, when hydro systems need, possible road access improvements, facilitate transition from diesel
to electric heating.
Jobs, demonstration of multiple systems in one community.
Information value of demo project.
Fish habitat, support of water system improvements, economic development/fish processing
Roads and trails, jobs, lower energy costs of about 16 cents per kWh in the first year, depending upon grant.
Information value of new commercial-sized ASHP
Demonstration of effluent heat pump.
Information value of new commercial-sized ASHP
Local employment, reduced fire risk, potential use of piping for other heat exchange purposes.
Useful information, possible local AQ improvements.
Additional road may provide some local benefit.
Useful information as a demonstration. Could be beneficial in other parts of the state.
web public information value
Solar connection to a biomass system, improvement of the Econoburn efficiency.
Jobs, waste disposal
long term econ dev
dispatchable electricity for heating community bldgs and homes; econ dev.
Demonstration, solve high penetration wind issues
Demonstration, jobs, economic development, air quality in non-attainment area benefits,
Infrastructure, shutting down power plants, improved reliability
Benefit point for intertie potential
Possible removal of old turbine.
Scored for developed infrastructure, economic development, and water temperature stability.
Possible road or intertie
This would be the most in-depth geothermal exploration in SE.
Potential tourism development
commercial econ dev.
Econ Development, lower cost, reliability
Infrastructure, demonstration project, econ development
Pellet distribution, demonstration, jobs, training
commercial econ dev
Hub for biomass supply could be future benefit, ash for gardens, local labor.
econ dev
Could obtain solar data. Higher summer loads will be well matched to wind and/or solar.
Generates heating for buildings in the region. Promote or sustain commercial and economic development in the region. May create or sustain jobs in the region.
Economic development, demonstration
increase in economic activity
Infrastructure, demonstration, jobs
Demonstration value of solar in Alaska.
Distributed energy generation for local energy security; jobs.
The Native Village of Nikolski requests funding to complete construction and commissioning of a 65-kW wind-diesel system.
In May 2006 AEA constructed a power plant with a total capacity of 180 kW. The community purchased a refurbished Vestas V15 wind turbine generator with a grant from USDA RUS and cost
share from APICDA in July 2007 ($474,475). In 2009, Nikolski received an RE Fund round 1 grant (#89) for $409,430 to integrate the wind turbine generator with a heat-recovery system
by installing boilers and thermal nodes. Most of the work was done by the community?s contractor TDX Power. Currently the wind system remains inoperable.
Given our experience with the project, AEA has the following concerns:
1. Proposed budget seems too high.
2. The wind turbine generator may need repair due to extended non-operation in a marine environment.
3. The power output from the wind turbine generator is too high for the village load and diesel power system.
4. The proposed solution has not been demonstrated to be functional in other Alaska wind systems and is thus not guaranteed to provide a working system.
Recommend full funding of $331,240 with a special provision that AEA will be directly involved in the management of this project. AEA staff will work directly with the community and
its contractors to establish a scope, design and budget for a functioning power system. The design portion of this project will not exceed $50,000. Construction funds will be unallocated
until the design, budget and schedule has been accepted by AEA. AEA notes that the round 1 grant recommendation requires a 5-year O&M agreement with an entity acceptable to AEA.
`
Fish processing facility
project would upgrade existing USFS logging road.
AEA BCE calculated using estimated transmission line upgrade costs of $11 million which were not covered in the application
Possible integration of USFWS turbines into community
Two fish plants in community--one operating.
Score #670--not this proposal--Unless Doug/Audrey find something different between hydro gen and TX proposals.
AEA B/C used data from Draft Application for Capacity Amendment to License, which was lower in cost and lower in electricity displaced by 3rd unit than those data submitted in the application.
Result was still a relatively high B/C which merited all possible points (10).
May allow heat production.
Application B/C score assumes cruise ship load in Skagway. (not assumed in economic analysis "AEA"). Load to be determined in SE IRP.
Project has spinoff benefits for producing feedstock for densified fuel.
Applicant assumed 0% discount rate; AEA assumed 3% discount rate (consistent across all AEA B/C calculations in Round 3).
Applicant proposes to involve students in project.
Although economist provided B/C ratios ISER comments indicated "insufficient information to perform an economic analysis" B/C score is discounted by one point for this reason.
The B/C computation was based upon a 1981 study by the US ACE for a seasonal run-of-river hydro on Cosmos Creek to serve Shungnak/Kobuk. The project capital costs and O&M costs were
escalated in 2008 dollars.
The AEA B/C was estimated based upon capital costsof $3M from a 1984 US Army Corps study for a 270 kW run-of-river hydro plant escalated to today\'s dollars at $6.14M. The applicant\'s
capital estimate is $2.4M.
Given AEA\'s experience with the high historical costs of hydro construction, it appears the applicant\'s estimate of capital costs is low. It is also highly likely the project will
require a FERC license which has not been costed out by the applicant. Consequently, the AEA B/C has been used in computing the score.
The applicant B/C was computed without the cost of the replacement energy purchased from AEL&P and included an unsupported additional cost of $4.1M in the base case.
AEA added in the cost of the replacement hydro energy and did not include the $4.1M capital cost in computing its B/C. The AEA assumptions are considered to be valid adjustments and
therefore the AEA B/C ratio has been used to compute the benefits score in Stage 2.
The plan describing the future financing for the construction cost ($40M intertie + $40 M road) has not been identified.
The main differences between the AEA and the applicant computed the B/C ratios were the generated kWh versus the sold kWh and the annual O&M costs. AEA used the more conservative assumptions
for these items; the Stage 2 score was based upon these assumptions.
The B/C ratio was calculated at 6.19 using MIC assumptions that all excess energy from Annette Island would be purchased by Ketchikan.
AEA believes this is overly optimistic and chose a more conservative set of assumptions. Based upon Swan-Tyee Intertie in place, providing cheap abundant power to meet KTN needs, AEA
computed a B/C ratio of 2.26 based upon a 98% availability of Swan-Tyee power. The 2% outage rate assumption would allow MIC to sell approx. 2 MkWh in annual sales.
S3 Local Support
5
2
4
5
2
5
4
3
5
4
4
1
3
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
2
2
3
2
0
3
5
2
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
3
3
5
5
3
2
3
5
2
5
2
4
4
3
5
2
3
5
2
3
4
5
4
2
3
5
5
5
3
2
5
3
3
5
3
4
5
2
2
3
3
5
4
5
3
4
2
5
5
5
5
2
5
4
4
5
5
4
5
5
5
2
5
4
3
3
5
5
2
5
5
5
5
4
3
4
5
5
2
4
2
2
5
2
5
2
0
3
2
2
5
5
5
5
5
3
5
3
5
5
3
2
5
5
5
5
2
2
2
2
5
0
4
4
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
2
5
5
5
5
5
5
2
3
2
4
5
5
2
4
2
0
5
3
2
4
5
5
5
2
5
4
4
5
2
1
5
5
3
0
5
0
2
0
5
5
4
4
3
5
0
0
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
4
5
5
0
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
0
0
2
2
5
4
4
2
2
2
5
5
2
5
0
5
5
5
5
3
5
5
5
5
4
2
5
5
2
0
5
0
5
5
2
5
0
5
5
4
2
5
5
5
3
3
0
3
0
3
4
1
2
5
5
5
1
2
5
5
2
2
2
5
5
4
4
5
5
5
5
3
4
4
5
4
2
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
3
5
3
5
5
4
4
5
5
3
5
5
3
5
0
5
0
3
3
0
2
3
2
3
5
4
3
3
2
5
2
5
1
1
5
5
5
0
1
0
0
3
5
4
3
2
0
0
5
2
2
5
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
3
5
2
2
4
3
4
3
3
3
0
2
5
4
4
4
2
2
3
4
2
5
5
2
5
5
5
5
4
5
2
4
5
5
4
3
2
2
5
5
5
5
5
0
5
3
4
5
4
5
4
4
4
5
0
5
4
2
2
5
4
5
4
2
3
5
2
5
2
5
5
4
5
3
3
2
2
5
5
4
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
4
2
2
2
3
5
0
0
2
3
2
3
0
0
5
3
0
3
0
3
2
3
3
4
0
0
0
5
4
5
4
5
0
2
4
3
2
0
3
4
0
5
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
5
5
5
5
2
0
2
0
0
0
2
2
0
3
5
0
5
2
4
0
3
5
5
2
2
0
5
5
3
2
2
2
0
2
2
3
0
0
0
3
3
0
5
5
5
2
0
0
0
0
5
0
4
4
4
5
5
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
0
2
2
2
3
4
3
5
5
4
2
3
0
5
5
5
2
4
2
3
5
2
3
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
0
2
5
4
0
2
4
2
5
0
2
2
2
3
2
2
3
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
3
0
2
5
5
5
2
2
5
0
0
4
2
0
5
2
5
2
0
2
5
2
5
2
5
2
4
0
3
3
3
4
4
0
0
2
5
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
2
0
2
2
2
3
5
5
2
0
5
2
0
0
5
5
4
2
2
3
4
4
5
2
2
2
2
2
3
4
5
2
5
0
5
4
3
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
S3 Comments Support
3 letter 1 res
no letters, 1 res
2 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
no letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
2 letters 1 res
1 letter 1 res
3 letters 1 res
2 letters, 1 Res
2 letters 1 res
1 letter, no resolution
1 letter 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
2 letter 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
no letters 1 res
no letters 1 res
1 letter 1 res
no letters 1 res
No letters no resolution
1 letter 1 res
3 letters 1 res
1 letter 1 res1 letter against
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
2 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
2 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
1 letter 1 res
1 letter 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
1 letter 1 res
7 letters provided, 0 accepted, 1 res
1 letr 1 res
3 ltrs 1 res
No Letters of support, 1 Res
3 letters, 1 resolution
no letters, 1 resolution
2 letters, 1 resolution
2 letters accepted, 2 letters from the City only 1 counted1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
0 letters accepted, 5 letters out of date
1 resolution
1 letter accepted, 2 letters out of date
1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
0 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
2 letters accepted, 1 letter from ANTHC1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
2 letters, 1 resolution
0 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter accepted, 4 letters from legislatures
1 resolution
0 letters accepted, 1 letter from applicant1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
1 Letter accepted, 1 letter form ANTHC 1 Letter from ARUC
1 Resolution
1 letter accepted, 2 out of date1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter accepted, 2 letters out of date1 resolution
2 letters accepted, 1 letter from applicant1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
0 letters, 1 resolution
0 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
2 letters accepted, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter accepted, 1 Resolution
2 Letters Accepted, 1 Resolution
No Letters accepted, 1 from Contractor 1 from applicant
1 Resolution
3 letters, 1 Resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
0 Letters, 1 resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
2 Letters, 1 resolution
2 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
2 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 letters, 1 Resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
No Letters, 1 resolution
PCE Reporting3 letters, 1 resolution
2 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
2 letters for wrong project, 1 resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 Letters Accepted, 1 Resolution Accepted
2 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
2 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
No letters, 1 resolution
2 letters, 1 resolution
no letters, 1 resolution
3 letters Rejected out of date, 1 resolution
6 letters of support 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
1 letter of support, REJECTED applicant provided their own letter of support, Job Description for Superintendent of Schools accepted in lieu of resolution
4 letters 3 max accepted letters, 1 resolution
no letters, 1 resolution
No letters, No resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
no letters, 1 resolution
no letters, letter of authorization in lieu of resolution
6 letters 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
6 letters 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
No letters, no resolution
2 letters only 1 accepted 1 from applicant, 1 resolution.
3 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
10 letters 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, no resolution
no letters, 1 resolution
4 letters 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
4 letters 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
5 letters of support 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
over 30 demonstrations of local support, including petition, 1 resolution
no letters of support, 1 resolution.
1 letter of support not accepted, applicant provided their own letter of support, 1 resolution
no letters of support, 1 resolution.
no letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution--All dated 2008, too old.
2 letters of support, 1 resolution
2 letters of support, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
4 letters of support and 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
2 letters of support and 1 resolution
5 letters of support 3max accepted, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
5 letters of support 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
over 30 letters of support, 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
no letters of support, 1 resolution
5 letters of support 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
5 letters of support, max 3 accepted, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
5 letters of support max of 3 accepted, 1 resolution
No letters of support, 1 resolution
1 letter of support, 1 resolution
no letters of support, 1 resolution
2 letters of support, 1 resolution
4 additional resolutions counted as the max of 3 letters of support, 1 resolution
4 letters 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
no letters of support, 1 resolution
2 letters of support, 1 resolution
No letters of support, 1 resolution
No letters of support, no resolution
6 letters of support, 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
1 letter of support, 1 resolution
0 letters of support, 1 resolution
2 letters of support, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
3 letter of support, 1 resolution
no letters of support, 1 resolution
11 letters of support, max of 3 accepted, 1 resolution
2 letters of support, 1 resolution
3 letters of suppoort provided, 1 email string of non-support, 1 resolution
9 letters provided, first 3 accepted, 1 resolution
2 letter of support, only one is accepted. no resolution.
6 letters of support provided. 1 resolution. Maximum points awarded
3 letters 1 resolution
No letters of support 0 pts. No city or council resolutions 0 pts.
5 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
no letter of support 0 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
no letters of support 0 pts. No city resolution 2 pts.
2 letter of support from the grantee 0 pts. No city or coincil resolution 0 pts.
no letter of support 0 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
5 letters of support 5 points. city resolution 2 pts.
3 Letters of Support 5pts. No City or Council Resolution 0 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. No cityor council resolutions 0 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. No city or council resolutions 0 pts.
1 letter of support 3 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
4 letters of support 5 pts. City resolution for round 5 0 pts.
No letters of support 0 pts. No city or council resolutions 0 pts.
No letters of support 0 pts. No city or councilresolutions 0 pts.
no letter of support 0 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
no letters of support 0 pts. Borough resolution 2 pts.
no letters of support 0 pts. City and borough resolutions 2 pts.
no letters of support 0 pts. Borough resolution 2 points
No letters of support 0 pts. council resolution 2 pts.
no letters of support 0 pts. Borough resolution 2 pts.
2 letters of support out dated 0 pts. Borough resolution 2 pts.
No letters of support 0 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
1 leter of support 3 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
8 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
No letters of support 0 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
4 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
3 letters of support 5 pts. No cityor council resolution 0 pts.
11 letters of support 5 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
11 letters of support 5 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
9 letters of support 5 pts. 2 city resolutions 2 pts.
8 letters of support 5 pts. 2 city rsolutions 2 pts.
6 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
3 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
3 letters of support 5 pts. No cityor council resolution 0 pts.
3 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
4 letters of support in application out dated 0 pts. 2 letters emailed in 4 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
4 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
10 leters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolutionresolution 0 pts.
no letters 0 pts. No city resolution 0 pts.
no letters 0 pts. No city resolution 0 pts.
leters from ANTHC and AVEC 0 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
leters from ANTHC and AVEC 0 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
one letter 3 pts. ANTHC and AVEC letters 0 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. ANTHC letter doesn?t count. No city resolution 0 pts.
2 letters 4 pts. City of Hoonah letter from the Mayor in support not counted as there was a letter from council member rejecting the letter?s authority to represent Public support.
ANTHC Letter of commitment not considered support 0 pts. 2 letters from marsh creek and START not local support 0 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
ANTHC Letter of commitment not considered support 0 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
ANTHC Letter of commitment not considered support 0 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
6 leters of support 5 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
No leters of support 0 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
8 letters of support 5 pts. 3 resolutions resolution 2 pts.
13 letters of support all out of date 0 pts.. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
3 letters of support 5 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. Resolution from city 2 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. 1 letter from applicant not eligible. Resolution from the local council and board 2 pts
5 letters of support 5 pts. Resoltuion from board 2 pts.
UAF Letter out of date 0 pts. CCHRC letter of support referances differant project 0 pts. ACEP Letter out of date 0 pts. AEA letter not eligible 0 pts. NREL letter 3pts
6 letters of support 5 pts. No City or Council Resolution 0 pts.
2 letters of support 4 Pts. Council resolution 2 pts.
4 letter of support 5 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
4 letters of support 5 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. No City or Council resolution.
No letters of support 0 pts. resolution from council 2 pts
2 letters of support 4 pts. One letter not specific to the project 0 pts Resolution 2 pts
2 letters of support 4 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
No letters of support 0 pts. Resolution from School board 2 pts.
2 letters of support out of date and for a hydro project, 0 pts. No city or council resolutions 0 pts.
3 letters of support 5pts. 2 letters of support were outdated 0 pts. Borough resolution not specific to the Project 0 pts
outdated letters of support, letters from 2010, 0 pts. No city or council resolutions
Letter of support from Egegik 3 pts. Borough resolution 2 pts
letter of support from Levelock 3 pts. Borough resolution 2 pts
no leters of support 0 pts.. City resolution 2 pts.
6 eligible letters of support 5 pts. a city resolution 2 pts.
No letters of support provided. No resolution from city or village council
Letters from the Utility and SD worth 0 because they are components of the City. 1 leter of support from Econ develop council worth 3. Resolution worth 2 pts
3 letters of support 5 pts. No city or Council resolution 0 pts.
2 letters of Support 4 pts. No City or Council Resolution 0 pts.
No letters of support. City or Council Resolution 2 pts.
1 letter of support 3 pts. City or Council Resolution 2 pts.
3 letters of Support 5 pts. No City of Council Resolution 0 pts.
One letter of Support 3pts. Council Resolution 2pts.
Resolution 2, letter of support 1 = 3
2 letters, no resolution and one letter dated last year (?) 1 = 3 points
Unexcuted Resolution included in application- Followup? / application withdrawn
Current resolution = 2 and other letter from 2009 (?) 1 = 3
None provided = 0
Current resolution = 2, one dated resolution noted 1= 3
resolution - 2, current letter of support - 1 and one dated letter from the borough 1
One letter of support - 1 (no resolution from City?)
Council resolution 2
Resolution and 3 letters of support noted = 5
Resolution and several letters of support = 5
Resolution and 3 letters of support = 5
One letter of support noted - 1; resolution referenced, but not found ?
Current resolution noted - 2
Resolution referenced and backed up with MOU, and 3 letters of supporrt = 5
Multiple letters of support noted and a resolution = 5, though a couple of non-supportive comments were noted (minimal)
Council Resolution 2 (paper file)
Council Resolution 2
City Resolution 2
LOS City of St. Michael 1
LOS City of Stebbins 1
LOS Stebbins Native Corp. 1 and generic AVEC resolution 2 = 5
LOS City of Emmonak 1
LOS Emmonak Corp. 1
LOS Emmonak Tribal Council 1and similar letters from Alakanuk, plus generic AVEC resolution = 5
LOS City of Kalskag 1
LOS Native Village of Kalskag 1and generic AVEC resolution 2 = 4
LOS City of Gambell 1, letter from ANTHC 1 and generic AVEC resolution 2 = 4
LOS ARUC 1
LOS City of Chevak 1 and letter from ANTHC 1 and generic AVEC resolution 2 = 5
LOS City of Goodnews Bay 1
LOS Kuitsarak, Inc 1
LOS NAtive Village of Goodnews Bay 1and generic AVEC resolution 2
LOS City of Shishmaref 1
LOS Shishmaref Native Corp. 1
LOS Native Village of Shishmaref 1and generic AVEC resolution 2
LOS City of Mountian Village 1
LOS Azachorok Inc. 1
LOS Asa\'carsaemuit Tribal Council 1and generic AVEC resolution 2
LOS ANTHC 1 - Providing match and generic AVEC resolution 2
LOS from the City 1
LOS from ANTHC 1 - Providing match and generic resolution from AVEC Board 2
LOS Yupik of Andreafski 1
LOS Pitka\'s Point Village Council 1 and generic resolution from AVEC 2
ORPC Resolution 2 and 9 letters of support (one other from HEA subsidiary) 3 = 5
Council Resolution 2
LOS Bay View Inc. 1 and one other letter 1
Board Resolution 2
failed Stage 1 review
failed Stage 1 review
LOS AVEC 1
LOS Native Village of Elim 1
LOS Elim Native Corp. 1
City Resolution 2
City Resolution 2
LOS False Pass Tribal Council 1
LOS ISanotski Corp. 1and another resolution (show of support) 1
City Resolution 2
LOS Native Village of St. Michael 1
LOS AVEC 1 and two other letters 1
City resolution 2
LOS SEARHC 1
LOS Native Village of Angoon 1 and one other letter 1
LOS City of Goodnews Bay 1 and two other letters 2
Council Resolution (in paper file) 2
Council Resolution 2
LOS Traditional Village of Togiak 1
LOS BBAHC 1
LOS AVEC 1
City Resolution 2
LOS AVEC 1and one other letter 1
City Resolution 2
LOS AVEC 1and two other lettes 2
Council Resolution 2
LOS YKHC 1
LOS Kasigluk Inc. 1 and one other letter 1
City Resolution 2
LOS SEARHC1 and one other 1
City Resolution 2
LOS White Mountian Native Corp. 1
LOS Native Village of White mountain 1 and other letter 1
City Resolution 2
LOS Stuyahok 1
LOS New Stuyahok Traditional Council 1 and one other letter 1
City Resolution 2
LOS Nunakauiak Yupik Corp. 1
LOS Nunakauyak Traditional Council 1
LOS YKHA 1
Council Resolution 2
LOS LYSD 1
LOS ARUC 1
LOS Village of Lower kalskag 1
City Resolution 2
LOS AVEC 1
LOS Native Village of Selawik 1
LOS ARUC 1
Council Resolution 2
and one letter from ANTHC 1
LOS Askinuk Corp. 1
LOS LYSD 1
LOS AVEC 1
City Resolution 2
LOS LYSD 1
LOS ARUC 1 and one other letter 1 = 3
No Resolution 0
Council Resolution 2
LOS Noorvik Native Community 1
LOS AVEC 1
LOS ARUC 1
Council Resolution 2
LOS ARUC 1
LOS Iqurmiut Traditional Council 1
LOS LYSD 1
Council Resolution 2
LOS YKHC 1and one other letter 1 = 4 (didn?t count email from Alan Fetters)
City Resolution 2
LOS Chinik Eskimo Community 1
LOS ARUC 1
City Reolution, Signed but not dated only one signature 2; requested fully executed copy.
Letter of Support Oganized Village of kake 1
SEARHC letter of Support 1
Other letter of support 1
Council resolution 2
3 letters of support 3
Board resolution 2 and letter of support 1 = 3
Council resolution 2 and letters from community members 3 = 5
Application withdrawn
BBNA Letter of support 1
Lake and Pen letter of support 1
Other letters of support and resolution noted 3
3 letters of support 3, no resolution ?
Multiple letters of support 3; and letter from the school superintendent 2 = 5
Board resolution 2 / However letters received in opposition to the project also; unsure whether to give this application any points = 0 ?
School Board Resolution 2
3 letters of suppport 3
Failed Stage 1 review
4 letters of support = 3, no resolution ?
2 letters of support 2 and authorization from president to apply 1 (?) = 3
No local support provided
Combined with #825
Borough resolution 2
Council resolution 2 and dated letters of support 1
Borough Resolution 2
Council Resolution 2 and one letter of support 1 = 3
Board Resolution 2
Letters of support 3
Council Resolution 2 and 2 letters of support 2 = 4
Board resolution 2 and letter from ANTHC committing funds 1= 3
Board resolution 2
Dated letters of Support 1
Board resolution 2 / However, failed Stage 1 review
Letters of local support 3 & resolution 2 = 5
Board resolution
Letter of support SOA DNR 1
Letter of support US DOI 1
Letter of Support AHTNA, Inc. 1 Resolution also noted 2 = 5
Dated letters of support 1
Dated letter of support 1
Letters of support 3 and resolution 2 = 5
Letter of Support KGB 1
Letter of support City and Borough of Wrangell 1
Letter of support City of Ketchikan 1 Resolution also noted 2 = 5
letter of support City of Ketchican 1
Letter of support KGB 1
Letter of support City and Borough of Wrangell 1 Resolution also noted 2
No local support provided
2 letters of local support 2
Dated letters of support 1 Also received letters in opposition to the project Unsure how much to allow for local support / Suggest 1
No local support Provided
No local support provided
Board resolution 2
Dated letters of support 1
Letter from Kodiak Island Borough 1
Letter from Pacific Seafood 1
Letter from Kodiak Island Convention and Visitors Bureau 1
City Resolution 2
Resolution from City 2
Peterburg Economic Development Council Letter 1
PMP&L Memo, with promise of cash match 1
Village Council Support letter 2
Dated support letters 1
Resolution from the City
Nothing noted = 0
Nothing noted = 0
9 letters supporting funding of the project provided = 5 (Two from area legislators not counted per REFAC meeting 11/9/10.)
Applicant?s resolution noted = 2
Applicant?s resolution noted = 2
Applicant?s resolution noted and 3 letters of support = 5
Discussed, but nothing provided = 0
Applicant?s resolution noted = 2
Failed Stage 1 review
Applicant?s resolution noted = 2
Applicant?s resolution = 2
Applicant?s resolution = 2
Applicant?s resolution = 2
Applicant?s resolution noted = 2
Failed Stage 1 review
None noted = 0
One letter of support (dated) and applicant?s resolution noted = 3
3 letters or emails of support noted and applicant?s resolution = 5
Applicant?s resolution noted = 2
Applicant resolution noted = 2
2 letters of support and applicant?s resolution = 4
One resolution of support and applicant?s resolution = 3
Two letters of support and the applicant?s resolution noted = 4
Borough resolution and applicant resolution = 3
One letter and one resolution from City, which owns the utility - therefore counted as applicant?s resolution, in support of the project noted = 3
Resolution of support and applicant?s resolution noted = 3
None provided = 0
Letter of support from applicant = 2
4 letters or emails indicating support = 5
2 resolutions noted = 4
2 resolutions noted = 4
2 resolutions noted = 4
Applicant resolution noted = 2
Applicant resolution noted = 2
Resolution from one utility and the applicant?s resolution noted = 3
Two letters of support noted and the applicant?s resolution = 4
Letters referenced, but not provided. Did note a resolution from the applicant = 2
3 letters of support = 5
(Letter from signed by all 3 Juneau State legislators not counted per REFAC meeting of 11/9/10.)
Score #670--not this proposal--Unless Doug/Audrey find something different between hydro gen and TX proposals.
2 letters of support and a resolution noted (all dated) and the resolution from Kootznoowoo = 5?
Resolution noted = 2
6 letters or resolutions of local support noted, also noted resolution from housing authority = 5
5 letters of support noted = 5
3 letters of support, a resolution from the Kenai Peninsula Borough = 5
(Letter of support from the local State representative not counted per REFAC meeting of 11/9/10.)
However, project failed Stage 1 review
6 letters of support noted (including one from some ?sleazy guy? by the name of Peter Crimp.) = 5
Two letters of support and resolution noted = 4
5 letters of support submitted = 5
Resolution noted (other local support discussed, but not documented) = 2
Two letters of support (though one is from a vendor) and an unsigned agreement with a local union = 4
5 letters of support (though at least 2 are from professional firms and not local entities) = 5
7 letters of support and resolution submitted = 5
Two letters of support offered = 4
Letters from the grantee (considered as the ?resolution?) and City = 3
Resolution provided = 2
(Same one for both application #655 and #656.)
Resolution submitted = 2
(Same one for both application #655 and #656.)
Three letters of support submitted = 5
Four letters and resolutions submitted = 5
At least 7 different entities indicated their support for the project = 5
Letters of support and various resolutions noted = 5
4 letters of support noted = 5
Local support discussed, but not documented = 0
Five letters of support and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 5
One letter of support from NANA (needs to be a local entity?) and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 2
Two letters of support and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 4
Three letters of support and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 5
Two letters of support and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 4
Three letters of support and generic corporate resolution from AVEC noted = 5
Two letters of support and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 4
Two letters of support and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 4
Two letters of support and generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 4
A joint resolution presented by 3 different entities in Eek and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 5
None noted = 0
Several letters of support from impacted communities noted = 5
Two letters of support and a board resolution noted = 4
Corporate resolution noted = 2
(Three letters of support from local representatives and senator not counted per REFAC meeting of 11/8/10.) The Authority is also aware of opposition to this project, but no documented
issues noted or received.
Corporate resolution noted = 2
(Letters of support from local state representatives and senator not counted per REFAC meeting of 11/9/10)
Six letters of support noted = 5
Two letters of support and a resolution noted = 4
Three letters of support, a petition with several signatures and a generic corporate resolution from AP&T = 5
One letter of support, a ?watered-down? resolution from the Haines Borough, and a generic corporate resolution from AP&T = 4
None noted, but a generic corporate resolution from AP&T = 2?
One letter of support from a business and a generic corporate resolution from AP&T = 3
Several letters of support noted and Borough resolution = 5
Generic corporate resolution from AP&T = 2
2 letters of support (one signed by several individuals, therefore counted as a petition) and Borough resolution = 5
Borough resolution noted = 2
more than 3 letters of support from other entities (also noted letters from local individuals too), a letter from the borough too (supporting their own project). = 5 However, letter
from one individual was received, opposed to the project. This letter did not provide ?documented, unresolved issues...? therefore, the final score was unchanged. Discussed with Devany
and Peter.
3 letters of support & resolution from tribe = 5
Two letters of support & Council resolution noted = 4
3 letters of support and a letter from the borough = 5
One letter of support, no resolution from City and no authorized signers form (will need before grant in place - something that gives EP signatory authority) = 3
One letter of support and Board resolution noted = 3
Board resolution noted = 2
GVEA Resolution noted = 2
Four letters of support noted (one from MEA came in later) = 5
Three letters of support noted = 5
Two letters of support & borough resolution noted = 4
Borough resolution noted = 2
Resolution from NSB = 2
Local support demonstrated by resolution from city government; NSB resolution also noted = 3
Local support demonstrated by resolution from village government; NSB resolution also noted = 3
2 letters of support & resolution noted = 4
Two letters of support = 4
Six letters of support noted = 5
Resolution and 2 letters of support = 4
Resolution referenced in letter = 2
Resolution noted from assembly = 2
Corporate resolution noted @ 2
Email from Petro-Star supporting the project = 3
Letters of support for the project provided from at least 15 different entities. 5
letters of support mentioned in application, but nothing found
Discussed in application, but nothing found
Resolution provided, additional support discussed in application but nothing provided
Resolution and one letter of support provided
Resolution provided, letter of support mentioned in application but not found
Letter of support from NWAB
letters of support mentioned in application, but nothing found
generic resolution from 2000?; application unsigned
generic resolution from 2000?; 3 letters of local support provided, application unsigned
generic resolution from 2000?; one letter of support provided, application unsigned
generic resolution from 2000?; local support discussed in application but nothing provided
generic resolution from 2000?; local support discussed in application but only one letter provided, application not signed
generic resolution from 2000?; application not signed; local support discussed in application but nothing provided
Resolution (of sorts) and letter of support from AP&T
Resolution (of sorts) provided
Support from another entity (Kenai Peninsula Borough) application not signed
letter of support from City government
2 letters of support provided
mentioned in application, but nothing provided
mentioned in application, but nothing provided
discussed in application, but nothing provided
Resolution, 6 letters of support and 2 letters from vendors
Resolution provided and a letters of support from Sealaska and Huna Totem
9 letters of support and one from a vendor
2 letters of support
Resolution and 3 letters of support found
nothing provided, application not signed
Resolution provided
City Council Resolution and two letters of support (Forest Service and local vendor)
Resolution provided and letter of support from Seward Chamber of Commerce
Resolution from GFH, LLC provided
nothing provided
Resolution provided and letter of support from HEA
Resolution provided and two letters of support
one letter of support mentioned in the application, but not found
Resolution provided, 4 letters of support and a letter from BIA
nothing provided, application not even signed by anyone local
nothing provided, application not signed
Resolution from City Council, and resolutions from ANB, Tlingit & Haida Council and Wrangell
resolution provided from council
nothing noted, application not signed
FERC authorization provided (?), unsigned Memorandum of Agreement with Labors, letter from gravel source and an engineering firm - no specific support noted.
not demonstrated, but mentioned in the application
Letter of support from the Kenai Peninsula Borough and two other letters from individuals
Letters from another corporation (Tok Umbrella Corp), NREL, and UAF in support
resolution from the borough and several emails or letters from private individuals in support of the project
Letters of support from Kenai Peninsula Borough, Chugach Electric, Tyonek Native Corp and the Homer Electric Association Members Forum (?), MoA, Cook Inlet Keepers and other.
resolution provided
nothing provided
resolution provided
nothing found
nothing found
several letters of support provided, but not for this proposed project
city resolution
city resolution provided
nothing found
letter of support from borough
3 letters of support provided
support discussed in application, but none documented
resolution and 6 letters of support
borough resolution included
board resolution a letter of support from Hoonah and a resolution Sealaska.
none provided
emails from City indicating support
3 letters of support and a resolution from the school district
Support from Kenai Peninsula Borough, HEA, Tesoro, and other letters of support provided
letter of support from applicant in place of resolution
letter in support from applicant in place of resolution
none found
3 resolutions of support (but dated 2008 or earlier) 2 letters of support and 2 resolutions from the board
resolution and 4 letters of support, but one from the applicant itself
resolution and one letter of support
one letter of support, but from the MSB itself /count equivalent to resolution?
generic resolution provided supporting application
generic resolution provided supporing application
application says there are letters of support, but not found
Resolution from City received
Corporation (Utility) Resolution provided
3 letters of support provided
2008 board resolution provided, not specific to project ?
non-specific board resolution
non-specific board resolution
One letter of support (inlcuded in Connelly Lake support) and generic resolution from AP&T
2008 non-specific resolution and one letter of support from Whale Pass
none found / 2008 resolution is non-specific
3 letters of support and a petition with several signatures included
Seven letters of support and generic resolution from AP&T
4 letters/ resolutions provided in support of project
2008 board resolution submitted / is this acceptable ?
nothing provided, but applications mentions city council support discussed
nothing provided / mentioned getting support once "rant approved"?
nothing provided / mentioned getting support once "grant approved"?
nothing provided
updated Resolution from City Council, 2 resolutions / letters from other entities and one resolution from Wrangell
letter of support from Delta Junction mentioned; but not found
Also, no resolution from the applicant submitted
3 letters of support; but 2 were from TCC ?
2 letters of support
2 letters of support
3 letters of support and a resolution from the city
resolution and 3 letters of support
board resolution
Board Resolution and unsigned resolution of support from the Denali borough ?
Board Resolution
all inclusive resolution from the borough and one letter of support
all inclusive resolution from the borough
all inclusive resolution from the borough
all inclusive resolution from the borough
all inclusive resolution from the borough
unsigned resolution (letter) and a seperate letter from applicant stating he had spoke with entities in Delta Junction and indicated their support / no credit given; must be from entity
itself
Resolution from borough
Resolution from borough
Resolution from borough
Corporate resolution and one dated letter of support (2008 - signed by former mayor ?)
Resolution from City and 2 letters of support
one letter of support provided
4 letters of support
Resolution from Coop Board, 2 letters of support and a resolution of support from the City
Support letters from AVEC and Kotzebue Electric Assn. and a resolution from the borough
updated borough resolution found
one letter of support from City
none provided
Several letters of support (one from Polar Consult - private vendor ?) application unsigned and resolution was dated
Borough Council Resolution and 3 letters of support
8 letters of support provided
Letter of Authorization ?
Resolution and two letters of support found (take higer value) = 4
Letter authorizing signature (resolution)
Resolution and Letter of support provided (take higher valued item)
Resolution and letter of support (take higher valued item)
Resolution and letter of support (take higher valued item)
Multiple letters of support / some from firms that will probably benefit from the project?
Resolution from Ambler noted
One letter of support submitted
Comments received both for and against this project ; however, overwhelming support for the project was demonstrated with several emails and letters. Since this only funds a feasibilty
study, need to proceed with this project to answer the questions raised by those for and against the project.
resolution
resolution
Resolution
Resolution
Resolution
Resolution
Resolution
letter jointly signed by applicant and another entity
Resolution and letter of support submitted (take higher valued item)
Resolution noted
2 letters found from local entities other than applicant
Resolution noted
Resolution
resolution
No support noted
Resolution noted
Resolution
Four letters of support submitted
Two letters of support and resolution noted
No local support demonstrated
Resolution noted
Resolution from applicant = 2
Two letters of local support found = 4
Resolution
Resolution noted
letter from the Village Council in support of their project
Three letters of support found
Resolution noted
No support noted
Resolution noted (discussed support in minutes of council meeting)
Resolution noted
Resolution noted
One letter of support provided
Resolution / Board Authorization noted
Resolution noted = 2
Resolution noted
Resolution from council and one letter of support
Two letters of support noted (took higher valued item)
Resolution
Resolution
Resolution
Resolution from the City noted
Resolution
Resolution noted
Resolution submitted = 2
No local support demonstrated
One letter of support found
no local support noted
Resolution noted
Resolution noted
At least 7 letters of support submitted = 5
Resolution from Kenai Peninsula Borough and letters from Rep. Chenault, Borough Mayor and Homer Electric (?)
No local support demonstrated
3 letters of local support noted
Resolution noted
Resolution noted
Several letters of support noted
None noted
no support noted
Resolution and two letters of local support noted (take higher value) = 4
resolution noted
Letter of support found and resolution
No local support noted
No support noted
numerous lettes of support provided
resolution from city
One letter of support and resolution provided
no local support demonstrated
Numerous resolutions and letters of support provided
resolution from assembly
no local support demonstrated - however, resolution at #107 says \'Kongiganak\' ???
Resolution from utility
Numerous letters of support provided
resolution names Kongiganak???
Numerous letters of support provided
Resolution from board
Numerous letters and resolutions of support provided
Resolution from utility board
no local support demonstrated
no local support provided
no local support demonstrated
A letter of support was provided from BQ Energy; but this entity is participating in the project
one letter of support submitted
known differences between City and grant applicant exist / therefore no points awarded for local support; per matrix
letter from KPB Assembly
There also was a letter from HEA, but they are particpating in the project, therefore not counted in the tally for local support
no local support documented
resolution from council submitted
1 letter of support submittted / a letter from AIPCDA also was submitted; however they also participating in the project, therefore this letter was not counted in the tally for support
2 letters of support submitted
2 letters of support from within the University system (?)
no local support demonstrated
no local support demonstrated
resolution from utility board
3 letters of support provided
reolution from NWAB submitted
resolution from utility\'s board
one letter of support provided from University, a co-applicant? This is a questionable score.
no local support noted
no local support noted
no local support noted
no local support noted
no local support needed
no local support noted
no local support noted
resolution from another entity
resolution from assembly
no local support demonstrated
no local support demonstrated
none found
Resolution from Borough Assembly
resolution from Borough Assembly
resolution from Borough Assembly
letter of support submitted
3 letters of support submitted
resolutions from impacted communities and other entities in the area
resolution from council
no local support demonstrated
resolutions from 3 communities impacted and from the NWAB and NANA
resolution from board
no local support demonstrated
no local support demonstrated
3 letters of support provided
4 letters of support provided
two letters of support submitted
resolution from council
resolution from council
Support offered from wood supplier for proposed project
Two letters of support provided
Two letters of local support provided and a resolution from the borough assembly
3 letters of support provided
no local support demonstrated
resolution from council
resolution from council
no support demonstrated
resolution of support referenced in letter from mayor
board resolution
resolution from council
One letter of local support found
resolution and two letters of support (local)
several letters of support submitted
Several letters of support submitted from Hoonah businesses
resolution from utility board
3 letters of support submitted
Known differences with another local entity; therefore per the scoring matrix score is zero
no sprecific board resolution or letters of support found
3 letters of support
2 letters of support
letter of support from Ketchikan Public Utilities
resolutioin from one of the impacted communities included
no local support demonstrated and no resolution noted
4 letters of support submitted
no local support demonstrated
no local support noted
resolution submitted
no local support submitted
no local support submitted
resolution from AEB
City resolution included
resolution from City
MOU with Anchorage provided
no local support demonstrated and no resolution included
resolution from utility board
IPP, no local support demonstrated
IPP, no local support demonstrated
IPP, with no local support demonstrated
Resolution from council
Resolution from City & Borough of Sitka
S3 Sustainability
3.67
4.17
4
4.83
2.17
2
4
4.33
3.33
5
4.67
2.5
5
5
4.83
4.33
4.17
4.17
4.5
2.67
2.33
4.5
3.5
3.17
4.17
2.67
3.67
3.83
5
1.17
3
4.5
5
4.33
4.33
3.33
3
2
4
4
4
3.33
3
3.17
4.33
2
4
3.33
3
3.17
5
5
3.33
4.5
4.67
3.67
3
4.5
3.5
2.5
3.83
1.17
4.5
4.83
3.33
2.17
2.83
3.67
4.5
5
4.33
4.33
3
3.83
4
4.5
3.33
2.5
3.17
4.83
4
3
3.833333333
5
5
4
1.666666667
3.166666667
4.166666667
3.166666667
1.333333333
2.5
3
3.166666667
2.5
4
4.333333333
4.5
4.5
3.833333333
4.5
2.5
2.666666667
2.833333333
1.666666667
5
4.166666667
3.5
4
5
4.5
4.5
3.166666667
3.5
3.333333333
4.166666667
3.833333333
2.833333333
3.166666667
3
3.5
3.833333333
4.166666667
3.166666667
3.833333333
4
3
4.166666667
4
3.833333333
5
3.666666667
4.5
4
4
3.5
5
3
4.833333333
4.833333333
4.833333333
3.5
4
4.5
4.5
3
3
4
3.5
5
3.333333333
2
3
4.5
3.5
3.833333333
3.833333333
4.5
2.666666667
3.833333333
3.5
3.5
4
3.666666667
3.666666667
3.5
2.5
3.666666667
4.833333333
2.833333333
2.166666667
4.666666667
3
2.833333333
4.333333333
2.666666667
4
4.333333333
1.5
4
4.833333333
5
4.666666667
2.833333333
4.166666667
2.833333333
4.833333333
3
4.833333333
3.333333333
1
5
4
4.333333333
1.833333333
5
4.5
4
1.166666667
4.166666667
4.5
4
4.5
5
1.666666667
2.666666667
4.5
2.166666667
5
5
3
2.5
4
3.5
3.5
4.5
2.666666667
3.5
3.5
4
5
3.666666667
3.333333333
2.833333333
3.166666667
2.5
3.333333333
3.166666667
1.666666667
3.833333333
3.5
4.5
4
3.666666667
3.833333333
3
2.333333333
2.833333333
2.5
3.333333333
1.833333333
5
3.666666667
1.666666667
3
5
1.166666667
4
4
5
5
2.666666667
3
2.166666667
3.833333333
2.333333333
4
2.333333333
3.333333333
3.166666667
4.166666667
2.333333333
4
3.333333333
2.5
1.833333333
5
5
3.333333333
4.666666667
4.333333333
4
3
3.666666667
2.333333333
3.5
2
3.666666667
4.5
3.833333333
4.5
3.833333333
5
4.166666667
4
4.166666667
4.5
4.333333333
4.5
4.333333333
4.833333333
4.5
4.5
4.666666667
4.5
4.166666667
3.666666667
3.5
5
2.5
3
5
3.5
2.833333333
3.333333333
3.833333333
4.166666667
3.333333333
5
2.5
4.666666667
4
4
4
4
4.5
3.166666667
3.5
3.333333333
2.5
4.166666667
4.666666667
4.333333333
4.333333333
2.5
4.166666667
4.166666667
4.333333333
4.333333333
4.5
4.5
3.833333333
4.333333333
2.5
2.5
2.5
3.5
4
4.833333333
3.833333333
2.5
3.333333333
4.166666667
4.5
3.5
3
2.5
4
3.833333333
2.333333333
4.333333333
4.5
4.5
2.5
3.833333333
4.5
2.333333333
2.333333333
3.166666667
4.5
2.5
4.666666667
3.833333333
2.833333333
5
2.5
1.333333333
4.5
2.666666667
4
4.166666667
2.333333333
4.333333333
4.5
4.333333333
4.833333333
5
3
3.333333333
2.5
3.5
3
4.166666667
5
2.5
3.833333333
2.5
3.833333333
3.166666667
2.333333333
3.333333333
4.5
2.333333333
5
4
4.166666667
3.5
5
2.5
2.666666667
3.833333333
3.833333333
3.333333333
3.666666667
5
4.166666667
5
4.5
3.833333333
2.666666667
2.333333333
5
4
4.666666667
3.166666667
4.666666667
3.5
3.166666667
4.5
1.833333333
2.5
5
4.333333333
4.5
4.5
4.333333333
4
4.5
3.666666667
3.166666667
3.166666667
3
3.5
2.166666667
3.166666667
1.5
4
4.5
5
3.5
4
3.5
2.833333333
2.666666667
3.333333333
5
5
4.333333333
4.166666667
3.666666667
3.666666667
3
2.5
2.5
3.833333333
4
5
3.666666667
3.333333333
3.166666667
4.5
3.666666667
4.833333333
3.5
3.666666667
5
3.666666667
2
3.5
2.333333333
4.333333333
5
2
4.166666667
5
5
3.5
4.5
3.666666667
3.5
2
4.833333333
3.833333333
4.5
4
4.5
4
4.833333333
2.833333333
2.833333333
5
5
1.666666667
4.5
5
4.666666667
1.833333333
3.833333333
3.833333333
3.833333333
2.666666667
4
5
5
3.833333333
5
3.5
3.666666667
3.5
4
4.5
1.666666667
3.166666667
4.833333333
5
4
5
4.333333333
4.666666667
4.666666667
5
2.5
4.666666667
5
4.333333333
5
4.833333333
5
5
4.333333333
4.666666667
5
3.5
2.5
4.166666667
5
2
5
5
4.833333333
5
5
4.333333333
3.666666667
5
4
3.666666667
5
5
S3 Comments Sustain
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting. Issued noncompliance declaration for State Audit for FY2009 and FY2012
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
Tax Liens $1,091,121
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting Tax Lien $25
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting Issued noncompliance declaration for State Audit FY2010
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting Tax Lien $80,000
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting Fuel Loans $193,510
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting Tax Lien $5,365
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting Fuel Loan $122,115
PCE Reporting Tax Lien Native Village of Tanacross $ 253,516
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
Small and decreasing population. Power house needs work. Wind resource is turbulent.
DCCED Comments - 3 liens
BF - none
PCE Comments - Buckland Non Fuel Costs not reported
Private lodge ownership is a concern
DCCED Comments - 11 liens
One delinquent audit.
BF - None
BF Comments - Current
PCE Comments - Power is purchased from Bethel Utilities Corp.
PCE Comments - Reported kWh sold exceed kWh generated Jan 12 through May 12
PCE Comments - Reported kWh sold exceed kWh generated Sep 11 through Jun 12
BF Comments - None (DCRA database); DCRA Fuel Watch says 1 loan
DCCED Comments - 2 liens
BF - None
DCCED Comments - 6 liens against the city.
BF None
PCE Comments - Non Fuel Costs not reported
BF Comments: Remaining
BF Comments: Complete
PCE Comments: No issues.
BF Comments: Remaining
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: No generation data: Sep-Dec;
South Naknek and King Salmon receive power from Naknek via intertie.
BF Comments: Complete
BF Comments: Complete
BF Comments: In progress; Alan Fetters is PM
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Complete
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Missing PCE report: Jan-Jun
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Remaining
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Lutak-No generation data: May;
Power purchased from AP&T. Southern Energy Inc.
10 Mile - No data available
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues for City of Unalaska utility
BF Comments: Complete
BF Comments: Complete
BF Comments: Final Design; David Lockard is PM
Kobuk is a new AVEC community. Previous PCE reporting issues.
BF Comments: Ambler, Shungnak: N/A; Kobuk: Remaining
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Kobuk - No generation data: Jan-Dec;
Kobuk recieves power from Shungnak via intertie. Power purchased from AVEC.
BF Comments: Stebbins: N/A; St. Michael: Conceptual Design; David Lockard is PM
BF Comments: Complete
DCCED Comments: Not included
PCE Comments: Kobuk: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Shungnak: N/A; Kobuk: Remaining
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Kobuk - No generation data: Jan-Dec;
Kobuk recieves power from Shungnak via intertie. Power purchased from AVEC.
DCCED Comments: Not included
PCE Comments: No issues.
BF Comments: N/A
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: No generation data: Jan-Dec;
Pitkas Point receives power from St. Mary\'s/Andreafsky via intertie.
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: No issues.
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes:No generation data: Jan, Feb, Dec
BF Comments: All complete
BF Comments: Complete
DCCED Comments: Not included
PCE Comments: No issues.
BF Comments: All either complete or N/A
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Beaver- Missing generation data: Mar& Dec; Sept-Dec not yet processed by PCE. Stevens Village - Missing PCE reports: Jan-Dec
DCCED Comments: Not included
PCE Comments: Beaver, Hughes: Some reporting issues. Stevens Village: Not in 2011 report but not currently inactive.
BF Comments: All either complete or N/A
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Ruby - No generation data: Mar, Apr, Jun. Beaver- Missing generation data: Mar& Dec; Sept-Dec not yet processed by PCE. Stevens Village - Missing PCE reports:
Jan-Dec
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Complete
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Power purchased from Focus Energy Corp
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: Not in 2011 report but not currently inactive.
BF Comments: Remaining
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Missing PCE reports: Jan-Dec
2010 Energy Statistics Notes:
Dot Lake & Tetlin - No generation data: Jan-Dec
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes:
No generation data: Jan-Dec.
Chilkat Valley provides power to Klukwan via intertie.
Some power purchased from AP&T.
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: No generation data: Jan-Dec
BF Comments:Complete
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Missing PCE report: Apr
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Missing PCE reports: March-Jun. No generation data: Nov
DCCED Comments PCE Comments BF Comments
No liens Some reporting issues. Newhalen: Construction; Kris is PM
BF Comments: Remaining ???
2010 Energy Statistics Notes
Ketchikan - SEPA no Tyee Lake data available
DCCED Comments PCE Comments BF Comments
Not included Some reporting issues. N/A
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Complete
Kodiak Electric Association proposes 4.5 MW of additional wind generation capacity.
#311 is a Biomass project also in Tanana
No indication that the local utility will own and operate.
AEA assistance requested
Flashy stream may increase risk to project.
KEA is experienced in O&M of Terror Lake hydro
Applicant proposes feasibility through construction of a wind energy system of unspecified scale and location in Akiakchak. The applicant requests AEA to manage the project.
The application provides only a general description the project. There is no detailed budget.
AEA recommends funding only onsite wind resource assessment at $15,000. AEA will supply an instrumented met tower.
Difficult project to maintain; will require helicopter access since roads not likely. Long transmission line construction involved through difficult terrain will be a challenge to
maintain.
1. No obvious obstacles
Project organization structure is complex. May be difficult to achieve all project goals.
S3 Regional Balance
Compare
Compare
Compare
Compare
Compare
Compare
Compare
Compare
Fail
S3 Compliance
Stage 3 Rank
2
2
3
1
3
3
3
4
1
3
2
1
2
1
3
2
1
2
3
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
4
2
1
3
3
1
2
4
4
1
2
2
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
2
1
3
2
3
1
4
1
4
3
2
2
1
4
1
3
1
4
4
3
3
3
4
3
4
3
2
3
1
1
1
4
2
1
1
3
4
4
3
1
4
1
1
2
1
1
3
3
2
3
2
3
3
2.5
2
3
2
1
1
1
2
2
4
3
3
4
2
3
2
1
1
2.5
1
2
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
3
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
4
4
4
3
3
S3 Comments
This project is potentially competing for same energy market as #1243, Cordova Electric dispatchable heat.
Rich to enter mwh and diesel totals
DEV TO ENTER STAGE 3 ENERGY PRODUCTION NUMBERS.
DANIEL FILL OUT ENERGY PRODUCTION AND START YEAR...
Annual MWH production number is between current use of 900 MWH and total capacity of 2140.
the anticipated start dates will likely be spread out as the different boilers are completed. Some might start fall 2015.
S3 Score 75.22
Project Rank
22
6
11
4
34
31
29
2
38
39
16
17
24
37
28
40
12
14
30
9
23
15
32
27
25
33
5
18
10
20
19
1
36
8
26
3
13
35
21
7
13
8
39
34
15
57
55
54
60
11
58
44
24
25
32
45
31
7
12
49
36
43
9
35
30
62
23
5
59
50
64
4
28
3
21
41
26
18
33
14
2
42
22
19
48
51
10
1
17
37
47
20
63
27
29
16
46
38
53
6
40
56
52
61
30
6
24
59
1
60
11
49
8
2
39
45
51
46
43
40
47
38
35
36
27
54
29
7
37
26
12
17
9
13
28
18
16
21
34
23
19
33
10
52
22
32
58
5
41
56
20
31
15
44
25
3
14
50
4
53
48
42
55
57
23
26
4
31
29
17
28
12
9
32
24
13
14
25
34
2
20
3
1
11
15
22
8
19
41
7
33
27
21
39
6
5
30
18
16
35
38
40
36
10
37
72
73
37
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
0
29
33
0
58
59
16
1
13
22
53
0
20
19
5
39
56
0
64
10
43
31
15
7
52
3
30
0
8
36
0
0
0
54
0
18
47
68
75
2
6
21
0
49
61
32
45
42
23
11
38
48
41
50
35
0
26
4
44
0
0
74
0
62
46
0
55
0
69
71
60
57
51
34
0
12
0
14
25
0
63
67
66
65
40
24
27
70
28
9
0
0
0
0
42
85
2
4
29
39
40
30
16
46
80
62
35
89
74
5
32
79
49
50
77
63
21
52
65
51
83
28
25
34
56
15
12
53
67
19
13
82
78
17
73
8
87
75
33
59
9
10
54
64
86
69
14
24
43
11
37
58
57
18
22
3
31
76
7
61
81
68
60
47
27
41
38
26
48
90
88
70
66
71
20
45
55
1
44
36
23
84
6
72
1
16
5
14
42
8
17
30
19
23
34
38
27
31
20
56
7
6
59
53
40
45
55
41
13
43
12
4
21
48
37
49
50
60
36
46
39
51
3
22
32
29
11
9
52
33
18
58
10
26
28
44
15
57
47
24
2
54
35
25
10
76
87
81
40
12
37
82
14
58
60
23
33
64
89
67
79
84
35
41
59
17
15
75
46
74
44
11
69
92
71
34
28
26
66
48
52
62
47
21
25
61
70
7
24
16
3
49
8
2
30
45
5
38
27
54
13
73
55
78
53
68
39
93
50
42
88
85
57
43
29
22
9
56
32
20
19
1
6
4
63
77
80
98
36
65
97
96
31
18
72
83
51
94
95
91
90
86
Project Rank Region
0
0
2
3
2
1
4
2
1
0
1
0
0
3
2
1
0
4
1
2
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
3
1
3
2
1
6
3
6
8
1
3
3
3
2
4
2
9
7
1
0
5
0
0
2
5
1
1
2
4
3
6
5
2
1
2
2
9
12
2
1
2
7
1
2
6
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
3
1
4
10
1
4
1
2
3
8
4
11
5
2
2
3
2
1
6
5
3
7
4
3
12
6
2
10
4
9
1
4
13
1
3
3
7
8
8
6
1
8
1
2
2
6
1
5
11
7
2
1
3
1
12
5
2
2
4
3
1
4
9
13
5
5
7
8
1
2
10
15
1
11
5
14
2
17
18
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
5
8
0
10
11
5
1
1
2
3
0
2
2
1
2
4
0
13
1
6
5
4
3
11
1
2
0
1
7
0
0
0
9
0
2
8
14
20
1
1
3
0
10
4
2
3
9
3
2
8
3
5
4
6
0
4
2
7
0
0
19
0
13
11
0
12
0
15
16
12
3
3
9
0
1
0
2
4
0
2
5
4
3
1
3
4
14
7
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
2
2
3
7
6
2
6
3
1
2
5
3
7
1
2
4
4
3
4
1
3
3
5
1
1
1
2
3
3
3
1
4
4
1
3
4
3
4
5
2
11
2
1
6
5
3
4
5
4
2
8
2
2
1
9
7
4
5
7
2
6
5
7
1
2
3
2
1
2
4
5
3
12
1
1
4
5
1
5
6
3
1
10
6
3
1
9
10
17
5
2
4
18
3
4
9
4
1
11
18
12
16
5
3
6
7
3
2
1
7
15
5
3
8
3
13
4
3
2
7
2
6
8
5
1
4
10
14
1
3
2
1
8
1
1
2
6
2
5
1
2
4
14
3
6
10
13
4
21
9
6
2
9
8
7
7
6
2
11
4
3
5
1
2
1
12
16
7
24
5
6
20
19
4
3
15
19
5
22
23
20
7
17
AEA Managed
Yes
Yes
Yes
Y
Y
Y
Request Early Funding
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Award Code
7071087
7071085
7071082
7071077
7071073
7071072
7071068
7071067
7071061
7071053
7071052
7071047
7071044
7071043
7071041
7071040
7071037
7071036
7071032
7071031
7071027
7071026
7071025
7071021
7071015
7071011
7060982
7060978
7060976
7060967
7060966
7060944
7060941
7060940
7060939
7060937
7060935
7060934
7060933
7060930
7060929
7060927
7060925
7060922
7060917
7060915
7060912
7060911
7060908
7050887
7050881
7050876
7050875
7050871
7050870
7050858
7050856
7050848
7050847
7050844
7050840
7050839
7050836
7050825
7050823
7050821
7050820
7050803
7040071
7040072
7040001
7040041
7040043
7040060
7040061
7040040
7040036
7040009
7040016
7040011
7040012
7040010
7040004
7040006
7040051
7040063
7040003
7040005
7040002
7040039
7040038
7040057
7040028
7040029
7040045
7040020
7040059
7040046
7040058
7040068
7040074
7040007
7040013
7040032
7040056
7040055
7040008
7040030
7040022
7040017
7040014
7040021
7040052
7040049
7040053
7040019
7040048
7040037
7040035
7040073
7040067
7040066
7040069
7040070
7040062
7040054
7040050
7040044
7040031
7040033
7040024
7040027
7040026
7040025
7040023
7040047
7040018
7040064
7040042
7040015
7030001
7030015
7030006
7030016
7030002
7040034
7030007
7030018
7030022
7030023
7030003
7030037
7030019
7030010
7030017
7030004
7030021
7030038
7040065
7030020
7030008
7030013
7030012
7030014
7030009
7030011
2195446
2195461
2195450
2195459
2195453
2195463
2195468
2195464
2195452
2195451
2195476
2195457
2195449
2195466
2195474
2195473
2195472
2195475
2195448
2195467
2195471
2195456
2195454
2195462
2195455
2195460
2195469
2195447
2195432
2195395
2195393
2195411
2195425
2195394
2195410
2195391
2195440
2195371
2195370
2195433
2195437
2195426
2195398
2195375
2195442
2195435
2195420
2195427
2195402
2195422
2195412
2195413
2195431
2195384
2195385
2195383
2195430
2195465
2195374
2195406
2195409
2195416
2195424
2195397
2195376
2195434
2195377
2195443
2195358
2195438
2195401
2195417
2195396
2195444
2195302
2195400
2195372
2195388
2195415
2195441
2195439
2195428
2195373
2195405
2195403
2195414
2195390
2195399
2195360
2195407
2195386
2195429
2195380
2195389
2195408
2195387
2195423
2195419
2195381
2195418
Application Round
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Applicant Phases
Design
Construction
Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design
Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Construction
Recon, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Recon, Feasibility
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Construction
Construction
Recon
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon
Design
Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Recon
Feasibility
Recon
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Construction
Design
Design
Construction
Feasibility
Design
Recon, Design
Design
Design
Feasibility
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Construction
Recon
Recon
Design
Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Feasibility
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Design
Feasibility
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Recon
Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Design
Recon, Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Design
Recon
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Recon
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Construction
Design
Design
Recon
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Construction
Recon
Recon
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Recon
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Recon
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Design
Design
Design
Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Design
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon
Design
Recon
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Design
Recon
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Project Type
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro, Storage, Other
Hydro
Wind, Transmission, Solar, Storage
Hydro
Hydro
HeatPump
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Transmission, Other
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Wind
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
HeatPump
Biomass
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery, HeatPump
Solar
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro, Storage
Hydro
Hydro
HeatWind
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Transmission, Other
Wind
HeatPump
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Solar
Hydro, Storage, Other
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
HeatPump
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
HeatWind
HeatWind
Wind
HeatWind
Storage
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Wind
HeatRecovery
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Transmission
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
HeatPump
Biomass
HeatPump
Storage
Hydro
Wind
HeatHydro
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
HeatPump
HeatPump
HeatPump
Biomass
Biomass
HeatPump
Solar
Biomass
Biomass
Solar
HeatBiofuel
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Biomass
Wind
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Transmission
Geothermal
Solar
Hydro
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Hydro
Transmission
Biomass
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Hydro
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Wind
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Hydro
Geothermal
Geothermal
Geothermal
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Transmission
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Other
Biomass
Wind
Other
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Geothermal
Hydro
Geothermal
Wind
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Solar
Wind
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Geothermal
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Hydro
Other
Biomass
Biomass
Geothermal
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Transmission
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Other
Biomass
Solar
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
HeatRecovery
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Wind
Other
Hydrokinetic
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Geothermal
Hydrokinetic
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Geothermal
Geothermal
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Geothermal
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Geothermal
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Solar
Hydro
Geothermal
Hydro
Solar
Hydro
Transmission
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
Solar
Other
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Biomass
Geothermal
Biomass
Hydro
Solar
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Other
Biomass
Hydrokinetic
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Wind
HeatBiofuel
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Solar
HeatRecovery
Other
Wind
HeatRecovery
Hydrokinetic
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Biomass
Geothermal
Geothermal
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Geothermal
Transmission
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
HeatRecovery
HeatBiofuel
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Geothermal
Wind
Wind
Solar
Wind
Wind
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Wind
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Hydro
Other
Other
Solar
Solar
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Wind
Biomass
Wind
HeatRecovery
HeatBiofuel
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Transmission
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Transmission
Hydro
Biomass
Transmission
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Transmission
Biomass
Hydro
Other
Hydro
Other
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Applicant Type
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
IPP
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
IPP
Utility
IPP
IPP
IPP
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Other
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
IPP
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
Utility
IPP
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Energy Region
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River Chugach
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Aleutians
Southeast
Railbelt
Kodiak
Bering Straits
Aleutians
Lower Yukon Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
North Slope
North Slope
Copper River Chugach
Railbelt
Lower Yukon Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Aleutians
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
Southeast
Kodiak
Aleutians
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Aleutians
Southeast
Aleutians
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Kodiak
North Slope
North Slope
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Bering Straits
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Aleutians
Railbelt
Railbelt
Aleutians
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Copper River/Chugach
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Aleutians
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
North Slope
North Slope
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Kodiak
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Aleutians
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Aleutians
Kodiak
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Kodiak
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Kodiak
Aleutians
Aleutians
Aleutians
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bering Straits
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Bering Straits
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Kodiak
Railbelt
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Kodiak
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Copper River/Chugach
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Aleutians
Aleutians
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Bering Straits
Kodiak
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Bering Straits
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Aleutians
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Railbelt
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Aleutians
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Northwest Arctic
Bering Straits
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Aleutians
Railbelt
Statewide
Aleutians
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Kodiak
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Railbelt
Aleutians
Aleutians
Statewide
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Statewide
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Statewide
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Kodiak
Railbelt
Aleutians
Copper River/Chugach
Aleutians
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Railbelt
Aleutians
Aleutians
Aleutians
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
Bristol Bay
Copper River/Chugach
Northwest Arctic
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Kodiak
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Southeast
Kodiak
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Aleutians
Aleutians
Statewide
Railbelt
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Statewide
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Kodiak
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Aleutians
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
S3 Funding Resource
11
15
13
7
11
13
13
11
15
6
15
6
6
6
9
9
15
10
15
7
9
7
15
0
15
6
11
6
6
9
9
11
15
0
0
15
11
15
11
7
11
0
15
15
6
6
9
11
0
6
0
0
6
9
9
6
9
6
7
11
8
7
9
15
7
7
7
7
9
15
15
11
15
11
13
11
11
15
11
7
6
15
15
15
15
9
6
11
15
11
6
6
13
6
9
9
7
7
7
7
13
6
6
7
9
11
13
6
9
9
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
11
11
15
15
15
15
9
11
11
7
15
7
9
0
11
7
15
6
15
9
15
11
7
11
6
9
8.25
12
10.5
9
6
5.25
11.25
5.25
5.25
6.75
5.25
0
6
6
9
6.75
6
6
6
6
6.75
9
5.25
14.25
5.25
6
5.25
6
6
5.25
5.25
5.25
0
6
15
12.75
9.75
6
6
6
6
0
5.25
7.5
11.25
14.25
9
9.75
10.5
15
7.5
6
14.25
9.75
9
0
10.5
0
3
0
0
8.25
14.25
13.5
0
12
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
9
2.25
6.75
6.75
6.75
6
5.25
6.75
0
8.25
9
0
10.5
8.25
6
0
6
12.75
8.25
0
9.75
9
15
0
6
10.5
15
9.75
9
9
9.75
8.25
11.25
8.25
9.75
10.5
9.75
12.75
10.5
6
6
6.75
12
6
6
6
9
13.5
15
5.25
10.5
9.75
6
6.75
7.5
8.25
8.25
15
1.5
1.5
10.5
0
13.5
15
14.25
6.75
1.5
6
7.5
6
9
6
6
6
7.5
6
6
0
9.75
10.5
0
9.75
10.5
10.5
5.25
7.5
5.25
5.25
9
15
12
15
6.75
8.25
8.25
8.25
7.5
8.25
0
5.25
6
13.5
10.5
0
0
9.75
13.5
9.75
6
6
9
6
6
0
14.25
0
0
8.25
9
14.25
0
12.75
0
0
0
11.25
9.75
6
9
0
7.5
7.5
8.25
13.5
14.25
9.75
9.75
9.75
7.5
7.5
0
0
9.75
0
8.25
0
0
15
13.5
9.75
13.5
11.25
6.75
0
6.75
10.5
8.25
8.25
11.25
10.5
10.5
9.75
10.5
10.5
15
10.5
0
15
10.5
0
0
0
0
15
6
9.75
9.75
11.25
0
0
9
9
9
13.5
10.5
5.25
14.25
5.25
9
5.25
5.25
15
0
13.8
6
9.6
10.2
12.6
8.4
11.4
9.6
10.2
6
6
6
6
6
7.2
10.8
10.8
0
0
11.4
13.8
0
6
9
10.8
13.2
12.6
6.6
6.6
12
6.6
0
0
10.8
0
0
0
10.8
8.4
8.4
6.6
9.6
12.6
12
9
11.4
0
11.4
15
6.6
7.8
13.8
6
9.6
10.8
13.8
7.2
12
11.4
0
12.6
13.2
12.6
6
13.2
12
11.4
12.6
12
14.4
15
4.2
15
0
14.4
9
0.6
14.4
15
11.4
6
0
15
9
9
9
7.8
9
9.6
9.6
9.6
14.4
10.8
10.8
10.8
10.8
11.4
8.4
13.8
13.8
14.4
7.2
14.4
14.4
10.2
7.2
11.4
13.8
9
6
10.2
9
0
10.8
11.4
0
11.4
9
13.2
13.8
13.8
11.4
13.8
14.4
14.4
15
7.8
6
0
12.6
0.6
7.2
15
0
1.2
Energy Region
Statewide
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Northwest Arctic
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bering Straits
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
North Slope
Railbelt
Kodiak
Total Match score
8.85
520.65
242.6
881.25
255.35
399
618.5
318.5
1065.9
149.1
827.15
189.3
Total projects
6
72
33
117
32
49
74
37
122
17
86
19
Average match score
1.475
7.23125
7.35151515151515
7.53205128205128
7.9796875
8.14285714285714
8.35810810810811
8.60810810810811
8.73688524590164
8.77058823529412
9.61802325581395
9.96315789473684
Applicant Type
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Total Match score
776.85
1165.85
1762.3
554.55
Total projects
112
154
188
57
Average match score
6.93616071428571
7.57045454545454
9.37393617021277
9.72894736842105
Project Type
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Solar
Wind
Geothermal
Hydrokinetic
Other
Hydro
Transmission
Storage
HeatPump
Total Match score
424
790
140.75
1058
156.6
117.4
103.2
1422
182
24
123
Total projects
59
108
18
132
19
14
12
151
19
2
10
Average match score
7.1864406779661
7.31481481481481
7.81944444444444
8.01515151515152
8.24210526315789
8.38571428571428
8.6
9.41721854304636
9.57894736842105
12
12.3
Applicant Phases
Design
Recon
Feasibility
Construction
Total Match score
833
611
1996
1113.55
Total projects
108
78
251
108
Average match score
7.71296296296296
7.83333333333333
7.95219123505976
10.3106481481482
Application Number
1252
1251
1250
1249
1248
1247
1246
1245
1244
1243
1242
1241
1240
1239
1238
1237
1236
1235
1234
1233
1232
1231
1230
1229
1228
1227
1226
1225
1224
1223
1222
1221
1220
1219
1218
1217
1216
1215
1214
1213
1212
1211
1210
1209
1208
1207
1206
1205
1204
1203
1202
1201
1167
1166
1165
1164
1163
1162
1161
1160
1159
1158
1157
1156
1155
1154
1153
1152
1151
1150
1149
1148
1147
1146
1145
1144
1143
1142
1141
1140
1139
1138
1137
1136
1135
1134
1133
1132
1131
1130
1129
1128
1127
1126
1125
1124
1123
1122
1121
1120
1119
1118
1117
1116
1115
1114
1113
1112
1111
1110
1109
1108
1107
1106
1105
1104
1103
1102
1101
1087
1086
1085
1084
1083
1082
1081
1080
1079
1078
1077
1076
1075
1074
1073
1072
1071
1070
1069
1068
1067
1066
1065
1064
1063
1062
1061
1060
1059
1058
1057
1056
1055
1054
1053
1052
1051
1050
1049
1048
1047
1046
1045
1044
1043
1042
1041
1040
1039
1038
1037
1036
1035
1034
1033
1032
1031
1030
1029
1028
1027
1026
1025
1024
1023
1022
1021
1020
1019
1018
1017
1016
1015
1014
1013
1012
1011
1010
1009
1008
1007
1006
1005
1004
1003
1002
1001
985
984
983
982
981
980
979
978
977
976
975
974
973
972
971
970
969
968
967
966
965
964
963
962
961
960
959
958
957
956
955
954
953
952
951
950
949
948
947
946
945
944
943
942
941
940
939
938
937
936
935
934
933
932
931
930
929
928
927
926
925
924
923
922
921
920
919
918
917
916
915
914
913
912
911
910
909
908
907
906
905
904
903
902
901
898
897
896
895
894
893
892
891
890
889
888
887
886
885
884
883
882
881
880
879
878
877
876
875
874
873
872
871
870
869
868
867
866
865
864
863
862
861
860
859
858
857
856
855
854
853
852
851
850
849
848
847
846
845
844
843
842
841
840
839
838
837
836
835
834
833
832
831
830
829
828
827
826
825
824
823
822
821
820
819
818
817
816
815
814
813
812
811
810
809
808
807
806
805
804
803
802
801
800
707
706
705
704
703
702
701
700
699
698
697
696
695
694
693
692
691
690
689
688
687
686
685
684
683
682
681
680
679
678
677
676
675
674
673
672
671
670
669
668
667
666
665
664
663
662
661
660
659
658
657
656
655
654
653
652
651
650
649
648
647
646
645
644
643
642
641
640
639
638
637
636
635
634
633
632
631
630
629
628
627
626
625
624
623
622
621
620
619
618
617
616
615
614
613
612
611
610
609
608
607
606
605
604
603
602
601
600
523
522
521
520
519
518
517
516
515
514
513
512
511
510
509
508
507
506
505
504
503
502
501
500
499
498
497
496
495
494
493
492
491
490
489
488
487
486
485
484
483
482
481
480
479
478
477
476
475
474
473
472
471
470
469
468
467
466
465
464
463
462
461
460
459
458
457
456
455
454
453
452
451
450
449
448
447
446
445
444
443
442
441
440
439
438
437
436
435
434
433
432
431
430
429
428
427
426
425
424
423
422
421
420
419
418
417
416
415
414
413
412
411
410
409
408
407
406
405
404
403
402
401
400
321
320
319
318
317
316
315
314
313
312
311
310
309
308
307
306
305
304
303
302
301
300
299
298
297
296
295
294
293
292
291
290
289
288
287
286
285
284
283
282
281
280
279
278
277
276
275
274
273
272
271
270
269
268
267
266
265
264
263
262
261
260
259
258
257
256
255
254
253
252
251
250
249
248
246
245
244
243
242
241
240
239
238
237
236
235
234
233
232
231
230
229
228
227
226
225
224
223
222
221
220
219
218
217
216
215
214
213
212
211
210
209
208
207
206
205
204
202
122
121
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
101
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
86
85
84
83
82
81
79
78
77
76
75
74
73
72
71
70
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
61
60
59
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Application Round
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Applicant Project Name
Igiugig RivGen® Power System Commercial Project
100 Kilowatt Solar Array for Circle
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Permitting
Indian River Hydroelectric Project - Construction
Crater Lake Power and Water Project
Chignik Hydroelectric Dam Project
St. Paul Island 80% Renewable Energy Feasibility Study
Hydro Power Generator Adak
Gunnuk Creek Hydro Rehabilitation - IPEC Kake
Maximizing Hydropower Utilization with Controlled Electro-Thermal Systems
Heat Pump System For City Owned Buildings
Minto PV Solar Project
Solar Panels for Kake Community Buildings
Ouzinkie Hydroelectric Power Project
Koyuk Water System Heat Recovery
Sand Point High Penetration Wind System
West Creek Hydroelectric Project
Scammon Bay Hydroelectric Project
Wales Water System Heat Recovery
Grayling Water System Heat Recovery
Atqasuk Transmission Line Design and Permitting
Kaktovik Wind Diesel Design
100 Kilowatt Solar Array for Kotzebue
Knik Arm Power Plant Recycled Biomass to Power
Point McKenzie Correction Farm (PMCF) PV Solar Project
Hoonah Waste-to-Energy Project
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Project
Mountain Village-St. Mary’s Wind Intertie Project – Final Design and Construction
Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Bethel Power Plant Heat Recovery Module Construction
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project −Geotechnical Study and Final Design
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Construction Project
False Pass Hydroelectric Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design
Saxman Low-Rent Multifamily Air Source Heat Pump
Klawock School Biomass Fuel Boiler Project
Shungnak Wind-Diesel Conceptual Design
Huslia Water System and Clinic Biomass Boiler Project
Eek Water System Heat Recovery
Ambler Washeteria and City Office Biomass Heating System
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Design & Permitting
Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Heat Pump
Evaluation of a Community Solar Project
Ketchikan Schools Recreation Central Heating Plant
Ketchikan High School Biomass Boiler Construction
Yerrick Creek Hydropower Project: Construction
Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study: False Pass, Alaska
Neck Lake Hydropower Project: Phases II-III
Clearwater Creek Hydropower Project: Phase II
Craig Water Treatment Plant Micro-Hydro
Upper Hidden Basin Diversion - Geotechnical Investigation
Water Treatment Plant Inline Micro Turbines
Community Solar Project
Chignik Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Chenega Bay Hydroelectric Construction
Port Graham Community Building Biomass Heat Distribution Project
Sand Point Excess Wind Utilization
Adak Hydroelectric Feasibility Study – Phase II
Hoonah Biomass District Heating Loop
Indian River Hydroelectric Project – Construction
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Permitting
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Construction Project
Deadhorse Waste Heat to Energy Plant
Northwest Alaska Wind Resource Assessment and Intertie Study
City of Noorvik Solar-PV
Eek Water System Heat Recovery
Unalakleet Wind-Diesel Optimization
Lake and Peninsula Borough Wood Boilers
St. Paul - 80% Renewable by 2020 – Community Energy Baseline Study
Adak Community Energy Baseline Study
Southcentral Small Hydro Assessments
Scammon Bay Hydroelectric Project
Southeast Island School District wood boilers
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Project
IRHA Facility Biomass Feasibility Study
Kake senior housing solar PV
Scammon Bay Community Facilities Heat Recovery
Gateway Borough Recreation and Schools Central Heating Plant Design
Selawik Water System Heat Recovery
Ketchikan Gateway Borough – Ketchikan High School Biomass Boiler Construction
Chefornak Wind Heat System
Ouzinkie Hydroelectric Power Project
Atqasuk Transmission Line Design and Permitting Project
Kaktovik Wind Diesel Design
Lepquinum Wellness Center Ground Source Heat Pump
Kwigillingok Wind Heat System – Electric Thermal Storage
Kotzebue Paper and Wood Waste to Energy Project
Wales Water System Heat Recovery
Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler Project
Holy Cross Power Plant Heat Recovery for Water Distribution System
Nikolai Community Biomass Heating System
Igiugig RivGen® Power System Project
Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study: False Pass, Alaska
Huslia Water System and Clinic Biomass Boiler Project
Ambler Washeteria and City Office Biomass Heating System
Grayling Water System Heat Recovery
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
Koyuk Water System Heat Recovery
Biomass for Akiachak Native Community Electric Company
Yerrick Creek Hydropower Project
Shungnak Wind-Diesel Design
Bethel Power Plant Heat Recovery System Assessment and Conceptual Design
Goodnews Bay Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project ï€Geotechnical Study and Final Design
St. Mary’s-Pitka’s Point Wind Energy Construction Project
Klawock low-income housing pellet heat
Angoon low-income housing pellet district heat
100 Kilowatt Solar Array for Kotzebue
Crater Lake Power and Water Project
Wood Boiler for The Native Village of Tazlina
Craig High School Wood Heat Conversion
Neck Lake Hydropower Project
Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project
Mahoney Lake Hydropower Project
Clearwater Creek Hydropower Project
SEAPA Wind Resource Assessment
Sitka: Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Heat Pump
Upper Hidden Basin Diversion
Manokotak Renewable Energy Feasibility Project
Kake Community Energy
Chefornak High Penetration Wind Diesel System
Tuntutuliak Heat Recovery
Juniper Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project
Stetson Creek Diversion Cooper Lake Dam Facilities Project
Waste to Energy Reconnaissance Study
False Pass Wind Energy Project
Koliganek Wind Diesel and Heat Recovery
Chickaloon Solar Thermal and Biomass Project
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
NWAB School District Solar Thermal Systems
Cascade Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Tuntutuliak Wind Heat Electrical Thermal Storage
Kongiganak Wind Heat Electrical Thermal Storage
Igiugig Wind Resource Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Kwigillingok Wind Heat Electrical Thermal Storage
Sand Point Energy Storage Project
St Marys Pitkas Point Wind Energy Construction Project
Stebbins St Michael Wind Energy Final Design and Permitting
Mountain Village Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Marshall Wind Energy Final Design and Permitting Project
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project Final Design and Permitting
Chenega Bay Hydroelectric Construction
Iliamna Solar Ground Mounted Energy System
False Pass Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study
Emmonak Heat Recovery System
Holy Cross Water System Heat Recovery
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Design and Permitting
Noatak Utility Size Photovoltaic Array Construction Project
Mertarvik Renewable Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Adak Wind Data Collection Analysis and Preliminary Design
Alaska SeaLife Center Heat Recovery Project
Multiple Alternative Energy Sources for Napakiak
Yakutat Biomass District Heating Loop
Nunam Iqua Heat Recovery Project
AGSD Extension of Heating Loop
Bristol Bay Borough School District Solar PV Project
Atqasuk Transmission Line Design and Permitting Project
Kaktovik Wind Diesel Design and Permitting
Galena Community Wood Heat Project
Port Alsworth Hydropower PreConstruction Phase
Grayling Heat Recovery System
Venetie Clinic Heat Recovery
St Marys Heat Recovery System
Eek Water System Heat Recovery
Chevak Water and Vacuum Plant Heat Recovery
Brevig Mission Water System Heat Recovery
Four Villages lntertie Design
Kotzebue Paper and Wood Waste to Energy Project
Ketchikan Gateway Borough Biomass Heating Project
Packers Creek Hydroelectric Project Phase II
Feasibility Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Metlakatla to Ketchikan Intertie
Sitka Sea Water Source Heat Pump Project
Biomass Heat for Minto Community Buildings
Seldovia House Ground Source Heat Pump Project
Flywheels ESS for Kodiak Pier Electric Crane
Jack River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Carlo Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study
Chisana Mountain Wind Feasibility Project
Atka Dispatchable Heat
Gunnuk Creek Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
Walker Lake Hydro Project Feasibility
Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project
SEAPA Wind Resource Assessment Phase I and II
Haines Borough Municipal Buildings Biomass Project
Excursion Inlet Hydro Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Survey Creek Hydroelectric Project
Chignik Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Southeast Island School District Wood Boilers
Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler Project
Allison Creek Hydroelectric Project Construction
Wood Chip Boiler for The Native Village of Tazlina
Sitka Kettleson Library Air Source Heat Pump
Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Heat Pump
Sitka Centennial Hall Air Source Heat Pump
Craig High School Wood Heat Conversion
Nenana Collaborative Biomass Heating System Project
Chuathbaluk Water System Heat Recovery
Mendenhall Valley Library Geothermal HVAC System
NEA Stack Heat to Power Project
Tuntutuliak Water Treatment Plant Washeteria Heat Recovery
Karluk Tribal Council Wind Energy System
Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Phase III and IV
Poncelet Kinetics RHK100 Prototype Demonstration
Northwest Arctic Borough Solar PV Project
Electrical Power Lines -Western Alaska
Noatak Wind Resource Assessment
Wood Heat Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design for the Organized Village of Kake
Community Facilities Woody Biomass Space Heating Project
Tanana Solar Domestic Hot Water Heating Project
Bristol Bay Borough School District Energy Project
Waste-to-Energy Feasibility Study
Indian River Hydroelectric Project Construction
Carlo Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study
Knutson Creek Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Juniper Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Neck Lake Hydro Project
Elim Geothermal Resource Assessment I Feasibility
Akiak Wind Resource Assessment
Eastern Copper Basin Geothermal Assessment
Kipnuk Wind Diesel Power Generation and Heating
Nelson Lagoon Wind Energy Project
False Pass Wind Energy Project
Cold Bay Waste Heat Recovery Project
High-penetration Wind Energy Project- Kokhanok
Haines Borough Pellet Heating Project
Excursion Inlet Hydro Project- Phase II
Mount Makushin Geothermal Project
Manokotak Wind & Heat Feasibility Study
Atka Wind Power Project
TidGen? Array Project
Ticasuk Brown School Pellet Boiler Project-Phase 2
Wrangell Power Plant Upgrade
Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Goodnews Bay Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
St. Mary?s / Pilot Station Wind Energy Intertie Construction Project
St. Mary?s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design
Hotham Peak Wind Resource and lntertie Assessment
Cosmos Hills Wind Resource and Intertie Assessment
St. Michael/Stebbins Wind Energy Final Design and Permitting Project
Russian Mission Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Kotlik Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Wales Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Marshall Wind Energy Design and Permitting Project
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
St. Mary?s / Pitka?s Point Wind Energy Project
New Stuyahok Heat Recovery
OIT Inc Waste Heat Turbine Project
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant/Washeteria Building
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant and Community Store
Stebbins Heat Recovery Project
Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant and Washeteria
Heat Recovery for the Water System
Atmautluak Washeteria Heat Recovery Project
Savoonga Heat Recovery System - Power Plant to Water Plant
Biomass Feasibility Studies in Public Facilities, Interior Region
Design and Construction of Biomass Systems in Interior Villages
Nenana Collaborative Biomass Heating System Project
Allison Creek Project
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project
Bathymetric survey and marine geological study to refine submarine cable route for Kodiak-Ouzinkie Electrical Inter-tie project
Galena Community Wood Heat Project
AGSD District Heat Loop Project
Upper Tanana Biomass CHP Project
Seward Schools Biomass Heating System
Afognak Biomass Feasibility Study
Gartina Falls Hydroelectric Project
AVCP RHA Wood Biomass Heating System
Walker Lake Hydro Feasibility Project
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie
West Creek Hydroelectric Project
Blue Lake Hydroelectric Expansion Project
Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler Project
Eagle Solar Array Project
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Stetson Creek Diversion/Cooper Lake Dam Facilities Project
Egegik Wind Feasibility Study
Levelock Wind Reconnaissance Study
Igiugig Wind Turbine Design
Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Project: Phase Ill
Tazimina Hydroelectric Project Capacity Increase
Petersburg Community Heating System Retrofit Feasibility Study
Coffman Cove Hydropower Line Extension
HydroPower Surplus to Stored Hydrogen Feasibility Study
Dimond Park Library Geothermal HVAC System
Northwest Arctic Borough Solar PV
Jack River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Karluk Tribal Council ? Wind Energy System
Nome Renewable Energy Optimization Project
Port Graham Village Biomass Waste Heat Demonstration Project
MEA Power Plant Waste Heat Utilization Reconnaissance Study
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Alakanuk Waste Water Treatment Facility Wind Generation
Reconnaissance Study of Thomas Bay Public Projects
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Adak Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
Igiugig Wind, Solar, Hydrokinetic and Thermal Feasibility Study
Nikolski Renewable Energy Wind Project
Kodiak High School Ground Source Heat Pump
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
High Penetration Wind Diesel Power and Heat
Nenana?s Solar-Powered Student Living Center
Transmission Line from Fire Island Wind Project
Mentasta Woody Biomass Community Facility Space Heating Project
Tanacross Woody Biomass Community Facility Space Heating Project
Tanana Solar Thermal Public Facilities Heating Project
St. Michael / Stebbins Wind Energy Design
Emmonak/Alakanuk Phase 2 Wind Energy Construction
Upper Kalskag Solar Construction
Gambell Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Gambell Water System Heat
Chevak Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Chevak Water System Heat
Goodnews Bay Wind Energy Feasibility
Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility
Mountain Village Wind Energy Construction
Shaktoolik Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Shaktoolik Water System Heat
Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Mekoryuk Water System Heat
St. Mary\'s/Pitka\'s Point Wind Construction and Commissioning
TidGen? Array Project
Reconnaissance Study of the Geothermal Potential for the Ivanoff Bay Region
Extension of Heating Loop
Greenhouse and Processing Facility utilizing surplus heat
Net-Zero Training and Administration Center (TAC)
Community of Elim Geothermal Resource Assessment
False Pass Tidal Energy Study
Saint Michael Renewable Energy Reconnaissance Study
City of Angoon Wind to Energy Feasibility Study
Goodnews Bay Wind Generator Study
Togiak Waste Heat Recovery Project
Savoonga Heat Recovery - Power Plant to Water Plant
Shishmaref Heat Recovery Project
Old Kasigluk Wind Feasibility Study
Klawock Biomass Boiler System Feasibility Study
White Mountain Heat Recovery Feasibility Study
New Stuyahok Heat Recovery Study
Toksook Bay Heat Recovery Feasibility Study
Water Plant Biomass System Feasibility Study
Selawik Wind Feasibility Study
Sleetmute Heat Recovery - Power Plant to Water Plant
Scammon Bay Hydro Design & Engineering
Kotlik Wind Generator Study
Noorvik Heat Recovery System Feasibility Study
Russian Mission Heat Recovery System
Atmautlauk Washeteria/ Power Plant Waste Heat Recovery Project
Golovin Wind Feasibility Study
City of Kake Hydroelectric Resource Analysis
Kobuk Biomass Design & Construction Project
and 898 Nome Renewable Energy Expansion/Optimization Project
Chickaloon Solar Thermal and Biomass Project
Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Packer?s Creek Hydroelectric Project
Mahoona Hydroelectric Dam Replacement
Seward Schools Biomass Heating System
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility
Kake Pellet Boiler System
Juneau Super Critical Water Oxidation Sewage Sludge to Energy
Multi Disciplinary Combined Facility Primary Care Center Biomass Feasibility Project
Walker Lake Feasibility Study
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development GENERATION Project
Wrangell Electrical Capacitor Bank
and 827 Thayer Lake Hydropower Development Transmission/Generation Project
Anaktuvuk Pass Geothermal Feasibility Study
Tatitlek Heat Recovery Project
Wood Heating Feasibility in Public Facilities, Interior Region
Huslia Water System & Clinic Wood Boiler Project
Design & Construction of Wood Heating Projects in Interior Alaska Communities
Stetson Creek Diversion/ Cooper Lake Dam Facilities Project
Gulkana Village Biomass Fuels Project
Solomon Gulch unit 2 Efficiency Upgrade
Allison Creek Project
Wave Energy/ Sequestration Technology (WEST)
Glennallen School Campus Biomass Heating Project
Whitman Lake Project
AVTEC Hydroelectric Training Facility
Kake-Petersburg Inter-Connection Engineering
SEAPA Wind Resources Assessment & Economic Feasibility Study
SEAPA Phase I Wind Site Recon Study
Reynolds Creek Hydro Transmission Line
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Upper Tanana Area Intertie Project
Black Bear Lake Hydro Project Storage Increase
Transmission Line to Renewable Energy Resources (Mount Spurr)
Pillar Mtn High Penetration Wind Project
Petersburg Public Library Geothermal Heat Pump Construction
Jack River Hydro Project Phase II
West Creek Hydroelectric Project
Sitka Renewable Energy Feasibility for Centennial Hall & Library
Sitka Renewable Energy Feasibility for Wastewater Treatment Plant
Japonski Island Boathouse Heat Pump
Kwigillingok Wind Energy Storage
Tuntutuliak Wind Energy Storage
Packers Creek Hydroelectric Project
Palmer Ice Arena Geothermal & Heat Recovery Improvements
High Penetration Wind Diesel Power and Heat
Akiak Integrated Renewable Energy Projects
Kongiganak Flywheel Energy Storage
Napakiak Wind Design & Construction Planning
Merrill Field Landfill Gas Heating/Energy Project
Indian River Hydroelectric Project
Southern Railbelt Small Hydro Reconn. Study
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project
Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project
Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project
Port Graham Biomass Waste Heat Demo Project
Pelican Hydroelectric Upgrade Project
Hoonah Heat Recovery Project
Port Heiden Wind Turbine Project
Napaskiak Wind, Power and Heat Recovery
New Koliganek Wind & Heat Recovery Feasibility Study
Cook Inlet Tidal Hydrokinetic Power Generation
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
Lake & Peninsula Wood Boilers
Cold Bay Wind Energy Project
Nelson Lagoon Wind Energy Project
False Pass Wind Energy Project
Akiak Hydro Study
Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project
Battle Creek Diversion Project
Stetson Creek Diversion/Cooper Lake Dam Facilities
Atmautluak Wind Renewable Energy
Snettisham Transmission Line Avalanche Mitigation
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development, Transmission
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development Generation
Akiachak Wind Feasibility & Conceptual Design
Upper Kobuk River Biomass
Kotzebue Paper & Wood Waste to Energy
Kenai Winds Expansion
Upper Tanana Biomass CHP Project
Kwethluk Wind Feasibility
Ionia Renewable Energy Training Center
Gulkana Village Pellet Fuels Project
Turnagain Arm Tidal Electrical Generation Project
Cook Inlet TidGen Project
Kachemak Bay Tidal Power
Organic Rankine Cycle Field Testing
AVTEC Hydro Training Facility
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie
Triangle Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pilgrim Hot Springs Geothermal Resource Assessment
Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydroelectric Project
Mount Spurr Geothermal Project
Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project
Chefornak Wind Feasibilitly
Kenny Lake School Wood Fired Boiler
Stebbins Wind Feasibility
Selawik Hybrid Wind Diesel System Turbine Upgrade
Scammon Bay Wind Feasibility
St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point Wind Construction
Old Harbor Hydroelectric
Marshall Wind Feasibility
Koyuk Wind Phase II Feasibility
Kaltag Solar Construction
Elim Wind Feasibility
Eek Wind Feasibility
Yukon River Debris Mitigation Project
Feasibility Assessments for Wood Heating in Interior AK Communities
Thorne Bay School Wood Fired Boiler Project
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility
Nikiski Combined Cycle Conversion (NCCC)
Nushagak Community Wind Power Project
Reconnaissance Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
Schubee Lake Hydroelectric Project
Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Transmission Line
Neck Lake Hydroelectric Project
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project
Excursion Inlet Hydro Project Phases I and II
Wrangell Electric Vehicle Feasibility Study
Susitna Valley High School Wood Heat
Cordova Community Biomass Feasibility Study
Akutan Geothermal Development Project
Whitman Lake Project
Port St. Nick Fish Enhancement Hydropower
CVEA Silver Lake Feasibility
Tok School Biomass Heating Project
GVEA Eva Creek Wind Turbine Purchase
CEA Transmission Line to Renewable Energy Resources
NWAB School Alternate Energy Solar Awareness Project
Wainwright Wind Turbine Design
Point Lay Wind Generation Design
Point Hope Wind Turbine Design
Kaktovik Wind Diesel
Atqasuk Transmission Line
Renewable Energy Feasibility Study
Lime Village Photovoltaic System Retrofit
Jack River Hydro Project
Biomass Fuel Dryer Project
Bethel Renewable Energy Project
Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility Analysis
Adak Renewable Diesel Project
Waste Energy Powered Absorption Refrigeration Unit
AVCP Housing Wind Turbine Project
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development (TLHD) Generation
City of Ouzinkie Wind Generator Project
Fuel Cell Feasibility
The Angoon Commercial Demonstration Tidal Power Project
Atka Hydro Dispatched Excess Electrical Power
High Penetration Wind-Battery-Diesel Hybrid
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development (TLHD) Transmis
St. Mary?s Wind-Final Design, Permitting & Construction
New Stuyahok Wind-Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment & Conceptual Design
Scammon Bay Wind Project
Teller Wind-Final Design, Permitting & Construction
Kivalina Wind-Intertie Feasibility Analysis & Conceptual Design
Stebbins Wind-Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment and Conceptual Design
Slana Wind Farm-Wind Energy Resource Assessment
Jarvis Creek Natural Gas Project
Cook Inlet Tidal Hydrokinetic Power Generation
Adak Renewable/Diesel Project
Tatitlek High Penetration Wind-Diesel Project
West Cook Inlet Energy Cumulative Impacts
Wave Power Project Evaluation Study
St. Paul Wind Diesel Project
Cook Inlet TidGen Project
Reconnaissance Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Kachemak Bay Tidal Power-Feasibility & Conceptual Design
Biomass for Energy: Supply Side Knowledge Base
City of Napaskiak Wind Study
Tuntutuliak Flywheel Energy Storage
Kenny Lake School biomass-Fired Heating System
Hoonah City Schools Biomass Heating System
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project
Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project
Archangel Creek Hydroelectric Project
Transmission Line to Renewable Energy Resources
Tribal & Regional Energy Planning
Statewide run-of-river hydropower assessment
Port Graham Village Council Alternative Energy - Biomass Electric Generation Project
Kwigillingok Flywheel Energy Storage
Pilot Point Wind Power & Heat
Scenery Lake Hydroelectric Project
Kongiganak Flywheel Energy Storage
High Penetration Wind Diesel Power and Heat
Turnagain Arm Tidal Electric Generation Project
Tok Forestry Renewable Biomass Energy Demonstration Project
Ionia Renewable Energy Training Center
Alaska Biomass Combined Heat & Power Demonstration Project
Kodiak High School Renewable Energy Analysis
Mount Spurr Geothermal Project
City Tribe Biomass Energy Conservation
Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project
Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project
Hope Regional Hydroelectric Study
Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project
Virgin Creek Hydroelectric Project
Akutan Geothermal Development Project
Akutan Hydroelectric System Repair and Upgrade
Alaska Wind for Schools Program
Waste to Energy Feasibility Assessment for UAF and other medium sized communities in AK
Pilgrim Hot Springs Geothermal Resource Assessment
Melozi-Horner Hot Springs Geothermal Resource Estimate
AVCP Housing Wind Turbines Project
Yakutat Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration
Hoonah-IPEC Hydro Project
Thermal Engine Generator System (TEGS) for Ugashik, AK
AVTEC Hydro Training Facility Project
City of Kotzebue Biomass Tactical Garbage to Energy Refinery (TGER) Project
Kenai Winds Expansion
Hybrid Biomass and Solar Combined Heat and Power System
2MW Refinery Waste Energy Recovery
Chenega Bay Hydro Design and Permitting
Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project
Alaska SeaLife center Phase II Seawater Heat Pump Project
Silver Lake Pre-Feasibility Study
MSB Solar and Wind Potential
Triangle Lake Hydroelectric Project
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Interie
Saint Paul Fuel Economy Upgrade
Indian River Hydroelectric Project
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project
District Wood Heating in Fort Yukon
SEAPA Integrated Resource Planning Project (IRP)
Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project
Port Frederick Tidal Power Project
Schubee Lake Hydroelectic Project
Neck Lake Hydroelectric Project
Reynolds Creek Hydro Transmission Line
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Port Alsworth Hydroelectric Construction Project
Nushagak Area Hydropower Project (NAHP)
Waste Energy Powered Absorption Refrigeration Unit
Seldovia small wind generation facility
Skyline Mini Wind Farm
Tyonek Native Village Wind Project
Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project
Keep it Sustainable, Keep it Local (KISKIL) Renewable Energy Project
Cultivating Rural Alaska for Biomass Energy
Greenhouse Feasibility and Application in Rural Alaska
Heat Recovery/Power Generation in Rural Alaska
Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project
Chefornak Wind Turbine Installation
Combined/Hybrid solar-thermal collection & storage with ground-source heat-pumps
A Feasibility & Planning Project to Recapture & Utilize Waste Heat from the Healy Clean Coal Project
Renewable Support Mode for BESS
Alaska British Columbia (AK-BC) Intertie Project
Wrangell Street Light Conversion
Spur Road Distribution Line Extension
Wrangell Downtown Revitalization
Sunrise Lake Project
Clearwater Wind Farm
Wainwright Wind Diesel Generation Project
Point Hope Wind Diesel Generation Project
Point Lay Wind Diesel Generation Project
Anchorage geothermal district heating project
Biomass Fuel Dryer Project
Gastineau Elementary School Geothermal Loopfield
Cordova Community Biomass Feasibility Study
Humpback Creek Hydroelectric Project Rehabilitation
NWAB School Alternate Energy Solar Awareness Project
Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility Analysis
Galena Renewable Energy Project
Delta Junction Wood Pellet Boiler: Biofuel Pilot Program
Jack River Hydro Project
Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydroelectric Project
Wood Chip Boiler Heating System
Noatak Biomass_Native Village of Noatak
Marshall Wood Fired Boiler_Ohogamiut Traditional Council
Wood Pellet Plant_AHTNA
Chignik Lake CBM_AGE
Sand Point Wind_AWE
Tatitlek High Penetration Wind
Adak Diesel Hybrid_TDX Power
McGrath Biomass Feasibility
Nenana Biomass Feasibility
Tanacross Biomass Feasibility
Tanana Biomass Feasibility
ORPC Cook Inlet Tidal
Orutsaramiut Native Council
Plasma Gasification_Solena Group
Ambler HR_City of Ambler
Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting Wind
Connelly Lake Hydro_APT
Geothermal Resource Assessment Seward Pen_AVEC
Shaktoolik Wind_AVEC
Emmonak Wind and Transmission_AVEC
Stebbins Wind Analysis_AVEC
New Stuyahok Wind Analysis_AVEC
Scammon Bay Wind Analysis_AVEC
St. Mary\'s Wind Analysis_AVEC
Teller Wind Analysis_AVEC
Archangel Creek Hydro_AGP
Delia Creek Hydro_HPML
Sitka CHP_City and Borough
Venetie District Heat_Village Council
Chalkyitsik District Heat_Village Council
McGrath District Heat_MPL
Packers Creek Hydro_CLPU
Glacier Fork Hydro
St Paul Wind Construction_City of St. Paul
Tok Wind Construction_VWP
Slana Wind Construction_AWP
Delta Wind Construction_AWP
Kotzebue Solid Waste_City of Kotzebue
Statewide Biomass Assessment_UAF
Tidal Feasibility_City of Homer
Tanana Alternative Energy Assessment _Tanana Power
Alternative Energy Assessment_Perryville NVOP
Tanalian River Hydro_AGE
Solar Hot Water NWAB_NIHA
Angoon HR_IPEC
Integrated Resource Plan_FDPPA
Nenana Healy Hydro Phase II_GVEA
Wind Recon_NPRHA
Tuntutuliak High Penetration Wind Diesel
Akiak Wind
Unalaska Heat Recovery
UAF Photovoltaic
WCA Hydrokinetic_Tanana River
UAF Absorption Chiller
Mobile Biodiesel Processing Plant_CCTHIA
Birch Creek Solar
Kvichak River_Igiugig
Yakutat Wave Energy Conversion
Alternative Energy Feasibilty_CSD
West Creek Hydro_Muni Skagway
Alternative Energy Recon_YKSD
Biomass Hydronic Heating_YKSD
Mountain Village Wind_City and Tribe
Pilgrim Hot Springs Assessment_ACEP
Mt. Spur Resource Assessment_Ormat
Statewide Heat Pump Analysis_ACEP
Chena Hot Springs Reservoir Modeling_ACEP
Victor Creek Hydro_Kenai Hydro
Chena Power Hydrogen
Manley Village Council Geothermal
AEB Geothermal Assessment_AGDAP
Galena Hydrokinetic
Akutan Hydrosystem Repair and Upgrade
Loud Creek Hydro_Akutan
Hot Springs Bay Valley_Akutan
Barrow_Atqasuk Transmission
Point Lay Heat Recovery
Wainwright Heat Recovery
Wainwright Coal Bed Methane Phase III
Natural Gas Distribution_AGPA
Wasteoil for Heat_#2 Fuel
Biomassheat Anchorage_Earth Run Energy
Pilot Point High Penetration Wind/Diesel/CHP
Kotlik Pellet Stove_KYE
Fivemile Creek_Chitna Electric
Kotzebue HR and Ammonia Power Cycle
Knik Arm CHC_KAPP
Crooked Creek Hydro Kinetic
Bristol Bay Fish Waste_NEA
Crooked Creek Hydro_Elfin Cove
Wood Gasification_KISKIL
AVTEC Wind
Sunrise Lake Hydro_Wrangell
AK_BC Intertie_Wrangell
Carlson Creek Hydro_APT
Triangle Lake_Metlakatla Indian Community
Haines Assistant living GSHP_Apt
Neck Lake Hydro_APT
Kenai Winds_Nikiski
Kake Biomass gasifer_ccthita
Heat Recovery UMED_MLPUAA
High Penetration Wind Diesel Heat_Kipnuk
Cordova District Heat_NVE
Camp Hill Wind_NVE
Little Port Walter Hydro_Ameresco
Terror Lake Capacity_KEA
Air Source Heat Pump_BIHA
Jack River Recon_Cantwell
Akiachak Wind_ANCEC
Thorne Bay Wood Boiler_SEISD
Kiseralik_Chikuminuk Hydro_AVCP Housing
Kasaan Wood Boiler_Village of Kasaan
Coffman Cove Wood Boiler_SEISD
PetroStar HR_VFDA
Whitman Lake Hydro Construction_KPU
Banner Wind Construction_Nome
Grant Lake Phase III & IV_Nushagak
Ruth Lake Hydro Phase II _PMPL
Bethel Wind Power Project Times 4
Ambler Solar and Wind Power Construction
Napaskiak Wind Farm Feasibility Study
Delta Junction Wood Chip Heating Feasibility Study
Juneau Ground Source Heat Pump Construction (Aquatic Center)
Kongiganak Wind Farm Construction
Eva Creek Wind Farm Construction
McKinley Village Solar Thermal Construction
Kwigillingok Wind Farm Construction
Nome/ Banner Peak Wind Farm Construction
North Pole Heat Recovery Construction
Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Pillar Mountain Wind Farm Construction
Delta Junction Wind Farm Construction
Ketchikan Biomass Gasification Construction
Nikiski Wind Farm Construction
Nenana Hydrokinetic Construction
Crooked Creek Renewable Energy Reconnaissance Study
Makushin Geothermal Feasibility Study
Nikolaevsk Wind Farm Final Design
Anchorage Landfill Gas Electricity Final Design
Delia Creek Hydro Construction
Napaimute Solar PV Construction
St. George Wind Farm Construction
Nikolski Wind Integration Construction
Statewide Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study
Fishhook Hydroelectric Construction
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance
Kotzebue Wind Farm Expansion Construction
Ruby Hydrokinetic Construction
Kotzebue Wind Farm Red-Ox Flow Battery Storage Construction
Juneau Based Statewide Hydro/Ammonia Electricity Construction
Statewide Heat Recovery/Electric Demonstration Construction
Palmer Coal Bed Methane CHP Construction
Girdwood Gas CHP/Hydro/Wind Solar Construction
Shungnak Solar PV Construction
Noatak Solar PV Construction
Ambler Solar PV Construction
Upper Kobuk Region Hydroelectric Feasibility
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Final Design
Mekoryuk Wind Farm Construction
Toksook Bay Wind Farm Expansion Construction
Quinhagak Wind Farm Construction
Anchorage Landfill Gas Electricity Construction
Bethel Wind Farm Construction (BNC land)
Coal Mine Road Wind Farm Final Design
Indian River Hydroelectric Construction
Lake Pen Borough Wind Feasibility Study
Lake Pen Borough Wood Heating Final Design
Chignik Lake Area Wind-Hydro Final Design
McGrath Heat Recovery Construction
Yakutat Biomass Gasification Construction
Kobuk River Valley Woody Biomass Feasibility Study
Chuniisax Creek Hydroelectric Construction
South Fork Hydroelectric Construction
Buckland/Deering/Noorvik Wind Farm Construction
Snake Mountain Wind Farm Construction
Galena Wood Heating Construction
North Pole Biomass Electricity/Heat Construction
Nome/Newton Peak Wind Farm Construction
Mt. Alice Harbor Renewable Energy Construction
Unalakleet Wind Farm Construction
Tok Wood Heating Construction
Whittier Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance
Nome Banner Peak Wind Farm Transmission Construction
Kenny Lake Wood Heating Construction
Anchorage Wood Processing and Heating Construction
Whittier Gas CHP Construction
Palmer Gas CHP Construction
Burro Creek Hydro Feasibility Study
Haines Central Wood Heating Feasibility Study (Community Buildings)
Indian Creek Hydro Feasibility Study
Delta Junction Barley/Wood Pellet Central Heating Construction
Ruth Lake Hydro Reconnaissance
Whitman Lake Hydro Construction
Statewide Heat Recovery Demonstration Project
Hooper Bay Wind Farm Construction
Grant Lake/Falls Creek Hydro Feasibility Study
Haines Central Wood Heating System Construction (Low Income Housing Project)
Statewide Biomass Reconnaissance Study
Fort Yukon Central Wood Heating Construction
McGrath Central Wood Heating Construction
Kake-Petersburg Intertie Final Design
Hoonah - Hawk Inlet Intertie Construction
Allison Lake Hydro Feasibility Study
Cordova Wood Processing Plant Construction
Haines Ground Source Heat Pump Construction
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Coffman Cove-Naukati Intertie Construction
Cordova Heat Recovery Construction
Humpback Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie Construction
Gustavus/Angoon/Wrangell/Nikiski Tidal Feasibility Study
Pike\'s Ridge Geothermal Final Design
Jack River Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
Mt. Redoubt/Mt. Spur Geothermal Construction
Chistochina Central Wood Heating Construction
Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Final Design
Ketchikan Waste Gasification Reconnaissance Study
Juneau Waste Gasification Reconnaissance Study
Aleutians East Borough Renewable Energy Reconnaissance
Falls Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Wrangell Hydro Based Electric Boilers Construction
Anchorage Geothermal District Heating Feasibility Study
Naknek/King Salmon Fish Waste Feasibility Study
Lake Elva Hydropower Construction
Fairbanks Waste Gasification Feasibility Study
Palmer Waste Gasification Feasibility Study
Anchorage Waste Gasification Feasibility Study
Gulkana Central Wood Heating Construction
Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility
Project Name
Igiugig RivGen® Power System Commercial Project
Circle 100 Kilowatt Solar Array
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Permitting
Indian River Hydroelectric Project - Construction
Crater Lake Power and Water Project
Chignik Hydroelectric Dam Project
St. Paul Island 80% Renewable Energy Feasibility Study
Adak Hydro Power Generator
IPEC Gunnuk Creek Hydro Rehabilitation in Kake
Maximizing Cordova Hydropower Utilization with Controlled Electro-Thermal Systems
Heat Pump System for City of Seward Owned Buildings
Minto PV Solar Project
Solar Panels for Kake Community Buildings
Ouzinkie Hydroelectric Power Project
Koyuk Water System Heat Recovery
Sand Point High Penetration Wind System
West Creek Hydroelectric Project
Scammon Bay Hydroelectric Project
Wales Water System Heat Recovery
Grayling Water System Heat Recovery
Atqasuk Transmission Line Design and Permitting
Kaktovik Wind Diesel Design
Kotzebue 100 Kilowatt Solar Array
Knik Arm Power Plant Recycled Biomass to Power
Point McKenzie Correction Farm (PMCF) PV Solar Project
Hoonah Waste-to-Energy Project
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Project
Mountain Village-St. Mary’s Wind Intertie Project – Final Design and Construction
Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Bethel Power Plant Heat Recovery Module Construction
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project −Geotechnical Study and Final Design
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Construction Project
False Pass Hydroelectric Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design
Saxman Low-Rent Multifamily Air Source Heat Pump
Klawock School Biomass Fuel Boiler Project
Shungnak Wind-Diesel Conceptual Design
Huslia Water System and Clinic Biomass Boiler Project
Eek Water System Heat Recovery
Ambler Washeteria and City Office Biomass Heating System
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Design & Permitting
Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Heat Pump
Chugach Electric Association Evaluation of a Community Solar Project
Ketchikan Schools Recreation Central Heating Plant
Ketchikan High School Biomass Boiler Construction
Yerrick Creek Hydropower Project: Construction
False Pass Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study
Neck Lake Hydropower Project: Phases II-III
Clearwater Creek Hydropower Project: Phase II
Craig Water Treatment Plant Micro-Hydro
Upper Hidden Basin Diversion - Geotechnical Investigation
Unalaska Water Treatment Plant Inline Micro Turbines
Community Solar Project
Chignik Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Chenega Bay Hydroelectric Construction
Port Graham Community Building Biomass Heat Distribution Project
Sand Point Excess Wind Utilization
Adak Hydroelectric Feasibility Study Phase II
Hoonah Biomass District Heating Loop
Indian River Hydroelectric Project Construction
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Permitting
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Construction Project
Deadhorse Waste Heat to Energy Plant
Northwest Alaska Wind Resource Assessment and Intertie Study
City of Noorvik Solar-PV
Eek Water System Heat Recovery
Unalakleet Wind-Diesel Optimization
Lake and Peninsula Borough Wood Boilers
St. Paul - 80% Renewable by 2020 – Community Energy Baseline Study
Adak Community Energy Baseline Study
Southcentral Small Hydro Assessments
Scammon Bay Hydroelectric Project
Southeast Island School District Wood Boilers
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Project
IRHA Facility Biomass Feasibility Study
Kake Senior Housing Solar PV
Scammon Bay Community Facilities Heat Recovery
Gateway Borough Recreation and Schools Central Heating Plant Design
Selawik Water System Heat Recovery
Ketchikan Gateway Borough – Ketchikan High School Biomass Boiler Construction
Chefornak Wind Heat System
Ouzinkie Hydroelectric Power Project
Atqasuk Transmission Line Design and Permitting Project
Kaktovik Wind Diesel Design
Lepquinum Wellness Center Ground Source Heat Pump
Kwigillingok Wind Heat System – Electric Thermal Storage
Kotzebue Paper and Wood Waste to Energy Project
Wales Water System Heat Recovery
Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler Project
Holy Cross Power Plant Heat Recovery for Water Distribution System
Nikolai Community Biomass Heating System
Igiugig RivGen® Power System Project
Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study: False Pass, Alaska
Huslia Water System and Clinic Biomass Boiler Project
Ambler Washeteria and City Office Biomass Heating System
Grayling Water System Heat Recovery
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
Koyuk Water System Heat Recovery
Biomass for Akiachak Native Community Electric Company
Yerrick Creek Hydropower Project
Shungnak Wind-Diesel Design
Bethel Power Plant Heat Recovery System Assessment and Conceptual Design
Goodnews Bay Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project Geotechnical Study and Final Design
St. Mary’s-Pitka’s Point Wind Energy Construction Project
Klawock Low-Income Housing Pellet Heat
Angoon Low-Income Housing Pellet District Heat
100 Kilowatt Solar Array for Kotzebue
Crater Lake Power and Water Project
Wood Boiler for the Native Village of Tazlina
Craig High School Wood Heat Conversion
Neck Lake Hydropower Project
Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project
Mahoney Lake Hydropower Project
Clearwater Creek Hydropower Project
SEAPA Wind Resource Assessment
Sitka: Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Heat Pump
Upper Hidden Basin Diversion
Manokotak Renewable Energy Feasibility Project
Kake Community Energy
Chefornak High Penetration Wind Diesel System
Tuntutuliak Heat Recovery
Juniper Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project
Stetson Creek Diversion Cooper Lake Dam Facilities Project
Waste to Energy Reconnaissance Study
False Pass Wind Energy Project
Koliganek Wind Diesel and Heat Recovery
Chickaloon Solar Thermal and Biomass Project
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
NWAB School District Solar Thermal Systems
Cascade Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Tuntutuliak Wind Heat Electrical Thermal Storage
Kongiganak Wind Heat Electrical Thermal Storage
Igiugig Wind Resource Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Kwigillingok Wind Heat Electrical Thermal Storage
Sand Point Energy Storage Project
St Marys Pitkas Point Wind Energy Construction Project
Stebbins St Michael Wind Energy Final Design and Permitting
Mountain Village Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Marshall Wind Energy Final Design and Permitting Project
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project Final Design and Permitting
Chenega Bay Hydroelectric Construction
Iliamna Solar Ground Mounted Energy System
False Pass Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study
Emmonak Heat Recovery System
Holy Cross Water System Heat Recovery
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Design and Permitting
Noatak Utility Size Photovoltaic Array Construction Project
Mertarvik Renewable Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Adak Wind Data Collection Analysis and Preliminary Design
Alaska SeaLife Center Heat Recovery Project
Multiple Alternative Energy Sources for Napakiak
Yakutat Biomass District Heating Loop
Nunam Iqua Heat Recovery Project
AGSD Extension of Heating Loop
Bristol Bay Borough School District Solar PV Project
Atqasuk Transmission Line Design and Permitting Project
Kaktovik Wind Diesel Design and Permitting
Galena Community Wood Heat Project
Port Alsworth Hydropower PreConstruction Phase
Grayling Heat Recovery System
Venetie Clinic Heat Recovery
St Marys Heat Recovery System
Eek Water System Heat Recovery
Chevak Water and Vacuum Plant Heat Recovery
Brevig Mission Water System Heat Recovery
Four Villages lntertie Design
Kotzebue Paper and Wood Waste to Energy Project
Ketchikan Gateway Borough Biomass Heating Project
Packers Creek Hydroelectric Project Phase II
Feasibility Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Metlakatla to Ketchikan Intertie
Sitka Sea Water Source Heat Pump Project
Biomass Heat for Minto Community Buildings
Seldovia House Ground Source Heat Pump Project
Flywheels ESS for Kodiak Pier Electric Crane
Jack River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Carlo Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study
Chisana Mountain Wind Feasibility Project
Atka Dispatchable Heat
Gunnuk Creek Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
Walker Lake Hydro Project Feasibility
Swan Lake Reservoir Expansion Project
SEAPA Wind Resource Assessment Phase I and II
Haines Borough Municipal Buildings Biomass Project
Excursion Inlet Hydro Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Survey Creek Hydroelectric Project
Chignik Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Southeast Island School District Wood Boilers
Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler Project
Allison Creek Hydroelectric Project Construction
Wood Chip Boiler for The Native Village of Tazlina
Sitka Kettleson Library Air Source Heat Pump
Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Heat Pump
Sitka Centennial Hall Air Source Heat Pump
Craig High School Wood Heat Conversion
Nenana Collaborative Biomass Heating System Project
Chuathbaluk Water System Heat Recovery
Mendenhall Valley Library Geothermal HVAC System
NEA Stack Heat to Power Project
Tuntutuliak Water Treatment Plant Washeteria Heat Recovery
Karluk Tribal Council Wind Energy System
Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Phase III and IV
Poncelet Kinetics RHK100 Prototype Demonstration
Northwest Arctic Borough Solar PV Project
Electrical Power Lines -Western Alaska
Noatak Wind Resource Assessment
Wood Heat Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design for the Organized Village of Kake
Community Facilities Woody Biomass Space Heating Project
Tanana Solar Domestic Hot Water Heating Project
Bristol Bay Borough School District Energy Project
Waste-to-Energy Feasibility Study
Indian River Hydroelectric Project Construction
Carlo Creek Hydroelectric Project Reconnaissance Study
Knutson Creek Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Juniper Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Neck Lake Hydro Project
Elim Geothermal Resource Assessment I Feasibility
Akiak Wind Resource Assessment
Eastern Copper Basin Geothermal Assessment
Kipnuk Wind Diesel Power Generation and Heating
Nelson Lagoon Wind Energy Project
False Pass Wind Energy Project
Cold Bay Waste Heat Recovery Project
High-penetration Wind Energy Project- Kokhanok
Haines Borough Pellet Heating Project
Excursion Inlet Hydro Project- Phase II
Mount Makushin Geothermal Project
Manokotak Wind & Heat Feasibility Study
Atka Wind Power Project
TidGen? Array Project
Ticasuk Brown School Pellet Boiler Project-Phase 2
Wrangell Power Plant Upgrade
Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Goodnews Bay Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
St. Mary?s / Pilot Station Wind Energy Intertie Construction Project
St. Mary?s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design
Hotham Peak Wind Resource and lntertie Assessment
Cosmos Hills Wind Resource and Intertie Assessment
St. Michael/Stebbins Wind Energy Final Design and Permitting Project
Russian Mission Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Kotlik Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Wales Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
Marshall Wind Energy Design and Permitting Project
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
St. Mary?s / Pitka?s Point Wind Energy Project
New Stuyahok Heat Recovery
OIT Inc Waste Heat Turbine Project
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant/Washeteria Building
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant and Community Store
Stebbins Heat Recovery Project
Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Heat Recovery for the Water Treatment Plant and Washeteria
Heat Recovery for the Water System
Atmautluak Washeteria Heat Recovery Project
Savoonga Heat Recovery System - Power Plant to Water Plant
Biomass Feasibility Studies in Public Facilities, Interior Region
Design and Construction of Biomass Systems in Interior Villages
Nenana Collaborative Biomass Heating System Project
Allison Creek Project
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project
Bathymetric survey and marine geological study to refine submarine cable route for Kodiak-Ouzinkie Electrical Inter-tie project
Galena Community Wood Heat Project
AGSD District Heat Loop Project
Upper Tanana Biomass CHP Project
Seward Schools Biomass Heating System
Afognak Biomass Feasibility Study
Gartina Falls Hydroelectric Project
AVCP RHA Wood Biomass Heating System
Walker Lake Hydro Feasibility Project
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie
West Creek Hydroelectric Project
Blue Lake Hydroelectric Expansion Project
Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler Project
Eagle Solar Array Project
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Stetson Creek Diversion/Cooper Lake Dam Facilities Project
Egegik Wind Feasibility Study
Levelock Wind Reconnaissance Study
Igiugig Wind Turbine Design
Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Project: Phase Ill
Tazimina Hydroelectric Project Capacity Increase
Petersburg Community Heating System Retrofit Feasibility Study
Coffman Cove Hydropower Line Extension
HydroPower Surplus to Stored Hydrogen Feasibility Study
Dimond Park Library Geothermal HVAC System
Northwest Arctic Borough Solar PV
Jack River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Karluk Tribal Council ? Wind Energy System
Nome Renewable Energy Optimization Project
Port Graham Village Biomass Waste Heat Demonstration Project
MEA Power Plant Waste Heat Utilization Reconnaissance Study
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project Design and Permitting
Alakanuk Waste Water Treatment Facility Wind Generation
Reconnaissance Study of Thomas Bay Public Projects
Kvichak River RISEC Project
Adak Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
Igiugig Wind, Solar, Hydrokinetic and Thermal Feasibility Study
Nikolski Renewable Energy Wind Project
Kodiak High School Ground Source Heat Pump
Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
High Penetration Wind Diesel Power and Heat
Nenana?s Solar-Powered Student Living Center
Transmission Line from Fire Island Wind Project
Mentasta Woody Biomass Community Facility Space Heating Project
Tanacross Woody Biomass Community Facility Space Heating Project
Tanana Solar Thermal Public Facilities Heating Project
St. Michael / Stebbins Wind Energy Design
Emmonak/Alakanuk Phase 2 Wind Energy Construction
Upper Kalskag Solar Construction
Gambell Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Gambell Water System Heat
Chevak Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Chevak Water System Heat
Goodnews Bay Wind Energy Feasibility
Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility
Mountain Village Wind Energy Construction
Shaktoolik Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Shaktoolik Water System Heat
Surplus Wind Energy Recovery for Mekoryuk Water System Heat
St. Mary\'s/Pitka\'s Point Wind Construction and Commissioning
TidGen? Array Project
Reconnaissance Study of the Geothermal Potential for the Ivanoff Bay Region
Extension of Heating Loop
Greenhouse and Processing Facility utilizing surplus heat
Net-Zero Training and Administration Center (TAC)
Community of Elim Geothermal Resource Assessment
False Pass Tidal Energy Study
Saint Michael Renewable Energy Reconnaissance Study
City of Angoon Wind to Energy Feasibility Study
Goodnews Bay Wind Generator Study
Togiak Waste Heat Recovery Project
Savoonga Heat Recovery - Power Plant to Water Plant
Shishmaref Heat Recovery Project
Old Kasigluk Wind Feasibility Study
Klawock Biomass Boiler System Feasibility Study
White Mountain Heat Recovery Feasibility Study
New Stuyahok Heat Recovery Study
Toksook Bay Heat Recovery Feasibility Study
Water Plant Biomass System Feasibility Study
Selawik Wind Feasibility Study
Sleetmute Heat Recovery - Power Plant to Water Plant
Scammon Bay Hydro Design & Engineering
Kotlik Wind Generator Study
Noorvik Heat Recovery System Feasibility Study
Russian Mission Heat Recovery System
Atmautlauk Washeteria/ Power Plant Waste Heat Recovery Project
Golovin Wind Feasibility Study
City of Kake Hydroelectric Resource Analysis
Kobuk Biomass Design & Construction Project
and 898 Nome Renewable Energy Expansion/Optimization Project
Chickaloon Solar Thermal and Biomass Project
Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study
Packer?s Creek Hydroelectric Project
Mahoona Hydroelectric Dam Replacement
Seward Schools Biomass Heating System
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility
Kake Pellet Boiler System
Juneau Super Critical Water Oxidation Sewage Sludge to Energy
Multi Disciplinary Combined Facility Primary Care Center Biomass Feasibility Project
Walker Lake Feasibility Study
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development GENERATION Project
Wrangell Electrical Capacitor Bank
and 827 Thayer Lake Hydropower Development Transmission/Generation Project
Anaktuvuk Pass Geothermal Feasibility Study
Tatitlek Heat Recovery Project
Wood Heating Feasibility in Public Facilities, Interior Region
Huslia Water System & Clinic Wood Boiler Project
Design & Construction of Wood Heating Projects in Interior Alaska Communities
Stetson Creek Diversion/ Cooper Lake Dam Facilities Project
Gulkana Village Biomass Fuels Project
Solomon Gulch unit 2 Efficiency Upgrade
Allison Creek Project
Wave Energy/ Sequestration Technology (WEST)
Glennallen School Campus Biomass Heating Project
Whitman Lake Project
AVTEC Hydroelectric Training Facility
Kake-Petersburg Inter-Connection Engineering
SEAPA Wind Resources Assessment & Economic Feasibility Study
SEAPA Phase I Wind Site Recon Study
Reynolds Creek Hydro Transmission Line
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Upper Tanana Area Intertie Project
Black Bear Lake Hydro Project Storage Increase
Transmission Line to Renewable Energy Resources (Mount Spurr)
Pillar Mtn High Penetration Wind Project
Petersburg Public Library Geothermal Heat Pump Construction
Jack River Hydro Project Phase II
West Creek Hydroelectric Project
Sitka Renewable Energy Feasibility for Centennial Hall & Library
Sitka Renewable Energy Feasibility for Wastewater Treatment Plant
Japonski Island Boathouse Heat Pump
Kwigillingok Wind Energy Storage
Tuntutuliak Wind Energy Storage
Packers Creek Hydroelectric Project
Palmer Ice Arena Geothermal & Heat Recovery Improvements
High Penetration Wind Diesel Power and Heat
Akiak Integrated Renewable Energy Projects
Kongiganak Flywheel Energy Storage
Napakiak Wind Design & Construction Planning
Merrill Field Landfill Gas Heating/Energy Project
Indian River Hydroelectric Project
Southern Railbelt Small Hydro Reconn. Study
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project
Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project
Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project
Port Graham Biomass Waste Heat Demo Project
Pelican Hydroelectric Upgrade Project
Hoonah Heat Recovery Project
Port Heiden Wind Turbine Project
Napaskiak Wind, Power and Heat Recovery
New Koliganek Wind & Heat Recovery Feasibility Study
Cook Inlet Tidal Hydrokinetic Power Generation
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project
Lake & Peninsula Wood Boilers
Cold Bay Wind Energy Project
Nelson Lagoon Wind Energy Project
False Pass Wind Energy Project
Akiak Hydro Study
Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project
Battle Creek Diversion Project
Stetson Creek Diversion/Cooper Lake Dam Facilities
Atmautluak Wind Renewable Energy
Snettisham Transmission Line Avalanche Mitigation
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development, Transmission
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development Generation
Akiachak Wind Feasibility & Conceptual Design
Upper Kobuk River Biomass
Kotzebue Paper & Wood Waste to Energy
Kenai Winds Expansion
Upper Tanana Biomass CHP Project
Kwethluk Wind Feasibility
Ionia Renewable Energy Training Center
Gulkana Village Pellet Fuels Project
Turnagain Arm Tidal Electrical Generation Project
Cook Inlet TidGen Project
Kachemak Bay Tidal Power
Organic Rankine Cycle Field Testing
AVTEC Hydro Training Facility
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie
Triangle Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pilgrim Hot Springs Geothermal Resource Assessment
Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydroelectric Project
Mount Spurr Geothermal Project
Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project
Chefornak Wind Feasibilitly
Kenny Lake School Wood Fired Boiler
Stebbins Wind Feasibility
Selawik Hybrid Wind Diesel System Turbine Upgrade
Scammon Bay Wind Feasibility
St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point Wind Construction
Old Harbor Hydroelectric
Marshall Wind Feasibility
Koyuk Wind Phase II Feasibility
Kaltag Solar Construction
Elim Wind Feasibility
Eek Wind Feasibility
Yukon River Debris Mitigation Project
Feasibility Assessments for Wood Heating in Interior AK Communities
Thorne Bay School Wood Fired Boiler Project
Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility
Nikiski Combined Cycle Conversion (NCCC)
Nushagak Community Wind Power Project
Reconnaissance Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
Schubee Lake Hydroelectric Project
Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Transmission Line
Neck Lake Hydroelectric Project
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project
Excursion Inlet Hydro Project Phases I and II
Wrangell Electric Vehicle Feasibility Study
Susitna Valley High School Wood Heat
Cordova Community Biomass Feasibility Study
Akutan Geothermal Development Project
Whitman Lake Project
Port St. Nick Fish Enhancement Hydropower
CVEA Silver Lake Feasibility
Tok School Biomass Heating Project
GVEA Eva Creek Wind Turbine Purchase
CEA Transmission Line to Renewable Energy Resources
NWAB School Alternate Energy Solar Awareness Project
Wainwright Wind Turbine Design
Point Lay Wind Generation Design
Point Hope Wind Turbine Design
Kaktovik Wind Diesel
Atqasuk Transmission Line
Renewable Energy Feasibility Study
Lime Village Photovoltaic System Retrofit
Jack River Hydro Project
Biomass Fuel Dryer Project
Bethel Renewable Energy Project
Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility Analysis
Adak Renewable Diesel Project
Waste Energy Powered Absorption Refrigeration Unit
AVCP Housing Wind Turbine Project
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development (TLHD) Generation
City of Ouzinkie Wind Generator Project
Fuel Cell Feasibility
The Angoon Commercial Demonstration Tidal Power Project
Atka Hydro Dispatched Excess Electrical Power
High Penetration Wind-Battery-Diesel Hybrid
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development (TLHD) Transmis
St. Mary?s Wind-Final Design, Permitting & Construction
New Stuyahok Wind-Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment & Conceptual Design
Scammon Bay Wind Project
Teller Wind-Final Design, Permitting & Construction
Kivalina Wind-Intertie Feasibility Analysis & Conceptual Design
Stebbins Wind-Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment and Conceptual Design
Slana Wind Farm-Wind Energy Resource Assessment
Jarvis Creek Natural Gas Project
Cook Inlet Tidal Hydrokinetic Power Generation
Adak Renewable/Diesel Project
Tatitlek High Penetration Wind-Diesel Project
West Cook Inlet Energy Cumulative Impacts
Wave Power Project Evaluation Study
St. Paul Wind Diesel Project
Cook Inlet TidGen Project
Reconnaissance Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource
Kachemak Bay Tidal Power-Feasibility & Conceptual Design
Biomass for Energy: Supply Side Knowledge Base
City of Napaskiak Wind Study
Tuntutuliak Flywheel Energy Storage
Kenny Lake School biomass-Fired Heating System
Hoonah City Schools Biomass Heating System
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project
Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project
Archangel Creek Hydroelectric Project
Transmission Line to Renewable Energy Resources
Tribal & Regional Energy Planning
Statewide run-of-river hydropower assessment
Port Graham Village Council Alternative Energy - Biomass Electric Generation Project
Kwigillingok Flywheel Energy Storage
Pilot Point Wind Power & Heat
Scenery Lake Hydroelectric Project
Kongiganak Flywheel Energy Storage
High Penetration Wind Diesel Power and Heat
Turnagain Arm Tidal Electric Generation Project
Tok Forestry Renewable Biomass Energy Demonstration Project
Ionia Renewable Energy Training Center
Alaska Biomass Combined Heat & Power Demonstration Project
Kodiak High School Renewable Energy Analysis
Mount Spurr Geothermal Project
City Tribe Biomass Energy Conservation
Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project
Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project
Hope Regional Hydroelectric Study
Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project
Virgin Creek Hydroelectric Project
Akutan Geothermal Development Project
Akutan Hydroelectric System Repair and Upgrade
Alaska Wind for Schools Program
Waste to Energy Feasibility Assessment for UAF and other medium sized communities in AK
Pilgrim Hot Springs Geothermal Resource Assessment
Melozi-Horner Hot Springs Geothermal Resource Estimate
AVCP Housing Wind Turbines Project
Yakutat Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration
Hoonah-IPEC Hydro Project
Thermal Engine Generator System (TEGS) for Ugashik, AK
AVTEC Hydro Training Facility Project
City of Kotzebue Biomass Tactical Garbage to Energy Refinery (TGER) Project
Kenai Winds Expansion
Hybrid Biomass and Solar Combined Heat and Power System
2MW Refinery Waste Energy Recovery
Chenega Bay Hydro Design and Permitting
Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project
Alaska SeaLife center Phase II Seawater Heat Pump Project
Silver Lake Pre-Feasibility Study
MSB Solar and Wind Potential
Triangle Lake Hydroelectric Project
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Interie
Saint Paul Fuel Economy Upgrade
Indian River Hydroelectric Project
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project
District Wood Heating in Fort Yukon
SEAPA Integrated Resource Planning Project (IRP)
Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project
Port Frederick Tidal Power Project
Schubee Lake Hydroelectic Project
Neck Lake Hydroelectric Project
Reynolds Creek Hydro Transmission Line
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project
Port Alsworth Hydroelectric Construction Project
Nushagak Area Hydropower Project (NAHP)
Waste Energy Powered Absorption Refrigeration Unit
Seldovia small wind generation facility
Skyline Mini Wind Farm
Tyonek Native Village Wind Project
Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project
Keep it Sustainable, Keep it Local (KISKIL) Renewable Energy Project
Cultivating Rural Alaska for Biomass Energy
Greenhouse Feasibility and Application in Rural Alaska
Heat Recovery/Power Generation in Rural Alaska
Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project
Chefornak Wind Turbine Installation
Combined/Hybrid solar-thermal collection & storage with ground-source heat-pumps
A Feasibility & Planning Project to Recapture & Utilize Waste Heat from the Healy Clean Coal Project
Renewable Support Mode for BESS
Alaska British Columbia (AK-BC) Intertie Project
Wrangell Street Light Conversion
Spur Road Distribution Line Extension
Wrangell Downtown Revitalization
Sunrise Lake Project
Clearwater Wind Farm
Wainwright Wind Diesel Generation Project
Point Hope Wind Diesel Generation Project
Point Lay Wind Diesel Generation Project
Anchorage geothermal district heating project
Biomass Fuel Dryer Project
Gastineau Elementary School Geothermal Loopfield
Cordova Community Biomass Feasibility Study
Humpback Creek Hydroelectric Project Rehabilitation
NWAB School Alternate Energy Solar Awareness Project
Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility Analysis
Galena Renewable Energy Project
Delta Junction Wood Pellet Boiler: Biofuel Pilot Program
Jack River Hydro Project
Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydroelectric Project
Wood Chip Boiler Heating System
Noatak Biomass_Native Village of Noatak
Marshall Wood Fired Boiler_Ohogamiut Traditional Council
Wood Pellet Plant_AHTNA
Chignik Lake CBM_AGE
Sand Point Wind_AWE
Tatitlek High Penetration Wind
Adak Diesel Hybrid_TDX Power
McGrath Biomass Feasibility
Nenana Biomass Feasibility
Tanacross Biomass Feasibility
Tanana Biomass Feasibility
ORPC Cook Inlet Tidal
Orutsaramiut Native Council
Plasma Gasification_Solena Group
Ambler HR_City of Ambler
Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting Wind
Connelly Lake Hydro_APT
Geothermal Resource Assessment Seward Pen_AVEC
Shaktoolik Wind_AVEC
Emmonak Wind and Transmission_AVEC
Stebbins Wind Analysis_AVEC
New Stuyahok Wind Analysis_AVEC
Scammon Bay Wind Analysis_AVEC
St. Mary\'s Wind Analysis_AVEC
Teller Wind Analysis_AVEC
Archangel Creek Hydro_AGP
Delia Creek Hydro_HPML
Sitka CHP_City and Borough
Venetie District Heat_Village Council
Chalkyitsik District Heat_Village Council
McGrath District Heat_MPL
Packers Creek Hydro_CLPU
Glacier Fork Hydro
St Paul Wind Construction_City of St. Paul
Tok Wind Construction_VWP
Slana Wind Construction_AWP
Delta Wind Construction_AWP
Kotzebue Solid Waste_City of Kotzebue
Statewide Biomass Assessment_UAF
Tidal Feasibility_City of Homer
Tanana Alternative Energy Assessment _Tanana Power
Alternative Energy Assessment_Perryville NVOP
Tanalian River Hydro_AGE
Solar Hot Water NWAB_NIHA
Angoon HR_IPEC
Integrated Resource Plan_FDPPA
Nenana Healy Hydro Phase II_GVEA
Wind Recon_NPRHA
Tuntutuliak High Penetration Wind Diesel
Akiak Wind
Unalaska Heat Recovery
UAF Photovoltaic
WCA Hydrokinetic_Tanana River
UAF Absorption Chiller
Mobile Biodiesel Processing Plant_CCTHIA
Birch Creek Solar
Kvichak River_Igiugig
Yakutat Wave Energy Conversion
Alternative Energy Feasibilty_CSD
West Creek Hydro_Muni Skagway
Alternative Energy Recon_YKSD
Biomass Hydronic Heating_YKSD
Mountain Village Wind_City and Tribe
Pilgrim Hot Springs Assessment_ACEP
Mt. Spur Resource Assessment_Ormat
Statewide Heat Pump Analysis_ACEP
Chena Hot Springs Reservoir Modeling_ACEP
Victor Creek Hydro_Kenai Hydro
Chena Power Hydrogen
Manley Village Council Geothermal
AEB Geothermal Assessment_AGDAP
Galena Hydrokinetic
Akutan Hydrosystem Repair and Upgrade
Loud Creek Hydro_Akutan
Hot Springs Bay Valley_Akutan
Barrow_Atqasuk Transmission
Point Lay Heat Recovery
Wainwright Heat Recovery
Wainwright Coal Bed Methane Phase III
Natural Gas Distribution_AGPA
Wasteoil for Heat_#2 Fuel
Biomassheat Anchorage_Earth Run Energy
Pilot Point High Penetration Wind/Diesel/CHP
Kotlik Pellet Stove_KYE
Fivemile Creek_Chitna Electric
Kotzebue HR and Ammonia Power Cycle
Knik Arm CHC_KAPP
Crooked Creek Hydro Kinetic
Bristol Bay Fish Waste_NEA
Crooked Creek Hydro_Elfin Cove
Wood Gasification_KISKIL
AVTEC Wind
Sunrise Lake Hydro_Wrangell
AK_BC Intertie_Wrangell
Carlson Creek Hydro_APT
Triangle Lake_Metlakatla Indian Community
Haines Assistant living GSHP_Apt
Neck Lake Hydro_APT
Kenai Winds_Nikiski
Kake Biomass gasifer_ccthita
Heat Recovery UMED_MLPUAA
High Penetration Wind Diesel Heat_Kipnuk
Cordova District Heat_NVE
Camp Hill Wind_NVE
Little Port Walter Hydro_Ameresco
Terror Lake Capacity_KEA
Air Source Heat Pump_BIHA
Jack River Recon_Cantwell
Akiachak Wind_ANCEC
Thorne Bay Wood Boiler_SEISD
Kiseralik_Chikuminuk Hydro_AVCP Housing
Kasaan Wood Boiler_Village of Kasaan
Coffman Cove Wood Boiler_SEISD
PetroStar HR_VFDA
Whitman Lake Hydro Construction_KPU
Banner Wind Construction_Nome
Grant Lake Phase III & IV_Nushagak
Ruth Lake Hydro Phase II _PMPL
Bethel Wind Power Project Times 4
Ambler Solar and Wind Power Construction
Napaskiak Wind Farm Feasibility Study
Delta Junction Wood Chip Heating Feasibility Study
Juneau Ground Source Heat Pump Construction (Aquatic Center)
Kongiganak Wind Farm Construction
Eva Creek Wind Farm Construction
McKinley Village Solar Thermal Construction
Kwigillingok Wind Farm Construction
Nome/ Banner Peak Wind Farm Construction
North Pole Heat Recovery Construction
Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Pillar Mountain Wind Farm Construction
Delta Junction Wind Farm Construction
Ketchikan Biomass Gasification Construction
Nikiski Wind Farm Construction
Nenana Hydrokinetic Construction
Crooked Creek Renewable Energy Reconnaissance Study
Makushin Geothermal Feasibility Study
Nikolaevsk Wind Farm Final Design
Anchorage Landfill Gas Electricity Final Design
Delia Creek Hydro Construction
Napaimute Solar PV Construction
St. George Wind Farm Construction
Nikolski Wind Integration Construction
Statewide Hydrokinetic Feasibility Study
Fishhook Hydroelectric Construction
Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance
Kotzebue Wind Farm Expansion Construction
Ruby Hydrokinetic Construction
Kotzebue Wind Farm Red-Ox Flow Battery Storage Construction
Juneau Based Statewide Hydro/Ammonia Electricity Construction
Statewide Heat Recovery/Electric Demonstration Construction
Palmer Coal Bed Methane CHP Construction
Girdwood Gas CHP/Hydro/Wind Solar Construction
Shungnak Solar PV Construction
Noatak Solar PV Construction
Ambler Solar PV Construction
Upper Kobuk Region Hydroelectric Feasibility
Old Harbor Hydroelectric Final Design
Mekoryuk Wind Farm Construction
Toksook Bay Wind Farm Expansion Construction
Quinhagak Wind Farm Construction
Anchorage Landfill Gas Electricity Construction
Bethel Wind Farm Construction (BNC land)
Coal Mine Road Wind Farm Final Design
Indian River Hydroelectric Construction
Lake Pen Borough Wind Feasibility Study
Lake Pen Borough Wood Heating Final Design
Chignik Lake Area Wind-Hydro Final Design
McGrath Heat Recovery Construction
Yakutat Biomass Gasification Construction
Kobuk River Valley Woody Biomass Feasibility Study
Chuniisax Creek Hydroelectric Construction
South Fork Hydroelectric Construction
Buckland/Deering/Noorvik Wind Farm Construction
Snake Mountain Wind Farm Construction
Galena Wood Heating Construction
North Pole Biomass Electricity/Heat Construction
Nome/Newton Peak Wind Farm Construction
Mt. Alice Harbor Renewable Energy Construction
Unalakleet Wind Farm Construction
Tok Wood Heating Construction
Whittier Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance
Nome Banner Peak Wind Farm Transmission Construction
Kenny Lake Wood Heating Construction
Anchorage Wood Processing and Heating Construction
Whittier Gas CHP Construction
Palmer Gas CHP Construction
Burro Creek Hydro Feasibility Study
Haines Central Wood Heating Feasibility Study (Community Buildings)
Indian Creek Hydro Feasibility Study
Delta Junction Barley/Wood Pellet Central Heating Construction
Ruth Lake Hydro Reconnaissance
Whitman Lake Hydro Construction
Statewide Heat Recovery Demonstration Project
Hooper Bay Wind Farm Construction
Grant Lake/Falls Creek Hydro Feasibility Study
Haines Central Wood Heating System Construction (Low Income Housing Project)
Statewide Biomass Reconnaissance Study
Fort Yukon Central Wood Heating Construction
McGrath Central Wood Heating Construction
Kake-Petersburg Intertie Final Design
Hoonah - Hawk Inlet Intertie Construction
Allison Lake Hydro Feasibility Study
Cordova Wood Processing Plant Construction
Haines Ground Source Heat Pump Construction
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Coffman Cove-Naukati Intertie Construction
Cordova Heat Recovery Construction
Humpback Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie Construction
Gustavus/Angoon/Wrangell/Nikiski Tidal Feasibility Study
Pike\'s Ridge Geothermal Final Design
Jack River Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
Mt. Redoubt/Mt. Spur Geothermal Construction
Chistochina Central Wood Heating Construction
Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Final Design
Ketchikan Waste Gasification Reconnaissance Study
Juneau Waste Gasification Reconnaissance Study
Aleutians East Borough Renewable Energy Reconnaissance
Falls Creek Hydroelectric Construction
Wrangell Hydro Based Electric Boilers Construction
Anchorage Geothermal District Heating Feasibility Study
Naknek/King Salmon Fish Waste Feasibility Study
Lake Elva Hydropower Construction
Fairbanks Waste Gasification Feasibility Study
Palmer Waste Gasification Feasibility Study
Anchorage Waste Gasification Feasibility Study
Gulkana Central Wood Heating Construction
Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility
Project Type
Hydrokinetic
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro, Storage, Other
Hydro
Wind, Transmission, Solar, Storage
Hydro
Hydro
HeatHydro, HeatRecovery
HeatPump
Solar
Solar
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Transmission, Other
Wind
Solar
Other, HeatBiofuel
Solar
Transmission, HeatBiofuel
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Wind
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
HeatPump
Biomass
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery, HeatPump
Solar
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro, Storage
Hydro
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
HeatWind
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind, Transmission
Solar
HeatRecovery
Wind
Biomass
Other
Other
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Solar
HeatRecovery
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Wind
Hydro
Transmission, Other
Wind
HeatPump
HeatWind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Hydrokinetic
Hydrokinetic
Biomass
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Hydro
Wind
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Solar
Hydro, Storage, Other
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
HeatPump
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Wind
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
HeatSolar
Hydro
HeatWind
HeatWind
Wind
HeatWind
Storage
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Solar
Hydrokinetic
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Solar
Wind
Wind
HeatRecovery
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Solar
Transmission
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Transmission
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Geothermal
Transmission
HeatPump
Biomass
HeatPump
Storage
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
HeatHydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
HeatPump
HeatPump
HeatPump
Biomass
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatPump
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
Solar
Wind, Transmission
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Solar
Solar
HeatBiofuel
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Geothermal
Wind
Geothermal
Wind
Wind
Wind
HeatRecovery
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Geothermal
Wind
Wind
Other
Biomass
Other
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Solar
Wind
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Geothermal
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Transmission
Other
Geothermal
Solar
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Geothermal
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Solar
Transmission
Biomass
Biomass
Solar
Wind
Wind
Solar
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Geothermal
Biomass
Transmission
HeatRecovery
Geothermal
Hydrokinetic
Transmission
Wind
Wind
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Wind
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Geothermal
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Wind
Wind
Transmission
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Transmission
Wind
Geothermal
Hydro
Hydro
Geothermal
Geothermal
Geothermal
Other
Other
Hydro
Geothermal
Wind
Other
Other
Wind
Other
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Wind
Wind
Other
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Transmission
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Other
Wind
Biomass
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Other
Other
Other
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Geothermal
Hydro
Geothermal
Geothermal
Wind
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Solar
Wind
Wind
Other
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Geothermal
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Other
Biomass
Biomass
Geothermal
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Transmission
Solar
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Other
Biomass
Solar
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Other
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Other
Hydrokinetic
HeatRecovery
Wind
Transmission
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
NaturalGas
Hydrokinetic
Wind
Wind
Other
Hydrokinetic
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Geothermal
Hydrokinetic
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Other
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Geothermal
Geothermal
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Geothermal
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Geothermal
Geothermal
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Solar
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Geothermal
Geothermal
Hydro
Solar
Hydro
Transmission
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
Solar
HeatRecovery
Other
Transmission
Other
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Geothermal
Biomass
Geothermal
Biomass
Hydro
Solar
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
HeatBiofuel
Biomass
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Wind
Other
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydrokinetic
NaturalGas
HeatBiofuel
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Geothermal
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
HeatBiofuel
Biomass
Hydrokinetic
Other
Other
Hydro
Solar
HeatRecovery
Other
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
HeatRecovery
Solar
Hydrokinetic
HeatRecovery
HeatBiofuel
Solar
Hydrokinetic
Hydrokinetic
Other
Hydro
Other
Biomass
Wind
Geothermal
Geothermal
Geothermal
Geothermal
Hydro
Geothermal
Geothermal
Geothermal
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Geothermal
Transmission
HeatRecovery
HeatRecovery
Other
NaturalGas
Other
Biomass
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Biomass
Hydrokinetic
HeatBiofuel
Hydro
Biomass
Wind
Hydro
Transmission
Hydro
Hydro
Geothermal
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Wind
Biomass
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Other
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Biomass
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Other
Wind
Biomass
Geothermal
Wind
Wind
Solar
Wind
Wind
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Wind
Wind
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Other
Geothermal
Wind
HeatBiofuel
Hydro
Solar
Wind
Wind
Hydrokinetic
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Other
HeatRecovery
Other
Other
Solar
Solar
Solar
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Wind
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Wind
Hydro
Wind
Biomass
Wind
HeatRecovery
HeatBiofuel
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
Wind
Wind
Biomass
HeatBiofuel
Wind
Other
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Transmission
Biomass
Biomass
NaturalGas
NaturalGas
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Biomass
Hydro
Hydro
HeatRecovery
Wind
Hydro
Biomass
HeatBiofuel
Biomass
Biomass
Transmission
Transmission
Hydro
Biomass
Geothermal
Hydro
Transmission
HeatRecovery
Hydro
Transmission
Hydrokinetic
Geothermal
Hydro
Geothermal
Biomass
Hydro
HeatBiofuel
HeatBiofuel
Other
Hydro
Other
Geothermal
HeatBiofuel
Hydro
HeatBiofuel
HeatBiofuel
HeatBiofuel
Biomass
Hydro
Application Type
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Heat
Heat
Standard
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Applicant Phases
Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Recon
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility
Construction
Recon
Recon
Recon
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Construction
Recon, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Recon, Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Recon, Feasibility
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Construction
Construction
Recon
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Recon, Design
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Recon
Design
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Recon
Feasibility
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Construction
Recon
Feasibility
Recon
Feasibility, Design
Recon
Design
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Design
Construction
Feasibility
Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility
Design
Design
Design
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Construction
Recon
Recon
Feasibility
Design
Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon
Feasibility
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Recon
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility
Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Recon
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Recon
Design
Feasibility
Recon
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Recon
Recon
Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Recon, Construction
Design
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Recon
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Recon
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Design
Recon
Design
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Construction
Recon
Construction
Recon
Design
Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Recon, Design
Design
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Recon
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Recon
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Recon, Design
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Design
Design
Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Design
Design
Design
Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Design
Recon
Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design
0
Design
Recon
Construction
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Design
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Design
Design
Feasibility
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Recon, Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon
Design
Design
Recon
Recon
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon
Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Feasibility
0
Feasibility, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Recon
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Feasibility, Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Recon
Recon
Recon
Construction
Feasibility, Construction
Recon, Design
Design
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design
Feasibility, Design
Design
Feasibility, Construction
Design
AEA Phases
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Design
Design
Recon, Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Construction
Feasibility, Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Design
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Recon
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Feasibility
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Feasibility
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Design
Design, Construction
Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Construction
Design
Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Recon, Feasibility
Design, Construction
Recon
Recon
Recon
Recon
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Design, Construction
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility
Design
Design
Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Recon, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Construction
Feasibility
Feasibility
Feasibility
Design
Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Design, Construction
Design, Construction
Feasibility, Design
Construction
Design
Feasibility
Recon, Feasibility
Design, Construction
Design
Recon, Feasibility
Design
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Construction
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Applicant Name
Igiugig Village Council d/b/a Igiugig Electric Company
Circle Utilities, Inc.
Community of Elfin Cove Non-Profit Corporation, Elfin Cove Utility Commission
City of Tenakee Springs Dba Tenakee Springs Electric Department
Cordova Electric Cooperative, Inc.
City of Chignik
TDX Power, Inc.
TDX Adak Generating, Inc. (TAG) - TDX Power, Inc.
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Cordova Electric Cooperative, Inc.
City of Seward
Minto Development Corporation
City of Kake
City of Ouzinkie
City of Koyuk
Sand Point Generating, LLC - TDX Power, Inc.
Municipality of Skagway Borough
City of Scammon Bay
City of Wales
City of Grayling
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
Kotzebue Electric Association, Inc.
Central Environmental Inc.
State of Alaska Department of Corrections
City of Hoonah
Chitina Electric Inc. (CEI)
Kenai Hydro LLC
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
City of King Cove
City of False Pass
Tlingit-Haida Regional Housing Authority (THRHA)
Klawock City School District
Native Village of Shungnak
City of Huslia
City of Eek
City of Ambler
NANA Regional Corporation
City and Borough of Sitka
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Upper Tanana Energy, LLC. UTE
City of False Pass
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
City of Craig
Kodiak Electric Association, Inc.
City of Unalaska
Homer Electric Association, Inc.
City of Chignik
Native Village of Chenega
Port Graham Village Council
TDX Power, Sand Point Generating
TDX Power, Inc.
Hoonah Indian Association
City of Tenakee Springs DBA Tenakee Springs Electric Department
Community of Elfin Cove Non-Profit Corporation, Elfin Cove Utility Commission
City of King Cove
TDX Power, North Slope Generating
Northwest Alaska Tribal Energy Organization (NATEO)
City of Noorvik
City of Eek
Unalakleet Valley Electric Cooperative/UVEC
Lake and Peninsula Borough
TDX Power, Inc.
Adak Generating, LLC., A Subsidiary of TDX power, Inc.
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
City of Scammon Bay
Southeast Island School District
Kenai Hydro LLC
Interior Regional Housing Authority
Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority
City of Scammon Bay
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
City of Selawik
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
City of Chefornak/Naterkaq Light Plant
City of Ouzinkie
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
Metlakatla Indian Community
Kwig Power Company
City of Kotzebue
City of Wales
Hydaburg City School District
City of Holy Cross
City of Nikolai
Igiugig Village Council d/b/a Igiugig Electric Company
City of False Pass
City of Huslia
City of Ambler
City of Grayling
Chitina Electric Inc. (CEI)
City of Koyuk
Akiachak Native Community Electric Company/Akiachak Native Community IRA Council
Upper Tanana Energy, LLC (UTE)
Native Village of Shungnak
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority
Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority
Kotzebue Electric Association Inc.
Cordova Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Native Village of Tazlina
Craig City School District
Alaska Power Company
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA)
City of Saxman
Alaska Power Company
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA)
City and Borough of Sitka Public Works Department
Kodiak Electric Association, Inc. (KEA)
Manokotak Natives Limited: Manokotak Power Company (MPC)
Organized Village of Kake
Naterqak Light Plant, City of Chefornak
Native Village of Tuntutuliak
Ram Valley, LLC
City of King Cove
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
City of False Pass Electric Utility
New Koliganek Village Council
Chickaloon Native Village
Native Village of Tanacross
Northwest Arctic Borough School District
Blue Hole Properties, LLC (BHP)
TCSA Electrical Services
Puvurnaq Power Company
Igiugig Village Council
Kwig Power Company
TDX Sand Point Generating, LLC
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Native Village of Chenega
Iliamna Village Council
City of False Pass
City of Emmonak
City of Holy Cross
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Northwest Arctic Borough
Ungusraq Power Company (UPC) / Newtok Traditional Council
City of Adak, Alaska
City of Seward
Napakiak lrcinraq Power Company
City and Borough of Yakutat
City of Nunam Iqua
Alaska Gateway School District
Bristol Bay Borough School District
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
City of Galena
Tanalian Electric Co-op, Inc.
City of Grayling
Village of Venetie
City of St. Mary\'s
City of Eek
City of Chevak
City of Brevig Mission
Nuvista Light and Electric Cooperative
City of Kotzebue
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Chignik Lagoon Village Council
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Metlakatla Indian Community
City and Borough of Sitka
Village of Minto
Cook Inlet Housing Authority
Kodiak Electric Association, Inc.
Native Village of Cantwell
Native Village of Cantwell
Alaska Power Company
City of Atka
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Tlingit-Haida Regional Electrical Authority
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency
Haines Borough
Haines Borough
Edna Bay Community
City of Chignik
Southeast Island School District
Hydaburg City School District
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc.
Native Village of Tazlina
City and Borough of Sitka
City and Borough of Sitka
City and Borough of Sitka
Craig City School District
Nenana School District
City of Chuathbaluk
City & Borough of Juneau
Naknek Electric Association, Inc.
Native Village of Tuntutuliak
Karluk Tribal Council
City of Saxman
Whitestone Power and Communications
Northwest Arctic Borough
Nuvista Light & Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Noatak IRA
Organized Village of Kake
Mentasta Traditional Council
City of Tanana
Bristol Bay Borough School District
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
City of Tenakee Springs DBA Tenakee Springs Electric Department
Native Village of Cantwell
Pedro Bay Village Council
Ram Valley LLC
Alaska Power Company (APC)
City of Elim
Akiak Native Community/ Akiak IRA Council
Copper Valley Development Association
Kipnuk Light Plant
Nelson Lagoon Electric Cooperative
City of False Pass Electric Utility
G&K Electric Utility
Kokhanok Electric
Haines Borough
Haines Borough
The Aleut Corporation
Manokotak Power Company
City of Atka
ORPC Alaska 2, LLC
Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB)
City & Borough of Wrangell
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Southwest Region School District
OIT Inc.
Native Village of Tuntutuliak
City of Noorvik
City of Marshall
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Native Village of Kwinhagak
City of Chuathbaluk
Atmautluak Traditional Council
City of Savoonga
Interior Regional Housing Authority
Interior Regional Housing Authority
Nenana City School District
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc. (CVEA)
City of King Cove
City of Ouzinkie
City of Galena
Alaska Gateway School District
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Kenai Peninsula Borough School District (KPBSD)
Native Village of Afognak
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
AVCP Regional Housing Authority
Tlingit-Haida Regional Electric Authority
Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC)
Municipality of Skagway Borough
City & Borough of Sitka (CBS)
Hydaburg City Schools
Alaska Power Company (APC)
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Lake and Peninsula Borough
Lake and Peninsula Borough
Lake and Peninsula Borough
City of Saxman
INN Electric Cooperative, Inc.
City of Petersburg
City of Coffman Cove
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency
City & Borough of Juneau
Northwest Arctic Borough
Native Village of Cantwell
Karluk Tribal Council
Nome Joint Utility System
Port Graham Village Council
Eklutna, Inc.
Independence Power, LLC
City of Alakanuk
City of Angoon
Igiugig Village Council dba Igiugig Electric Company
TDX Power, Inc.
Igiugig Village Council
Native Village of Nikolski
Kodiak Island Borough
City of King Cove
Chitina Electric, Inc.
Kipnuk Light Plant
City of Nenana/Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Mentasta Traditional Council
Tanacross Village Council
City of Tanana
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
ORPC Alaska, LLC
Ivanoff Bay Tribal Council
Alaska Gateway School District
Alaska Gateway School District
Alaska Gateway School District
City of Elim
City of False Pass Electric Utility
City of Saint Michael
City of Angoon
Native Village of Goodnews Bay
City of Togiak
City of Savoonga
City of Shishmaref
Native Village of Kasigluk
City of Klawock
City of White Mountain
City of New Stuyahok
City of Toksook Bay
City of Lower Kalskag
City of Selawik
Sleetmute Traditional Council
City of Scammon Bay
City of Kotlik
City of Noorvik
Russian Mission
Atmautlauk Traditional Council
City of Golovin
City of Kake
City of Kobuk
City of Nome dba Nome Joint Utility System (NJUS)
Chickaloon Village Traditional Council
Eklutna, Inc.
Chignik Lagoon Village Council
City of Ouzinkie
Kenai Peninsula Borough School District
Kenai Hydro LLC
Kake City School District
Lammergeier CleanTech (A Subsidiary of Juneau BioFuels Research Corporation)
Copper River Native Association (on behalf of native Village of Tazlina)
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Metlakatla Indian Communityi
Kootznoowoo, Inc.
City & Borough of Wrangell/Wrangell Municipal Light & Power
Kootznoowoo, Inc.
North Slope Borough
Tatitlek Village IRA Council
Interior Regional Housing Authority
Huslia Traditional Council
Interior Regional Housing Authority
Chugach Electric Association
Gulkana Village Council
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc. (CVEA)
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc. (CVEA)
Atmocean, Inc.
Copper River School District
City of ketchikan dba Ketchikan Public Utilities
Alaska Vocational Technical Center
Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA)
Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA)
Southeast Alaska Power Agency
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Chugach Electric Association
Kodiak Electric Association
City of Petersburg
Native Village of Cantwell
Borough & Municipality of Skagway
City & Borough of Sitka
City & Borough of Sitka
City and Borough of Sitka
Kwig Power Company
Tuntutuliak Community Services Assn., Inc.
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility
City of Palmer
Kipnuk Light Plant
City of Akiak
Puvurnaq Power Company
Napakiak Ircinraq Power Company
Municipality of Anchorage
City of Tenakee Springs Electric Department
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
Independence Power, LLC
Community of Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Glacier Fork Hydro, LLC
Eklutna, Inc.
Port Graham Village Council
City of Pelican
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Lake & Peninsula Borough
City of Napaskiak Electric Utility
New Koliganek Village Council
Baker Hughes, Inc.
Chitina Electric, Inc.
Lake & Peninsula Borough
G&K Electric Utility
Nelson Lagoon Electrical Cooperative
City of False Pass Electric Utility
City of Akiak
Bering Pacific Engineering
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Village of Atmautluak
Alaska Electric Light & Power Company
Kootznoowoo, Inc.
Kootznoowoo, Inc.
Akiachak Native Community/Akiachak Ltd.
Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority
City of Kotzebue
Kenai Winds LLC
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Organized Village of Kwethluk
Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority
Gulkana Village Council
Turnagain Tidal Energy Corporation
ORPC Alaska, LLC
City of Homer
University of Alaska Fairbanks ACEP
Alaska Vocational Technical Center
Metlakatla Indian Community
Metlakatla Indian Community
University of Alaska Fairbanks INE/ACEP
Kodiak Electric Association, Inc.
Ormat Nevada, Inc.
Naknek Electric Association, Inc.
City of Chefornak
Copper River School District
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Interior Regional Housing Authority
Southeast Island School District
Kenai Hydro LLC
Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative
Nushagak Electric & Telephone Cooperative (NETC)
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Haines Borough
City & Borough of Wrangell
Matanuska Susitna Borough
Native Village of Eyak
City of Akutan
City of Ketchikan dba Ketchikan Public Utilities
City of Coffman Cove
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc.
Alaska Gateway School District
Golden Valley Electric Association
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Northwest Arctic Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
Louden Tribal Council
Lime Village Traditional Council
Native Village of Cantwell
City of Craig, Alaska
TDX Power, Inc.
City & Borough of Sitka
TDX Adak Generating, LLC
Valdez Fisheries Development Assn., Inc.
AVCP Regional Housing Authority
Kootznoowoo Inc.
City of Ouzinkie Utility Operations
City of Houston
Blue Energy Canada, Inc
City of Atka
Kotzebue Electric Association
Kootznoowoo Inc.
AVEC
AVEC
AVEC
AVEC
AVEC
AVEC
Village Wind Power, LLC
Alaska Wind Power, LLC
Baker Hughes, Inc.
TDX Adak Generating, LLC
Tatitlek IRA Council/Tatitlek Electric Company
TDX Power, Inc.
TDX Power, Inc.
TDX Corporation
ORPC Alaska, LLC
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
City of Homer
UAF
City of Napaskiak-Napaskiak Electric Utility
Tuntutuliak Community Services Association Electrical Services
Copper River School District
Hoonah City School District
Independence Power, LLC
Glacier Fork Hydro, LLC
Bering Pacific Engineering
Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
Cheesh?na Tribal Council
UAA State Controlled Institute of Higher Learning
Port Graham Village Council
Kwig Power Co.
City of Pilot Point
City of Angoon
Puvurnaq Power Company
Kipnuk Light Plant
Little Susitna Construction Co., Inc.
State of AK DNR Division of Forestry Tok Area Offic
The State of Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority
Alaska Power Company
Kodiak Island Borough
Ormat Nevada, Inc.
City of Tanana
Eklutna Inc
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility (CLPU)
Bering Pacific Engineering
Bering Pacific Engineering
Bering Pacific Engineering
City of Akutan
City of Akutan
UAF Alaska Center for Energy & Power_Wind Diesel Application Center
UAF Institute of Northern Engineering, AK Center for Energy & Power
UAF, Institute of Northern Engineering, AK Center for Energy & Power
Ruby Tribal Council
AVCP Regional Housing Authority
City and Borough of Yakutat
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Ugashik Traditional Village
AVTEC-Alaska Institute of Technology
City of Kotzebue-Maniilaq Services LLC
Kenai Winds LLC
Chena Power, LLC
Chena Power, LLC
Chenega Corporation/Chenega IRA Council
Naknek Electric Association, Inc. (NEA)
City of Seward
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc. (CVEA)
Matanuske-Susitna Borough
Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC)
Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC)
City of Saint Paul Electric Utility
City of Tenakee Springs
Elfin Cove Utility
Gwitchyaa Zhee Utility Company
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Power Company
Alaska Green Energy
Nushagak Electric & Telephone
Valdez Fisheries Development Association
City of Seldovia
April Park/IPP
Native Village of Tyonek
City of Angoon
Delta Mine Training Center
University of Alaska Fairbanks
University of Alaska Fairbanks
University of Alaska Fairbanks
Ketchikan Public Utilities Electric Division
City of Chefornak
Golden Valley Electric Association
Golden Valley Electric Association
Golden Valley Electric Association
City and Borough of Wrangell
City and Borough of Wrangell
City and Borough of Wrangell
City and Borough of Wrangell
City and Borough of Wrangell
C&L Ranch LLC
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
Iceland America Energy, INC
City of Craig
City & Borough of Juneau
Native Village of Eyak
Cordova Electric Cooperative
Northwest Arctic Borough
City & Borough of Sitka Electric Department
Louden Tribal Council
State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry
Native Village of Cantwell
Kodiak Electric Association, INC
Delta/Greely School District
Native Village of Noatak
Ohogamiut Traditional Council
Ahtna, Incorporated
Alaska Green Energy, LLC (AGE)
Aleutian Wind Energy / AWE
Tatitlek IRA Council/ Tatitlek Electric Utility
TDX Adak Generating, LLC
McGrath Traditional Council
Nanana Native Council
Tanacross Tribal Council
Tanana Tribal Council
ORPC Alaska LLC ("ORPC")
Orutsaramiut Native Council Incorporated
Solena Group
City of Ambler
Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting, Inc.
Alaska Power and Telephone Co
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Alaska Village Cooperative (AVEC)
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Akaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Alaska Village Cooperative (AVEC)
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Archangel Green Power, LLC
HPML LLC
City and Borough of Sitka (CBS) Alaska
Venetie Village Council
Chalkyitsik Village Council
McGrath Power and Light
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility (CLPU)
Glacier Fork Hydropower, LLC
City of St. Paul
Village Wind Power, LLC
Village Wind Power, LLC
Alaska Wind Power, LLC
Municipal Government
University of Alaska, Fairbanks
City of Homer
Tanana Power Company
Native Village of Perryville (NVOP)
Alaska Green Energy, LLC
Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority
Inside Passage Electric Company
The Four Dam Pool Power Agency
Golden Valley Electric Association
North Pacific Rim Housing Authority
Tuntutuliak Community Services Association
Akiak Power Utilities
City of Unalaska, Department of Public Utilities
Univertity of Alaska, Fairbanks
Whitestone Community Association
University of Alaska, Fairbanks
Tlingit Haida Central Council
Birch Creek Village Council
Igiugig Village Council d/b/a Igiugig Electric Company
Yakutat Power
Chugach School District
Borough and Municipality of Skagway
Yukon-Koyukuk School District
Yukon-Koyukuk School District
Asa\'carsarmuit Tribal Council
University of Alaska Fairbanks, Institute of Northern Engineering, Alaska Center for Energy and Power
Ormat Nevada, Inc
University of Alaska Fairbanks, Center for Energy and Power
University of Alaska Fairbanks, Institute of Northern Engineering, Alaska Center for Energy and Power
Kenai Hydro, LLC
Chena Power, LLC
Manley Village Council
Aleutians East Borough
City of Galena
City of Akutan
City of Akutan
City of Akutan
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
North Slope Borough
Alaska Gasline Port Authority
Daniel A Pryse
EarthRun Energy
City of Pilot Point
Kotlik Yupik Enterprise
Chitna Electric Inc, (CEI)
Kotzebue Electric Association
KAPP,LLC
Crooked Creek Traditional Council
Naknek Electric Association
Community of Elfin Cove Non-Profit Corporation, Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Delta Mine Training Center, Inc.
Alaska Vocational Technical Center (AVTEC)
City and Borough of Wrangell
City and Borough of Wrangell
Alaska Power Company (a subsidiary of Alaska Power & Telephone Company)
Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC)
Alaska Power and Telephone, Inc. Haines Assistant Living, Inc.
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Kenai Winds, LLC
Central Council Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska
University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA) and Municipal Light & Power (ML&P)
Kipnuk Light Plant
Native Village of Eyak
Native Village of Eyak
Ameresco, Inc
Kodiak Electric Association, Inc. (KEA)
Baranof Island Housing Authority
Native Village of Cantwell
Akiachak Native Community Electric Company
Southeast Island School District for Thorne Bay School
Association of Village Council Presidents Regional Housing Authority
Organized Village of Kasaan
Southeast Island School District
Valdez Fisheries Development Association
Ketchikan Public Utilities
Banner Wind, LLC
Nushagak Electric & Telephone Company, Inc
City of Petersburg, Alaska d/b/a Petersburg Municipal Power & Light
City of Bethel
City of Ambler
Napaskiak Utility (electric) - City of Napaskiak
Delta/Greely School District
City & Borough of Juneau
Puvurnaq Power Company
Golden Valley Electric Association
Golden Valley Electric Association
Puvurnaq Power Company
Banner Wind, LLC
Golden Valley Electric Association
Haida Power, Inc.
Kodiak Electric Associaiton, Inc.
Alaska Environmental Power LLC
Diesel Brewing Company, LLC dba Diesel Brewing of Ketchikan
Kenai Winds, LLC
University of Alaska Fairbanks, Office of Sponsored Programs
Crooked Creek Traditional Council
Kiiguusi Suuluta Land Company, LLC
Alaska Wind Energy, LLC, d/b/a Wind Energy Alaska (WEA)
Alaska Wind Energy, LLC, d/b/a Wind Energy Alaska (WEA)
HPML, LLC
Native Village of Napaimute
City of St. George - St. George Municipal Electric Utility
Umnak Power / Nikolski IRA Council
Thomas Ravens, Ph.D. and Myree McDonald, Ph.D.
Fishhook Renewable Energy, LLC
Independence Power, LLC
Kotzebue Electric Association
Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council
Kotzebue Electric Association
Alaska Electric Light & Power
Ormat Nevada Inc.
Alaska Green Energy, LLC
Alaska Green Energy, LLC
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Municipality of Anchorage, Solid Waste Services Dept
Village Wind Power, LLC
Alaska Wind Power, LLC
City of Tenakee Springs
Lake and Peninsula Borough
Lake and Peninsula Borough
Lake and Peninsula Borough
McGrath Light & Power, Co.
Yakutat Power
Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority
City of Atka
South Fork Hydro, LLC
Northwest Arctic Borough
Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation
Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA)
Chena Power Utility, LLC
City of Nome d/b/a Nome Joint Utility System (NJUS)
Mt. Alice Development, Inc.
Unalakleet Valley Electric Cooperative, Inc. (UVEC)
Alaska Gateway School District
City of Whittier
City of Nome d/b/a Nome Joint Utilities System
Copper River School District
EarthRun Energy
Alpine Energy, LLC
Alpine Energy, LLC
Burro Creek Holdings, LLC
Haines Borough
City Of Chignik
State of AK, Dept. of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry
City of Petersburg d/b/a Petersburg Municipal & Light
Ketchikan Public Utilities- Electic Division
Precision Power, LLC
City of Hooper Bay
Kenai Hydro, LLC
Chilkoot Indian Association
University of Alaska, Fairbanks
Gwitchyaa Zhee Utility Company
McGrath Power and Light
Kwaan Electric Transmission Intertie Cooperative, Inc (KWETICO)
Kwaan Electric Transmission Intertie Cooperative, Inc (KWETICO)
Copper Valley Electric Association, Inc (CVEA)
Native Village of Eyak
Haines Assisted Living, Inc
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
Cordova Electric Cooperative
Cordova Electric Cooperative
Metlakatla Indian Community
Alaska Tidal Energy Company
Naknek Electric Association
Native Village of Cantwell
Cook Inlet Power
Cheesh\'na Tribal Council
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility (CLPU)
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC
Aleutians East Borough
Gustavus Electric Company
City and Borough of Wrangell
Iceland America Energy, Inc.
Naknek Electric Association
Nushagak Electric & Telephone Cooperative, Inc
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC
Gulkana Village Council
City & Borough of Sitka
Applicant Type
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
UtilityGovernment Entity
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
IPP
IPP
Utility
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
IPP
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
IPP
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
IPP
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Utility
IPP
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
Utility
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
IPP
Utility
IPP
Utility
Local Government
IPP
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Other
IPP
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
IPP
IPP
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
IPP
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
IPP
IPP
Utility
IPP
Utility
Utility
IPP
Other
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Local Government
IPP
IPP
Utility
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Local Government
Utility
Government Entity
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
IPP
IPP
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Local Government
Utility
Utility
IPP
Local Government
IPP
Government Entity
Government Entity
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Utility
Utility
Utility
Utility
Government Entity
Other
Utility
Government Entity
IPP
Government Entity
Utility
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Utility
Local Government
IPP
Utility
Utility
IPP
IPP
IPP
Local Government
Local Government
Grantee PM
Vern Neitzer, AP&T
Jill Reese
Diane Moore, CLPU
Joel Groves
Bob Gross, AGE LLC
Eric Wolfe, FDPPA
Paul Taylor, Pacific Contract Co. & Stan Selmer, AP&T
Steve Gilbert & Brad Zubeck
RMA Consulting Group
RMA Consulting Group
Lee Johnson, Leland Johnson & Associates
Jane Button / Hap Leon, CECNPC
Eric Hannan, AP&T
Paul Brendible, MIC
Greg Mickelson, AP&T
Darron Scott, KEA
Bob Charles, AVCP
Ed Schofield & Jennifer Soderstrom, KPU
Michael Favors, NETC
Joe Nelson, PMPL
Todd Tew, Haida Corp. and Robert Grimm, AP&T
Daniel Hertrich
Joel Groves
Brent Petrie, AVEC
Brent Petrie, AVEC
Arthur Bloom
Earle Ausman
Bruce Sexuaer, Alaska District USACE
Darrel Maple
Brian Davis, CE2 Engineers
Joe Nelson, PMPL
Ed Schofield, KPU
Steve Gilbert
Eric Hannan, AP&T
Greg Mickelson, AP&T
John Magee
Paul Brendible, MIC
Diana Moore
Richard Levitt
Steve Henson
Michael Favors
Christopher Brewton, Utility Director
Energy Region
Bristol Bay
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River Chugach
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Aleutians
Southeast
Copper River Chugach
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
Southeast
Kodiak
Bering Straits
Aleutians
Southeast
Lower Yukon Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
North Slope
North Slope
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Copper River Chugach
Railbelt
Lower Yukon Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Aleutians
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
Aleutians
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana
Southeast
Kodiak
Aleutians
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Aleutians
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Aleutians
North Slope
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Aleutians
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
North Slope
North Slope
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Bering Straits
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Copper River/Chugach
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Southeast
Kodiak
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Aleutians
Railbelt
Railbelt
Aleutians
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Copper River/Chugach
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Copper River/Chugach
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
North Slope
North Slope
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Kodiak
Railbelt
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Southeast
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Southeast
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Aleutians
Aleutians
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Aleutians
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Aleutians
Kodiak
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Kodiak
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Kodiak
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Kodiak
Aleutians
Copper River/Chugach
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bering Straits
Aleutians
Bering Straits
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Bering Straits
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Bering Straits
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Kodiak
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
North Slope
Copper River/Chugach
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Railbelt
Kodiak
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Aleutians
Aleutians
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Bering Straits
Kodiak
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Bering Straits
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Kodiak
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Aleutians
Copper River/Chugach
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Kodiak
Railbelt
Southeast
Aleutians
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Northwest Arctic
Bering Straits
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Railbelt
Aleutians
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Statewide
Aleutians
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Statewide
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Statewide
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Kodiak
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Aleutians
Aleutians
Statewide
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Statewide
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Statewide
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Railbelt
Kodiak
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Bristol Bay
Aleutians
Copper River/Chugach
Aleutians
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Aleutians
Southeast
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Aleutians
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Northwest Arctic
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Aleutians
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Aleutians
Aleutians
Aleutians
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
North Slope
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Northwest Arctic
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Kodiak
Southeast
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Bering Straits
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Northwest Arctic
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Southeast
Kodiak
Railbelt
Southeast
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aleutians
Aleutians
Statewide
Railbelt
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Northwest Arctic
Statewide
Statewide
Railbelt
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Northwest Arctic
Kodiak
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Northwest Arctic
Aleutians
Railbelt
Northwest Arctic
Bristol Bay
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Railbelt
Bering Straits
Copper River/Chugach
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Southeast
Southeast
Statewide
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Railbelt
Southeast
Statewide
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Southeast
Copper River/Chugach
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Southeast
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Bristol Bay
Southeast
Southeast
Aleutians
Southeast
Southeast
Railbelt
Bristol Bay
Bristol Bay
Railbelt
Railbelt
Railbelt
Copper River/Chugach
Southeast
Community to Benefit
Igiugig, AK
Circle, Alaska
Elfin Cove, Alaska
Tenakee Springs, Alaska
Cordova, Alaska and Eyak Village, Alaska
Chignik, Alaska
St. Paul Island, AK 99660
Adak, Alaska
All IPEC Communities
Eyak Village, Alaska
Seward, Alaska
Minto, Alaska
Kake, Alaska
Ouzinkie, Alaska
Koyuk, Alaska
Sand Point, Alaska
Skagway, AK; Dyea, AK; Haines, AK; the Yukon Territory of Canada
Scammon Bay, Alaska
Wales, Alaska
Grayling, Alaska
The City of Atqasuk will be the beneficiary of this project
Kaktovik, Alaska
Kotzebue, Alaska
Anchorage and Alaska Railroad Corporation communities
Department of Corrections
Hoonah, Alaska
Chitina, Alaska
utility customers on the Kenai Peninsula
Mtn. Village, St. Mary’s, and Pitka’s Point
Shishmaref, Alaska
Bethel, Alaska
Old Harbor, Alaska
City of King Cove
False Pass, Alaska
Saxman and Ketchikan, Alaska
Klawock, Alaska
Shungnak, Alaska
Huslia, Alaska
Eek, Alaska
Ambler, Shungnak and Kobuk
Sitka, Alaska
Chugach's retail consumers live in the communities of Anchorage, Indian, Girdwood, Portage, Hope, Moose Pass, Cooper Landing and Tyonek.
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
interconnected communities of the Upper Tanana region, including Tok, Tanacross, Tetlin, and Dot Lake.
False Pass, Alaska
Whale Pass, Alaska
interconnected communities of the Upper Tanana region, including Tok, Tanacross, Tetlin, and Dot Lake.
Craig, Alaska
Kodiak, Alaska
City of Unalaska
The residents of the Kenai Peninsula
Chignik Bay
Chenega Bay, Alaska
Port Graham, Alaska
Sand Point, Alaska
Adak, Alaska
Hoonah, Alaska
Tenakee Springs, Alaska
Elfin Cove
The residents, small businesses, and major seafood processing plant in City of King Cove will benefit from this project.
Prudhoe Bay (Sagavanirktok) in the North Slope Borough
Kiana, Alaska, Noorvik, Alaska, Selawik, Alaska
Noorvik, Alaska
Eek, Alaska
Unalakleet, AK
Port Alsworth, Nondalton and Pedro Bay
St. Paul Island, AK
Adak, AK
Communities served by Chugach include Anchorage, Indian, Bird, Girdwood, Portage, Whittier, Hope, Moose Pass, Cooper Landing, Beluga, Tyonek and Seward.
Scammon Bay, Alaska
The communities of Thorne Bay, Whale Pass, Hollis, and Naukati
Persons benefitted would be the utility customers on the Kenai Peninsula.
Fairbanks and Nenana will have a direct benefit, Interior region villages will benefit indirectly by having IRHA reduce its overhead.
Kake Alaska
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Selawik, Alaska
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Chefornak, Alaska
Ouzinkie, Alaska
The City of Atqasuk will be the beneficiary of this project
Kaktovik, Alaska
Metlakatla Indian Community, Metlakatla, Alaska
the residents of Kwigillingok, Alaska
Kotzebue, Alaska
Wales, Alaska
Hydaburg, Alaska
Holy Cross, Alaska
Nikolai, Alaska
The Village of Igiugig
False Pass, Alaska
Huslia, Alaska
Ambler, Alaska
Grayling, Alaska
Chitina, Alaska
Koyuk, Alaska
Akiachak
Upper Tanana region
Shungnak, Alaska
Bethel
Goodnews Bay, Alaska
The residents, businesses, local government, and tribe of Old Harbor will be the beneficiaries of this project.
St. Mary’s and Pitka's Point
Klawock Alaska
Angoon Alaska
Kotzebue, Alaska
Cordova, Alaska
Native Village of Tazlina and The Association of Tazlina Residents
community of Craig
Whale Pass, Alaska
communities of Petersburg, Wrangell, and Ketchikan
City of Ketchikan, the City of Saxman, the Ketchikan Gateway Borough, Wrangell, and Petersburg by providing renewable energy via existing transmission lines.
interconnected communities of the Upper Tanana region
communities serviced by SEAPA
Sitka, AK
cooperative members of Kodiak Electric Association, Inc.
Manokotak, Alaska and immediate vicinity
Kake
Chefornak
Tuntutuliak, Alaska
railbelt energy grid
The City of King Cove
Anchorage, Girdwood, Portage, Hope, Cooper Landing, Moose Pass and Tyonek) as well as
the City of Seward.
Anchorage, Girdwood,
Portage, Hope, Moose Pass, Cooper Landing, Tyonek and Seward.
City of False Pass
Koliganek, Alaska
Sutton, AK
Tanacross, Dot Lake, Tetlin and Tok
Ambler, Buckland, Deering, Kiana, Kivalina, Kobuk, Kotzebue, Noatak, Noorvik, Selawik, and Shungnak
Communities served by Copper Valley Electric
Association, Inc. (CVEA), which includes Valdez, Glennallen, Gakona, Gulkana, Tazlina,
Copper Center, Kluti- Kaah, Copperville, Kenny Lake, Tolsona, Mendeltna, Nelchina, Eureka,
and Sheep Mountain.
Tuntutuliak, Alaska
Kongiganak, Alaska
Village of Igiugig
Kwigillingok, Alaska
Sand Point, Alaska
St. Mary?s
Stebbins
Mountain Village
Marshall
Old Harbor
Chenega Bay
Iliamna
City of False Pass
Emmonak, Alaska
Holy Cross
Ambler, Shungnak, and Kobuk
Noatak, Alaska
The Mertarvik, Alaska Community (Newtok)
Adak, AK
Seward, AK
Napakiak, Alaska
Yakutat, AK
Nunam Iqua
Tok
Bristol Bay Borough and Naknek, AK
City of Atqasuk
Kaktovik, Alaska
Galena
Port Alsworth
Grayling
Venetie
St. Mary?s, Alaska
Eek, AK
Chevak, AK
Brevig Mission, Alaska
Bethel, Akiachak, Akiak, Kwethluk,
City of Kotzebue
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Chignik Lagoon
Hoonah and Pelican
Metlakatla, Ketchikan and potentially other communities connected to the grid of the Southeast Alaska
Power Agency.
City and Borough of Sitka, AK
Village of Minto, Alaska
Seldovia, AK.
cooperative members of Kodiak Electric Association, Inc.
Cantwell, Carlo Creek, and McKinley
Village.
Cantwell, Carlo Creek, and McKinley
Village
Tok, Tetlin, Tanacross, & Dot Lake
Atka, AK
City of Kake, Alaska
Klukwan, Chilkat Valley, Haines and Skagway
Ketchikan, Wrangell, and Petersburg
Ketchikan, Wrangell, and Petersburg
Haines Borough
Excursion Inlet
Edna Bay
Chignik Bay
Thorne Bay, Whale Pass, Hollis, and Naukati
Hydaburg Alaska
Valdez, Glennallen, Gakona, Gulkana, Tazlina, Copper Center, Kluti-
Kaah, Copperville, Kenny Lake, Tolsona, Mendeltna, Nelchina, Eureka, and Sheep Mountain.
Native Village of Tazlina
Sitka
Sitka, AK
Sitka, AK
Craig, AK Klawock, Hollis, ThorneBay, Coffman Cove
Nenana, AK
Chuathbaluk, AK
Juneau
Naknek, King Salmon, South Naknek
Tuntutuliak
Karluk
Ketchikan, Saxman, Wrangell, Petersburg
Whitestone
Kotzebue
Project Location
Igiugig, AK
Circle, Alaska
on Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake
on Indian River
Crater Lake, Cordova Alaska
Chignik, Alaska
St. Paul Island, AK 99660
Adak, Alaska
Kake, Alaska
Cordova, Alaska
Seward, Alaska
Minto, Alaska
Kake, Alaska
Ouzinkie, Alaska
Koyuk, Alaska
Sand Point, Alaska
West Creek
Scammon Bay, Alaska
Wales, Alaska
Grayling, Alaska
area of the North Slope between the communities of Atqasuk and Barrow
Kaktovik, Alaska
co-located with existing wind farm, located approximately 4 miles southeast of Kotzebue
Knik Arm Power Plant 29 Whitney Road Anchorage, AK 99501
Point McKenzie Correctional Farm Wasilla, Alaska
Hoonah, Alaska
on Fivemile Creek
Grant Lake watershed located near Moose Pass, Alaska.
located along the approximately 18-mile gravel road connecting the communities of Saint (St.) Mary’s and Mountain (Mtn.) Village.
Shishmaref, Alaska
Bethel, Alaska
Old Harbor, Alaska
small creek located approximately 5 miles north of downtown King Cove
False Pass, Alaska
Ketchikan, Alaska
Klawock, Alaska
at the proposed new landfill in Shungnak, Alaska
Huslia, Alaska
Eek, Alaska
Ambler, Alaska
Kogoluktuk River
Sitka, Alaska
The project would be located on Chugach's campus at 5601 Electron Drive in Anchorage.
Ketchikan, Alaska
Ketchikan, Alaska
False Pass, Alaska
Project is near Whale Pass, Prince of Wales Island
Approximately 15 miles south of Tok, Alaska
Craig, Alaska
Kodiak, Alaska
City of Unalaska
Parcel No. 75, Northeast corner of East Road and Bear Creek Drive, Homer, Alaska
Chignik Bay
Chenega Bay, Alaska
Port Graham, Alaska
Sand Point, Alaska
Adak, Alaska
Hoonah, Alaska
Indian River, approximately one mile east of Tenakee Springs
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake
located on a small creek located approximately 5 miles north of downtown King
100 Powerplant Way, Deadhorse, AK 99734
Hotham Ridge
Noorvik, Alaska
Eek, Alaska
186 Main Street
Port Alsworth, Nondalton and Pedro Bay
St. Paul Island, AK
Adak, AK
Lowell Creek in Seward and Ship Creek in Anchorage
Scammon Bay, Alaska
Thorne Bay, Alaska
Grant Lake watershed
Fairbanks and Nenana
Kake Senior Center
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Selawik, Alaska
2610 Fourth Ave., Ketchikan, AK 99901
Chefornak, Alaska
Ouzinkie, Alaska
Atqasuk, AK
Kaktovik, Alaska
Metlakatla Indian Community, Metlakatla, Alaska
community of Kwigillingok
258 Third Avenue Kotzebue, Alaska
Wales, Alaska
Hydaburg School, located in Hydaburg Alaska, Prince of Wales Island in SE Alaska
Holy Cross, Alaska
Nikolai, Alaska
Kvichak River
False Pass, Alaska
Huslia, Alaska
Ambler, Alaska
Grayling, Alaska
Akiachak, Alaska
within 2.5 miles of Shungnak, Alaska
Bethel
Old Harbor (pop. 193) is located on the southeast coast of Kodiak Island, 70 miles southwest of the City of Kodiak and 322 miles southwest of Anchorage.
near Pitka’s Point
Klawock Senior Center
Xootz Road, Buildings 1 – 9.
approximately 4 miles southeast of Kotzebue
Crater Lake, Cordova, Alaska
Mile 110.5 Richardson Highway
Craig, Alaska
remote area of Revillagigedo Island at the northern end of Carroll Inlet, approximately 22 air miles northeast of Ketchikan, Alaska.
approximately 5 miles northeast of Ketchikan, Alaska
Approximately 15 miles south of Tok, Alaska
Kake, Alaska
Chefornak
Tuntutuliak
Juniper Creek
King Cove
Stetson Creek, Cooper Lake
Anchorage
False Pass
Koliganek
Sutton
Yerrick Creek
Ambler School ? Latitude 67.084985, Longitude -157.8632
Buckland School ? Latitude 65.899971, Longitude -161.57341
Deering School ? Latitude 65.894924, Longitude -162.552567
Kiana School ? Latitude 66.971982, Longitude -160.436275
Kivalina School ? Latitude 67.654166, Longitude -164.06456
Kobuk School ? Latitude 66.90489, Longitude -157.029362
Kotzebue School ? Latitude 66.8983, Longitude -162.5959
Noatak School ? Latitude 67.624386, Longitude -163.001633
Noorvik School ? Latitude 66.833224, Longitude -161.042926
Selawik School ? Latitude 66.599159, Longitude -160.014675
Shungnak School ? Latitude 66.893844, Longitude -157.159138
Cascade Creek
Tuntutuliak
Kongiganak
Igiugig
Kwigillingok
Sand Point
Pitka?s Point
Stebbins
Mountain Village
Marshall
Old Harbor
Chenega Bay
Iliamna
False Pass
Emmonak
Holy Cross
Kogoluktuk River
Noatak
Vicinity of the new Mertarvik Community Site
Adak
Seward
Napakiak
Yakutat
Nunam Iqua
Tok
Naknek
Atqasuk and Barrow
Kaktovik
Galena
Tanalian water falls and in-river along the Tanalian River
Grayling
Venetie
St. Mary?s
Eek
Chevak
Brevig Mission
Bethel, Alaska 60.7922 N 161 .7558 w
Akiachak, Alaska 60.9094 N 161.4314 w
Akiak, Alaska 60.9122 N 161.2139W
Kwethluk, Alaska 60.8122 N 161.4358 w
Kotzebue
Ketchikan
Packers Creek
at the head of Tenakee Inlet on Chichagof Island in Southeast Alaska
on Annette Island
between Metlakatla and Walden Point and a submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel
between Walden Point on Annette Island and Mountain Point on Revillagigedo Island.
Sitka
Minto
Seldovia
Kodiak
Jack River approximately 3 miles southeast of Cantwell
Carlo Creek
Chisana Mountain
Atka
Kake
27 miles northeast of Haines, Alaska
Revillagigedo Island at the northern end of Carroll Inlet,
approximately 22 air miles northeast of Ketchikan, Alaska
westem coast of Revillagegedo Island
Haines
Excursion Inlet
Survey Creek on Kosiusko Island near the community of Edna Bay
Chignik Bay
Thorne Bay School
1010 Sandy Beach Road, Thorne Bay, AK 99919
Naukati School
100 Heather Street, Naukati, AK 99950
Whale Pass School
126 Bayview Road, Whale Pass, AK 99950
Hollis School
6488 Klawock Hwy. Hollis, AK 99928
Hydaburg
Valdez
mile 110.5 on the Richardson Highway
Sitka
Sitka
Sitka
Craig
Nenana
Chuathbaluk
Juneau
Naknek
Tuntutuliak
Karluk
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Community of Whitestone
Kotzebue, AK
Akiachak, Alaska 60.9094 N 161.4314 w
Akiak, Alaska 60.9122 N 161 .2139 w
Alakanuk, Alaska 62.6889 N 164.6153 w
Bill Moore\'s Slough, Alaska 62.9706 N 163.8041 w
Chevak, Alaska 61 .5278 N 165.5864 w
Emmonak, Alaska 62.7756 N 164.5545 w
Hamilton, Alaska 62.8961 N 163.8942 w
Hooper Bay, Alaska 61.5311 N 166.0967W
Kipnuk, Alaska 59.9375 N 164.0439 w
Kongiganak, Alaska 59.9539 N 162.8953 w
Kotlik, Alaska 63.0342 N 163.5533 w
Kwethluk, Alaska 60.8122 N 161.4358 w
Kwigillingok, Alaska 59.8723 N 163.1658 w
Napaskiak, Alaska 60.7081 N 161 .7661 w
Nunam lqua, Alaska 62.5203 N 164.8478 w
Oscarville, Alaska 60.7220 N 161.7893 w
Paimiut, Alaska 61 .9667 N 160.2333 w
Scammon Bay, Alaska 61.8428 N 165.5817 w
Tuntutuliak, Alaska 60.3431 N 162.6631 w
Noatak is located on the west bank of the Noatak River, 55 miles north of Kotzebue and 70 miles north of
the Arctic Circle. This is the only settlement on the 396 mile-long Noatak River, just west of the 66-
million acre Noatak National Preserve.
Kake, AK
Mentasta Village, AK
Tanana, AK
Naknek, AK
Anchorage: specific location to be determined. If a Waste-to-Energy (WtE) plant was
constructed it could be by Chugach\'s Headquarters (5601 Electron Drive} or centrally located
elsewhere in Anchorage, preferably near the solid waste transfer station (1111 E. 561
h Avenue)
to minimize handling and transportation logistics.
The project is located on Indian River, approximately one mile east of Tenakee Springs in
Township 47 South, Range 63 East of the Copper River Meridian.
The project is located on Carlo Creek approximately 10 miles north of Cantwell
The project is located on Knutson Creek near the Village of Pedro Bay
The project is located on Juniper Creek, a tributary of Eagle River near Anchorage.
This project is located 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales
Island, Alaska. The Project would supply power to the community of Whale Pass.
Elim (pop. 337) is located on the northwest shore ofNorton Sound on the Seward Peninsula, 96
miles east of Nome.
The actual met tower site will need to be determined upon initial evaluation of the site. The Akiak IRA is
interested in a met tower east of the community approximately 4 miles at 60?54\'25.80"N and 161?
6\'19.02"W.
The project is located in the Eastern Copper Basin of Central Alaska. Primarily in the
Tazlina and Copper Center area on the east side of the Copper River. See attached
maps. The Tazlina anomaly is located on the old Copper Valley School Road near
Tazlina Village.
Kipnuk, AK
Nelson Lagoon is situated on the north coast of the Alaska Peninsula on a slender strand of sand between
the Bering Sea and a lagoon of the same name, approximately 580 miles southwest of Anchorage.
False Pass is located on the eastern shore ofUnimak Island on a strait connecting the Pacific
Gulf of Alaska to the Bering Sea. It is 646 air miles southwest of Anchorage.
Cold Bay is located on the Alaska Peninsula, approximately 634 miles southwest of Anchorage and 180
miles northeast ofUnalaska.
Kokhanok, Alaska is located on the southern shore of Iliamna Lake. Kokhanok is 88 miles
northeast of King Salmon, Alaska
PO Box 1209, Haines, AK
99827
The Excursion Inlet Hydro Project is located on Excursion Inlet in the community of the same
name in southeastern Alaska (See Figure 1). Excursion Inlet is strategically located in Icy
Straits, the water body at the extreme southwest of the Haines Borough. The community is
composed of 95 land owners including Wards Cove Packing Company, dba Ocean Beauty
Seafoods, and several commercial sport fishing lodges. The industry and most residences are
seasonal. The valuation of the community in FY12 was $16,200,000.
Mount Makushin is an ice-covered stratovolcano located on Unalaska Island in the Aleutian
Islands approximately 800 miles southwest of Anchorage. With an elevation of (6,680 ft), its
summit is the highest point on the island (See Figure 1).
The City of Unalaska, which includes Dutch Harbor, is the main community on the Island. The
Port of Dutch Harbor is the only deep draft, ice-free port from Unimak Pass west to Adak and
north to the headwaters of the Bering Straits. Unalaska?s economy is based primarily on
commercial fishing, seafood processing, fleet services and marine transportation. Unalaska
relies on diesel fueled generators to supply most of its power.
The City of Unalaska and its customers will benefit most from this project. This project will play
a major role in providing clean, reliable, and affordable base-load renewable power.
The local community will also benefit from increased local hire and local services for the
development and eventually construction work contemplated in this project as well as on-going
maintenance and operations.
Manokotak is located on the lgushik River 25 miles southwest of Dillingham and 347 miles southwest of
Anchorage.
Atka, Alaska located about 1,100 miles from Anchorage, 350 miles west of Unalaska, and 90
miles east of Adak in the Aleutian Islands.
The TidGen? Array Project, part of a larger commercial project at East Foreland, near Nikiski, Alaska, is
a pilot project to test the effectiveness of Ocean Renewable Power Company?s TidGen? Power System
in Cook Inlet. The energy produced will be delivered to the Railbelt Grid via interconnect to the Homer
Electric Association (HEA) distribution system in the early stages of the project, and ultimately via a
dedicated transmission line to the Bernice Lake Substation. From there, it can be delivered to any of the
Railbelt utilities and associated communities
Ticasuk Brown Elementary School
785 Lakloey Drive
North Pole, AK 99705
City & Borough of Wrangell
Shishmaref (population563) is located on Sarichef Island, in the Chukchi Sea, just north of the Bering Strait. Shishmaref is 5 miles from the mainland, 126 miles north of Nome, and 100
miles southwest of Kotzebue.
Goodnews Bay (population 243) is located on the north shore of Goodnews Bay at the mouth of Goodnews River. It is 116 air miles south of Bethel, 110 miles northwest of Dillingham, and
400 miles west of Anchorage.
This electric intertie to wind energy will be constructed between St. Mary?s and Pilot Station.
Both Western Alaskan communities are approximately 450 air miles west-northwest of
Anchorage.
This electric intertie to wind energy will be constructed between St. Mary?s and Mountain
Village. Both Western Alaskan communities are approximately 450 air miles west-northwest of
Anchorage. Pitka?s Point will also benefit because it is already intertied to the St. Mary?s
electrical system.
The communities impacted by this project are Noorvik, Kiana, and Selawik. They are all located
in Northwest Alaska.
The communities impacted by this project are Ambler, Shungnak, and Kobuk. These villages are
located in Northwest Alaska on the Kobuk River.
St. Michael (2010 U.S. Census population 401) is located on the east coast of St. Michael Island in Norton Sound. It lies 125 miles southeast of Nome and 48 miles southwest of Unalakleet.
Russian Mission (population 303) is located on the west bank of the Yukon River in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, 25 miles southeast of Marshall. It lies 70 air miles northeast of Bethel
and 376 miles west of Anchorage
Kotlik (population 601) is located on the east bank of the Kotlik Slough, 35 miles northeast of Emmonak in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. It lies 165 air miles northwest of Bethel and 460
miles from Anchorage.
Wales (population 154) is located on Cape Prince of Wales, at the western tip of the Seward Peninsula, 111 miles northwest of Nome.
This project will be located near the community of Marshall (population 407) which is located on the north bank of Polte Slough, north of Arbor Island, on the east bank of the Yukon
River in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. It lies on the northeastern boundary of the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge.
This project will be constructed in Shungnak, Alaska (population: 261) and will benefit Shungnak
and its neighbor, Kobuk (population: 148).
This project will be constructed near Pitka?s Point and will service that community and its
neighbor St. Mary?s, five miles away. Both communities are approximately 450 air miles westnorthwest
of Anchorage.
The school is located near the old airstrip 2000 feet northwest of the Nushagak river
The OIT Inc Waste Heat Turbine Project is located in Moose Creek, Alaska 20 miles from
Fairbanks, AK. The project will create electrical power through use of a steam turbine driven by
waste heat generated during operations at OIT?s remediation facility. The turbine project will
create 335KWH providing enough electrical power to operate OIT?s facility while adding
157KWH to the GVEA grid in cogenerated surplus electrical power. The 157KWH in
supplementary power would benefit the general Moose Creek, AK population consisting mainly
of small business, churches and homes.
Tuntutuliak, AK. The existing power plant, water treatment plant and existing washeteria.
Noorvik, AK. The existing power plant and water treatment plant.
Marshall, AK. The existing power plant community store and the water treatment plant.
This project will be located in Stebbins, AK and connect the existing power plant, water
treatment plant, school, Head Start building, clinic, and washeteria.
The project is located at the head of Tenakee Inlet, Chichagof Island in Southeast Alaska. The location is
a rugged stream valley accessible via helicopter. The area of interest is approximately 4 to 5 acres in
size and occurs on both sides of the stream we have called Tenakee Creek.
Quinhagak, AK. The power house, washeteria, and combined utility building
Chuathbaluk, AK. The existing power plant and water system.
Atmautluak, AK. The power plant and washeteria buildings
Savoonga is located on the northern coast of St. Lawrence Island in the Bering Sea, 164 miles
west of Nome. The water treatment plant (WTP) is located approximately 200 feet from the
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant.
This project will fund feasibility assessments and forest inventories in the communities of Alatna,
Allakaket, Northway, Grayling, Shageluk, Beaver and Stevens Village. All communities are
located in the Interior/Doyen region of Alaska.
IRHA recently completed biomass feasibility studies and forest inventories in the Interior
communities of Hughes, Ruby, Koyukuk, Nulato, Kaltag, Nikolai, Anvik and Holy Cross. Using
Renewable Energy Fund Round 5 funds, design and construction will commence for biomass
projects in Nikolai, Koyukuk and Anvik. The Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 proposal will
fund the design and construction of three more biomass systems in three more Interior villages.
The communities and biomass projects will be selected based on existing feasibility studies for
Hughes, Ruby, Nulato, Kaltag, Holy Cross and new feasibility studies to be conducted for
Alatna, Allakaket, Shageluk, Grayling, Northway, Beaver and Stevens Village. Project selection
will be based on sustainable forest inventories, effective project champions in the communities,
cost savings and simple payback.
The project is located in Nenana, Alaska. The collaborative partners in the application for this grant funding are the Nenana City School District, the City of Nenana, and the Nenana
Native Council. All three entities expect to derive benefit from this project.
The Allison Creek Hydroelectric Project is located adjacent to the Prince William Sound,
immediately south of Port Valdez, Alaska.
CVEA is a member-owned electric cooperative providing central station electric service to a
relatively large geographic area of Eastern Interior and Prince William Sound. CVEA is a
stand-alone (not interconnected to another power system) electric utility.
The service territory is divided into two districts, the Valdez District and the Copper River Basin
District. The Valdez District is comprised of the organized area of the City of Valdez. The
Copper River Basin District incorporates many outstretched communities
Delta Creek Valley- King Cove, Alaska
T he Project will be located on a small creek located approxima tely 5 miles north of the City of King
Cove. T his creek is adjacent to and west of an existing hydroelectric project on Delta Creek that
was constructed in 1995. T he creek has a noticeable waterfall that is visible form the Delta Creek
hydroelectric powerhouse.
The project is located between the City of Kodiak on Kodiak Island and the City of Ouzinkie on Spruce Island. This specific grant request is to assess the underwater structures in the
marine channel between the two islands. The project will benefit the communities of Ouzinkie and Kodiak.
The project will be located in Galena, AK at the Galena Base Steam Plant, adjacent to the former Galena Air Force Base.
Tok, Alaska with six (6) other small communities.
The Upper Tanana Biomass CHP (Combined Heat & Power) Project will be located in the Alaska Interior community of Tok (pop. 1270), at the junction of the Alaska Highway and the Tok Cutoff
to the Glenn Highway, 200 miles southeast of Fairbanks, 93 miles from the Canadian border. This project will serve an isolated power grid that connects the communities of Tok, Tanacross,
Tetlin and Dot Lake (combined population estimate 1580)
Location ? latitude and longitude or street address or community / communities served:
The proposed project will serve the community of Seward, AK, located on the Kenai Peninsula. The three locations for the project are:
1. Seward Middle School, 304 Sea Lion Avenue, Seward, AK 99664
2. William H. Seward Elementary School, 606 Sea Lion Avenue, Seward, AK 99664
3. Seward High School, P.O. Box 1049, Seward, AK 99664
Kodiak Island ? City of Kodiak and road system communities
Hoonah, Alaska
Project will be located at AVCP Housing campus in Bethel, AK. The beneficiaries will include
AVCP Housing and its 60-plus staff, new AVCP Housing regional headquarters, the 30-bed
AVCP Aviation Dormitory, 32-unit Bethel Low Rent Apartment Complex, 16-unit Lulu Heron
Assisted Living Facility, 20-bed Construction Worker Bunkhouse, AVCP RHA\'s Maintenance
Facility, Warehouse and Satellite Office Buildings.
Walker Lake is located approximately 30 miles inland on the Chilkat side of the peninsula that
separates the Chilkoot and Chilkat Rivers at the head of Lynn Canal. The service area includes
the Chilkat Valley from 10 Mile Haines Highway to the US-Canada border and Klukwan. These
two areas currently receive electric service from Inside Passage Electric Cooperative (IPEC).
The Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie will include an overhead transmission line on Annette Island
between Metlakatla and Walden Point and a submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel
between Walden Point on Annette Island and Mountain Point on Revillagigedo Island. The
Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie will provide benefits to both Ketchikan and Metlakatla, allowing
for significantly improved utilization of Metlakatla?s existing hydroelectric generating resources
while reducing diesel generation in Ketchikan.
Skagway, Alaska; Haines, Alaska; potentially other electric utilities in the area and region
The project is located on Sawmill Creek, formerly the Medvetche River, in the Borough of Sitka, Alaska. The project currently occupies a total of 1,676 acres of federal lands administered
by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (U.S. Forest Service), and under the City of Sitka?s proposal, it would occupy 1,798 acres of federal lands.
Hydaburg, Alaska on Prince of Wales Island
The communities of Eagle and Eagle Village will benefit from this project
Haines, Lutak, and Skagway
The project is located at the northern extent of the existing Cooper Lake project, approximately
4.5 miles south of Cooper Landing, Alaska. A map of the area is attached.
City of Egegik located on the King Salmon River approximately 330 miles SW of Anchorage
The village of Levelock located on the Kvichak River approximately 230 miles SW of Anchorage
The village of Igiugig located at the head of the Kvichak River approximately 210 miles SW of
Anchorage
The Mahoney Lake hydroelectric project is located in the Ketchikan Gateway Borough, approximately 5
miles northeast of Ketchikan, Alaska.
Petersburg, AK- Numerous locations in the city. School Buildings, Parks and Recreation
Facilities, Municipal buildings, etc.
Coffman Cove, Prince of Wales Island, Alaska
SEAPA hydro generation is
located at Tyee Lake and Swan Lake
Dimond Park Library is located at Dimond Park in the Mendenhall Valley, Juneau AK 99801.
The community of Juneau will benefit from this project.
Kotzebue Alaska
The project is located on Jack River approximately 3 miles southeast of Cantwell (MP
209.5 Parks Hwy).
Karluk, Alaska 99608
Nome, Alaska
Port Graham, AK
Eklutna, AK
Seward, AK
Alakanuk, AK
Three SE communities: Petersburg, Kake, Angoon
Igiugig, AK
Adak, AK
Igiugig, AK
Nikolski, AK
Kodiak, AK
King Cove, AK near Delta Creek Valley
Chitina, Alaska at Fivemile Creek
Kipnuk, AK
Nenana, AK
Fire Island to International Substation
Mentasta, AK
Tanacross, AK
Tanana, AK
St. Michael and Stebbins, AK
Emmonak and Alakanuk, AK
Upper Kalskag, AK
Gambell, AK
Chevak, AK
Goodnews Bay, AK
Shishmaref, AK
Mountain Village, AK
Shaktoolik, AK
Mekoryuk, AK
St. Mary?s, AK
East Foreland near Nikiski, AK
between Perryville and Port Moller, AK
Upper Tananacross Valley
Upper Tanacross Valley
Upper Tanacross Valley
Elim, AK
False Pass, AK
St. Michael, AK
Angoon, AK
Goodnews Bay, AK
Togiak, AK
Savoonga, AK
Shishmaref, AK
Old Kasigluk, AK
Klawock, AK
White Mountain
New Stuyahok, AK
Toksook Bay
Lower Kalskag, AK
Selawik, AK
Sleetmute, AK
Scammon Bay
Kotlik, AK
Noorvik, AK
Russian Mission, AK
Atmautlauk, AK
Golovin, AK
Kake, AK
Kobuk, AK
Nome, AK
Sutton, AK
Hunter Creek tributary to Knik River
Chignik Lagoon at Packer?s Creek
Ouzinkie, AK
Seward, AK
Moose Pass, AK
Kake, AK
Juneau, AK
Tazlina, AK
Chilkat Lake Road near Klukwan
Annette Island, AK
Angoon, AK
Wrangell, AK
Angoon, AK
Anaktuvuk Pass, AK
Tatitlek, AK
8 Interior AK Villages
Huslia, AK
Interior Alaska 8 communities
Cooper Landing, AK
Community of Gulkana, AK
Across from the city of Valdez, AK on Dayville Road
Prince Williams Sound south of Valdez, AK
Cannon Beach in Yakutat, AK
Copper River School District Glennallen Campus
Whitman Creek/Achilles Creek Watersheds
Seward, AK
Petersburg, AK
Ketchikan, AK
Ketchikan
Prince of Wales Island, AK
Haines, AK
Tok, AK
BBL Prince of Wales Island, AK
Mount Spurr
Pillar Mtn near Kodiak
Petersburg, AK
Jack River in Cantwell
West Creek near Dyea
Sitka, AK
Sitka, AK
Sitka, AK
Kwigillingok, AK
Tuntutuliak, AK
Chignik Lagoon, AK
Palmer, AK
Kipnuk, AK
Akiak, AK
Kongiganak, AK
Napakiak, AK
Anchorage, AK
Tenakee Springs, AK
Railbelt
Seward, AK
Elfin Cove
Glacier Fork, Knik River
Hunter Creek, AK
Port Graham, AK
Pelican, AK
Hoonah, AK
Port Heiden, AK
Napaskiak, AK
Koliganek, AK
Cook Inlet, AK
Chitina, AK
Igiugig, Iliamna, Kokhanok, Port Alsworth
Cold Bay, AK
Nelson Lagoon, AK
False Pass, AK
Akiak, AK
Sutton, AK
Homer, AK
Cooper Landing, AK
Atmautluak, AK
Juneau, AK
Angoon, AK
Angoon, AK
Akiachak, AK
Kobuk Valley, AK
Kotzebue, AK
Nikiski, AK
Tok, AK
Kwethluk, AK
Kasilof, AK
Gulkana, AK
Turnagain Arm, AK
Cook Inlet, AK
Homer, AK
Rural Alaska Communities
Seward, AK
Annette Island, AK
Annette Island, AK
Pilgrim Hot Springs, Alaska
Kodiak Island, AK
Mount Spurr, Alaska
Naknek, AK
Chefornak, AK
Kenny Lake, AK
Stebbins, AK
Selawik, AK
Scammon Bay, AK
St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point, AK
Old Harbor, AK
Marshall, AK
Koyuk, AK
Kaltag, AK
Elim, AK
Eek, AK
Eagle, AK
Alaska Communities
Thorne Bay, AK
Moose Pass, AK
Nikiski, AK
Dillingham, AK
Tenakee Inlet, AK
Tok, AK
Haines, AK
Prince of Wales Island, AK
Whale Pass, POW Island, AK
Haines, AK
Slana, AK
Haines, AK
Wrangell, AK
SVHS Mile 98 Parks Highway
Cordova, AK
Akutan, AK
Ketchikan, AK
Craig, AK
Silver Lake, AK
Tok, AK
Ferry, AK
Railbelt
NWAB communities
Wainwright, AK
Point Lay, AK
Point Hope, AK
Kaktovik, AK
Atqasuk, AK
Galena, AK
Lime Village, AK
Cantwell, AK
Craig, Alaska
Bethel, AK
Sitka, AK
Adak, AK
Valdez, AK
Bethel, AK
Angoon, AK
Ouzinkie, AK
Houstan, AK
Angoon, AK
Atka Island, AK
Kotzebue, AK
Angoon, AK
St. Marys, AK
New Stuyahok, AK
Scammon Bay, AK
Teller, AK
Kivalina, AK
Stebbins, Ak
Chistochena, AK
Delta Junction, AK
Cook Inlet
Adak, AK
Tatitlek, AK
Cook Inlet
Gulf Alaska Communities
St. Paul Island
Upper Cook Inlet
Tenakee Inlet
Kachekmak Bay, AK
Fairbanks, AK
Napaskiak, AK
Tuntutuliak, AK
Glennallen, AK
Hoonah, AK
Seward, AK
Glacier Fork
Sutton, AK
Cook Inlet
Chistochina, AK
Anchorage, AK
Port Graham, AK
Kwigillingok, AK
Pilot Point, AK
Thomas Bay, AK
Kongiganak, AK
Kipnuk, AK
Turnagain Arm
Upper Tanana Communities
Kenai Pennisula Communities
Upper Tanana Communities
Kodiak, AK
Anchorage, AK
Tanana, AK
Hunter Creek
Chignik Lagoon, AK
Hope, AK
Sutton, AK
Girdwood, AK
Akutan Island, AK
Akutan Island, AK
Fairbanks, AK
Fairbanks, AK
Pilgrim Hot Springs, AK
Ruby, AK
Bethel, AK
Yakutat, AK
Hoonah, AK
Ugashik, AK
Seward, AK
Kotzebue, AK
Nikiski, AK
Chena Hot Springs, AK
North Pole, AK
Chenega Bay, AK
Bristol Bay, AK
Seward, AK
Valdez, AK
Matanuska-Susitna Borough
Annette Island, AK
Metlakatla, AK
Saint Paul, AK
Tenakee Springs, AK
Elfin Cove, AK
Fort Yukon, AK
Melakatla, AK
Slana, AK
Hoonah, AK
Haines, AK
Prince of Wales Island, AK
Prince of Wales Island, AK
Tok, AK
Skagway, AK
Port Alsworth, AK
Dillingham, AK
Valdez, AK
Seldovia
Eagle River
Village of Tyonek
Thomas Bay, AK
Delta Junction, AK
Bethel, Eyak, Nenana, Nome & Fairbanks
Galena, AK
Ruby, AK & Galena, AK
Ketchikan, AK
City of Chefornak
Fairbanks, AK
Healy, AK
Fairbanks, AK
British Columbia Border
Wrangell, AK
Wrangell, AK
Wrangell, AK
Wrangell, AK
Delta Junction, AK
Wainwright, AK
Point Hope, AK
Point Lay, AK
Anchorage, AK
Craig, AK
Juneau, AK
Cordova, AK
Cordova, AK
Northwest Arctic Borough Schools
Sitka, AK
Galena, AK
Delta Junction
Cantwell
Kodiak Island
Delta Junction, AK
Native Village of Noatak
Village of Marshall
Statewide
Chignik Lake
Sand Point
Tatitlek
Adak
McGrath
Nenana
Tanacross
Tanana
Anchorage
Bethel
Statewide
Ambler
Sand Point
Skagway
Seward Peninsula
Shaktoolik
Emmonak-Alakanuk
Stebbins
New Stuyahok
Scammon Bay
St. Mary\'s
Teller
Hatcher Pass
Delia Creek
Sitka
Venetie
Chalkyitsik
McGrath
Chignik Lagoon
Eklutna
St. Paul
Tok
Slana
Delta
Kotzebue
Statewide
Homer, Seldovia, Port Graham
Tanana
Perryville
Port Alsworth
NWAB
Angoon
Ketchikan, Wrangell, Petersburg
Healy
Chenega Bay, Tatitick
Tuntutuliak
Akiak
Unalaska
Fairbanks
Whitestone
Fairbanks
Southeast, Southcentral,Statewide
Birch Creek
Igiugig
Yakutat
CSD Whittier, Chenega, Tatilek
YKSDAlakaket ,Hughes,Huslia,Kaltag,Kayukuk, Manley, Minta, Nulato,Ruby
Kaltag
Kaltag
Mountain Village
Pilgrim Hot Springs
Anchoragae
Statewide
Statewide
Moose Pass
Chena Hot Springs
Manley
Aleutians East Borough
Galena
Akutan
Akutan
Akutan
Atqasuk
Point Lay
Wainwright
Wainwright
North Pole/Salcha
Statewide
Anchorage
Pilot Point
Kotlik
Chitna
Kotzebue
Anchorage
Crooked Creek
Statewide
Elfin Cove
Delta Region
Seward
Wrangell
AK-BC SE AK to BC
Slana
Metlakatla
Haines
Whale Pass
Nikiski
Kake
Anchorage
Kipnuk
Cordova
Cordova
Baranof Island Little Port Walter
Kodiak
Sitka
Cantwell
Akiachak
Thorne Bay
Calista Region
Kasaan
Coffman Cove
Valdez
Ketchikan
Nome
Grant Lake
Northeast of City of Petersburg
Bethel, AK
Ambler, AK
Napaskiak, AK
Delta Junction
Juneau\'s Mendenhall Valley
Kongiganak, AK
Eva Creek near Ferry, AK
Denali Education Center
Kongiganak
Nome, AK
North Pole Expansion Plant
Prince of Whales Island, AK
Kodiak, AK
Delta Junction, AK
Ketchikan, AK
Nikiski on the Kenai Penisula
Tanana River by Nenana
Crooked Creek, AK
Unalaska
Village of Nikolaevsk, Southern Kenai Peninsula
Alaska Regional Landfill / Eagle River
Little Susitna River
Village of Napaimute
St George
Umnak Island
Statewide
Fishhook Creek in Hatcher Pass
Seward
Kotzebue
Yukon River
Kotzebue
Juneau, AK
To Be Determined
Palmer, AK
Girdwood, AK
Shungnak, AK
Noatak, AK
Ambler, AK
Upper Kobuk Valley, Alaska - Ambler, Shungnak, Kobuk, Kiana
Old Harbor, AK
Mekoryuk, AK
Toksook Bay, AK
Quinhagak, AK
Anchorage Regional Landfill
Bethel, Ak
Coal Mine Rd , south of Delta Junction
Tenakee
Pedro Bay, Newhalen/Ilimna, Nondalton, Port Alsworth, Egegik, port Heiden and Pilot Point
Pedro Bay, Newhalen/Ilimna, Nondalton, Kokhanok and Port Alsworth
Chignik bay, Chignik Lagoon and Chignik lake
Mcgrath, Ak
Yakutat, AK
Upper Kobuk River Valley
Atka
Eagle River, AK
Buckland, Deering and Noorvik
Snake Mountain
Galena
North Pole
Nome. AK
Mt. Alice Harbor
Unalakleet, AK
Tok
Whittier
Nome
Kenny Lake
Anchorage
Whittier
Palmer
Skagway
Haines Borough
Chignik
Delta Junction
City of Petersburg
Revillagigedo Island near Ketchikan
Statewide
Hooper Bay, AK
Moose Pass, AK
Haines
Statewide
Fort Yukon, AK
McGrath, AK
Kake - Petersburg
City of Hoonah
Near Valdez, AK
Cordova
Haines
Yerrick Creek
North Prince of Wales Island
Orca Plant/ Cordova
Humpback Creek
Between Metlakatla and Ketchikan
Icy Passage/Icy Straits near Gustavus,Angoon,Wrangell Narrows, central Cook Inlet
Pike\'s Ridge site in King Salmon
Jack River
Redoubt or Spur
Chistochina, AK
Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon, AK
Ketchikan, AK
Juneau, AK
Cold Bay, False Pass, Nelson Lagoon, AK
Gustavus, AK
Wrangell, AK
Anchorage, AK
Bristol Bay
Lake Elva
Fairbanks
Matanuska-Susitna Borough
Anchorage
Gulkana Village
Takatz Lake
Project Latitude
59.328889
65.741918
58.1989
57.785776
60.572401
56.29528
57.122962
51.843106
56.9708
60.544699
60.1244
65.152812
-133.947222
57.925879
64.933871
55.340103
59.525833
61.843879
65.610613
62.90554
70.48122
70.132607
66.838394
61.224703
61.59
58.10028
61.582261
60.461317
62.08556
66.25667
60.7922
57.197222
55.069129
54.85394
55.319642
55.553311
66.880226
65.701462
60.2187
67.086437
66.964444
57.047394
-149.910688
55.347579
55.352793
63.379197
54.85394
56.097806
63.1513
55.457222
57.608333
53.846484
58.99567
60.0657
59.348592
55.340669
51.879532
58.110181
57.788
58.19
55.069129
70.198287
66.8
66.83201
60.219142
63.876925
60.202524
57.196697
51.879702
60.101173
61.843879
55.687638
60.460926
64.8378
56.977
55.34517
66.604053
55.352793
60.15907
57.925879
70.48122
70.132607
55.125514
59.868038
66.897263
65.610613
55.204971
62.198619
63.01347
59.328601
54.85394
65.701462
67.086437
62.90554
61.588635
64.933871
63.379197
66.886238
60.7922
59.12
62.03278
55.555
57.496
66.838394
60.572401
62.030702
55.488697
56.097806
55.416653
63.1513
56.18906
57.049259
57.3537
58.99567
56.97724
60.15907
60.371787
61.257
55.069129
60.44611
61.17417
54.52443
59.72861
61.42697
63.223078
67.084985
61.19673
60.343042
59.95993
59.32688
59.872222
55.2043
62.03278
63.51722
62.0856
61.87778
57.165
60.0657
59.75459
54.85394
62.779254
62.198707
66.5752
67.572031
60.826028
51.8439
60.099943
60.695536
59.559038
62.515487
63.327019
58.732329
70.4812
70.132607
64.741678
60.19806
62.90554
67.016009
62.051472
60.371787
61.527769
65.330894
60.7922
66.897212
55.35588
56.1827
57.5924
55.127
57.11252
65.14712
59.438063
57.782
63.21
63.57
63.186
52.1157
56.58
59.395144
55.35662
56.18906
59.141224
58.25
55.5641
56.174
55.68784
55.20719
61.055388
62.030702
57.025062
57.025062
57.049543
55.291931
64.564075
61.528424
58.377756
58.72833
60.371787
57.556361
55.416653
64.156278
66.895127
67.589961
56.965256
62.93155
65.173056
58.732329
61.169528
57.788
63.57
59.79833
61.433333
56.0981271
64.7
60.907167
62.05079
59.93889
55.999489
54.85394
55.204694
59.4416
59.2338
58.416667
53.907574
58.98139
52.207002
60.722092
64.82569
56.461753
66.25667
59.11889
61.93889
62.08556
66.8086111
67.0063889
63.52222
61.785
63.03417
65.60917
61.87778
66.88806
62.03278
59.45278
64.713889
60.371787
66.839487
61.878974
63.52222
57.99
59.75148
61.574708
60.86694
63.69417
66.56692
66.04889
64.564075
61.055388
55.069129
57.92361
64.741678
63.175433
63.334806
60.127554
57.7934954
58.084479
60.804019
59.39529
55.12959
59.525833
57.065378
55.2080556
64.783544
59.4235727
60.427
58.21556
59.11417
59.32778
55.4211134
59.904488
56.815274
56.0037
56.18906
58.376946
66.895127
63.3441449
57.556361
60.78
67.08
60.7
64.03
58.3
59.87
63.85
63.655489
59.85
64.5
64.75
55.2
57.788611
64.03
55.33
60.73
64.57
61.87
53.886389
59.83
61.32
61.53
56.6
52.93
61.22
61.6
60.12
66.9
64.75
66.9
58.3
61.6
60.93
66.87
67.57
67.08
66.92
57.2
60.38
60.52
59.75
61.22
60.78
64.03
57.77
59.78
59.78
56.23
62.95
59.55
66.92
52.191111
61.32
65.98
58.97
64.73
64.75
64.5
60.12
63.87
63.33
60.77
64.5
61.72
61.22
60.77
61.6
59.45
59.23
56.3
64.03
56.991389
55.333333
61.6
61.52
60.488889
59.23
64.83
66.57
62.95
56.97
58.1
61.12
60.55
59.23
63.395278
56.02
60.55
60.6125
55.12
58.4
58.72
63.38
61.3
62.57
56.33
55.33
58.3
55.2
58.4
56.47
61.22
58.72
59.611389
64.83
61.6
61.22
62.27
57.136833
Project Longitude
155.885278
-144.225858
-136.3553
-135.193628
-145.699744
-158.40222
-170.279317
-176.670155
-133.9339
-145.757525
-149.4333
-149.337219
56.975833
-152.502766
-161.156731
-160.489627
-135.4125
-165.581303
-168.087044
-160.066681
-157.42
-143.623838
-162.555569
-149.879283
-149.4525
-135.397327
-144.436483
-149.337272
-163.72944
-166.07194
-161.7558
-153.307778
-162.313385
-163.40883
-131.595161
-133.099242
-157.168627
-156.389489
-162.0259
-157.856047
-156.73
-135.355222
61.168823
-131.641339
-131.67743
-143.602086
-163.40883
-133.138525
-143.198217
-133.030833
-153.002778
-166.56318
-159.002809
-148.0104
-151.829739
-160.49567
-176.65675
-135.442792
-135.193
-136.35
-162.313385
-148.460364
-160.8
-161.047705
-162.024822
-160.791306
-154.314218
-170.258443
-176.658398
-149.449241
-165.581303
-132.526403
-149.336959
-147.7164
-133.947
-131.637603
-160.012811
-131.67743
-164.269437
-152.502766
-157.42
-143.623838
-131.577267
-163.159663
-162.592764
-168.087044
-132.822037
-159.770336
-154.375076
-155.903146
-163.40883
-156.389489
-157.856047
-160.066681
-144.434915
-161.156731
-143.602086
-157.137787
-161.7558
-161.59
-163.28778
-133.095
-133.947
-162.5555561
-145.699744
-145.253895
-133.128597
-133.138525
-131.529814
-143.198217
-131.48126
-135.356066
-153.059
-159.002809
-133.945663
-164.269437
-162.658081
-149.73
-162.313385
-149.84944
-149.99611
-163.24646
-157.28444
-148.54249
-143.361815
-157.8632
-145.552136
-162.663078
-162.893479
-155.892706
-163.166111
-160.2921
-163.28778
-162.28444
-163.7294
-162.08111
-153.33
-148.0104
-154.87231
-163.40883
-164.550176
-159.770908
-156.4348
-162.975085
-164.487494
-176.677548
-149.441035
-161.982822
-139.749895
-164.877377
-142.994328
-157.004415
-157.42
-143.623838
-156.956306
-154.34194
-160.066681
-146.421061
-163.175812
-162.658081
-165.586624
-166.487846
-161.7558
-162.592725
-131.713607
-158.3136
-135.562
-131.576
-135.39277
-149.36631
-151.710884
-152.436
-148.49
-148.81
-142.553
-174.9248
-133.56
-136.144681
-131.6733
-131.48126
-135.264226
-135.2634
-133.4316
-158.2414
-132.53246
-132.82783
-146.348126
-145.253895
-135.20554
-135.211882
-135.334893
-133.74295
-149.091442
-165.586452
-134.588592
-157.01389
-162.658081
-154.447639
-131.529814
-145.861078
-162.599894
-163.133906
-133.925683
-143.79273
-152.1
-157.004415
-149.91124
-135.193
-148.81
-154.1575
-149.45
-133.1398627
-162.467
-161.105283
-145.43588
-164.04139
-161.207267
-163.40883
-162.718386
-154.75514
-135.447009
-135.442778
-166.930389
-159.05833
-174.201729
-151.413974
-147.532489
-132.379074
-166.07194
-161.5875
-162.875
-163.72944
-160.6894444
-157.0566667
-162.28806
-161.32028
-163.55333
-168.0875
-162.08111
-157.13639
-163.28778
-157.31194
-147.138056
-162.658081
-161.032963
-162.081642
-162.28806
-135.938889
-161.90188
-159.24408
-162.26306
-170.47889
-152.66639
-154.25556
-149.091442
-146.348126
-162.313385
-152.50222
-156.956306
-143.258972
-142.964639
-149.443803
-152.393707
-135.381367
-161.790939
-136.14536
-131.57496
-135.4125
-135.198442
-132.8266667
-141.204028
-135.664053
-149.865
-157.37583
-156.85889
-155.89472
-131.5237029
-154.692138
-132.953314
-132.4836
-131.48126
-134.589901
-162.599894
-148.7814559
-154.447639
-161.75
-157.87
-161.9
-145.73
-134.4
-163.03
-148.97
-148.834642
-163.13
-165.42
-147.35
-132.82
-152.435556
-145.73
-131.63
-151.32
-149.08
-158.1
-166.931111
-151.58
-149.57
-158.68
-169.53
-168.85
-149.88
-149.1
-149.43
-162.58
-155.5
-162.58
-134.4
-149.1
-149.17
-157.15
-162.97
-157.87
-156.87
-153.3
-166.18
-165.1
-161.9
-149.88
-161.75
-145.73
-135.22
-154.1
-154.1
-158.78
-155.58
-139.73
-156.87
174.193611
-149.57
-161.13
-159.05
-156.93
-147.35
-165.42
-149.43
-160.78
-142.98
-148.68
-165.42
-144.93
-149.88
-148.68
-149.1
-135.3
-135.43
-158.4
-145.73
-132.731389
-131.53
-149.1
-166.08
-149.306389
-135.43
-147.72
-145.27
-155.58
-133.93
-135.43
-146.27
-145.75
-135.43
-143.55
-132.83
-145.75
-145.682222
-131.57
-135.73
-157
-148.93
-152.25
-144.67
-158.48
-131.63
-134.4
-162.7
-135.73
-132.37
-149.88
-157
-159.135556
-147.72
-149.1
-149.88
-145.38
-134.867833
Election District
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
O-29 North Kenai
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
Q-33 Downtown Juneau/Douglas/Haines/Skagway
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
L-23 Taku
D-7 Greater Wasilla
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
P-31 Homer/South Kenai
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
T-40 Arctic
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
M-25 Abbot
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
P-31 Homer/South Kenai
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
L-23 Taku
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
P-31 Homer/South Kenai
A-1 Downtown Fairbanks
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
T-40 Arctic
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
T-40 Arctic
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
T-40 Arctic
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
T-40 Arctic
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
S-38 Lower Kuskokwim
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
T-39 Bering Straits/Yukon Delta
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
T-40 Arctic
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
C-6 Eielson/Denali/Upper Yukon/Border
R-36 Ketchikan/Wrangell/Metlakatla/Hydaburg
R-35 Sitka/Petersburg
P-32 Kodiak/Cordova/Seldovia
S-37 Bristol Bay/Aleutians/Upper Kuskokwim
Q-34 Southeast Island
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
M-26 Eagle River Valley
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
N-28 North Kenai
K-22 Taku
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
C-06 Richardson Highway
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
T-40 Arctic
C-06 Richardson Highway
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
R-35 Kodiak/Cordova
R-35 Kodiak/Cordova
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamn
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamn
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
N-28 North Kenai
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
R-35 Kodiak/Cordova
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
T-40 Arctic
T-40 Arctic
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamn
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
S-37 Bethel/Aleutian
T-40 Arctic
Q-34 Southeast Island
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-34 Southeast Island
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
O-30 Homer/South Kenai
R-35 Kodiak/Cordova
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
S-37 Bethel/Aleutian
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-33 Ketchikan/Wrangell
Q-33 Ketchikan/Wrangell
Q-34 Southeast Island
P-32 Downtown Juneau
Q-33 Ketchikan/Wrangell
S-37 Bethel/Aleutians
Q-33 Ketchikan/Wrangell
Q-34 Southeast Island
C-06 Richardson Highway
T-39 Bering Straits/Interior Villages
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-34 Southeast Island
Q-34 Southeast Islands
S-38 Wade Hampton/McKinley
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
P-31 Mendenhall Valley
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
R-36 Dillingham/Illiamna
R-35 Kodiak/Cordova
Q-33 Ketchikan/Wrangell
C-06 Richardson Highway
T-40 Arctic
T ? Arctic
Q ? Southeast Islands
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
K ? Taku
P ? Downtown Juneau/ Skagway/Petersburg
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
M ? Eagle River Valley
Q ? Ketchikan/Wrangell
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
P ? Downtown Juneau/ Skagway/Petersburg
P ? Downtown Juneau/ Skagway/Petersburg
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
N ? North Kenai
A - North Pole/ Eielson
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
T ? Arctic
T ? Arctic
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
T ? Arctic
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
A - North Pole/Eielson
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
T ? Arctic
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
Q ? Southeast Islands
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
S - Wade Hampton/ McKinley
C ? Richardson Highway
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
R - Kodiak/Cordova
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
N ? North Kenai
R - Kodiak/Cordova
Q ? Southeast Islands
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
Q ? Southeast Islands
Q ? Ketchikan/Wrangell
P ? Downtown Juneau/ Skagway/Petersburg
Q ? Southeast Islands
Q ? Southeast Islands
T ? Bering Straits/ Interior Villages
P ? Downtown Juneau/
Skagway/Petersburg
N ? North Kenai
S ? Bethel/Aleutians
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
Q ? Ketchikan/ Wrangell
R ? Dillingham/ Illiamna
P ? Downtown Juneau/ Skagway/ Petersburg
Q ? Ketchikan/ Wrangell
Q ? Ketchikan/ Wrangell
P ? Mendenhall Valley
T ? Arctic
S - Wade Hampton/McKinley
R- Kodiak/Cordova
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
13, Greater Palmer
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
15, Rural Mat-Su
35, Homer-Seward
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
16, Chugiak-South Mat-Su
16, Chugiak-South Mat-Su
35, Homer-Seward
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
38, Bethel
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
35, Homer-Seward
6, Interior Villages
36, Kodiak
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
37, Bristol Bay - Aleutians
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
38, Bethel
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
35, Homer-Seward
35, Homer-Seward
38, Bethel
3, Juneau-Downtown-Douglas
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
38, Bethel
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
34, Rural Kenai
6, Interior Villages
38, Bethel
34, Rural Kenai
6, Interior Villages
34, Rural Kenai
35, Homer-Seward
35, Homer-Seward
6, Interior Villages
35, Homer-Seward
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
39, Bering Straits
36, Kodiak
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
38, Bethel
6, Interior Villages
39, Bering Straits
40, Arctic
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
36, Kodiak
6, Interior Villages
39, Bering Straits
6, Interior Villages
39, Bering Straits
38, Bethel
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
1, Ketchikan
35, Homer-Seward
34, Rurak Kenai
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
6, Interior Villages
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
6, Interior Villages
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
15, Rural Mat-Su
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
1, Ketchikan
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
34, Rural Kenai
6, Interior Villages
8, Denali-University
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
8, Denali-University
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
38, Bethel
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
38, Bethel
40, Arctic
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
38, Bethel
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
40, Arctic
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
35, Homer-Seward
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
15, Rural Mat-Su
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
16, Chugiak-South Mat-Su
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
40, Arctic
9, City of Fairbanks
35, Homer-Seward
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
36, Kodiak
40, Arctic
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
1, Ketchikan
8, Denali-University
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
9, City of Fairbanks
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
9, City of Fairbanks
3, Juneau-Downtown-Douglas
6, Interior Villages
36, Kodiak
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
32, Chugach State Park
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
9, City of Fairbanks
7, Farmers Loop-Steese Highway
35, Homer-Seward
7, Farmers Loop-Steese Highway
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
11, North Pole
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
39, Bering Straits
6, Interior Villages
40, Arctic
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
35, Homer-Seward
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
6, Interior Villages
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
34, Rural Kenai
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
38, Bethel
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
36, Kodiak
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
8, Denali-University
38, Bethel
1, Ketchikan
38, Bethel
1, Ketchikan
1, Ketchikan
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
1, Ketchikan
39, Bering Straits
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
38, Bethel
40, Arctic
38, Bethel
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
3, Juneau-Downtown-Douglas
38, Bethel
8, Denali-University
8, Denali-University
38, Bethel
39, Bering Straits
11, North Pole
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
36, Kodiak
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
1, Ketchikan
34, Rural Kenai
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
34, Rural Kenai
17, Eagle River
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
13, Greater Palmer
35, Homer-Seward
40, Arctic
6, Interior Villages
40, Arctic
3, Juneau-Downtown-Douglas
32, Chugach State Park
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
40, Arctic
36, Kodiak
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
38, Bethel
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
38, Bethel
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
36, Kodiak
36, Kodiak
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
6, Interior Villages
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
40, Arctic
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
17, Eagle River
40, Arctic
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
6, Interior Villages
11, North Pole
39, Bering Straits
39, Bering Straits
6, Interior Villages
32, Chugach State Park
39, Bering Straits
6, Interior Villages
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
1, Ketchikan
13, Greater Palmer
39, Bering Straits
35, Homer-Seward
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
12, Richardson-Glenn Highways
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
6, Interior Villages
1, Ketchikan
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
6, Interior Villages
6, Interior Villages
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
1, Ketchikan
3, Juneau-Downtown-Douglas
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
5, Cordova-Southeast Islands
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
37, Bristol Bay-Aleutians
9, City of Fairbanks
13, Greater Palmer
23, Downtown-Rogers Park
6, Interior Villages
2, Sitka-Wrangell-Petersburg
Project Description
Igiugig Village Council (IVC) requests Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) funding through the Renewable Energy Fund Round IX program (RFA 16012) in the amount of $1,490,077 for the Igiugig
RivGen Power System Commercial Project (Project), which includes Phase III Final Design and Permitting and Phase IV Construction of a 20-kilowatt RivGen Power System by ORPC Alaska,
LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company (collectively ORPC). As a remote village that has extremely high energy costs and relies on diesel fuel to meet electricity
and heating needs, IVC seeks to lower energy costs by utilizing the Kvichak River as a local, clean, renewable energy source. This Project will be the first commercial installation
of a hydrokinetic power system of any type in the state of Alaska. The Project follows IVCs successful completion of previous project phases funded by AEA, i.e., Phase I Reconnaissance
and Phase II Feasibility and Conceptual Design. The Project also follows ORPCs successful demonstration of the RivGen Power System, which generated electricity from the Kvichak River
in August 2014, and of the optimized system, which provided over 2 MWh of clean power to Igiugigs local grid during the 2015 demonstration, also funded in part by AEA. On April 1, 2015,
IVC submitted a draft Federal Energy Regulatory Commission pilot license application. The proposed REF project works synergistically with a proposal submitted to the US Department of
Energy in July 2015 (EE1310-1517), which will provide matching construction funds.
Solar power feasibility for the community of Circle including resource assessment, integration and interconnection studies, and cost and preliminary design for a 100 kW solar array.
The proposed project is a 35 kW run-of-river upper project with a 105 kW storage lower project for a total installed capacity of 140 kW, based on updated hydrology and utility loan data
reported in a January 2014 sizing analysis.
The project will include a run-of-river hydroelectric plant between Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake (upper project) and a storage hydroelectric project between Jim's Lake and tidewater
(lower project). The recommended project is estimated to displace 89% of the annual diesel fuel consumed by the electric utility generators.
The proposed project is construction of a 180 kW new run of river hydro on Indian River serving the community of Tenakee Springs utilizing 50 cfs and 65 ft of head to generate approximately
680 MWhs of energy and displace 350 MWhs of diesel energy (34,000 gallons of fuel, 95% of current diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $5.5 million with
a projected start date of 2017. Proposed project features include a diversion structure with integrated fish ladder, 1,700 feet of 36 inch diameter penstock, a single crossflow turbine,
and 4,300 ft transmission line.
At least an additional 6,500 gallons of fuel oil can be displaced by heating public buildings (community building and school) with excess energy from the hydro project.
Design of a new 500 kW storage hydro at Crater Lake serving the community of Cordova utilizing 5 cfs and 1440 ft of head and 790 acre ft of storage to generate approximately 2,260 MWhs
of energy and displace 2,000 MWhs of diesel energy (145,000 gallons of fuel, 25% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $17.3 million with a projected
start date of 2020. Proposed project features include a low height high dam, 3,500 feet of 16 inch diameter penstock, and a single pelton turbine.
Crater Lake is a perched lake located directly above existing City of Cordova chlorinator building and water supply line, and a CEC transmission line from the Humpback Creek Hydroelectric
Project to Cordova. In addition to providing improved generation, in part from storage capability (Cordova’s first water storage project), the project is expected to improve water
supply to the City of Cordova.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough applied on behalf of the City of Chignik for the design and permitting of a reconfigured and new 385 kW storage hydro on Indian Creek serving the community
of Chignik Bay utilizing 18 cfs and 380 ft of head and 200 acre ft of storage to generate approximately 2,140 MWh of energy and displacing 900 MWh of diesel energy (64,000 gallons of
fuel, 95% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $8 million with a projected start date of 2020. Proposed project features include a 25 foot high
dam, 7280 feet of 24 inch diameter penstock, a single pelton or turgo turbine, 9170 ft of access road, and 1,600 ft of transmission line.
The City, Tribal Council, Borough, CE2 Engineers, and the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium are in a collaborative venture to manage the project successfully with ANTHC taking the
lead on project management. Through this project the City will see enhancements in the areas of water supply delivery, elimination of the diversion of 2 cfs from the anadramous habitat
due to the existing project which would be decommissioned, reduced dependence on fossil fuels, and reduced maintenance of electric generation infrastructure. The City of Chignik is
already a FERC license holder for the hydroelectric project which can significantly reduce the permitting timeline.
St. Paul has a goal of 80% local renewable energy generation for electric, heat and transportation. TDX owns and operates three 225 kW wind turbines that provide wholesale power the
City of St. Paul Utility as well as the TDX owned and operated St. Paul Airport. However, most of the electric power on the island is still generated with diesel. TDX is committed to
establishing a sustainable source of energy that makes the island essentially independent of imported energy. In order to achieve this, TDX proposes to install additional renewable
energy sources such as wind and solar to increase renewable generation. On the demand side TDX proposes to promote, facilitate and install energy savings efficiency measures and technology
that takes advantage of excess renewable energy to heat space and water. To initiate the project, TDX proposes a detailed feasibility study to assess the current situation and identify
the most cost effective path to achieve the declared goal.
Feasibility, design, and construction of a 75-90 kW power recovery turbine on a water supply line serving the community of Adak utilizing 3-3.5 cfs and 440 ft of head to generate approximately
330-760 MWh of energy and displace 330-760 MWh of diesel energy (25-54k gallons of fuel, 17-38 % of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $1.75
million with a projected start date of 2020. Proposed project features include an unspecified turbine type in place of a pressure reducing valve.
Adak has high mountains with good snow cover that provide a water resource for hydropower. Currently the pipe line infrastructure is owned by the City of Adak. TDX Adak Generating (TAG)
will work with the City on the design, final configuration approvals, construction and operation. A Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study by HATCH (dated 2/16/2013, AEA REF grant 2195450)
provided the basis for assessing the hydro power potential. An existing 10" ductile iron pipe from Lake Bonnie Rose to a pressure reducing station, originally used to provide potable
water to the now closed military base, will be used as a penstock to keep the construction cost low. The turbine house location will be at the existing PRV station. The estimated power
production is 89 kW.
Construction of a 500 kW hydro addition to a water supply dam on Gunnuk Creek serving the community of Kake utilizing 130 cfs and 69 ft of head to displace 1,620 MWh of diesel energy
(115,000 gallons of fuel, 55% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $5.7 million with a projected start date of 2018. Proposed project features
include 2,100 feet of 54 inch diameter penstock and a single crossflow or francis turbine.
IPEC proposes to expand and rehabilitate the existing 7kW hydro project that makes use of the existing water supply dam and hatchery facilities at Gunnuk Creek in Kake, Alaska. Costs
and construction risks are minimized because the dam and intake facility have already been constructed, and no new transmission lines or access roads are required.
Cordova Electric Cooperative’s hydroelectric power plants are both run of the river and have no capacity to store energy. When 100% of the load is met with hydro, excess water is spilled
and used for spinning reserve. This situation occurs for substantial amounts of time for over half the year. Backup diesel power plant must also be kept warm to keep the generators
on standby; diesel-fired heaters are used for this purpose. The proposed REF project will: 1) Assess in detail the frequency, amplitude and duration of availability of excess hydropower,
2) Develop economic assessments, and RFP-quality specifications for controlled electrothermal system, implementation at the diesel power plant and the local pool to supplement and displace
diesel fuel-based heating systems, 3) Develop economic assessments, and RFP-quality specifications for efficiency upgrades of the cooling systems at the Orca Power Plant, and 4) Provide
an assessment of total potential for demand managed electro-thermal systems to maximize hydropower utilization economically.A preliminary study concluded in 2015 that 4,500-10,500 gallons
of diesel could potentially be saved annually by managing the loads via electrical heating of the CEC diesel power plant, electrical heating of the pool, and adding heat storage to
the system.
Design and construction of a ground source heat pump system to displace approximately 96% of the heating oil usage of four existing City buildings and one future building. A field of
sixteen vertical boreholes, 6†diameter x 300 ft depth, will be drilled on City land adjacent to the existing waterfront bike path. Vertical double u-bend 1†HDPE loops will be
installed in each of these boreholes. A single u-bend loop will be installed in the existing 300 ft deep test hole. The vertical loops will be charged with a 20% methanol and 80% water
heat transfer fluid. The loops will serve as 50 year design life underground heat exchanger, warmed by the ocean tides of Resurrection Bay. The vertical loops will connect via a reverse
return manifold to buried insulated supply and return trunk mains that will deliver ground heat to the four City buildings via loop pumps. A pair of blank tees will be provided on the
trunk mains to allow connection of the new year round Adams Street Shower House to be built in the fall of 2016. Four high efficiency water to water heat pumps, one buffer tank, and
loop pumps will be installed in the existing mechanical rooms of the Library and City Hall. One buffer tank will be installed in the Annex and the Fire Hall. One existing heating oil
boiler will remain in each building to serve as a standby and lag boiler. On the load (hot) side of the heat pumps, buffer tanks will be heated from 125F to 145F, these will in turn
supply heat to existing hydronic space heating and domestic hot water systems in the buildings. The total quantity of #1 heating oil anticipated to be displaced annually is 20,020 gallons,
which equates to 2,146 MMBTU.
Minto Development Corporation submitted an application for $22,748.80 to partially fund the feasibility study, conceptual and final design, and construction of a $56,872, 10.8kW solar
photovoltaic system in Minto. The original application requested $140,000 to assist in the purchase and installation of a 100.4 kW photovoltaic solar energy system. After the grant
application deadline, the applicant approached AVEC (the local utility) regarding interconnection standards. AVEC agreed to allow a 10kW solar PV system to be intertied, so the applicant
reduced the scope to a 10kW system.
Feasibility, design, and construction of solar panels on Kake community building and liquor store to reduce electricity costs.
Design and construction of 150 kW replacement storage hydro on Spruce Island serving the community of Ouzinkie utilizing 9 cfs and 230 ft of head and 183 acre ft of storage to approximately
generate 475 MWh of energy and displacing 475 MWh of diesel energy (36,000 gallons of fuel, 55% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $4.6 million
with a projected start date of 2018 for the reconstructed project. Reconstructed project features include a 17 foot high dam (recently completed), 5,100 feet of 24 inch diameter penstock,
and a single turgo or crossflow turbine.
Ouzinkie currently operates a makeshift hydroelectric operation that has served the village for many years. However, the dam failed in the fall of 2013 even while a new project was being
planned to replace the dam. The proposed project in Ouzinkie will work to install new hydroelectric capacity in conjunction with the recent new dam construction. A new Ossberger 150
KW hydroelectric turbine will be installed to maximize electrical generation in the community. The turbine is to operate efficiently at flow rates from 2 cfs to 10 cfs.
The proposed project will take recovered heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant and use it to offset the heating oil consumption in City of Koyuk’s
Water Treatment Plant and Washeteria. The estimated fuel savings from this heat recovery system is projected to be 11,971 gallons of heating oil per year.
Sand Point Generating LLC (SPG) proposes a high penetration wind diesel operation for the City of Sand Point. The proposed system will utilize a high speed low load generator. This unit
can run at 10% of its 600KW rating continuously. The power converter, which is integral to the Innovus IP MVS 600 variable speed generator proposed, can operate even when its diesel
engine is turned off. Ultra-capacitors on the DC Bus provide short term electrical storage to facilitate load pick up and diesel starting sequence. The IP MVS 600 power converter and
ultracapacitor energy storage can and will be used to maintain the frequency and voltage of the wind turbines, allowing (during steady wind) the Utility to power City loads with only
wind power (diesels off).
The Municipality of Skagway (MOS) proposes to construct the West Creek Hydroelectric Project located approximately 7 miles west of Skagway and adjacent to the small community of Dyea.
The primary purpose of the Project would be offsetting diesel generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway during the months of May through September each year. A secondary purpose
of the Project is to provide winter energy to the local utility when they have a shortfall of hydro energy from their hydroelectric projects (Dewey Lakes Hydro, Lutak Hydro, Goat Lake
Hydro, Kasidaya Creek Hydro) as well as to sell winter energy to other utilities in the area.
Feasibility and design of a 190 kW new run of river hydro on Hillside Creek serving the community of Scammon Bay utilizing 6 cfs and 480 ft of head to generate approximately 756 MWh
of energy and displacing 646 MWh of diesel energy (48,000 gallons of fuel, 38% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $4.3 million with a projected
start date of 2021. Proposed project features include a 6 foot high diversion structure, 4300 feet of 16 inch diameter penstock, a single pelton turbine, and 4300 feet of access road.
In 2013, AEA provided funding to the City of Scammon Bay through the Renewable Energy Fund for initial planning and feasibility analysis of hydroelectric potential. This initial study
was completed in 2014 and identified the best locations for hydroelectricity development in Scammon Bay, which had a variety of creeks available for development. The most promising
site, located 12 miles to the west of town, located on Ekashluak creek was found to have a significant salmon population, and the community of Scammon Bay was not interested in developing
the location. The small creek running through town, Hillside Creek, was found to be an economic and low impact run-of-river hydro alternative opportunity. The project will also would
improve and stabilize access to clean water for the water treatment plant.
In order to secure permitting and allow for a design that maximizes the potential of the resource, three years of stream gauging is recommended. This phase will fund survey and 35% design.
The proposed project will take recovered heat from the existing Wales power plant and use it to heat the City of Wales’ water system via a buried heating connection to the washeteria
and water treatment plant. The estimated fuel savings to save the washeteria and water treatment plant is 9,726 gallons of heating oil per year.
The proposed project will take recovered heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant and use it to heat the City of Grayling’s water system, via a
connection into the water treatment plant glycol loop prior to the boilers. The estimated fuel savings from this heat recovery system is projected to save the water treatment plant
6,518 gallons of heating oil per year.
This phase of the Barrow to Atqasuk Transmission Line Project is for final design and permitting required for the construction of the transmission line and conversion of homes and buildings
in Atqasuk to electric space heating.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions an area-wide energy production and management system consisting of integrated wind-diesel generation, end-use energy efficiency, automated building
controls, and conservation. The proposed project is the design and permitting phase of a three-phase project which will include construction and commissioning of three wind turbines
to supplement the existing power generation and distribution system for the community of Kaktovik.
Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA) has applied for a $384,730 grant to fund a $449,178 100kW solar photovoltaic project at the electric utility's wind energy site. Solar PV panels provide
little energy in the arctic during the winter but there is a solar resource during the shoulder seasons and Kotzebue experiences 35 days of constant daylight during the summer. The
applicant states that recent declines in prices for PV panels mean that there is sufficient power produced during the spring, summer and early fall months to justify the cost of installing
a solar array in Kotzebue. Using NREL’s September 2014 release of PV Watts’s photovoltaic modeling software, an optimized estimate of the useful power that would be produced by
a solar array was prepared. KEA has successfully worked with piling systems on its wind site since 1996 using both standard and freeze-back pilings to install wind turbines. KEA’s
significant experience with foundations on the site will allow the use of a piling system to be used for a solar installation which will reduce design costs. The site has had three
extensive geophysical surveys that will be relied upon to assist in the foundation design and help minimize costs. Inverters can be installed in the existing wind farm structures.
Knik Arm Power Plant (KAPP) provided heat and power from 1952 until it was decommissioned in 1985. Over the last decade, there have been numerous attempts to reopen energy operations
at KAPP. The proposed project intends to demonstrate 400 kWe from recycled construction and demolition cellulose biomass waste at a levelized cost of $0.05 per kWh. Power would be sold
to the Alaska Railroad Corporation, Anchorage Municipal Light & Power or Chugach Electric Association. Additional benefits are an increase in recycling of construction and demolition
cellulose from 75% to 90%. Other benefits stated in the application include distributed generation benefits to utilities and diversion of 1,000 tons from Alaska landfills.
This grant application requests $140,000 to assist in the purchase and installation of a 100.4 kW Photovoltaic Solar Energy System to supply a portion of the energy needs at the Point
Mackenzie Correctional Farm (PMCF). It is estimated that this size PV system may produce 92,973 kWh annually. The stated goal of the project is to install a 100.4 kW Solar Energy System
that will produce an estimated $64,153 in electricity annually to contribute a portion of PMCF's electrical supply needs.
The proposed project involves the development of a waste-to-energy facility that will use the process of anaerobic digestion (AD) to generate methane from waste water biosolids and other
biomass feedstocks and then burn the methane to generate electricity. The project includes the design and construction of the AD facility, a transmission line to convey electricity
to the City of Hoonah and ancillary facilities to dispose of digestate by-products. The project is being developed by the City of Hoonah, in close collaboration with the Hoonah Indian
Association.
Construction of a 300 kW new run of river hydro on Fivemile Creek serving the community of Chitina utilizing 5 cfs and 900 ft of head to generate approximately 2,000 MWh of energy and
displacing 500 MWh of diesel energy (40 k gallons of fuel, 100% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 6.6 million with a projected online date
of 2019. Proposed project features include a 10 foot high diversion structure, 10,000 feet of 12-16 inch diameter penstock, a single pelton turbine, and 2,900 feet of access road.
This project will serve the native community of Chitina which currently is an isolated micro grid and entirely diesel dependent. The diesel plant will function primarily as a backup
system after the hydro is constructed. An electric boiler will be installed in the existing diesel module and connected to the existing hydronic heat recovery system currently utilized
to heat the clinic building and the aboveground storage tank used to store diesel fuel for the diesel plant. The boiler will provide a dual purpose; provide frequency control during
operation of the hydro turbine, and allow for continued utilization of the existing heat recovery system infrastructure. During most times of the year, excess water will be available
beyond the communitys demand. During these times, the excess energy will be available for space heating during winter months via electric boilers installed in various community buildings,
residential living facilities, and commercial facilities. In the summer, when flow in Fivemile Creek is higher, there will be considerable excess energy available for commercial and
industrial uses such as ice making, sawmill operation, etc.
Design of a 5000 kW new storage hydro on Grant Lake, located near the community of Moose Pass, serving the railbelt utilizing 385 cfs and 185 ft of head and 18,790 acre ft of storage
to generate approximately 19,500 MWh of energy and displacing 19,500 MWh of natural gas energy annually at an estimated total project cost of $59 million with a projected start date
of 2020. Proposed project features include an intake structure, 3300 feet of 10 foot diameter tunnel and surge tank, two Francis turbines, 2 miles of access road and a bridge across
Trail Lakes, and 3.5 miles of transmission line.The layout has been recently revised to minimize the project footprint. The current design omits the construction of a diversion structure
(dam) at the outlet of Grant Lake. All 13-feet of storage that will be utilized for power generation will be drawn from below the natural lake outlet.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is seeking $3,196,000 from this Grant Program for the construction of an electrical intertie to connect Mtn. Village to the St. Mary’s/Pitka’s
Point Wind Energy Project. The intertie will include 16.1 miles of new 3-phase overhead power line along the existing gravel road between the St. Mary’s Airport and the Mtn. Village
Airport. The project will also include upgrading 4.0 miles of existing electrical distribution system near both communities from single-phase to threephase. The existing power plant
in Mtn. Village will be put into standby mode, with installation of an electric boiler to keep the existing generators warm. This intertie project will enable the community of Mtn.
Village to benefit from the new wind energy system in St. Mary’s /Pitka’s Point.
This proposal requests $152,000 and provides a match of $8,000 to conduct a wind power feasibility and conceptual design project for the community of Shishmaref. The Alaska Village Electric
Cooperative (AVEC), with the cooperation of the community, proposes to assess the feasibility of wind resources to provide power to Shishmaref and to prepare a conceptual design of
a wind generation system.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is requesting $2,555,489 to construct a new heat recovery module at the Bethel Power Plant. The new module will isolate the generator
cooling loop from the existing recovered heat distribution loop to enable expansion of the recovered heat system. The new approximately 800-square foot module and associated piping
located immediately adjacent to the Bethel Power Plant will enable expansion of the existing system including future connection of exhaust heat recovery at the power plant, creating
a significant increase in recovered heat available for the community. The heat recovery module will also allow expansion of the existing loop and an additional future second loop that
could supply heat to the Aquatic Center and the new alcohol treatment facility currently under construction.
Design of a 525 kW new diversion hydro on Mountain Creek (discharging to Lagoon Creek) serving the community of Old Harbor utilizing 12 cfs and 790 ft of head to approximately generate
3520 MWh of energy and displacing 850 MWh of diesel energy (96 k gallons of fuel, 100% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 9.3 million with
a projected online date of 2019. Proposed project features include a 6 foot high diversion structure, 10,000 feet of 16-20 inch diameter penstock, one of two pelton turbines, 3 miles
of access road, and 1 mile of transmission line.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), the electrical utility provider in Old Harbor, is proposing to complete geotechnical field work and final design for a hydroelectric project
in Old Harbor, Alaska. The 262 kilowatt (kW) (initial, 525 kW future) basin diversion project will be located on East Fork Mountain Creek and Lagoon Creek Tributary. The project will
be capable initially of generating an average of about 2,300,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) annually and will run year-round and meet all the existing electricity demands of the community.
Power from the facility would also be used to heat the school, saving up about 8,370 gallons of diesel heating fuel annually.
Construction of a 350 kW new run of river hydro on Waterfall Creek serving the community of King Cove utilizing 12 cfs and 470 ft of head to approximately generate 1167 MWh of energy
and displacing 720 MWh of diesel energy (49 k gallons of fuel, 31% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 6.9 million with a projected online
date of 2017. Proposed project features include a 20 foot high diversion structure, 4630 feet of 20 inch diameter penstock, a single pelton turbine, and 5000 feet of access road.This
facility will be a working partner to the Citys existing and highly successful Delta Creek hydroelectric project, which has been operating for the last eighteen years.
Feasibility study for a 125 kW new run of river hydro on Unga Man Creek serving the community of False Pass utilizing 12 cfs and 200 ft of head to approximately generate 936 MWh of energy
and displacing 540 MWh of diesel energy (43 k gallons of fuel, 85% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 4.4 million with a projected online
date of 2021. Proposed project features include a low height diversion structure, 4300 feet of 20 inch diameter penstock, a single turbine, 4300 feet of access road, and associated
transmission line.
The City of False Pass requests funding from the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) in the amount of $187,000 through the Renewable Energy Grant Program for a Hydroelectric Feasibility Study
and Conceptual Design of Unga Man Creek. Reconnaissance work funded by the City and performed in August 2015 suggests that Unga Man Creek may hold adequate hydro potential. This proposal
will build upon recent efforts in order to confirm the viability of hydro power to reduce the communitys dependence on diesel and provide a stable and renewable source of electricity.
This project is consistent the Aleutian and Pribilof Islands Regional Energy Plan. The City of False pass believes that this project will provide significant benefits to the public
and represents a relatively low risk and high value hydroelectric project.
The Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority (THRHA) plans to renovate, modernize, and expand the existing Saxman Multifamily Low Rent building. THRHA requested funding for the inclusion
of an air-to-water heat pump system in the renovation. This system would include a new low temperature hydronic heating system and domestic hot water tank to allow the heat pump to
provide the building space heating and domestic hot water demands. If funded, this would replace the existing oil boilers and high temperature hydronic heating system. The THRHA recently
completed a weatherization and interior insulation project for this building, and will be incorporating additional efficiency measures into the upcoming renovation. If the heat pump
project is funded, the THRHA will install a new mechanical room in the existing walk-in crawlspace and the existing mechanical room would be converted to an ADA accessible bathroom.
The heat pump project would offset the use of 100% of the oil use at the facility. The heat pump is estimated to cover 95% of the overall heating and domestic hot water demand with
a seasonal efficiency of 233%. The remaining 5% (peak and during pump maintenance) of demand would be provided with electric resistance heaters. It is anticipated that the overall energy
use index for the facility will drop by over 46%, from 94,000 Btu/sqft/yr to 51,000 Btu/sqft/yr through the implementation of the heat pump and low temperature hydronic system. The
project will provide an estimated $5,200 in annual energy savings for the facility at current low oil prices.
This project will install a wood fired (proposed dried chips) boiler to heat the two school buildings. The wood boiler will connect to the existing heating system and dramatically reduce
diesel fuel consumption. The gymnasium boiler will be decommissioned and the existing main building boilers will be used only during peak heating needs and as a backup system.
Using the conclusions from a completed Wind Resource Data Collection Report, the Native Village of Shungnak will, with assistance from Alaska Energy Authority (AEA), initiate and complete
the conceptual design process and establish an environmental baseline to successfully install a winddiesel system in the community. This includes automated controls and the equipment
necessary to regulate, control and deliver reliable wind energy to the residents of the community. The project will also establish an environmental baseline and a list of permits for
the projected wind turbine, in addition to associated equipment installations needed to upgrade the existing power generation and distribution system to a wind turbine-diesel engine
configuration. The Native Village of Shungnak will hire and contract with WHPacific to complete the design project as well as provide management oversight of subcontracted engineering/design
firms. Assuming the project progresses to construction, the consultant will also complete the Final Design and needed construction solicitation packages by collaborating with the NANA
Regional Corporation, Shungnak Power Plant operator, and the Native Village of Shungnak.
In 2013, AEA provided REF for initial planning and conceptual design of a biomass heating system to serve community buildings in Huslia. Huslia partnered with ANTHC to engineer a conceptual
design and to develop a draft biomass operations plan. In addition, ANTHC contracted with Tanana Chiefs Conference to complete an Assessment of Woody Biomass Resources for Huslia, which
provides local wood resource harvesting guidance. The proposed project will build on this initial work to complete the design and construction of a biomass heating system to serve the
Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plant in Huslia. The proposed project will install a prefabricated, containerized cordwood boiler and cordwood storage area adjacent to
the Clinic and Washeteria. Biomass heating will be integrated using circulating glycol heat transfer loops from the containerized biomass boiler. The estimated heating oil reduction
resulting from this biomass project is 8,474 gallons per year.
The proposed project is for final design of a recovered heat system from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant to heat the City of Eek’s water system
via a circulating distribution water loop. The estimated heating fuel savings from this heat recovery system is 4,000 gallons per year.
In 2013-2014, the Northwest Arctic Borough, through funding provided by the AEA Renewable Energy Fund, contracted with Tetra Tech, Inc. and Dowl HKM to complete a biomass feasibility
study and initial engineering design for the Upper Kobuk villages of Ambler, Shungnak and Kobuk. The study focused on identifying woody biomass feedstock availability, availability
of local woodcutters, site surveys of viable project locations, heating demand, conceptual design for each proposed project, and a review of permitting requirements. This study concluded
that Ambler’s City Office/Washeteria building offered the best opportunity in the region to integrate biomass heating into an existing community facility. The proposed project will
build from this initial work to complete the design and construction of a biomass heating system to serve the City Office/Washeteria in Ambler. Specifically, this project will install
a prefabricated, containerized cordwood boiler and wood storage area adjacent to the City Office/Washeteria. Biomass heating will be integrated into the end user building using circulating
glycol heat transfer loops from the containerized biomass boiler. The estimated heating oil reduction resulting from this biomass project is 3,516 gallons per year.
Design and permitting of a 700 kW run of river hydro on the Kogoluktuk River serving the communities of Ambler, Shungnak, and Kobuk utilizing 170 cfs and 64 ft of head to generate approximately
5,410 MWh of energy and displace 2,900 MWh of diesel energy (212,000 gallons of fuel, 95% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of $51 million with
a projected start date of 2021. Proposed project features include a 10 foot high diversion structure, 4300 feet of 72 inch diameter insulated above grade penstock, a single kaplan turbine,
7 miles of access road, and 6 miles of transmission line to Kobuk and 25 mile of transmission intertie connecting Shungnak to Ambler.
After evaluation of the potential hydropower sources in the Cosmos Hills, as documented in the Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design Report, project stakeholders have chosen to move
forward with design and permitting for a hydroelectric project on the Kogoluktuk River to provide renewable electric generation year round. The Kogoluktuk River has an upstream basin
catchment area of approximately 424 square miles. In addition to the displaced diesel electric energy the project has significant excess energy that could be used to offset heating
fuels.
The proposed project would design and construct a heat pump system to replace the existing fuel oil boilers at the Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The system would utilize treated
effluent as the heat source, and the heat pump would be powered by renewable energy from Sitka’s hydroelectric power generation. One fuel-oil boiler would be retained to generate
heat on the coldest winter days and to provide redundancy. The system would displace approximately 95 percent of the heating oil usage at the WWTP.
The proposed project is to for a feasibility study, conceptual design and cost estimate to evaluate the potential for a small scale solar energy project in Anchorage. If feasible, Chugach
has land available for an array of solar panels; the location proximate to Chugach's system will allow for easy interconnection.
The proposed project is a feasibility study and design of a central biomass boiler plant to serve the Schools/Recreation complex consisting of Schoenbar Middle School, Valley Park School,
the Gateway Recreation Center/Aquatic Center, and the Ketchikan Gateway Borough School District Maintenance Facility. The total project area is roughly 207,000 square feet of building
space.
Ketchikan Gateway Borough seeks to modify install a containerized, 2,460-MBH biomass-fired boiler at the Ketchikan High School. The woody biomass fired boiler will be installed to replace
heating oil boilers, which will become more costly to maintain. The project will include construction of the biomass system, including storage bin, collection bin, motors, fans, controls,
circulation pumps, accumulator tanks and valves.
The proposed project includes construction of a 1500 kW new run of river hydro on Yerrick Creek serving the communities of Tok, Tanacross, Tetlin, and Dot Creek utilizing 60 cfs and
460 ft of head to generate approximately 3,450 MWh of energy and displace 3450 MWh of diesel energy (240 k gallons of fuel, 37% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated
total project cost of $21 million with a projected start date of 2019. Proposed project features include a 10 foot high diversion structure, 15,000 feet of 36-42 inch diameter penstock,
turbines, 3 miles of access road, and 5 miles of transmission line.
The applicant estimates that the project will provide 4.9 GWH of energy. Tok and surrounding communities in the upper Tanana region (Tok, Tanacross, Tetlin, Dot Creek) are currently
dependent upon 100% diesel-fired generation of electricity. Construction of project features (transmission) has already begun through the support of USDA funds. Applicants are requesting
$4 million through the AEA REF IX program. It is estimated that this level of funding support by the State of Alaska, in conjunction with $500,000 in new USDA Renewable Energy for America
Program (REAP) funds awarded to the project in September of 2015, will result in a project which produces clean energy at less than the cost of diesel fuel, which will allow for project
approvals by the regulatory commission of Alaska (RCA).
Tanacross Inc., the Native Village of Tanacross, and Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T) signed a Memorandum of Understanding expressing willingness to work cooperatively on the Yerrick
Creek project in August of 2014. The three entities established a new venture named Upper Tanana Energy (UTE) to develop, own, and operate the project as an independent power producer
(IPP). As a project partner, AP&T has drafted and will finalize and execute PPA terms and other commercial agreements after project financing is secured. Yerrick Creek is located on
private and State lands and has received a non-jurisdictional determination from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), making it possible to develop this low-impact hydropower
project in a timely fashion without undergoing lengthy federal permitting processes through FERC. In 2015, UTE installed several stilling wells on Yerrick Creek at the request of ADF&G
to record subsurface flow and for stream gaging. In addition, 5.3 miles of new transmission line was installed from Tok toward the project. An additional 5 miles of upgraded transmission
line will still need to be funded.
The City of False Pass requests Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) funding in the amount of $440,319 through the Renewable Energy Fund Round IX program (RFA 16012) to complete Phase II Feasibility
Analysis and Conceptual Design for the False Pass Tidal Energy Project proposed for the Isanotski Strait. The City of False Pass, like most communities of the Aleutian Islands, has
very high energy costs and depends completely on diesel fuel to meet their electricity and heating needs. While diesel fuel is currently the most practical option for such communities,
it also creates economic, energy security and environmental problems it has a disproportionately high carbon dioxide (CO2) output compared to other power generation systems at both
local and global levels. The City of False Pass, fortunately, is situated near a significant hydrokinetic (tidal) resource at the Isanotski Strait that offers a potential to significantly
reduce, or eliminate the use of diesel fuel. Circulation modeling conducted by University of Alaska Anchorage shows False Pass as a premier tidal energy resource, having the strongest
tidal energy resource measured in Alaska. The City seeks to lower its very high cost of energy by utilizing this resource and proposes the False Pass Tidal Energy Project. The completed
Project will be the first commercial installation of a tidal hydrokinetic power system in the state of Alaska and is a key part of our quest for sustainability. In addition, the Project
will benefit local industry by selling excess energy to the expanded Bering Pacific Seafood plant. This Phase II proposal follows the successful completion of the AEA-funded Phase I
Reconnaissance research, which proved a significant tidal energy resource in the Isanotski Strait. This Project proposes to build on this work, thereby accelerating development of the
False Pass Tidal Energy Project. The Project Team has previously worked together and is comprised of the City of False Pass; Aleutian Pribilof Islands Community Development Association
(APICDA); University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA); Benthic GeoScience, Inc.; and ORPC Alaska, LLC (ORPC).
Feasibility and design of a 124 kW new run of river hydro on Neck Lake serving the community of Whale Pass utilizing 34 cfs and 60 ft of head to approximately generate 1086 MWh of energy
and displacing 300 MWh of diesel energy (24k gallons of fuel, 98% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 3.0 million with a projected online date
of 2022. Proposed project features include a low height foot high diversion structure, 400 feet of 30 inch diameter penstock, multiple pumps or other type of low head turbines, 400
ft of access road, and 4 miles of transmission line upgrades.
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T), requests $395,200 in funding for feasibility, design, and permitting activities for the Neck Lake hydropower
project. APC will provide $98,800 cash match to AEA funding. The 124 kW Neck Lake Hydroelectric Project will be located below the outlet of Neck Lake, approximately 1.5 miles southwest
of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island, Alaska. The Project will supply as much as 450,000 kilowatt hours of energy per year to the community of Whale Pass, offsetting
diesel generation, which is currently the sole source of electricity for residents. The relatively high and modulated flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end
of the outlet stream provide an attractive opportunity for a small run-of river hydroelectric project. The hydroelectric facilities will be designed to avoid interference with the existing
salmon rearing and collection facilities operated at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA). A letter of support from the SSRAA is enclosed. APC
conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2009 and determined that there is sufficient potential to almost always provide enough generation meeting 100% of current and future
Whale Pass loads. This Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for APCs Whale Pass customers. In 2014 and 2015, AP&T conducted
financial and economic analysis which confirmed the economic and financial viability of this project.
Feasibility for a 1000 kW new run of river hydro on Clearwater Creek serving the community of Tok, Tanacross, Tetlin, utilizing 35 cfs and 500 ft of head to approximately generate 3400
MWh of energy and displacing 1700 MWh of diesel energy (118 k gallons of fuel, 18% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 15.4 million with a
projected online date of 2021. Proposed project features include a low height diversion structure, 20,000 feet of penstock, a single turgo turbine, 2 miles of access road, and 9 miles
of transmission line.
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T), requests $386,000 in AEA Renewable Energy Fund Round IX grant funding support for Phase II Feasibility /
Conceptual Design activities for the Clearwater Creek hydropower project. APC proposes a match of $100,000 in private funds supplied by AP&T / APC. The proposed project is located approximately
15 miles southwest of the community of Tok on the Tok-Cutoff Highway (Glenn Highway).
Feasibility and design of a 45 kW power recovery hydro serving the City of Craigs water treatment plant utilizing an estimated 1.8 cfs and 500 ft of head to approximately generate 287
MWh of energy and displacing 5 k gallons of diesel heating fuel annually at an estimated total project cost of 0.4 million with a projected online date of 2019. Proposed project features
include a power recovery turbine in the existing 6.4 mile long 12 inch diameter City water supply transmission main.
Provide design, engineering and permitting to install and operate a micro-hydro power generator in line of the raw water supply line from the Craig municipal water source (North Fork
Lake) to the Craig water treatment plant and Prince of Wales Hatchery Association Chinook Salmon hatchery to provide electrical power for the water treatment plant and hatchery.
Feasibility (geotech investigation) for a 0 kW addition to the existing Terror Lake storage hydro consisting of two diversions on Hidden Basin drainage serving the community of Kodiak
utilizing 950 cfs and rated 1436 ft of head and 118 k acre feet of storage to approximately generate 33,000 MWh of energy and displacing 0 MWh of diesel energy (based on 2015 demand,
fully utilized in 2025) annually at an estimated total project cost of $80 million with a projected online date of 2021. Proposed project features include a two low height diversion
structures, 0.6 miles of open channel or 60 inch diameter piped conveyance, 1.2 miles of 12 ft diameter horseshoe tunnel, and 4 miles of access road.
The Upper Hidden Basin Diversion (UHBD) will supplement the available hydro resource supply of KEAs existing Terror Lake Hydroelectric Facility (FERC Project No. 2743) by an additional
30,000 acre-feet of water. The UHBD will increase hydropower generation by an additional 33 million kilowatt-hours (kWh) annually. Diversion components would be a basic, non-mechanical
design intended for un-manned water conveyance. Structural components of the UHBD consist of two concrete-face rockfill dams, a buried conveyance pipe, tunnel and access road. Surface
water from the diversion dam on the eastern tributary of the West Fork of Hidden Basin Creek (D-East) will flow to the diversion dam on the western tributary of the West Fork of Hidden
Basin Creek (D-West). The combined flow of water from both diversions will then flow by gravity through a tunnel through a mountain ridge to the Terror Lake reservoir. Assuming no spill
at the Terror Lake reservoir, the inflow of water from the diversions generate additional hydropower from the existing Terror Lake powerhouse and will feed directly into KEAs existing
electrical grid without any operational or capacity-related changes. The UHBD is the most technically-viable, cost-effective, and minimally invasive option for adding renewable energy
to Kodiaks electrical grid for the benefit of the Kodiak community.
Feasibility, design, and construction of a 64 kW power recovery hydro serving the community of Unalaska utilizing 6.4 cfs and 184 ft of head to approximately generate 280 MWh of energy
and displacing 280 MWh of diesel energy (18 k gallons of fuel, <1% of existing diesel generation) annually at an estimated total project cost of 1.3 million with a projected online
date of 2019. Proposed project features include a power recovery turbine in the existing 4000 foot long 24 inch diameter City water supply transmission main.
This project will install inline micro-turbines in the new Pyramid Water Treatment Plant to generate power for its use as well as provide power to the Electric Utility's grid. The new
Water Treatment Plant was designed and constructed with a configuration that would allow for micro-turbines to be installed at a future date. This project is estimated to provide at
least 64 KW of in-house power using the water that passes through the Water Treatment Plant for treatment or system flushing; 30 KW may be needed for the Water Treatment Plant's electrical
usage. An annual average of 280,000 kWh of power production is anticipated. A 1997 DOE report indicated that up to 260 KW could be available from the source (Icy Creek Reservoir) with
additional water diversions, so there may be potential for future low-cost power development.
In response to strong member-consumer interest, Homer Electric Association (HEA) is pursuing $342,600 in grant funds to construct a 100 kW solar phovoltaic (PV) community-oriented project.
The general concept would be to develop an economy-of-scale project, and allow members to participate in that project through matching grant funds.The size of the project would be nominally
100 kW of photovoltaic panels, with the actual quantity adjusted to reflect internal system losses. The project would be sited on lands owned by HEA east of the town of Homer, Alaska.
This land is currently leased for use as a sod farm and has an optimal south-facing slope. HEA distribution lines are adjacent to the site, with a 3 phase 12.5 kV line on the south
side and a single phase 7.2 kV line on the west side.The following assumptions were made, based on a review of products from several manufacturers:1. Output per panel: Average of 300
Watts (Vendor Range: 250 to 410 watts)2. Power delivered to grid: 3 phase, transformed to 12.5 kV at interconnection point3. Number of Panels required: 360 (will vary depending on vendor)4.
General Panel Layout anticipated: (9 double rows of 20 panels each)5. 6 ft. X 7 ft. land surface area required for each panel: (7 ft. is largest case, and reflects ten Solar panels
w/reflectors)6. 12 ft. wide vehicle access between panel rows for maintenance & snow removal7. Estimated Total Land Surface Area (including inverter): 0.7 Acres
Complete final design and permitting for a 420-340kW storage hydroelectric project on Indian Lake in Chignik Bay. The project would consist of an approximately 25 foot high by 125 foot
long concrete faced, rock filled dam impounding up to 204 acre feet of water, 7,280 feet of 22 inch underground penstock, 9,170 feet of new access road and trail, Turgo impulse hydro
turbine and generator in a 26 x 26 foot powerhouse, tail race that returns water into Indian Creek above the anadromous reach of the creek, above ground insulated City water supply
line, 1,600 feet of electrical tie line. This project would replace the existing, 1947 era, 60kW, nonfunctioning hydro. The new proposed project will continue to supply raw water to
the City. The existing 60kW project was re-licensed by FERC in 2006. The application is based upon the findings of a the feasibility study funded by REF round 1 for $207,500 As required
by the grant the City received control and ownership of the hydro resource from NorQuest Seafoods owned by Trident Sea Foods in the fall of 2012.
The Native Village of Chenega (aka. Chenega Bay) proposes to construct a run-of-the-river hydroelectric project on Anderson Creek. The planned 64 kW capacity project will offset power
currently generated by burning diesel. The non-jurisdictional hydro will offset up to 10,400 gallons of diesel annually which translates into $56,600 in annual savings.
This project proposes the construction of a cordwood system in Port Graham to heat 4 community buildings: village council offices, clinic, public safety/fire station, and the Corporation
offices. The Corporation will be invoiced for the heat for its building. This project will displace approximately 5,365 gallons per year of heating fuel. Design was funded through round
4 for $75,000.
TDX AWE is requesting phase III and IV funding for installation of electric boilers at public facilities to utilize non-firm excess wind power for heating. This work was originally proposed
in 2008 as part of the Sand Point wind turbine installation, but not implemented due to wind turbine project cost and schedule difficulties. Presently, lacking means to deliver excess
wind, considerable excess wind energy is dissipated into a resistive dump load, and the Island’s two 500KW wind turbines are curtailed to 300KW each. This project proposes to install
thermal nodes at 2 community facilities – the Sand Point School and Health Clinic - with total installed nameplate electric boiler capacity of 600 kW. Preliminary energy auditing
(incorporating previous reports) will be performed on the facilities to determine the “energy baseline†from which project impact can be measured going forward. The project also
includes integration of building energy use data into the existing power plant SCADA system such that ongoing operational performance can be measured and optimized.
TDX previously completed an REF funded reconnaissance level analysis for a hydroelectric power plant in Adak. The reconnaissance study showed that a series of alpine lakes in the immediate
vicinity of the city have the potential to displace the diesel power plant as the primary energy source for Adak. Resource availability, engineering considerations, land ownership and
permitting issues were all considered. The proposed project is a continuation from the previous study that recommended two development options for further consideration and additional
data collection and analysis before making a recommendation for future development. The first configuration consists of an intake at Lake Bonnie Rose and a powerhouse at Mitt Lake,
with a preliminary capacity 440 kW and capable of generating 3,200 MWh’s at an estimated cost of $8 million. The alternative project utilizes the existing raw water transmission pipeline
from Lake Bonnie Rose to the water treatment plant having a capacity of 75 kW to 90 depending on the domestic water needs and capable of producing approximately 760 MWh’s at an estimated
cost of $2.75 million. An area of concern that required additional investigation are the instream flow requirements that significantly affect the economics of all of the diversion projects
using water from the lake system.
Hoonah Indian Association (HIA) proposes a feasibility study and conceptual design for a district heating loop for Hoonah School/pool, autoshop/carving shed, Boys and Girls Club, HIA
Cookhouse, Headstart, city hall, and a large privately owned commercial building (apartments, laundry, and store). This heating loop could potentially be operated as a heat utility
by HIA. HIA is also pursuing a community greenhouse, but this is not included in the feasibility study.
The City of Tenakee Springs is constructing a hydroelectric project on Indian River. This will be a 180 kW low head, run-of-river plant displacing the use of 30,000 gallons of diesel
fuel annually, or 90% of annual electric utility diesel consumption. At least 6,500 additional gallons of fuel oil can be displaced by heating public buildings with excess energy from
the hydro project. The city successfully completed construction of Phase 1 of this project in June 2014, which consisted of extending access roads and trails to the powerhouse and intake
sites. Phase 2 will commence this fall, which will construct the balance of the project. The final engineer’s cost estimate exceeds the funds the city has available for this project,
so the city is requesting additional grant funds to ensure Phase 2 can be completed without disruption.
The community of Elfin Cove proposes a hydroelectric project that would be located on Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake, located approximately one mile south of Elfin Cove at 58.19N, 136.35W.
The project will include a run-of-river hydroelectric plant between Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake (upper project) and a storage hydroelectric project between Jim's Lake and tidewater
(lowerproject). A January 20, 2014 updated sizing analysis from Polarconsult recommended a configuration with a 35 kW run-of-river upper project with a 105 kW storage lower project
for a total installed capacity of 140 kW, based on updated hydrology and utility load data.
The recommended project is estimated to displace 89% of the annual diesel fuel consumed by the electric utility generators.
This funding request supplements the community’s existing funding for project permitting. FERC declared that the project was not eligible for license exemption in August 2014, so the
project will require a FERC license. Based on recent FERC licensing processes in Southeast Alaska, the community anticipates more extensive resource studies than expected when the permitting
budget
was developed in 2010. The community is requesting this supplemental grant so the FERC licensing process can be completed without delay arising from funding constraints.
The Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project will result in a modest, run-of-the-river hydroelectric facility using Waterfall Creek and consisting of a concrete diversion/intake structure,
4,500 feet of HDPE penstock pipeline, 16 feet by 40 feet metal powerhouse on a concrete slab, Pelton Impulse Turbine and induction generator, remote-automatic control system, and 5,000
feet access road. This facility will be a working partner to the City’s existing Delta Creek hydroelectric project, which has been operating for the last eighteen years. It will produce
1 megawatt (MW) of electricity.
TDX proposes to install (3) 800 kWe Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) power generation units to generate electric power from waste heat in the flue gas of two Solar Turbine Taurus 70 gas turbines.
Furthermore TDX intends to utilize low grade waste heat downstream of the ORC topre-heat turbine inlet air to significantly improve the emissions profile at low temperatures. This new
facility will require an extended 40x64’ structure to the west of the new gas turbine plant building. Approximately 10.5 MWth waste heat would be drawn from the gas turbine stacks
and used to produce 2.1 MWe (net) electricity year round through the ORC system. Downstream the flue gas is exhausted through a separate stack. Systems are built on a pile foundation
with an air gap. The extended facility will remain on the footprint of the existing gravel pad. Glycol fluid coolers are placed on the roof of the extension from lower level switchgear
and shop rooms. Heat is intercepted downstream of the ORC and upstream of the fluid coolers and used in a coil to preheat inlet combustion air from each side of the main turbine room.
NATEO proposes to assess the wind energy resource potential on Hotham Peak, between Noorvik and Selawik, along with an intertie between Noorvik, Kiana, and Selawik. According to modeling
completed in the 2012 Noorvik Wind-Diesel Conceptual Draft Report, the most ideal location for a larger turbine would be on the southwest slope of Hotham Ridge between Noorvik and Selawik.
The work will involve obtaining a letter of non-objection for placement of a met tower and geotechnical fieldwork on Hotham Peak; permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing
a met tower; studying the wind resource for one year; and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design
will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
The Intertie between Noorvik, Kiana, and Selawik will be evaluated by looking at land use, permitting, and cost. AC and DC power transmission systems will be considered for cost estimating
and O&M purposes.
With Round VIII AEA Renewable Energy funding, the City of Noorvik would install a 10kW solar photovoltaic array on the City building as well as install another 10kW solar photovoltaic
array on the Noorvik IRA Council building. The anticipated annual generation, according to the new version of the PVWatts Calculator, will be approximately 8,982 kWh/building for a
total of 17,964 kWh for both the City and IRA buildings, for an annual average of 2.85 kWh/m2/day per building. That translates into a total of $11,742 electrical savings per year for
the City and IRA combined at an electrical rate of $.65/kWh.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to take waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant in Eek and use it to heat the city’s
water system via heating connection into the adjacent water distribution loop main. The heat recovery system is projected to save the water system 4,000 gallons of the estimated 5,900
gallons of heating oil used per year. The existing water distribution loop is located 100 feet from the powerhouse; heat recovered from the power plant and injected into the circulating
distribution loop can also be conveyed into to the more distant community water storage tank. The proposed connecting heat recovery pipe to the will be buried 1.5-in twin PEX carrier
pipe insulated with a minimum of 1.25-in polyurethane insulation. The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by ANTHC.
The hybrid wind-diesel system in Unalakleet is operational, but not performing to its full potential. UVEC will work with Marsh Creek to deploy a data collection system that will provide
reliable synchronized information at a 1 Hz data rate from the wind farm, the feeder from the wind farm to the power plant, and all equipment in the diesel plant. Along with voltages
and currents it will acquire waveforms of voltages under certain conditions. Marsh Creek will coordinate with NorthernPower to ensure useful data is obtained from the wind farm. The
data will be reviewed by Marsh Creek, Northern Power and the Alaska Center for Energy and Power/ACEP. Informed hypotheses to address and mitigate problems with the system will be developed
and modeled. From this work a conceptual design for modification to the system will be developed.
The Lake and Pen Borough proposes the construction of cordwood wood boilers for the communities of Port Alsworth (Improvement Center and Fire Hall), Nondalton (single structure or multiple
units), and Pedro Bay (Smokehouse Bay Annex). This project will displace approximately 9,104 gallons of heating fuel.
TDX believes that there is sufficient wind energy at St. Paul that eventually 80% of the total energy consumption for electricity, heating, and ground transportation on the island could
be sourced from renewable energy resources. Given the fifteen years of continuous wind power experience and recent improvements in controls, electrical storage and heat utilization,
TDX is committing to reaching our goal of 80% Renewable by 2020. Although the first steps have been taken there are a number of important steps that need to be completed to fully develop
and implement this vision. Under this grant proposal TDX is asking for support to conduct and implement a Community Energy Baseline study. This study would define the energy sources
and energy resources, energy use on the island for electricity, heat and transportation, and provide a solid baseline of current needs. This information would also be used to create
a roadmap to define specific approaches to both the reduction of energy consumption as well as the design of the renewable energy delivery system and required auxiliary components.
TDX believes that there is sufficient hydro, wind, or hydrokinetic renewable energy at Adak that eventually 70% of the total energy consumption for electricity, heating, and ground transportationon
the island could be sourced from renewable energy resources. TDX is committing to reaching a goal of 70% Renewable by 2023. Although the first steps have been taken there are a number
of important steps that need to be completed to fully develop and implement this vision. Under this grant proposal TDX is asking for support to conduct and implement a Community Energy
Baseline study. This study would define the energy sources and energy resources, energy use in Adak for electricity, heat and transportation, and provide a solid baseline of current
needs. This information would also be used to create a roadmap to define specific approaches to both the reduction of energy consumption as well as the design of the renewable energy
delivery system and required auxiliary components.
The project is to assess the hydroelectric energy potential of Lowell Creek and Ship Creek. The proposed work includes review of the public record, the installation of stream gauging
equipment at each location to measure annual water flow of each of the creeks, site reconnaissance,identification of permit requirements, and concept development.
Scammon Bay requests funding for feasibility and conceptual design for a 188 kW R-O-R hydro project on Hillside Creek. Proposed activities include surveying, 3 years of stream gauging
and a 35% project design. Capital cost is estimated at $4.3M. Services to be provided by ANTHC DEHE. The basin resource size is limited at 0.7 sq mile, which reduces in flow during
winter months. Existing electrical generation and distribution system in Scammon Bay is operated by AVEC. Project features would include an intake structure with coanda screen, 4300
lf of 16†dia penstock, and a powerhouse with a single 188 kW dual nozzle pelton turbine, controls, etc.
Expect FERC will have jurisdiction as Scammon Bay is located within the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge.
Scammon Bay has requested Rnd 8 REF grant for heat recovery. AVEC has applied to REF for wind turbines to be installed in Scammon Bay.
This application includes a feasibility study performed by Hatch for a hydroelectric project entitled Hillside Creek Hydroelectric Project. Completed in September 2014, the report was
funded through a Round 5 REF grant (#847). However, there are a number of items within the report that raise questions, such as how a hydro project on Hillside Creek would interact
with current community water supply for Scammon Bay (on the same creek) water is diverted for community use and/or needs to be re-pumped; over-estimation of hydro generation in 5 months
of winter; under-estimation of capital cost from leaving out steep access road (13.5% grade) needed for intake/penstock construction; under estimation of licensing costs due to lands
within the Wildlife Refuge, etc.)
The project proposes the design and construction of cordwood boiler systems for Hollis, Naukati, and Whale Pass Schools (including teacher housing and greenhouses), and the replacement
of the Thorne Bay school GarnPacs. The GarnPacs currently operated by the Thorne Bay School will be relocated Hollis and Whale Pass. The project will use wood biomass to replace diesel
as the heat energy source by installing wood fired boilers in four school communities. The applicant has purchased a greenhouse for Naukati that will also use the heat from the boiler
and will provide healthy, nutritious food for students and the community, in addition to giving students opportunities to learn life-long skills. Thorne Bay School received an AEA grant
in 2009 to install two GARN wood fired boiler units, and while the system has been operating, it has proven too small for the job. The units currently in use, (proto-types), can easily
be moved with a forklift, so part of the proposal is to install them at two other school sites, Whale Pass and Hollis Schools. In order to heat the facility in Thorne Bay, which includes
a teacher housing unit and a hydroponic greenhouse, the current system would be replaced with 2 GARN 3200’s, and a structure built to house the boilers. Very little reconstruction
would be necessary in Thorne Bay due to the portability of the current Garn Pacs. In Whale Pass and Hollis, structures would be built to house the boilers. A wood storage area will
also be constructed at Hollis, now the only one of the four communities where there is no wood storage shed. At Naukati School a wood fired boiler (2 2200 Garns) would be installed.
The Naukati School is the same size as Howard Valentine School, in Coffman Cove, which has a currently operating Garn system. Naukati will be modeled after the Coffman Cove set-up.
Wood storage facilities have already been built in Naukati and Whale Pass, with 30 cords in Naukati and less than 10 in Whale Pass. Southeast Island School District is committed to
moving in a direction of local energy independence, breathing life into small business enterprises such as wood cutting, and involving students in growing food, stoking the boilers,
and acquiring both work and meaningful life skills.
The Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility is a proposed 5 MW storage hydro project undergoing licensing (FERC P-13212) located near Moose Pass on the Kenai Peninsula in Southcentral Alaska
and serving the railbelt. The project features include an existing lake to provide approximately 15,900 acre-ft of storage, a conveyance tunnel, annual energy of 19,500 MWh at an estimated
cost of $60 million.
The proposed project is comprised of an intake structure in Grant Lake, a tunnel, a surge tank, a penstock, a powerhouse, a tailrace detention pond, a switchyard with disconnect switch
and step-up transformer, and an overhead or underground transmission line. The intake would be in Grant Lake near its outlet. Water would be conveyed from the intake through a 3200’
tunnel and a 150 foot penstock to a powerhouse containing two Francis-type turbines. The powerhouse would be located near the bank of Grant Creek and would discharge through a tailrace
into Grant Creek. A transmission line would connect the facility to the Railbelt grid near Moose Pass. Supplemental water will be routed from the intake tunnel to provide instream flows
for fish in the bypass reach.
IRHA is proposing a biomass feasibility study in order to examine the costs and possibilities of various appliances and woody biomass sources for three IRHA facilities - the IRHA office
building in Fairbanks, the IRHA warehouse in Fairbanks and the Meda Lord Center which is a 15 unit senior housing complex in Nenana. All three facilities currently are using heating
oil, and have been weatherized.
THRHA proposes to install a ground-mounted PV solar array at the Kake Senior Center. The Senior Center is currently undergoing expansion and modernization to include new community and
residential space, which will almost double the current electrical usage. The PV system will be designed to produce a minimum of 10,000 Watts and will displace approximately 25% -30%
of the projected increase in electrical load at the Senior Center. The intent is to keep electrical operating costs sustainable. It will not reduce the current utility usage, and therefore
will not have a negative impact on the local utility (IPEC). The PV system is intended only to avoid additional utility costs on a percentage of the new added usage expected when the
modernization improvements are completed. The system will be parallel to the utility grid system, isolated with a non-grid tie inverter, and will not feed back into the utility grid
system. The system will have battery storage to allow for night-time operation of specific house loads. The Project will include final design and installation of the PV system.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to take waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant in Scammon Bay and use it to heat three
community buildings and the city’s water system via heating connection into the adjacent water distribution loop main. The heat recovery system is projected to save 10,933 of the
estimated 11,578 gallons of heating oil used per year.
The City Office and Old Clinic are both hydronically heated and had been served by a heat recovery system that is no longer in use. The planned Community Hall will also be hydronically
heated; all buildings would be served by a heat recovery loop approximately 400 feet in length. The existing water distribution loop is located 300 feet from the powerhouse; heat recovered
from the power plant and injected into the circulating distribution loop can also be conveyed to the more distant community water storage tank. The proposed connecting heat recovery
pipe will be buried 2-in PEX carrier pipe insulated with 3-in polyurethane insulation.
The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by ANTHC.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough proposes the feasibility and final design and permitting for biomass-fueled boilers for five buildings: Schoenbar Middle School, Valley Park School, the
Gateway Recreation/Aquatic Centers (two buildings) and the School District Maintenance Facility. This project could displace 209,900 gallons per year of heating fuel.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) proposes to insulate above ground existing waste heat lines from the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant to the
city’s water plant. ANTHC estimates that insulating the heat recovery lines between the power plant and the WTP will save an additional 1,935 gallons annually of fuel. The existing
20+ year old insulated piping system dates back to the original heat recovery system construction. The round trip length of arctic pipe to be insulated in 1,600 ft. The existing pipe
and degraded insulation would be enclosed in closed cell Engineered Polymer Foam Insulation (EPFI) formed into clamshell sections for installation over the existing pipe, then wrapped
with a self healing multi-ply embossed UV-resistant aluminum foil / polymer laminate with a layer of rubberized asphalt (Alumaguard). A wear barrier of 24 gauge galvanized steel will
be installed over the exterior of the weather barrier and secured with stainless steel straps. The existing pipe supports would be re-used with new mounting hardware and two piece saddles
to allow pipe movement.The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by ANTHC.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough plans to replace two of three oil-fired boilers in the Ketchikan High School with pellet boilers, displacing approximately 108,715 gallons of fuel oil annually.
This project received design funding through the US Forest Service and School Bond CIP Fund and has contracted Wise Wood to complete the work.
This project consists of the installation and integration of five Windmatic 17S turbines 95 kW wind turbines (475 kW) into the Naterkaq Light Plant’s generation system. The integration
of this wind energy includes the installation of a load balancing boiler, 40 residential electric thermal storage (ETS) units, wind-diesel supervisory control and data acquisition system
(WDSC), and improvements to the electrical distribution system which include sectionalizing, the replacement of3 power poles and one distribution transformer, as well as the extension
of the distribution line by 3 power poles to the wind turbines. The proposed system is similar to those installed in theneighboring villages of Kongiganak, Kwigillingok and Tuntutuliak.
ANTHC on behalf of the City of Ouzinkie proposes to complete the final design, permitting and construction of a replacement penstock and replacement hydro turbine for the City of Ouzinkie.
The new project will provide increased hydroelectric capacity. A new 5,100 foot, 20 inch penstock will replace the one installed in 1987. A new 150kW Ossberger type turbine will replace
the existing 125kW turbine. The penstock is also used for the City water supply. The old wood dam at Mahoona Lake has recently been replaced by ANTHC with a rock and concrete dam. The
new dam will utilize the existing penstock and the existing hydro turbine. It is scheduled to be back online generating electricity mid Nov 2014. The dams replacement cost was estimated
at $2,087,000, of which the majority, $1,800,000, came from a 2013 Alaska Legislature appropriation.
This phase of the Barrow to Atqasuk Transmission Line Project is for final design and permitting required for the construction of the transmission line and home and building conversions
to electric space heating.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a wind energy and area-wide energy management system, consisting of wind diesel integration, end-use energy efficiency, automated building controls,
and conservation. This phase of the project is the design and permitting phase of a three phase project which will include a phase for construction and commissioning for three anticipated
wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution system for the community of Kaktovik. The contractor will provide overall project management and system engineering
during this phase of the project. During the construction phase, NSB will recruit an engineering and construction contractor for design and installation of all civil works, erection
of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to design and construct a ground source heat pump system to provide heat for the Lepquinum Wellness Center in Metlakatla. The heat
pump system would capture heat from the ground via a vertical bore loopfield and water-to-water heat pumps and tie into the facility’s existing hydronic heating system, which would
retain the oil-fired boilers for supplemental and backup heating. The heat pump system is projected to save the center 47,200 of the estimated 49,500 gallons of heating oil used per
year.
The loopfield would be located under the existing parking area; each of the approximately 80 6-in boreholes would be drilled to over 300-ft deep and use a 1-in HDPE pipe loop and thermal
conductive grout. The proposed system would be sized to satisfy 92% of the building’s overall heat demand. The existing heating system would be modified to use the lower temperature
water heated by the heat pump system.
The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by Alaska Energy Engineering.
This project would expand the heat storage capacity of Kwigillingok Wind Heat Smart Grid System by increasing the number of electric thermal storage (ETS) devices from 27 to 50 units.
The community of Kwigillingok (Kwig) has an operational, utility scale wind project that is designed to produce excess wind energy, and this excess energy is captured in residential
ETS devices to displace home heating fuel. Additional ETS storage capacity is needed to make use of the full capacity of the wind system.
The City of Kotzebue is proposing final design and construction for a waste to energy/biomass project to heat the Kotzebure Public Works buildings – water treatment facility and maintenance
shop. Feedstock for this system would consist of sorted and separated cardboard, newspaper, mixed paper, and wood materials from the city of Kotzebue's waste stream. The city's waste
management equipment will be used to collect materials, either as source-separated material from the producers or mixed with the city's MSW waste stream. RDF fuel will be separated
from the waste stream in the Bailer building, in conjunction with an aluminum and tin recycling program.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to take waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant in Wales and use it to heat the city’s
water system via a heating connection to the planned water treatment plant’s hydronic heating system. The heat recovery system is projected to save the washeteria/water treatment
plant 9,619 gallons of the estimated 12,475 gallons of heating oil used per year. The new water treatment plant will be located 200 feet from the powerhouse will also serve as the community
washeteria and will provide heat to circulating water lines and the community water storage tank. The proposed connecting pipe will be buried 2-in PEX carrier pipe with 1.5-in foam
polyurethane foam insulation and an HDPE outer jacket. The most frequently used generator (DDS60k4, 1200 rpm) will be equipped with a marine manifold to increase the amount of recoverable
heat.The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by ANTHC.
The Hydaburg City Schools in Hydaburg, AK on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska proposed the design and construction of a cordwood fired boiler system to heat the school buildings.
The project involves placing four Garn type wood fired boilers adjacent to the school site and running underground pipes from the wood fired boiler to plumb into the school’s heating
system, four teachers housing units, and a greenhouse. The system is anticipated to displace approximately 25,500 gallons of heating fuel annually.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to take waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant in Holy Cross and use it to heat the city’s
water system via heating connections into the water treatment plant’s hydronic heating system and the lift station. The heat recovery system is projected to save the water system
4,159 gallons of the estimated 4,826 gallons of heating oil used per year. The existing water treatment plant is located 750 feet from the powerhouse and also provides heat to the circulating
water lines and heat to the community water storage tank. The lift station is located 200 feet from the powerhouse and is heated with electric resistance heaters. The proposed connecting
pipe will be buried 2-in PEX carrier pipe insulated with 5-in foam insulation and an HDPE outer jacket. The powerhouse’s DDS60 1200 RPM generator would be equipped with a marine
manifold as a part of the project increase the amount of recoverable heat. The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by ANTHC.
The proposed project will install a manually-fed cordwood boiler into a prefabricated building to heat the City of Nikolai’s community building, city lodge, school, and city shop using
circulating glycol heat transfer loops. Modifications to end user building heating systems will be carried out as needed to ensure effective utilization of biomass heat. The estimated
heating oil reduction resulting from this biomass project is projected to save the City and school district approximately 9,630 gallons of heating oil per year.
The Igiugig Village Council requests REF in the amount of $2,016,509 for Phase III Final Design and Permitting and Phase IV Construction of a RivGen® Power System on the Kvichak River
by Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC (ORPC). This Project will be the first commercial installation of a river hydrokinetic power system in the state of Alaska and follows the Igiugig
Village Council’s successful completion of previous project phases – Phase I Reconnaissance and Phase II Feasibility and Conceptual Design, as well as ORPC’s successful demonstration
of the RivGen® Power System, which generated electricity from the Kvichak River in August 2014.
The City of False Pass proposes to follow up a study of the tidal resource in Isanotski Strait with a feasibility study and conceptual design of a tidal power project. The proposed phase
would include current profile surveys at 3-5 sites, submission of draft study plans to regulatory agencies, detailed economic analyses, conceptual design, cost estimates and operations
plan, and completion of a sub bottom survey.
The project envisions installation of a seafloor-mounted 200kW TidGen device made by Ocean Renewable Power Company. Power would be delivered first to the False Pass community grid with
excess power sold to the recently expanded Bering Pacific Seafood fish processing plant. The city estimates that the project can generate 730,000 kWh and offset 58,400 gallons of diesel
annually.
In 2013, AEA provided funding to the community of Huslia through the Renewable Energy Fund for initial planning and conceptual design of a biomass heating system to serve community buildings.
Under this previous grant, Huslia partnered with ANTHC to engineer a conceptual design and to develop an initial woody biomass resource assessment and a draft operations plan. The proposed
project will build from this initial work to complete the design and construction of a biomass heating system to serve the Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plant in Huslia,
Alaska. Specifically, this project will install a manually-fed cordwood boiler to be housed in a prefabricated building and integrated into the existing buildings using circulating
glycol heat transfer loops. Modifications to end user building heating systems will be carried out as needed to ensure effective utilization of biomass heat. The estimated heating oil
reduction resulting from this biomass project is projected to save the Clinic and Water Treatment Plant 8,474 gallons of heating oil per year.
In 2013-2014, the Northwest Arctic Borough, through funding provided by the AEA Renewable Energy Fund, contracted with Tetra Tech, Inc. and Dowl HKM to complete a biomass feasibility
study and initial engineering design for the Upper Kobuk villages of Amlber, Shungnak and Kobuk. This study concluded that Ambler’s City Hall / Washeteria building offered the best
opportunity in the region to integrate biomass heating into an existing community facility. The proposed project will build from this initial work to complete the design and construction
of a biomass heating system to serve the City Hall / Washeteria in Ambler. Specifically, the project will install a manually-fed cordwood boiler to be housed in a prefabricated building
and integrated into the existing building via a circulating glycol heat transfer loop. Modifications to the existing building heating system will be carried out as needed to ensure
effective utilization of biomass heat as part of a separate Ambler Washeteria Upgrades project funded by the Indian Health Service (match to this project). The estimated heating oil
reduction resulting from this biomass project is projected to save the Washeteria and City Office 3,516 gallons of heating oil per year.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to take waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant in Grayling and use it to heat the city’s
water system via a heating connection into the water treatment plant’s hydronic heating system. The heat recovery system is projected to save the water treatment plant 6,669 gallons
of the estimated 8,004 gallons of heating oil used per year. The water treatment plant is located 250 feet from the powerhouse and will also provide heat to the circulating water lines
the community water storage tank. The proposed connecting pipe will be buried 2.5-in PEX pipe insulated with 3.5-in foam insulation and an HDPE outer jacket. The powerhouse’s DDS60
1200 RPM generator would be equipped with a marine manifold as a part of the project increase the amount of recoverable heat. The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed
by ANTHC.
Chitina's application is for design and construction of a new 300 kW run of river (no storage) hydro on Fivemile Creek serving the community of Chitina producing approximately 2,000
MWh's of energy
The proposed Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project consists of the following major components: 1. Creek diversion/intake structure- The proposed diversion/intake structure would divert
a portion of the flow from Fivemile Creek into a pipeline (penstock and would also create a small impoundment that would provide freeze protection. 2. Penstock – The proposed penstock
would transport water from the intake structure to the turbine powerhouse. The penstock will be buried, and will consist of insulated HDPE pipe (low pressure reach) and schedule 20
welded steel pipe (high pressure reach). The pipe will range from 12-20 inches in diameter and will be roughly 10,400 feet long. 3. Diversion Access Road – An access road will be
constructed between the existing jeep trail and the proposed diversion/intake structure location. This road will be approximately 2,850 feet long and will provide access for construction
and maintenance of the diversion/intake structure. 4. Turbine Building – the turbine building will house a 300 kW pelton wheel turbine/generator and controls. The building foundation
will include a tailrace that will return water from the penstock to the creek. 5. Electrical Intertie - A 4-mile long overhead transmission line will connect the turbine power plant
step up transformer to the community grid. The transmission line was constructed utilizing federal grant funds in 2008. 6. Diesel Integration - The proposed hydro switchgear will be
linked to the community’s existing diesel powerhouse controls. The diesel plant will function primarily as a backup system after the hydro is constructed. 7. Heat Recovery – An
electric boiler will be installed in the existing diesel module and connected to the existing hydronic heat recovery system currently utilized to heat the clinic building and the AST
used to store diesel fuel for the diesel plant. The boiler will provide frequency control and allow for continued utilization of the existing heat recovery system infrastructure. 8.
Excess energy utilization – During most times of the year, excess water flow will be available to produce electricity above and beyond the community’s electric demand. During these
times the excess energy will be delivered to dispatchable loads throughout town. The dispatchable loads will include electric heaters installed at community buildings, residential living
facilities and commercial facilities.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to take waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant in Koyuk and use it to heat the city’s
water system via a heating connection into the water treatment plant’s hydronic heating system. The heat recovery system is projected to save the water treatment plant 11,971 gallons
of the estimated 12,300 gallons of heating oil used per year.
The existing water treatment plant/washeteria is located 850 feet from the powerhouse and also provides heat to the circulating water lines and heat to the community water storage tank.
The proposed connecting pipe will be buried 3-in polypropylene and fiberglass composite carrier pipe insulated with 3.5-in foam insulation and an HDPE outer jacket. The powerhouse’s
DDS60 1800 RPM generator would be equipped with a marine manifold as a part of the project increase the amount of recoverable heat.
The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by ANTHC.
Akiachak Native Community Electric Company (“the Utilityâ€) proposes a biomass project to save fuel and reduce costs for the generators and community buildings. The project includes
all phases of development including reconnaissance, feasibility, design and construction. The project would be located on Akiachak, Alaska about 18 air miles east of Bethel.
Upper Tanana Energy's application is for construction of a new 1,500 kW run of river hydro on Yerrick Creek serving the communities of Tok and surrounding area capable of producing approximately
7,000 MWh's of energy annually at an estimated cost of $19 million.
The communities in the upper Tanana region (Tok, Tanacross, Tetlin, Dot Creek) are currently dependent upon diesel-fired generation of electricity and pay energy costs of $0.50/kWh (before
PCE). Upper Tanana Energy, LLC is requesting $8,000,000 through the AEA REF Round VIII program for Phase IV – Construction which is the estimated level of funding support required
by the State of Alaska that will result in a project which produces clean energy for half of the cost of diesel-fired generation of electricity. The Yerrick Creek hydropower project
will displace approximately 40%, or 4,900 MWh’s, of the region’s diesel-fired generation. Tanacross Inc., the Native Village of Tanacross, and AP&T signed a Memorandum of Understanding
expressing willingness to work cooperatively on the Yerrick Creek project in August of 2014. The three entities established a new partnership named Upper Tanana Energy to develop, own,
and operate the project as an independent power producer (IPP).
Yerrick Creek is located on private and State lands and has received a non-jurisdictional determination from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) making it possible to develop
this hydropower project in a timely fashion without undergoing federal permitting processes through FERC. Construction is anticipated to be complete by 2017. Project partners anticipate
that all remaining permitting, power sales agreement, and other pre-construction activities will be complete by the 2015 construction season. Unlike other communities in Alaska, Tok
and surrounding communities of the upper Tanana region have not yet had the opportunity to transition from 100% diesel-fired generation to an energy mix including renewables. If the
Slana-Chistochina-Mentasta grid becomes connected to Tok in the future, these communities will also benefit. Similarly, if Northway, Northway Junction, and Northway Village also become
connected to Tok, they will benefit from this project.
Based on the conclusions of a completed wind resource data collection report, the Native Village of Shungnak will, with Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) assistance, complete the design
process to successfully install a wind-diesel system in the community. This includes automated controls and the equipment necessary to regulate, control and deliver reliable wind energy
to the residents of the community. The project will produce the final designs and plans and complete the necessary permitting for one projected wind turbine and the associated equipment
installations to upgrade the existing power generation and distribution system to produce power from a wind turbine-diesel engine configuration. The Native Village of Shungnak will
hire and contract with an engineering consultant to complete this design project and provide management oversight of any subcontracted engineering/design firms. The consultant will
also complete the construction solicitation package by working closely with NANA Regional Corporation, Shungnak Power Plant operator, and the Native Village of Shungnak.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative proposes to complete a detailed assessment of the existing 40 year old heat recovery system and prepare a conceptual design report of essential
upgrades to the existing system and potential new recovered heat connections. The project would also consider additional heat capture using exhaust gas heat exchangers. Assessment of
the existing system would include installation of BTU meters and inline ultrasonic inspection of the 10†pipeline mains. Heat is recovered from the powerhouse’s six 2.2 MW EMD 16-645
E4D generators.
The application is based on a reconnaissance study completed by Coffman Engineers in 2014. Recommendations in the report include ultrasonic inspection, consideration of a list of potential
future users of recovered heat, and evaluation of the installation of exhaust gas heat exchangers for system evaluation.
AVEC proposes to use wind data to be collected by AEA and to complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Goodnews Bay. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the geotechnical fieldwork and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering
at the site. A conceptual design will be created based upon the wind data and geotechnical investigation.
AVEC requests funds to complete geotechnical and final design for a 262kW (initial) 525kW (future) run of the river hydroelectric project with water diverted from East Fork Mountain
Creek in Old Harbor on Kodiak Island. Hatch was contracted by AVEC for the feasibility report. The 4-6 foot high by 100 foot long intake structure is proposed to be concrete. The 16
to 20 inch, 10,350 long buried penstock will consist of HDPE and steel. The 11,700 foot long intake access trail will be 12 foot wide. The hydro powerhouse is expected to be 25 x 35
x 12 foot metal building. The new 6,200 foot long road to the turbine will be 24 foot wide. A new 7,700 foot long 7.2kV 3 phase distribution tie lie will follow the new road alignment.
The project will divert 5.9 to 11.8 cfs of water from East Fork Mountain Creek to the Lagoon Creek. The FERC license application was submitted in October 2013. FERC license anticipated
to be issued in December 2015.
AVEC proposes to complete construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of four wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation system for currently intertied communities
of St. Mary’s and Pitka’s Point. As a part of this project, AVEC will upgrade the electrical distribution line between St. Mary’s and Pitka’s Point to a 3-phase line and upgrade
the joint power plant to accommodate wind turbine energy generators.
Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority proposes a biomass pellet heat system that will be installed at the (18) unit senior housing center in Klawock, Alaska. The building is currently
heated with oil. The project will entail the installation of a single biomass heating system and will reduce the cost of heat by offsetting 4,750 gallons of fuel oil with 42 tons of
pellets per year. The biomass heat system will be located within the existing building.
A biomass district heat system will be installed to serve eight multiplex residential buildings and one community center in Angoon, Alaska. The buildings are currently heated with one
oil boiler per residence and also one boiler for the community center. The objective of this project is to reduce fossil fuel consumption and operating costs by installing a wood-fired
pellet heating plant to serve all nine buildings in the complex. This project is expected to displace 11,400 gallons of heating fuel annually.
Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA) has applied for final design, permitting, and construction funding of $384,730 for a $449,178 solar project. The project as proposed is a 100kW, dual-axis
tracking solar photovoltaic system to be installed at KEA’s wind farm approximately four miles from Kotzebue. There are no prior REF grants directly associated with this project,
although it would be constructed at KEA’s wind site which did receive REF funding for two 900kW EWT wind turbines and associated equipment.
Cordova Electric's application is for design and permitting for a storage hydro using Crater Lake creating an estimated 400 acre-ft of storage for a 500 kW capacity project capable of
generating 2,000 MWh's of electricity at an estimated cost of $10 million.
Crater Lake is a perched lake located directly above existing City of Cordova chlorinator building and water supply line to Cordova, and a CEC transmission line from the Humpback Creek
Hydroelectric Project to Cordova. The reconnaissance study (Appendix B) indicates the project can deliver 2,000,000 kWh of direct energy, and up to 2,000,000 of additional energy by
eliminating the need for Power Creek Hydroelectric Plant and Orca Diesel Generation Plants to provide spinning reserve – the most significant waste of hydro and diesel fuel resources
on the CEC system. The Crater Lake Hydroelectric Project represents a relatively low risk, low cost, high value hydroelectric project with multiple extended public benefits.
The Native Village of Tazlina is proposing a small wood boiler to heat four community buildings: Community Hall, Clinic/Police Station, Office, and Shop. A centrally located boiler will
supply heat through underground insulated pex pipe running to all four buildings. The existing oil boilers will remain as backup.
The project will consist of engineering and layout; acquiring machinery and equipment; installation of fuel delivery systems; and acquiring and installing biomass boilers to be integrated
into the existing heating system of the Craig High School. The system will use dried fuel from the AEA funded dryer at Viking Lumber and benefit Viking Lumber by expanding the market
base for dry wood fuel. The installed boilers would heat the 53,319 square foot high school using wood chips generated by operations at a local lumber mill. Feedstock for the mill and
the resulting wood chips comes from timber logged from the nearby Tongass National Forest, Southeast Alaska State Forest, Alaska Native Corporation lands and other private lands. The
project is similar in scope to the Craig wood-fired boiler and will share an existing contract to provide wood chips for the boiler. A preliminary feasibility study for conversion from
fossil fuel to wood heating for the Craig High School was prepared for the Craig City School District by Robert Deering, Biomass Program Manager, USDA Forest Service, Tongass National
Forest. An energy audit has also been completed for the facility.
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T), requests $391,200 for Phase II and Phase III activities for the Neck Lake hydropower project. The 124 kW
Neck Lake Hydroelectric Project will be located below the outlet of Neck Lake, approximately 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island, Alaska. The
Project will displace as much as 450,000 kilowatt hours of diesel electric energy per year to the community of Whale Pass which is currently the sole source of electricity for residents.
The relatively high and modulated flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end of the outlet stream provide an attractive opportunity for a small run-of-river hydroelectric
project. Project features would include an access road, intake structure, 400 feet of penstock, a containerized power plant, a tailrace channel, and 4 miles of distribution line upgrades.
The hydroelectric facilities will be designed to avoid interference with the existing salmon rearing and collection facilities operated at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional
Aquaculture Association (SSRAA). APC conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2009 and determined that there is sufficient potential to almost always provide enough generation
meeting 100% of current and future Whale Pass loads. This Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for APC’s Whale Pass customers.
Southeast Alaska Power Agency's application if for construction of a project that will raise the normal reservoir height 15' (5% head increase) at the existing Swan Lake hydro project,
FERC No. P-2911, creating an additional 21,600 acre-ft of storage resulting in an average annual energy generation of 7,500 MWh's at a total cost of $13 million. The Swan Lake Hydroelectric
Project is currently comprised of a concrete arch dam 174' high and 430' long at its crest, an intake structure near the dam, a rock tunnel and penstock water conveyance system, and
a power house located near tidewater. It is located 22 air miles northeast of Ketchikan, Alaska and generates renewable energy for the communities of Ketchikan, Petersburg, and Wrangell.
SEAPA proposes to raise the existing dam by 6' and install a gate system (fuse type and vertical gate) in the fixed spillway slot, which will result in an overall reservoir height increase
of 15'. This will provide additional 25% increase in active reservoir storage. Modifications to the concrete intake structure will also be required, including raising the height and
moving internal equipment to a higher elevation.
City of Saxman's application is for design of the FERC licensed (P-11393) project that will create 9.6 MW of new hydroelectric capacity on Mahoney Lake with a storage capacity of 4,000
acre-ft and 41,700 MWh of energy at a cost of $45 million to serve Ketchikan and surrounding communities.
Approximately 17,900,000 average annual KWH (17.9 aGWH) of power is available between November and April as winter storage, allowing the project to meet the key SEIRP (Southeast Integrated
Resource Plan) objective of increasing winter storage. A detailed cost estimate was performed by Mead & Hunt, a third party engineering firm, in August of 2014, which estimated the
project’s total cost at $45,320,707, making the Mahoney Lake hydroelectric project one of southeast Alaska’s most affordable options for new hydropower energy and capacity. This
alpine lake tap project does not require construction of a dam, and the project’s FERC license has already been issued. Project proponents are requesting $800,000 AEA REF Round VIII
funds, and are proposing $100,000 match (cash and in-kind) to follow through on $200,000 of work funded to date by a SFY14 Capital Appropriation from the State of Alaska.
Alaska Power Company's application is for a feasibility study for a new 1 MW run of river (no storage) hydro project on Clearwater Creek to serve Tok and surrounding area producing 3,400
MWh's of energy at an estimated cost of $16 million.
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T), requests $413,600 in AEA Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII grant funding support for Phase II Feasibility
/ Conceptual Design activities for the Clearwater Creek hydropower project. The proposed project is a 1 MW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Clearwater Creek, which is located approximately
15 miles southwest of the community of Tok on the Tok-Cutoff Highway (Glenn Highway). The project would supply approximately 3.4 GWh annually to Tok and surrounding interconnected communities.
Clearwater Creek’s project features would consist of a small diversion structure, a 1 MW generating system (Turgo turbine), approximately 20,000 feet of penstock, an open tailrace
channel, substation, approximately 5 miles of access road, and a distribution line. The project would interconnect with the Tok region grid via a 14-mile transmission connection made
utilizing existing highway right-of-way.
Applicant accepted delivery of a 34-meter Met Tower from the Alaska Energy Authority in July 2013 and seeks to conduct a reconnaissance and feasibility analysis to determine if it is
feasible to use wind power to supplement the energy needs and displace diesel for the communities serviced by SEAPA. After the site assessment has determined the most suitable site
for collection of raw wind data, the Met Tower will be installed to gather two (2) years of wind data for a thorough analysis. An analysis of the wind data and a final report will be
performed by a qualified consultant specializing in the field.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes to design and construct an effluent source heat pump system to provide space heat to the Wastewater Treatment Plant on Japonski Island. The heat
pump system would capture heat from screen effluent through a stainless steel heat exchanger and water-to-water heat pumps for use in the buildings hydronic heating system.
Effluent currently passes by the boiler at an average temperature of ~50 F; the 72-ton heat pump system is expected to perform with a higher efficiency as a result of the warm source
fluid, with a coefficient of performance of approximately 4.0. Backup heat would be supplied by a new 955 MBH fuel oil boiler.
The application is based on a 2014 feasibility study completed by Alaska Energy Engineering and a 2014 HVAC assessment complete by CH2MHill.
Kodiak Electric's (KEA) application is for final design and permitting for basin diversion project to augment existing Terror Lake (P-2743) hydroelectric generation serving Kodiak. No
additional storage or capacity would be added by the project. The diversion is expected to produce 30,000 MWh of energy through the existing Terror Lake hydro at an estimated project
cost of $50 million.
Hydropower generated by the Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project is KEA’s primary energy source. Enhancing water availability to Terror Lake with a new diversion would allow KEA’s future
electrical load growth to be continually powered with renewable energy. The Upper Hidden Basin Diversion would supplement the available water supply for the Terror Lake Hydroelectric
Facility by capturing additional snow melt and rain in the upper reaches of the Hidden Basin watershed and conveying it to the existing Terror Lake reservoir. Structural components
for the proposed project would consist of two dam embankments connected by an approximately 0.4 mile long channel, an intake structure connected to subterranean tunnel that would run
through a mountain ridge for approximately 1.2 miles, and a gravel road for construction and future maintenance access. These diversion components would be a simple, nonâ€mechanical
design intended for unâ€manned water conveyance. Once the water from the Upper Hidden Basin diversion flows into the Terror Lake reservoir, the additional hydropower would be generated
from the existing Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project and fed directly into the KEA grid.
Manokotak Power Company (MPC) is proposing to install up to 4 small meteorological towers to determine a location with the following criteria: (1) a location with class 5 or better wind
resource, (2) a location nearest to the road system and (3) location suitable for the installation of a wind turbine. The project would complete a conceptual design to establish and
further the development of the project at a suitable wind turbine site and offer viable design configurations from available wind resource turbines and equipment. The conceptual design
will offer a determination of the optimal capacity of any wind turbine system to be incorporated into the community’s existing power plant (260 kW diesel powered generators). Based
on similar configured systems, a system with two (2) 100 KW wind generators would be optimal in a class 5 wind environment.
Kake Community Energy (KCE), a project of the Organized Village of Kake (OVK), is a community-scale thermal energy services company providing affordable biomass heat to critical public
institutions and (later) businesses in Kake, AK while creating local employment and enhancing forest restoration on Tribal and National Forest lands. It is designed to achieve the economies
of scale, customer convenience and price stability of traditional district energy systems, while allowing the adaptability and flexibility needed to serve a community with a spatially
extensive development pattern, typical of Southeast Alaska.
This project consists of the installation and integration of 5 each Windmatic 175 turbines 95 kWe wind turbines (490 kW) into the Naterqak Light Plant diesel power grid. The integration
of this wind energy includes the installation of load balancing boiler, 40 residential electric thermal storage (ETS) units, wind diesel supervisory control and data acquisition system
(WDSC), and improvements to the electrical distribution system which include sectionalizing, the replacement of 3 power poles and one distribution transformer, as well as the extension
of the distribution by 3 power poles to the wind site. The proposed system is similar to those installed in the neighboring villages of Kongiganak, Kwigillingok and Tuntutuliak.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant/washeteria. The estimated fuel oil savings to the community water plant and
washeteria is projected to be 6,600 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached updated Tuntutuliak, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
The proposed project is a run-of-river hydroelectric project located on private property along Juniper Creek, a tributary of Eagle River about 10 miles upstream from the Glenn Highway.
The proposed project would include an intake/diversion structure at approximately the 1900-foot elevation and powerhouse at the 1500-foot elevation. The design flow is estimated at
10 to 20 cfs, for an estimated installed capacity of 250 to 500 kW.
Participation of adjacent downstream property owners would increase the available head from 400 feet to either 900 feet or 1,100 feet if one or two adjacent land owners were to participate.
This would increase installed capacity to as much as 1,300 kW. The adjacent landowner is open to discussion, but questions the resource and impacts. Results of the feasibility study
are expected to encourage local support and participation.
This project will be a modest, run-of-the-river hydroelectric facility using Waterfall Creek and consisting of a concrete diversion/intake structure, 4,500? HDPE penstock pipeline, 16?X40?
metal powerhouse on a concrete slab, Pelton Impulse Turbine and induction generator, remote-automatic control system, and 5,000? access road. This facility will be a working partner
to the City?s existing and highly successful Delta Creek hydroelectric project, which has been operating for the last eighteen years.
As a condition of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing of the Cooper Lake plant in 2007, Chugach agreed to construct a project to divert water from Stetson Creek
into the Cooper Lake reservoir and a related structure to release water into Cooper Creek. The project will enhance fish habitat and add water to Cooper Lake which will result in additional
hydroelectric energy generation. Most importantly, constructing this project allows the license for the Cooper Lake hydro facility to be renewed for 50 years.
The project is the performance of a reconnaissance study to provide a preliminary assessment of the viability of a WtE plant in Anchorage. Other than some recyclables that are recovered
prior to disposal, municipal solid waste (MSW) in Anchorage is largely disposed of in the municipal landfill. The quantity of refuse currently being disposed of in this manner is approximately
330,000 tons per year. There may also be an opportunity to incorporate other fuel, such as wood being disposed of in local woodlots.
WtE plants, while somewhat rare in the U.S., are very popular, efficient and environmentally effective in many European and Asian countries. If feasible, a WtE plant would be expected
to provide energy, environmental, reliability, economic and community benefits
False Pass currently produces all their electricity from diesel generators and heating from burning fossil fuels. Analysis by Marsh Creek LLC confirms that, despite the ample Class 4
wind resource, a Class 3 S designation is most appropriate. Turbulence from complex terrain precludes a typical rural Alaskan wind project. This project proposes feasibility completion
funding to 1) fully assess commercially available wind turbines for deployment in high turbulent locations and 2) expanding available wind resource data at the 10 meter height on proposed
sites and 3) revised Conceptual Design Report (CDR) recommending the best turbine to proceed to design in Round 8. Vertical axis wind turbines (VAWTs) are potentially a mechanically
and economically sound upgrade to False Pass?s current diesel generator system. This project will consider ten (10) 5 kW Kelso VAWTs in comparison to the use of either the Xzeres Skystream
and Bergie options.
The CDR recommendations will closely examine three potential turbines and research other potential options. The Vertical axis wind turbines (VAWTs) are potentially a mechanically and
economically sound upgrade to False Pass?s current diesel generator system. This project will consider ten (10) 5 kW Kelso VAWTs in comparison to the use of either the Xzeres Skystream
and Bergie options. This project seeks feasibility funding for the False Pass wind project. The feasibility funding would allow for further site testing of wind resources at the proposed
system height of 10M and heat recovery analysis. Conceptual Design Report Updates will include additional HOMER analysis with wind resource data at the 10M height, Down East Heat Recovery
modeling, WASP modeling, wind turbine profiles, revised economic analysis and recommendations.
This project proposes to install two remanufactured Vestas V20 wind turbines in the community of Koliganek. Koliganek was awarded a grant from the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) in Renewable
Energy Fund Round IV to complete a conceptual design for installation of wind turbines, with possible construction beginning in 2015. New Koliganek Village Council owns and operates
the electric utility for the community of Koliganek. The moderate wind resource at this site could support a medium penetration wind-diesel system.
The Draft Conceptual Design Report for the RPSU project does not currently include the prospect of integrating wind energy. Koliganek has received $300,000 for conceptual design and
design completion for the Rural Power System Upgrade (RPSU) project. The 2009 Conceptual Design Report (CDR) will be updated starting in January 2014.
This project proposes that the conceptual designs of both the wind-diesel and RPSU project proceed in coordination. If the projects are designed together, potential retrofitting expenses
will be avoided and savings realized through the elimination of redundancies.
The proposed project is to build and install a Combined Solar Thermal and Wood Pellet Boiler System that would provide heat for both a 3,200 sq ft shop/office and a 1,160 sq ft ? administrative
building. Included in the project is construction of a building addition to house the boiler system, purchase and installation of solar thermal panels and pellet boiler, ?and focused
monitoring and evaluation. The project will also be used as a demonstration projectfor the community to learn about solar thermal and wood pellet boiler systems and to encourage the
use of renewable resources for heating.
Project location: 21117 Myers Avenue Sutton, Alaska 99674
The communities in the Upper Tanana Subregion to be served by this renewable energy project are economically distressed in part caused by the very high cost of electricity at $0.51 per
kWh. These communities currently rely on diesel generation to meet their electric needs.
Renewable energy is a must for this area to remain economically viable during these difficult times. The Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project, first pioneered by Alaska Power and Telephone
(AP&T), would be the first renewable electric energy project for the Upper Tanana Subregion and is now a collaborative effort of the Native Village of Tanacross, Tanacross, Inc. and
AP&T.
The project site can be accessed at MP 1339 of the Alaska Highway
This project focuses on installing a solar hot water thermal system in each of the eleven Northwest Arctic Borough schools to provide a year around economical source of hot water. Currently,
each school?s hot water heater is part of the heating plant, which is separate from each building. For example, the Kotzebue school?s hot water is heated indirectly with hot glycol
from a boiler module, which also provides space heating. The boiler water heats the school?s two huge plate and frame heat exchangers where the schools glycol/water-heating medium is
heated. Hot glycol is then circulated through a plate type heat exchanger (for 115 degree water) and an Amtrol hot water maker for 140-degree hot water.
During the warmest months of the school year, the school must run a boiler to make hot water. One boiler contains 385 gallons of water, the piping that connects it with the plate and
frame heat exchangers contain approximately 200 gallons. Thus there are times when the school does not need space heating, but does have need for hot water; just as all the other school?s
do.
The proposed project is an approximately 200 kW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Cascade Creek at MP 35 of the Richardson Highway. The project would provide power to CVEA via a
proposed 14-mile line extension or tie into the 138 kV transmission line that runs within ? mile of the project site.
This project expands the Tuntutuliak Wind Heat Smart Grid System by from 30 to 50 electric thermal storage devices (ETS). ETS units are used to capture and store surplus wind energy
and use it to displace home heating fuel. The increase in the number of residential ETS units is needed to absorb wind generated energy during modest to high wind periods, which occur
in throughout the fall and winter, when heating requirements are the greatest. The addition of 20 ETS units increases the productivity and efficiency of the existing wind system.
This project expands existing Kongiganak Wind Heat Smart Grid System by adding additional electric thermal storage (ETS) devices. The units themselves have been in production since the
mid-1980?s as electric heat sources, but have only recently been advanced to include Grid Interactive Controls for renewable energy sources. Currently, the units and their controls
are considered ?off the shelf? technology and are readily available. The ETS units proposed for installation in this project are already in use in 20 homes in Kongiganak (Kong) and
have realized those homes 30-50% fuel decreases (in home heating fuel) in the 10 months they have been in use. Kong has operational, utility scale, wind turbine project that produces
excess wind capacity. This capacity needs to be used or the turbine production must be governed in a way that energy is wasted. Additional ETS units will provide an outlet to maximize
the use of wind power to displace diesel fuel for both power generation and heating.
The Village of Igiugig seeks funding to complete the final feasibility of our wind resource and conceptual design to verify the economic viability of a wind-diesel electric generation
facility. A Rural Power Systems Upgrade was completed in 2011, and a preliminary wind feasibility study was completed by Knight-Piesold Consulting in 2012. Igiugig has a class 3-4 wind
resource, and with the higher cost of diesel and the increasing electrical demand, it was determined that a high-penetration wind turbine system is economically viable. A final feasibility
study and conceptual design with a construction cost estimate remains to be completed. The total cost of the project is $110,000 and the Lake and Peninsula Borough has committed a $20,000
match. Igiugig Village is providing a $10,000 in-kind match, and requesting the additional $80,000 needed.
This project expands existing Kwigillingok Wind Heat Smart Grid System by expanding electric thermal storage (ETS) devices from 20 to 50 units.
The ETS units proposed for installation in this project are in use in 27 homes in Kwigillingok (Kwig). Kwig has an operational, utility scale wind turbine project that produces excess
wind capacity. Additional ETS units will maximize the use of wind power to displace diesel fuel for both power generation and heating.
TDX Power intends to build on a successful wind?diesel power system at Sand Point, Alaska, by adding an energy storage component to its Sand Point Generating power plant. The additional
hardware ? inverter and battery bank ? will allow the utility to purchase more wind power from the existing turbines and shut off the diesel engines for approximately 30% of the year.
The project includes the final design, procurement, installation and commissioning of an inverter and battery bank and integration with the existing wind?diesel power system in Sand
Point, Alaska.
AVEC proposes to complete construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of four wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation system for currently intertied communities
of St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point. As a part of this project, AVEC will upgrade the electrical distribution line between St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point to a 3- phase line and upgrade the
joint power plant to accommodate wind turbine energy generators. This project has been in planning for over 10 years, and with funding from this grant AVEC will complete the St. Mary?s
wind farm.
The proposed project is located near the village of Stebbins on St. Michael Island. Stebbins is located approximately 430 miles northwest of Anchorage, on the south side of Norton Sound.
Stebbins is 8 air miles from the village of St. Michael. This project will benefit both the communities of Stebbins and St. Michael as an intertie to connect the two communities and
a new joint power plant will be constructed
by 2015.
AVEC proposes to complete a conceptual design report (CDR) for a wind energy project in Mountain Village. This project will move the project towards the goal of reducing fuel usage by
establishing a renewable energy resource in the community. A met tower collected data east of Mountain Village from November 2009 to August 2011. A wind resource report was completed
and revealed a low Class 5 (excellent) wind resource with an average wind speed of 7.62 m/s. Work under this grant will include updating the wind resource report, conducting a geotechnical
investigation at a proposed wind site, completing the CDR with the preliminary design of a wind farm.
Building on the results of the completed Conceptual Design Report (attached in Tab G), Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is proposing to complete the final design and
permitting to install three Northern Power Systems NPS 100-24 turbines, each with a 95 kilowatt (kW) installed wind capacity (aggregate generating capacity of 285 kW), to the existing
diesel power generation system in Marshall. Once work done under this grant is completed, AVEC will seek funding to construct the turbines. A met tower in the proposed turbine site
has collected 21 months of data. A wind resource report has been completed based on data from the met tower and has revealed a Class 4 (good) wind resource at the site with an average
wind speed of 6.30 m/s.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), the electrical utility provider in Old Harbor, is proposing to complete final design and permitting of a hydroelectric project in Old
Harbor, Alaska. The 262 kW (initial; nominal) basin diversion project will be located on East Fork Mountain Creek and Lagoon Creek Tributary. The project will be capable initially of
generating an average of about 2,018,924 kWh annually and could grow to an annual generation of 2,725,646 kWh when demand warrants and an additional turbine is installed. The project
will run year-round and meet all the existing and future electricity demands of the community.
The Native Village of Chenega (aka. Chenega Bay) proposes to construct a run-of-the-river hydroelectric project on Anderson Creek. The planned 64 kW capacity project will offset power
currently generated by burning diesel. The non-jurisdictional hydro will offset up to 10,406 gallons of diesel annually which translates into $56,600 in annual savings. Engineering
design is 95% complete and permit applications to the appropriate agencies have been submitted.
This project entails the construction of a ground-mounted, stand-alone solar energy system to manage the energy capacities of the Iliamna Village Council and adjacent maintenance buildings,
eventually adding houses and/or additional community facilities to this solar energy powered system as funds permit. Further study will take place during Phase I of this project to
assess the measure of insolation in our location, to determine how much sunlight will be available for solar panels to convert into electricity and how many hours of peak sunlight the
location receives per day, making adjustments for Net Metering with the local power company, or for a battery-storage system. We will assess the number of devices that will be electrically
powered in total for both buildings, and the total kWh and wattage consumption of these devices. An assessment must also be performed to determine an accurate cost for both buildings?
heating fuel requirements. Once a thorough energy cost assessment has been completed, Phase I will meld into Phase II as further assessments are implemented to develop cost evaluations
for installing a solar electric system to successfully power total electric energy consumption requirements, as well as solar energy systems to manage both buildings? heating needs,
taking into account plausible separate and hybrid systems. Phase II will also entail developing a detailed evaluation intended to further assess the technical, economic, financial,
and operational viability of the project. Phase II will be completed by narrowing the focus of our final ground mounted solar panel design and construction plans, to prepare for future
final design and implementation of the Project, and establish pre-construction equipment, shipment costs, time-frames etc.
The City of False Pass requests Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) funding through the Renewable Energy Grant Program (RFA 2014-006) to complete Phase II Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual
Design Requirements (Project) for a proposed tidal energy project at False Pass in the Isanotski Straight. The City of False Pass, like most communities of the Aleutian Islands, depends
on diesel fuel to meet their electricity and heating needs. While diesel fuel is currently the most practical option for such communities, it also creates economic, energy security
and environmental problems?it has a disproportionately high carbon dioxide (CO2) output compared to other power generation systems?at both local and global levels. The City of False
Pass, fortunately, is situated near a significant hydrokinetic (tidal) resource at the Isanotski Straight that offers a potential to significantly reduce, or eliminate, the use of diesel
fuel. The viability of this resource was confirmed through a reconnaissance study funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Tribal Energy Program that included measurement of the
current velocities in the vicinity of False Pass through a full lunar cycle. This Project proposes to build on the completed reconnaissance study to accelerate efforts to develop this
tidal energy resource. The following goals will be achieved in this Project: (1) measure current velocities and collect turbulence data at 3-5 sites selected for potential deployment
of tidal turbines based on University of Alaska (UAA) circulation modeling, (2) analyze the data from the field effort including extending UAA modeling efforts to select the optimal
site(s) for tidal turbine placement, (3) collect existing environmental data and develop draft environmental study plans in consultation with regulatory agencies, (4) initiate stakeholder
outreach efforts, (5) collect additional geophysical data required to inform engineering of the project, and (6) complete a conceptual design and economic analysis for a tidal energy
project at False Pass. The Project Team is comprised of the City of False Pass; Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Inc. (APIA); Aleutian Pribilof Islands Community Development Association
(APICDA); University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA); Benthic GeoScience, Inc.; National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and ORPC Alaska, LLC (ORPC).
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant, the City Office, and the Boys and Girls Club. The estimated fuel oil savings
to these facilities is projected to be 18,879 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached updated Emmonak, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility
Study. (Note that the potential savings noted above are contingent on the completion of proposed renovations to the power plant.)
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant/washeteria. The estimated fuel oil savings to the community water plant and
washeteria is projected to be 3794 gallons of heating oil per year.
For more detailed information, see the attached updated Holy Cross, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
After careful consideration of the potential hydropower sources in the Cosmos Hills, as documented in the Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design Report, AVEC has chosen to move forward
with design and permitting for a hydroelectric project on the Kogoluktuk River. The Kogoluktuk River project would be a run-of-river project with a small diversion dam and intake, a
long above-ground penstock pipeline, a
small Kaplan turbine and powerhouse, and a tailrace back to the river. The project would also include an access road, a transformer, and a high-voltage transmission line. At this location,
the upstream basin catchment area is approximately 424 square miles.
Northwest Artie Borough is seeking $447,800.00 from this Grant Program on behalf of Noatak and Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC), to add a solar energy component to the
existing diesel power generation system that serves the community. Northwest arctic Borough will construct a new 52.5 kW array of 210 pc. 250W, Photovoltaic (PV) modules in Noatak,
Alaska. The array will be inclined at 34 degrees from May through September, and 90 degrees the remainder of the year to take advantage of the solar angle at this northerly location.
The annual power production of the array is estimated to be approximately 49,500 kWh (with shading). The solar array will be located on a lot of land under discussion near the powerplant.
A Feasibility study was performed for a system of similar size in 2008, see attached. A request for funding was turned in at that time for round 1, Renewable Energy Fund. Since that
time fuel prices have increased and equipment( Solar Arrays) have come down in price. This have made the project more economically feasible. Considering that no other renewable energy
option is available for Noatak as Wind and Hydro is below development stage, Solar-PV is a good match for this community. Additionally Solar-PV is being successfully installed and integrated
for the regions Water-plants to help offset the use of Diesel fuel and lower the cost of living.
The Newtok community must move due to the erosion of the existing community site and based on the Mertarvik Relocation Plan, the time has arrived to begin the study and development of
an efficient energy project for the new site. Ungusraq Power Company (UPC) is the independent power producer for the community of Newtok, Alaska. This proposed UPC project will begin
the conceptual and preliminary design and feasibility study work necessary to utilize the least diesel fuel and to maximize the renewable energy resources for: electrical and heat generation
production systems at the new Mertarvik community site.
The proposed project is for wind field data collection, analysis and preliminary engineering design. Wind field data collection will require a one year collection period as recommended
by AEA for location of wind generators. The wind data will be analyzed and used for the design of the wind generators and related facilities. The City of Adak has completed a hydroelectric
power feasibility analysis and preliminary engineering prepared by McMillen LLC. The report recommends hydro ? wind generation with pump storage development project that includes hydroelectric
power generation, raising the Lake Bonnie Rose and Lake DeMarie dams, construction of the penstock, powerhouse (2 MW hydro), transmission lines, wind generation (4.5 MW), wind pump
from L. DeMarie to L. Bonnie Rose storage, and associated facilities. Both lakes are in the same watershed. The hydro - wind generation with pump storage project will supply hydro and
wind generated power to the community as well as pump water to the higher elevation Lake Bonnie Rose to store potential energy for conversion into hydropower
generation to the community to meet demand (a buffering effect). The next step in the development process is wind field data collection and analysis to design the wind generation system.
The hydropower feasibility component and preliminary engineering design is complete in the McMillen report.
The City of Seward is the owner of the Alaska SeaLife Center (ASLC), which is leased and operated by the Seward Association of Marine Science (SMMS), doing business as the Alaska SeaLife
Center. In conjunction with SMMS, the City proposes installation of an innovative heat recovery system that captures waste heat from exhaust fans EF-4 & EF-5, minus 80 tissue freezers,
IT .server room, electrical and mechanical room, fan coils and animal and necropsy refrigeration. Heat recovered will be directed to the front end of the seawater heat pump system and
this will increase the coefficient of performance (COP) of this system.
The applicant will work with Energy Unlimited, LLC on final design of an alternative energy system that includes a wind tower, solar panels, and an energy storage system. The products
we intend to use for each of these technologies are tested, warrantied, and commercially available. However, the combination of these technologies to achieve maximum local benefits
is innovative.
Primary heat sources in three municipal publicly accessible buildings will be replaced with two Garn WHS2000 boilers, which will use locally sourced cordwood biomass to provide heat
through a supply loop linking all buildings. Existing antiquated hydronic heating systems in each building will be replaced and upgraded to improve efficiency an estimated 25%. Concurrent
to this project, VEEP projects (Yakutat is a 2013 VEEP recipient) will be conducted to increase envelope efficiency per AEA statewide goal of 15%. AEA-required performance metering
is addressed through ACEP subcontract. With significant local match and good project partners, we are seeking the funding for Phases III and IV: final design, purchase and installation
of 2 Garn WHS2000 boilers, pipe installation and associated link up plumbing to all three buildings in the district heating loop. The project also includes construction of a separate
boiler building and a cordwood storage/drying building. Per standard practice, existing oil furnaces will remain as supplemental and emergency back-up heat systems. The City and Borough
of Yakutat, along with Yak-tat-Kwaan, want to ensure that we install the most effective technologically and economically appropriate equipment for our biomass district heating loop.
We are pleased to have the interest of Garn Boiler Company in participating in this application based on the estimate for the equipment they suggested as most appropriate for the buildings
involved. Garn has a proven track record of installing and operating their equipment in several locations in Alaska, including at least two that we know of in the coastal SE Alaska
environment. It is our plan to also closely monitor developments in the biomass energy world, and we recognize that this technology sector is evolving. During the 9th month period of
AEA review, legislative approval and appropriation, CBY and Yak-tat-Kwaan will continue to monitor technological development. One of our goals for the project is to link Yak-tat Kwaan?s
forest management program and the biomass products produced with the installed boiler technology and have the best opportunity for expansion and integration of future biomass projects.
CBY is prepared to operate and maintain this project, and has demonstrated ability to operate energy infrastructure through the electric utility, Yakutat Power.
Project Locations in Yakutat, AK:
City Hall Building: 309 Max Italio Drive, Court House Building: 120 Max Italio Drive,, Yakutat Community Center: 100 Ridge Road.
This project will provide recovered heat from the new Nunam Iqua power plant to the washeteria/water treatment plant for building heat; the water treatment plant for process heat; and
to the Clinic, Community Hall and Corporation Store for building heat. The delivery system will include supply and return lines; BTU meters, heat exchangers and unit heaters. The estimated
combined fuel reduction is 18,000 gallons per year with an expected annual savings of roughly $79,000.
The project will include extending a new hot water heating I return loop from the recently completed Biomass Heating Plant to two (2) additional buildings on the Tok School Campus and
will include the required integration work within the two buildings.
The first building is the multipurpose building which houses an ice hockey rink and shooting range. The intent is to use the biomass plant to heat the shooting range and toilet group
portion of the multipurpose building, approximately 10,000 square feet.
The second building is the Zamboni garage which would approximately 1 ,400 square feet. The heating loop will connect to the Tok School Biomass Plant that was completed in the fall of
2010. (The Tok School Biomass Plant was developed using AEA Round I Grant Funding.
The project consisted of a Biomass heating facility that contained an automated biomass heating system that now provides heat to the existing K-12 School.) Since the completion of the
Tok School Biomass Plant a steam turbine and electrical generation system have been added to create a combined heat and power (CHP) system. The original biomass boiler was sized to
allow for the CHP expansion and the additional load of the multipurpose building and Zamboni garage. The CHP project was completed the fall of 2012. When the CHP system is in operation
it generates a substantial amount of heat as a byproduct. The heat created currently surpasses the required heat demand of the existing K-12 School. The intent is to recover the surplus
heat and supply it to meet the heating demand of the additional buildings mentioned above. The cost for maintenance and operation as well as for biomass fuel will be negated for this
project due to the current operation of the CHP system.
Project Location: 249 Jon Summar Road
This project will consist of a 50 kW (d.c. rating) ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV) system, to be installed next to the school building. The PV system will generate clean, renewable
power for decades to come, reducing the amount of electricity the school buys from the local utility and reducing pollution associated with burning fossil fuels. The system will also
provide an opportunity for the school?s students and the wider community to learn about PV. The system will be composed of (200) 250-watt photovoltaic (PV) collector panels (e.g. Solarworld
250W monocrystalline or equivalent), 50 kW DC to AC power inverter capacity (multiple smaller inverters, e.g. SMA Sunnyboy 6000TL) and a data acquisition system with a graphical display
inside the building and accessible through the Internet. The panels will be wired in multiple DC series circuits called strings. The strings will be wired to a combiner box, then connect
to the power inverter(s) which transforms the DC power into AC power suitable for use by the building?s existing electrical system. The inverter assures that the PV generated power
is compatible with the power supplied by the utility grid and will disconnect from the electrical system in the event of a utility power outage to prevent ?back feed? to the utility
grid. The proposed system is sized to supplement current electric usage and peak demand only, as it will not store power. The proposed system will be interconnected with the electrical
system and controlled to ?follow? the existing systems? electrical characteristics.
A dedicated data acquisition system tied directly to the inverter will display the performance of the PV system and describe how it works through a dedicated live display setup in the
lobby. A revenue grade utility meter will also be installed on the PV system to accurately measure the power generated. The existing electric systems supply 208-volt, three phase power
for larger loads and 120-volt, single-phase for most of the distributed loads from a three phase service provided by NEA. The average monthly electric demand for the school is approximately
137 kW.
This phase of the Barrow to Atqasuk Transmission Line Project is for final design and permitting required for the construction of the transmission line as wells as home and building
conversions to electric space heating.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a wind energy and area-wide energy management system, consisting of wind diesel integration, end-use energy efficiency, automated building controls,
and conservation. This phase of the project is the design and permitting phase of a three phase project which will include a phase for construction and commissioning for three anticipated
wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution system for the community of Kaktovik. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough(NSB), a contracted
engineering/design firm, and Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont (wind turbine experts and supplier). The contractor will provide overall project management and system engineering
during this phase of the project. During the construction phase, NSB will recruit an engineering and construction contractor for design and installation of all civil works, erection
of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100B model wind turbines plus startup & commissioning services.
The City of Galena is requesting AEA Round VII funding to provide a sustainable and predictable energy resource for its school district. The Galena Community Wood Heat Project will substantially
reduce high costs for heat for the Galena Interior Learning Academy School (GILA) by utilizing woody biomass harvested and processed from local forests. The project will implement Phase
IV Construction over an eighteen (18) month period to construct and install a biomass boiler system for the GILA campus. Local coordination among the stakeholders group is strong, infrastructure
and administrative resources are in place to support the project, and the Galena City School District has committed to purchasing the resulting heat. Existing Feasibility Studies and
strategic community planning documents align with the project.
The proposed project will assess hydroelectric and hydrokinetic resource potential and economics of the Tanalian River for providing electric energy to the Community of Port Alsworth.
Reconnaissance of hydroelectric at Tanalian Falls has already been complete and this project will include the feasibility and conceptual design of hydroelectric at the waterfalls. Due
to land use designations at the proposed hydroelectric power plant we would also like to include a reconnaissance of in-river hydrokinetic along the Tanalian River. This portion of
the proposed project has documented National Park Service support and may be a viable option for an alternate location of hydropower.
This project will provide waste heat from the AVEC electrical power plant to water treatment plant (WTP). The expected annual savings is 5,261 gallons, or approximately half of the total
heat demand. For more detailed information, see the attached Grayling, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the newly constructed clinic. The fuel oil savings to the clinic is projected to be 2,300 gallons of
heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached updated Venetie, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the AVEC electrical power plant to the city shop, water circulation loops, cold storage/hotel, and city office buildings. The expected annual
fuel savings is 15,726 gallons, which is approximately equivalent to the total heat demand of three buildings plus the water system. For more detailed information, see the attached
St. Mary\'s, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water system via a heating connection into the circulating water distribution loop. The fuel oil
savings to the community water system is projected to be 4,000 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached updated Eek, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery
Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the Water Treatment Plant and Vacuum Sewer Plant. The estimated fuel oil savings to the water treatment
plant and vacuum sewer plant is projected to be 12,500 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached updated Chevak, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility
Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant and washeteria. The project will install marine manifolds on the existing diesel
generators and provide the recovered heat to the water system. The current estimate of fuel savings is 14,726. However, an intertie of the power system is planned with the neighboring
village of Teller. If that project proceeds, available heat may be increased to up to 33,000 gallons of equivalent heat. For more detailed information, see the attached, updated Brevig
Mission, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will perform initial design, right-of-way planning, and environmental work for transmission lines between the communities shown in Table 2.2.1 in the region. This project
will connect closest and largest population center villages shown in table 2.2.1. This initial village group connection is a critical foundation block for the region intertie system,
and enables access to alternative energy options. All communities currently have diesel power plants. Subsequent phases to complete design and perform construction are contingent upon
the technical findings and community acceptance under this phase.
The objective of the Kotzebue Paper and Wood Waste to Energy Project is to replace fuel oil fired boilers with refuse derived fuel (RDF) and wood fired boilers in two city owned buildings.
Feedstock for this system will consist of sorted and separated cardboard, newspaper, mixed paper, and wood materials from the city of Kotzebue waste stream. The city\'s waste management
equipment will be used to collect materials, either as source-separated material from the producers or mixed with the city\'s MSW waste stream. RDF fuel will be separated from the waste
stream in the Bailer building, in conjunction with an aluminum and tin recycling program.
Project Location: 258 Third Avenue Kotzebue, Alaska
Ketchikan Gateway Borough seeks to secure its future energy independence through the construction of two biomass-fired building heating systems. The woody biomass fired boilers will
replace outdated heating oil boilers, which are costly to maintain and run on heating oil number 2, which is more expensive than locally sourced woody biomass. These systems will, in
turn help to stabilize and secure the forest products industry of Southeast Alaska through the sourcing of locally-produced wood pellets.
The project is a high head run-of-river hydroelectric power plant on Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon with an installed capacity of 167kW. The first phase of this project, currently under
construction, includes a 480 square foot powerhouse, a 1,500 foot long access road with a bridge across Packers Creek to the powerhouse, a 3,260 foot long access trail to the intake,
as well as supply of the turbine, generator, and switchgear. This grant funds the second phase of this project which includes a 9-foot tall concrete dam, a 3,260 foot long 18-inch and
16-inch diameter penstock, a 1,750 foot long overhead power line extension to the existing distribution system and 3,000 foot long control connection to the existing diesel power plant,
interconnection to the existing diesel plant controls, addition of dispatchable electric heat to the existing diesel plant waste heat system feeding the school, environmental upgrades
to Packers Creek at the Powerhouse location required by ADF&G, and start-up and commissioning of the new hydroelectric power plant.
The Reconnaissance Study of Tenakee Inlet Geothermal Resource funded by Alaska Energy Authority Renewable Energy Grant #7040073 was completed in July 2013. The reconnaissance study was
the first time this geothermal resource had been significantly studied. The surface expression of the resource is four hot springs that occur together near the base of a hill approximately
200 feet high in a rugged, isolated, stream valley on Chichagof Island in southeast Alaska. During the field effort in September 2011, the hot springs had surface water temperatures
of between 1610F to 1760F. Geochemical sampling of water and soil, a shallow temperature survey, and geological mapping occurred in this first field effort. Later fieldwork in the spring
and summer of 2012 included infrared imaging of the area, additional shallow temperature survey, and CO2 gas survey.
The purpose of this phase of the project is to further evaluate the viability of the geothermal resource by 1) obtaining Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data to locate faults and
obtain topographical information for design; 2) drill two slim holes to about 2,500 feet each and conduct well testing; 3) conduct an environmental assessment to address agency and
environmental issues; 4) prepare a conceptual design to develop the resource; and 5) refine the economic analysis based on the conceptual design and more detailed economic parameters.
The primary goal of the site work during this phase would be to collect the information needed to verify resource viability and evaluate whether this project should be considered for
Phase 3 investigation and development. The drill holes will be approximately 10 inches in diameter necking down to approximately 2.5 inch core hole. Each well will have a temperature/pressure
survey conducted and rock chip samples will be analyzed for fluid inclusions and alterations. If the wells penetrate the reservoir we will conduct flow tests on the wells and collect
water samples for chemical analysis. The location, depth, size and flow characteristics are important parameters that determine the viability of the geothermal resource. Evaluating
those parameters was beyond the scope of the Phase 1 reconnaissance study. If found viable, the results of this Phase 2 investigation would provide information necessary to support
the development phase of the project.
<Project description edited for reporting purposes. See original application for full scope of work.>
The proposed Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie is a 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan Public Utilities
(KPU). The Intertie will include 14 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line on Annette Island between Metlakatla and Walden Point and an approximate three mile submarine cable
crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Walden Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation. The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for the integrated operation
of the interconnected systems? generating plants.
Final design of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie is underway.
Construction of the line began in June 2010 and the overhead line to the new ferry terminal at Walden Point was completed in August 2013.
The line to the ferry terminal is scheduled to be energized at 12.47-kV in the fall of 2013.
The control system upgrades were completed in July 2011.
The City and Borough of Sitka is applying for design and construction of a sea water source heat pump system to displace 100% of the heating oil usage of the existing 11,000 sq ft historic
Sage Memorial Building that has been home to the Sitka Sound Science Center (SSSC) since 2010.
The Science Center has already conducted significant feasibility and reconnaissance work on this project. With the help of the Rasmuson Foundation and Foraker Group, they have conducted
an energy audit, a heat pump evaluation, and a master plan for the facility. A significant amount of funds have been raised to improve the energy efficiency of the structure through
renovations of roof, windows and exterior. These renovations will compliment the project proposed here. Raw sea water flow of up to 85 gallons per minute will serve as the heat source.
The sea water is drawn from a depth of 65 ft via an existing 8? intake line and shoreside pump station. A buried manifold pipe delivers sea water in to the basement of the building
where the heat pump system will be located. The sea water will transfer heat thru a titanium plate heat exchanger to a glycol loop that in turn will serve as the source side of the
new heat pumps. Three 84,000 BTU/hour high efficiency water to water heat pumps will be installed in the existing mechanical room. The existing heating oil boiler and electric boiler
will be replaced by the three new heat pumps. On the load (hot) side of the heat pumps, two buffer tanks will be heated from 115F to 145F, these will in turn supply hydronic heat to
new low temperature baseboards also included in the project. A heat pump controller will modulate the temperature of the hydronic heat based on outdoor air temperature. This project
will be the first sea water source heat pump system in Sitka, and the first water source heat pump system in Sitka to displace 100% of its existing annual heating oil and electric resistance
heat. The proposed heat pump system is anticipated to perform with a seasonal COP of 3 or greater, due in great part to the reliably warm sea water from Sitka Sound.
Project Location: 834 Lincoln Street, Sitka AK 99835
The project is the installation of a single biomass heating system serving the Minto Multi-Purpose Building/ Lodge and the Health Clinic. The project will reduce the cost of heat by
offseting 11,400 gallons of fuel oil with 99 cords of firewood per year. The biomass heat system will be located in a stand-alone building (new construction) located adjacent to the
project buildings. The project site and all project buildings are controlled by the Village of Minto. The wood fuel will be sourced from nearby forests owned by Seth-De-Ya-Ah Corporation,
which has provided a letter of commitment for the project. Fuel harvests will be completed by Minto?s trained wildfire crew, and the crew boss has provided a letter of support for the
project. A harvest plan will be completed by Tanana Chiefs Conference, and is included as part of the project budget. The project emerges from significant community energy planning
efforts and project prioritization, including the US DOE Strategic Technical Assistance Response Team (START) program and wood energy assessment supported by the Alaska Wood Energy
Development Task Group.
Funding is being requested to help support the costs of final design, permitting and construction of a ground source heat pump system to displace approximately 75% of the heating oil
usage of the 17,191 sq. ft. Seldovia House Senior Housing Complex. Seldovia House is an 18-unit housing complex serving low income senior citizens living in Seldovia. The total annual
cost for heating oil for 2012 heating season (Jan 2012-Dec 2012) was $56,461. A field of ten vertical wells, 6? diameter x 300 ft. depth, will be located under the existing parking
area and will serve as the heat source. A manifold loop of buried HDPE piping with methanol/water mixture will connect the wells to two high efficiency water to water heat pumps installed
in the existing mechanical room. One of the existing heating oil boilers will be replaced by the two new heat pumps. On the load (hot) side of the heat pumps, buffer tanks will be heated
from 130F to 145F, these will in turn supply heat to both hydronic space heating and domestic hot water. A heat pump/boiler controller will integrate the heating oil boiler such that
supplemental heat will be provided when the heat pump capacity is exceeded on cold winter days. The goal of the ground source heat pump project is to displace approximately 75% of the
heating oil currently used annually in the building for space heating and domestic hot water heating.
The Flywheel Energy Storage Systems (FESS) for Kodiak Pier Electric Crane is the installation and integration of two (2) ABB modular PowerStore flywheel energy storage units at the City
of Kodiak?s Pier III. Modernizing Kodiak?s shipping infrastructure with an electric crane instead of a diesel-powered crane requires KEA to install the two new ABB flywheel energy storage
systems, each with one (1) megawatt (MW) of generating capacity, in order to safely integrate the crane?s electrical load demand onto KEA?s isolated grid. This project allows KEA to
be the energy solution for the communities of Kodiak Island by making it possible to power a critical component of the City with locally generated, clean renewable energy. The versatile
grid?stabilizing flywheel generator would mitigate the sudden increase in electric load caused by the operation of a high?powered electric cargo crane, and would also supplement KEA?s
existing Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) for systemwide electric grid support and conserve water utilized at the hydro facility. By being first?in?line to respond to rapid micro?second
grid frequency fluctuations, the FESS optimizes the range of frequency and voltage support provided by KEA?s other renewable generation, thereby making KEA?s entire grid system more
robust. This project is the next step in advancing KEA?s renewable energy vision for the benefit of all Alaskans by bringing renewable energy to more sectors of Kodiak Island and by
demonstrating a new energy storage technology in Alaska.
The proposed project is a feasibility study of a 3 MW storage hydroelectric project on Jack River near Cantwell. The hydro project?s output would be sold to the local electric utility,
Golden Valley Electric Association, Inc. (GVEA) to reduce GVEA?s reliance on diesel and naptha for generation. Other project configurations with installed capacity ranging from 1.6
to 7.3 MW were identified in the 2013 Reconnaissance Study and may be considered in the feasibility study.
The proposed project is a reconnaissance study of a 1 to 2 MW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Carlo Creek near the Parks Highway approximately 10 miles north of Cantwell. The hydro
project?s output would be sold to the local electric utility, Golden Valley Electric Association, Inc. (GVEA) to reduce GVEA?s reliance on diesel and naptha for generation.
The Chisana Mountain Wind Feasibility Project would consist of installing a single 50 meter meteorological tower (met tower) to record wind velocities, temperature, and humidity to determine
if this site is feasible for a wind turbine installation to generate electricity for the Tok power grid.
This project consists of the installation of a dispatchable electric energy system to supply electric space heat to designated buildings regularly used by the general public of Atka.
The energy to power the system will come from excess electricity available from the recently completed Chuniixsax Creek hydroelectric plant. The existing hydro-electric controls will
be reprogrammed to support the dispatchable system. Each installation will include replacement of the existing electric meter with a duplex meter base to meter dispatched energy separate
from building power; a new dispatchable energy panel and controller; an electric boiler; unit heaters or baseboards; wiring; and hydronic heating connections.
IPEC proposes to conduct a Feasibility Study for the Gunnuk Watershed. In 1977, the Alaska Power Authority identified two potential hydroelectric projects near Kake. The focus was
on the Gunnuk Creek water shed. However, the projects were never pursued due to the relatively low cost of diesel fuel which was less than $1.00 per gallon at that time. Since then
diesel has risen sharply to over $4.00 per gallon making the potential for this hydro project more attractive as a more economical power source for the community.
THREA proposes to conduct a Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design in an effort to further prove the Walker Lake Hydro Project and apply for a FERC license. The Project is expected
to have a 1 megawatt power output, generating 3,615 MWH of energy, using an estimated 780 feet of head and 18 cfs of flow year-round using Walker Lake as a reservoir. Two small earthen
dams will raise the lake elevation from 1,180 ft to 1,195 ft, increasing the reservoir storage capacity to allow for year-round power production. A penstock will run from two small
dam locations and join together to supply an 11,000 ft long buried penstock that terminates at the powerhouse next to Little Salmon River. THREA proposes to work with IPEC to provide
the lowest cost power from the project to benefit of IPEC\'s members in the Chilkat Valley and Klukwan service areas and the Upper Lynn Canal (ULC) grid.
Swan Lake is currently comprised of a concrete arch dam, 174\' high and 430\' long at its crest, which is located approximately 3/4 mile downstream from the mouth of the original Swan
Lake. SEAPA proposes a 15-foot lake raise, and a new reservoir level of 345 feet, raising the crest of the dam to 350 feet. SEAPA would install a 15-foot high Obermeyer gate system
as shown below in the existing spillway to achieve the new maximum normal operating pool level of 345 feet. The intake structure would need to be raised to contain the maximum operating
pool of 345 feet. This would require raising the concrete intake structure, relocating the gate hoist equipment, and increasing the gate lift shaft.
Applicant accepted delivery of a 34-meter meteorological tower (\'Met Tower\') from the Alaska Energy Authority in July 2013 and seeks to conduct a reconnaissance and feasibility analysis
to determine if it is feasible to use wind power to supplement the energy needs and displace diesel for the communities serviced by SEAPA. After the site assessment has determined the
most suitable site for collection of raw wind data, the MET Tower will be installed to gather two (2) years of wind data for a thorough analysis. An analysis of the wind data and a
final report will be performed by a qualified consultant specializing in the field.
This project will install biomass pellet boilers in ten borough buildings; The Haines School and Pool, The Chilkat Center, The Sewer Treatment Plant, The Water Treatment Plant, The Vocational
Education Building, The Library, The old City Shop, The new City Shop, The Public Safety Building and The Sheldon Museum.
A Phase II Feasibility Study would be carried out, including the following tasks
? Project scoping
? Detailed energy resource analysis
? Identification of land and regulatory issues
? Permitting and environmental analysis
? Detail analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets
? Assessment of alternatives
? Conceptual design analysis and cost estimate
? Conceptual business and operations plan
? Final report and recommendations
Currently, all electric power in Edna Bay is provided by private gas or diesel generators. Significant gains in efficiency and reliability would be realized with the installation of
a diesel power plant integrated with a hydroelectric Archimedes type screw driven generator distribution system. The proposed project is a reconnaissance study for the potential of
Survey Creek to provide Hydroelectric power to the community of Edna Bay. In addition, the feasibility of constructing a power plant and distribution system also needs to be evaluated.
Besides private homes, the electric service would also serve businesses (including saw mills, the General Store, and the Post Office), the school, the church, and AP&T?s communication
site.
This project will complete the necessary design and permitting for the recommended hydroelectric project in Chignik Bay, AK. The existing hydro project currently only serves as the community\'s
raw source and transmission and does not produce power for the City. The existing
project is in imminent danger of failing and a replacement dam and pipeline will be required in the near future. This work will fulfill the design and permitting needs of the replacement
project.
Our project will serve four school communities and we intend to use wood biomass and replacing diesel as the energy source by installing wood fired boilers. We anticipate the result
of greatly reduced heating costs for the schools and associated buildings. Thorne Bay School received a grant in 2009 to install two Garn wood fired boiler units, and while the system
has been operating, it has proven too small for the job. The units currently in use, (proto-types), can easily be moved with a forklift, so part of the proposal is to install them at
two other school sites, Whale Pass and Hollis Schools. In order to heat the facility in Thorne Bay which includes a teacher housing unit and a hydroponic greenhouse, the current system
would be replaced with 2 Garn 3200\'s, and a structure built to house the boilers. Very little reconstruction would be necessary in Thorne Bay due to the portability of the current
Garn Pacs. In Whale Pass and Hollis, structures would be built to house the boilers. Wood storage buildings will also be constructed. At Naukati School we would install a wood fired
boiler and build the housing for it as well as for wood storage. The Naukati School is the same size as Howard Valentine School, Coffman Cove, in our district, where we have an operating
Garn system. Naukati will be modeled after the Coffman Cove set-up. Money saved on the fuel costs will be re-invested in the school, resulting in more direct service to our students.
This project involves placing cord wood fired boilers in the schools. The supplemental heating system would be located at the Hydaburg City Schools in Hydaburg, AK on Prince of Wales
Island in Southeast Alaska.
We intend to use wood biomass to heat the school buildings replacing diesel as the energy source. The project involves placing four Garn wood fired boilers adjacent to the school site
and running underground pipes from the wood fired boiler to plumb into the school\'s heating system, four teacher hosing units and a greenhouse.
The Allison Creek Project is a run of the river (ROR) alternative involving construction of a diversion structure on Allison Creek at elevation 1,300 feet. Water will be diverted from
the creek into a 42/36 inch surface / buried penstock to a 6.5 megawatt powerhouse near tidewater.
The wood chip boiler will be centrally located between the four buildings with underground insulated pex pipe running to all four buildings. The pipes will connect to existing boiler
and furnaces through heat exchangers to supply required heat.
Design and construction of an air source heat pump system to displace approximately 95% of the heating oil usage of the expansion and renovation of the 7,752 sq ft Kettleson Memorial
Library at a seasonal efficiency of 220%. The expansion and renovation, which will increase the building to 12,400 sq. ft., will require the replacement of the current constant volume
ventilation system. While the HVAC must be replaced, the base case assumptions include the retaining of the current fuel oil boilers, the use of natural cooling, a conventional variable
air volume ventilation system, and thermal upgrades that would decrease energy consumption by 20% relative to the current structure.
The two air-to-water heat pump units would be situated outdoors and a variable refrigerant flow (VRF) system would pipe refrigerant to the ten indoor fan coils to provide heating or
cooling to the building. Ventilation air would be supplied by energy recovery ventilators that transfer heat from the exhaust or relief air to the fresh air being supplied to each fan
coil unit. The outdoor heat pump assembly would be housed within a louvered enclosure to protect the equipment and lessen noise issues.
Backup heat will be supplied by 360 MBH electric heating coils.
This proposal is a direct result of the attached Renewable Energy Feasibility Analysis, which was completed in July 2012 under a RE Fund Round 3 grant. See Attachment 1.
Design and construction of an effluent heat pump system to displace approximately 95% of the heating oil usage at the Wastewater Treatment Plant on Japonski Island in the City and Borough
of Sitka at a seasonal efficiency of 400%. The existing oil fired boilers have reached the end of their useful life and need to be replaced. The effluent, with an average temperature
nearing 50?F, passes by the boiler room, easing the integration of the heat resource. The effluent from the wastewater treatment plant would pass through an in-line screen prior to
going through a stainless steel plate-and-frame heat exchanger; an antifreeze solution would be heated by the effluent on the other side of the heat exchanger. The refrigerant from
the 868 MBH water-to-water heat pump unit would be heated by the antifreeze solution in the evaporator. Using the vapor compression cycle, the heat pump would then "lift" this heat
to 115?F during the compression cycle, and then transfer that heat to the condenser loop to supply heating appliances. 220 gallons per minute of effluent will be required to provide
sufficient heat to the evaporator under design load conditions. A variable frequency drive on the existing recycled effluent pump will provide the correct flow of effluent to the heat
exchanger under varied heat load conditions. As the Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently designed for 180?F in its heating system, the air handlers, unit heaters, cabinet unit heaters,
and baseboard heaters would need to be replaced to increase the amount of surface area of heating coils to compensate for the 115F temperature hydronic water supplied by the heat pump
system. Backup heat would be supplied by a new 955 MBH fuel oil boiler in conjunction with a storage tank. This proposal is a direct result of the attached Renewable Energy Feasibility
Analysis completed by Alaska Energy Engineering, LLC in July 2012 under a RE Fund Round 3 grant. See Attachment 1.
Design and construction of an air source heat pump system to displace approximately 95% of the heating oil usage of the expansion and renovation of the 19,000 sq ft Harrigan Centennial
Hall at a seasonal efficiency of 220%. The expansion and renovation, which will increase floor space approximately 5,000 sq. ft, will require the replacement of the current ventilation
system. While the HVAC must be replaced, the base case assumptions include the retaining of the current fuel oil boilers, the use of natural cooling supplemented with air-cooled compressor
unit, separate conventional variable air volume ventilation systems for the museum, auditorium, and office units, and thermal upgrades that would decrease energy consumption by 20%
relative to the current structure.
The six air-to-water heat pump units would be situated outdoors and a variable refrigerant flow (VRF) system would pipe refrigerant to the 16 indoor fan coils to provide heating or cooling
to the building. Ventilation air would be supplied by energy recovery ventilators that transfer heat from the exhaust or relief air to the fresh air being supplied to each fan coil
unit. The outdoor heat pump assembly would be housed within a louvered enclosure to protect the equipment and lessen noise issues.
Backup heat would be supplied by electric heating coils with a total capacity of 930 MBH.
This proposal is a direct result of the attached Renewable Energy Feasibility Analysis, which was completed July 2012 under a RE Fund Round 3 grant. See Attachment 1.
This project will consist of engineering and layout, acquiring the machinery and installation of fuel delivery systems and biomass boilers to be integrated into the existing heat system
of the Craig High School and thus eliminate the use of oil for fuel. The system will use dried wood fuel from the AEA funded dryer at Viking Lumber and benefit Viking by expanding the
market base for dry wood fuel. The installed boilers would heat the 52,219 square foot high school using wood chips generated by operations at a local lumber mill. Feedstock for the
mill and the resulting wood chips comes from timber logged from the nearby Tongass National Forest, Southeast Alaska State Forest, Alaska Native Corporation lands and other private
lands. The project is similar in scope for the Craig Wood Fired Boiler and will share an existing contract to provide wood chips for the boiler. A Preliminary Feasibility Assessment
for Conversion from Fossil Fuel Oil to Wood Heating for the Craig High School, Craig, Alaska was prepared for the Craig city School District by Robert Deering, Biomass Program Manager,
USDA Forest Service, Tongass National Forest. A Copy of the study is attached to this application. An Energy Audit has been completed for the facility and is attached to this application.
The ?Pre-Feasibility Assessment for Integration of Wood-Fired Heating Systems Final Report? dated July 24, 2012 states that, ?Connecting the school with several nearby buildings with
a wood fired district heating system appears to be an economically viable project.? (p. 2 of 13) The buildings for the City of Nenana include the Water Plant and the Fire Department.
The building included for the Nenana Native Council is the Youth Educational Resource Center (YERC), which houses the Early Learning, Head Start, and Youth Center programs. The school
district buildings included in the project are the Nenana City Public School, the Administration Building, the Warehouse/Vocational Education Building, and the Nenana Student Living
Center. Though the Nenana Student Living Center is located approximately six blocks from the Nenana City Public School, the ?Pre-Feasibility Assessment? states, ?The additional energy
saved by connecting several buildings together offsets the significant additional cost of underground piping and pumping costs. . . . Even with the significant piping costs, the extra
pumping energy, and the extra wood fuel needed to offset the heat loss of the long pipe runs, this option remains the strongest relative to other options.? (p. 2 & 3 of 13)
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water system. The fuel oil savings to the community water plant is projected to be 1 ,900 gallons
of heating oil per year.
For more detailed information, see the attached Chuathbaluk, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
The City & Borough of Juneau is proposing the design and construction of a geothermal HVAC system to serve the heating and cooling needs at the new Mendenhall Valley Library (formerly
called the Dimond Park Library in prior AEA grant request). The community of Juneau recently received a $7 million grant from Alaska Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
to construct the new library in Juneau?s Mendenhall Valley. The City & Borough of Juneau Assembly is interested in reducing the carbon footprint of Juneau and reducing the operating
costs of their facilities. The use of a geothermal HVAC system rather than traditional oil-fired boilers and chillers provides an opportunity to achieve both goals of the City & Borough
of Juneau and to expand the use of renewable energy in city facilities.
The Cooperative faces an urgent need to stabilize and lower the cost of electricity to consumers. Improving fuel efficiency in its diesel generation facility NEA will install two highly
efficient waste heat to power (WH2P) systems onto existing diesel-fueled reciprocating engines to increase efficiency and reduce costs. The selected WH2P systems utilize supercritical
carbon dioxide (sCO2) as the working fluid for converting stack heat to electrical power without additional fuel consumption or emissions. The stack heat to power project is scheduled
for completion fifteen (15) months from the authorization to proceed date, and the proposed budget supports all design, fabrication, installation, commissioning, training, management,
and reporting tasks for a $1.94 million investment.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant/washeteria. The estimated fuel oil savings to the community water plant and
washeteria is projected to be 6,600 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached, updated Tuntutuliak, Alaska 2013 Heat Recovery Feasibility
Study.
Karluk is located on the west cost of Kodiak Island in Alaska. The village is cut-off from any road system. Fuel oil has to be shipped by barge to Karluk. Therefore, it is a high energy
cost village with fuel oil at 4.92 $/gal. This project will perform a feasibility study and complete the design & permitting for a wind energy system and a heat recovery system to serve
the existing power plant in Karluk, Alaska. For the wind energy system, wind data from a meteorological monitoring tower already installed at the proposed wind turbine location will
be available for the analysis and design. The wind energy systems would consist of wind turbines installed on the mountain 0. 7 miles south of the existing power plant, the transmission
line to the power plant, and the electric boiler for excess energy utilization. The heat recovery system would consist of upgrading the existing power plant generators with waste heat
recovery units and installing a total length of up to 100011 hydronic heating loop to connect the power plant with the community buildings.
The 9.6MW Mahoney Lake hydroelectric project (FERC License P-11393) will provide Ketchikan and SEAPA-region residents and businesses with 41,743,000 KWH (41.7 GWH) of renewable hydropower
per annum, allowing for continued economic and community growth while displacing use of diesel fuel. Approximately 17,900,000 KWH (17.9 GWH) of power is available between November and
April as winter storage. The most recent (June, 2012) cost estimate for the project is $46,000,000 +/- 20%, making the Mahoney Lake hydroelectric project one of southeast Alaska?s most
affordable options for new hydropower. This alpine lake tap project does not require construction of a dam. This application proposes State participation in the project through grant-funded
cost-sharing in remaining Phase III Final Design and Permitting tasks, and initial IV construction tasks, which will help assure the Mahoney Lake can be constructed in a manner which
benefits the Alaskan public, and provides the additional benefits of supporting new economic growth and job creation.
The proposed project would demonstrate a prototype hydrokinetic turbine through installation of a 100 kW Poncelet Kinetics? turbine. The project will prove the design concepts employed
for debris management, environmental impact, shallow water power generation, and electrical efficiency of the proposed design. The technology proposed to be used was developed by Whitestone
Power and Communications under the trademark Poncelet Kinetics. The project is shovel-ready with all permits and design documents in hand.
This project expands on a previous Feasibility study that has been ongoing for 3 years. In 2010 a Single 175W Solar Array was installed at the proposed location to see if Solar PV would
be feasible for the Northwest Arctic. The panel has been facing south-east and is connected to a single En phase inverter that is Cogenerating with the Kotzebue Electric Association
(KEA) grid. It was found that it produced 165 Kwh during 1 year average @ $ 0.54/Kwh this equals a savings of $ 89.10/year. A build-out of the array to 10 Kw would save the Northwest
Arctic Borough approximately $5,091.66/year in electric bills. This would also be a good match as the Borough operate mainly day time, when the sun is available. The project aims to
match the load of the building and offset just enough energy to try to get to stop the electric meter, this is important as we do not want to be paid for any generated electricity by
the KEA Coop. The project would consist of 42 pc. 240 watt panel, for a total of 10 KWatts configured on the roof of the building in a configuration to match the load of the building.
It would be a "fixed" array, non tracking. It would also be configured in 2 directions, southeast and south, to match the electric needs of the building, so not to overproduce with
one large peak power during the day. Each individual panel will have it\'s own Aurora micro-inverter. The entire array will be displayed and monitored on a website that can be accessed
for educational purposes.
This project will involve exploration and research regarding installation of transmission lines between the communities shown in Table 2.2.1 in the Nuvista region. Some of the communities
have wind turbines and all communities have diesel power plants. The final report will present a plan for connecting communities into small power grids to increase efficiency and reliability.
This project is a feasibility study to evaluate the potential wind resource in Noatak
This proposal will focus on a feasibility assessment and conceptual design for a wood heating system and district heating loop for an office building and lodge owned by the Organized
Village of Kake (OVK), a federally recognized tribe. The overall goal of the feasibility study is to determine what kind of wood heating system will best meet the objective of the tribe?s
energy planning targets which are to: reduce the cost of energy, reduce the environmental impacts of energy consumption, explore locally sourced sustainable energy supplies and to provide
energy related job opportunities. The assessment will expand on previous reconnaissance work performed by Dan Parrent in 2008 (Preliminary Feasibility Assessments for High Efficiency
Low Emission Wood Heating in Kake, Alaska) for the Kake School and Community building and provide an analysis of the economic and social benefits of high efficiency low emission cordwood/multifuel
systems (e.g. Garn and Wood Master) versus pellet systems for the two tribal buildings. The scope of the feasibility study will include assessing the suitability and economics of various
wood boiler systems including storage and delivery infrastructure, comparing the costs of locally sourced cord-wood and imported bulk fuel, conducting a thorough resource inventory
for local cord-wood production and evaluating and comparing the potential of locally sourced wood and imported pellets to create jobs. This feasibility study will also include collaboration
with efforts of the Renewable Energy Alaska Project to determine how, if at all, efficiency measures may decrease the OVK campus energy loads and influence the final system design,
as well as to what degree switching to biomass heating may help to recirculate money back into the community that would otherwise be spent on imported fuel oil. The outcome of the feasibility
study will be a conceptual design and final system recommendation based on the economic, logistical, environmental and social objectives of the community. The state recently released
a regional energy plan (Southeast Integrated Resource Plan) that recommends significant conversions from fuel oil to wood based heat. The tribe also recognizes the potential of wood
based heat to support a sustainable community energy portfolio by offsetting imported fuel oil with renewables, reducing costs, creating local job opportunities and aiding in forest
health. The tribe has identified wood heating as one of four energy priorities in its Community Economic Development Strategy Plan (CEDS updated 2012) and during its ongoing energy
planning process as part of DOE?s START (Strategic Technical Assistance Response Team) program. In addition, the tribe has taken a significant leadership role in the community on energy
issues and biomass specifically, and in June 2012 invited a number of technical experts to educate the community on the types of technologies available and lessons learned from projects
throughout the state. The information resulting from this feasibility study will be a significant contribution in the community?s energy planning and project efforts.
Mentasta?s predicament, as is the case for most of rural Alaska, is its dependence on imported expensive petroleum for space heating of community facilities. Mentasta?s community facilities
are centrally located and can be serviced by one woody biomass heating plant strategically located adjacent to Mentasta?s clustered public facilities (see Map - Attachment II). The
project is estimated to cost $460,000 of Round VI funds and donated building space with estimated value of $50,000 and will serve the school, teen center, clinic and tribal offices/post
office building and are expected to displace approximately 22,000 gallons of heating oil.
The Tanana Solar Public Facilities Heating Project seeks to implement the market transformative benefits of combining biomass space heating technologies currently being installed at
Tanana?s public facilities with solar thermal collectors. This Round 6 Renewable Energy Fund application has been revised since its original submission during Round 5 and limit solar
thermal application to best ?low hanging fruit at Tanana which is the large domestic hot water demand at the Tanana Tribal Elders Residential complex and the City?s Senior housing four-plex.
The synergistic benefits of the village existing biomass thermal storage capacity with solar thermal collectors will serve to result in reduced imported petroleum consumption and also
serve to optimize operation of the biomass boilers currently being installed at Tanana.
Heat energy is, by far, the greatest financial burden facing Alaskans, and particularly those in rural Alaska. It is also the most critical as heat during Alaska?s extreme winters is
a matter of survival. Many rural communities in Alaska are moving in the direction of biomass as an alternative to fuel oil for heat energy generation. Tanana has become a model in
Alaska for demonstrating the effective use of renewable energy to reducing heat energy operational costs. Tanana was one of the first villages in Alaska to incorporate the use of GARN
biomass boilers for offsetting the high expense of fuel oil for generating hot water in the community washeteria. In 2011, as a part of a major biomass expansion project, systems are
being installed in numerous commercial and residential scale buildings.
Solar thermal is an excellent complement to the biomass boilers. During the winter months the heat energy generated by the biomass boilers offsets a substantial amount of the fuel oil
normally required. The cordwood fuel source also allows many of the operating costs to remain in the community since the supply of the cordwood and manpower required to feed and boilers
is local. During the summer the biomass boilers are a less desirable alternative. The focus and energies of the community are diverted to essential traditional cultural activities.
The solar thermal, which is a passive heat energy source that can operate largely unattended, allows those activities to continue uninterrupted. Thus it is an excellent companion to
the biomass and can contribute substantially to the heat energy requirement for at least nine months of the year. The combination of the two heat energy sources virtually eliminates
the dependency on fuel oil as the heat energy source.
While used extensively throughout other parts of the U.S. and the world for years, the use of solar thermal technology as an alternative to fuel oil is relatively new. Equally new to
Alaska is the concept of solar thermal in conjunction with the biomass systems. The City believes that the integration of solar thermal is essential to the continued development and
expansion of the biomass program in Alaska. The resulting combination system is more compatible with the life styles and cultural activities of people in rural Alaska, further reduces
the ongoing operational costs of the heat energy system, and reduces the long term impact on the area biomass resource due to the system operation.
For this project, the City of Tanana has selected two buildings in Tanana that have biomass systems ? the tribal elders complex and City?s senior residential four-plex housing unit.
This mix represents a good cross section of multi-residentially oriented systems where domestic hot water usage is very high. Due to the highly variable temperatures found in the biomass
systems, the City has selected indirect, glycol based fltaplate collectors with variable speed circulation pumps and supplemental heat storage tanks for the solar thermal systems. In
the City?s senior housing 4 -plex, the integral storage of the GARN boiler will be utilized. In the tribal elder housing complex, that is utilizing Econoburn gasification boilers with
limited internal storage capacity, supplemental storage tanks will be installed in conjunction with the solar thermal.
1. Solar PV Installation This project will consist of a 50 kW (DC) ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV) system, to be installed next to the school building. The PV system will generate clean,
renewable power for decades to come, reducing the amount of electricity the school buys from the local utility and reducing pollution associated with burning fossil fuels. The system
will also provide an opportunity for the school\'s students and the wider community to learn about PV. The system will be composed of (185) 270-watt photovoltaic (PV) collector panels,
(1) 50 kW DC to AC power inverter and a data acquisition system with a graphical display inside the building and accessible through the Internet. The panels will be wired in multiple
DC series circuits called strings. The strings will be wired to a combiner box, then connect to the power inverter which transforms the DC power into AC power suitable for use by the
building\'s existing electrical system. The inverter assures that the PV generated power is compatible with the power supplied by the utility grid and will disconnect from the electrical
system in the event of a utility power outage to prevent "back feed" to the utility grid. The proposed system is sized to supplement current electric usage and peak demand only, as
it will not store power. The proposed system will be interconnected with the electrical system and controlled to "follow" the existing systems\' electrical characteristics. A dedicated
data acquisition system tied directly to the inverter will display the performance of the PV system and describe how it works through a dedicated live display setup in the lobby. A
revenue grade utility meter will also be installed on the PV system to accurately measure the power generated. The existing electric systems supply 208-volt, three phase power for larger
loads and 120-volt, single-phase for most of the distributed loads from a three phase service provided by NEA. The average monthly electric demand for the school is approximately 137
kW.
2. Heat Recovery from Exhaust Air Sensible heat-recovery systems that transfer sensible (dry-bulb) heat from the exhaust air to the supply air entering the building are proposed to be
installed for the fresh air supply air handling units using cross flow heat exchangers. This system transfers energy through a crossover grid or through plate heat exchangers made of
metal or plastic. Warm air passing between the plates transfers its energy by conduction through the material to another grid or plate where the air is warmed. The plates form alternating
exhaust and ventilation air pathways. Efficiencies (also referred to as effectiveness) of these systems vary from around 60% to 70%. It is proposed to install flat plate heat recovery
units for (7) fresh-air units, to pre-heat roughly 12,000 cfm of fresh air with the exhaust air from the space. The HR units would be tied to existing building management system to
ensure proper functioning and provide visibility to building operator.
This project is to perform a feasibility study, including a conceptual design, to assess the viability of a WtE plant. Other than some recyclable materials, municipal solid waste (MSW)
in Anchorage is largely disposed of in the municipal landfilL The quantity of refuse currently being disposed of in this manner is approximately 375,000 tons per year. There may also
be an opportunity to incorporate other fuel, such as wood being disposed of in local woodlots. WtE plants, while somewhat rare in the U.S., are very popular, efficient and environmentally
effective in many European and Asian countries. If feasible, a WtE plant would be expected to provide energy, environmental, reliability, economic and community benefits.
Replace diesel generation of electricity for the community of Tenakee Springs with renewable hydroelectric power. The City of Tenakee Springs proposes to construct a hydroelectric project
on Indian River. This will be a 180 kW low head, run-of-river plant displacing the use of 31,400 gallons of diesel fuel annually, or 90% of annual electric utility diesel consumption.
At least 6,500 additional gallons of fuel oil can be displaced by heating public buildings with excess energy from the hydro project.
Cantwell is currently served by GVEA via the power transmission line between MEA and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and
lower the cost of the community of Cantwell?s power system. To accomplish this we propose to study a run-of-river hydroelectric project on Carlo Creek, approximately 10 miles north
of Cantwell along the Parks Highway.
The proposed project is an approximately 150 kW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Knutson Creek near Pedro Bay. The hydro project will provide most of the electricity needs of the
village, as well as providing a significant amount of interruptible energy to heat the tribal council building, church, school, and potentially other buildings.
The proposed project is a run-of-river hydroelectric project located on private property along Juniper Creek in the Eagle River Valley, approximately 10 miles from Eagle River, Alaska.
The proposed project would include an intake / diversion structure at approximately the 1900-foot elevation and powerhouse at the 1500-foot elevation. The design flow is estimated at
10 to 20 cfs, for an estimated installed capacity of 250 to 500 kW. Participation of adjacent downstream property owners would increase the head available for the project from 400 feet
to either 900 feet or 1,100 feet if one or two adjacent land owners were to participate. This would increase installed capacity to as much as 1,300 kW. Ram Valley expects to determine
the participation status of these land owners prior to the start of the feasibility study.
APC proposes to construct a small run-of-river hydroelectric project at Neck Lake, a 1,000 acre lake located 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island.
The Project would supply power to the community of Whale Pass, and would offset diesel generation, which is currently the sole source of electricity. The relatively high and modulated
flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end of the outlet stream provide a good opportunity for a small run-of-river hydroelectric development. Facilities would
include an access road, intake structure, 400 feet of penstock, a containerized power plant, a tailrace channel, and upgrade of 4 miles of transmission line. The hydroelectric facilities
will be designed to avoid interference with the existing salmon rearing and collection facilities operated at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA).
APC conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2008, and determined that there is sufficient potential to almost always provide enough generation for Whale Pass loads (see Section
11 for a copy of the reconnaissance report). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for APC?s Whale Pass customers.
The AEA Energy Pathway 2010 indicates hot springs located on Elim Native Corporation land surrounding Elim are potential energy sources, but only comprehensive analysis can determine
how, and under what conditions, geothermal energy might be viable. The City of Elim, the Native Village of Elim, Elim Native Corporation, and the University of Alaska Fairbanks propose
a Resource Assessment (Reconnaissance} I Feasibility Analysis of Elim geothermal sites. It will use low cost airborne and ground-based reconnaissance and mapping techniques to develop
a conceptual model. Feasibility, cost analysis, and design of viable solutions will follow.
This project is a feasibility study to evaluate the potential wind resource in Akiak.
This project will conduct the much delayed follow up on the Wescott report. In 1985 Wescott and Turner study published the results of their geothermal investigations in the Copper Basin
during the 1982 field season. They recommended that additional detailed gravity and self-potential data be taken at the confluence of the Tazlina where a high helium anomaly was located.
In addition they also recommended self-potential surveys in two other anomaly areas and one area was recommended as a prime drilling target.1 We are requesting funds to do further reconnaissance
by completing the recommended studies using modern tools and efficiencies as well as compiling other research and exploration that has been done since 1985 in the Eastern Copper Basin
Kipnuk Light Plant is proposing to complete the final design, permitting and construction of a community wind diesel system for the community of Kipnuk, Alaska. The project will be owned
and operated by the Kipnuk Light Plant and the community of Kipnuk. Construction of the wind plant will be conducted in conjunction with the construction of a new school, powerplant
and bulk fuel facility in the community. The new school is currently under construction and is anticipated to completed in late 2013, early 2014. Funding has been received for a new
diesel powerplant and bulk fuel storage facility. The new powerplant construction will take place in the winter of 2014. The wind project would be completed at the same time. The design
of the wind system has been completed and is straightforward, in that is similar to the systems which have been installed in Kongiganak, Kwigillingok and Tuntutuliak. The only design
elements remaining to be completed, are: the installation and wiring diagrams for the specific installation of the load balancing boiler, system master control, communications gateways
and static var compensation in the new powerplant. These design elements will be conducted concurrently with the design and construction of the new diesel powerhouse.
Nelson Lagoon requests funding for this wind study as the first step towards supplementing the high cost of diesel generators currently in use. The wind study will result in a feasibility
report on the technical, economic, financial, and operational viability and guidance of implementing the next three phases of a wind energy system. The grant would be managed by the
Aleutian East Borough and calls for the solicitation off a contractor to perform the analysis and a community meeting with the contractor for presentation, review and discussion of
the results Participants in the project will include:
1. Nelson Lagoon Electrical Cooperative (owned by the Native Village of Nelson Lagoon)
2. Aleutians East Borough who will provide overall project management
3. A contractor firm who will provide civil and electrical system engineering.
False Pass currently produces all their electricity from diesel generators and heating from burning fossil fuels. Data from a met tower set up several years ago was compromised and has
data gaps when bears damaged the equipment, but the data still may be useful if analyzed using appropriate assumptions and software. The wind resource may prove to be good, but we won\'t
know until the data is analyzed and a wind resource report is completed. In addition, an avian study will determine if birds will be of concern and/or if mitigation measures are necessary.
This project seeks design and permitting for the False Pass wind project. The design and permitting phase will include project scoping and community solicitation for planning and design,
permit applications and acceptance, final environmental assessments and mitigation plans, resolution of land rights and right of way, final system design, engineers cot estimate, updated
economic and financial analysis, and final business plan and operational plans.
Cold Bay requests funding for this waste heat recovery study as a step towards supplementing the high cost of diesel generators currently in use. The waste heat recovery study and will
satisfy Phases I, Reconnaissance and Phase II, Feasibility, and the study will result in a feasibility report on the technical, economic, financial and operational viability and guidelines
of implementing the next three phases of a waste heat recovery system. The grant would be managed by the Aleutians East Borough and calls for the solicitation of a contractor to perform
the analysis and a community meeting with the contractor for presentation, review and discussion of the results. Participants in the project will include:
1. G&K Electric Utility
2. Aleutians East Borough who will provide overall project management.
3. A contracted firm who will provide civil and electrical system engineering.
By the end of 2011, the high development costs of the Kokhanok wind-diesel project drove Sustainable Automation out of business. Sustainable Power Systems LLC was subsequently formed
to pursue new business opportunities in the field of renewable energy systems integration. Given adequate funding, Sustainable Power Systems is ready and willing to take on the task
of completing the remaining system development and commissioning work that will be required to make the Kokhanok project a success. What remains to be done at this point is to complete
the development, testing, and commissioning of the software for the Hybrid System Supervisory Controller, the component that monitors and orchestrates the operation of all other system
components. Specifically, the following functions remain to be fully implemented:
? Automatic diesel dispatch
? Automatic inverter dispatch
? Automatic feeder control
? Data logging to a local database
? Fault logs for each component
? Data log exporting
? Automatic report generation
? Fault notification
? Public portal
Much of the remaining work can be accomplished in the Sustainable Power Systems offices and power lab in Boulder, Colorado. However, because they represent major changes to the system
operation, the automatic dispatch algorithms in particular will require on-site installation and testing as part of a final commissioning process. To be able to undertake this work
and continue to pay its staff, Sustainable Power Systems requires an immediate source of funds. The company is therefore requesting that 50% of the grant amount be paid up front, with
the remaining 50% of each task invoiced increments as each task is completed.
Project funds will be used to design, purchase and install six wood pellet boilers and storage silos at the following Borough-owned buildings: sewage treatment plant, human resources
I preschool building, Haines Borough School District vocational education building (also referred to in this application as voc-tec building), swimming pool, Borough administrative
offices, and visitor center.
A Phase II Feasibility Study would be carried out, including the following tasks:
>Project scoping
>Detailed energy resource analysis
>Identification of land and regulatory issues
>Permitting and environmental analysis
>Detail analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets
>Assessment of alternatives
>Conceptual design analysis and cost estimate.
>Conceptual business and operations plan
>Final report and recommendations.
Mount Makushin geothermal energy potential has been discussed and evaluated by the State of Alaska and others for the last twenty or so years. An exploratory drilling program, funded
by the Department of Energy in the early 1980s made the determination that the Makushin geothermal resource is the only proven high temperature geothermal system in Alaska that could
be used for power generation. While the data has been encouraging there has not been a sustained effort to develop the resource beyond its current status since 1995 when the design
and permitting reports were completed for a 12MW power plant for which the financing was approved by the Alaska State legislature. This grant will help the Aleut Corporation re-characterize
the Makushin resource and develop the preliminary design of a production facility with the intention of building and operating a geothermal plant on Unalaska for the benefit of the
Island. The cost elements in this grant are based on a 30MW plant ? which we expect to be the maximum size project (likely project size range 10-30 MW). During this phase we will evaluate
all options and determine the optimum size of the project as well as the optimal location of the steam field and other facilities.
The Manokotak Wind & Heat Feasibility Project proposes a further look at the viability of wind to produce electricity for residential and non-residential uses. A 2009 wind resource report
written by V3 Energy, LLC indicates a mid-Class 2 (marginal) resource, but given the position of the community in relation to nearby elevation (for a higher wind class) and an old landing
strip (for a solid foundation) a further look is warranted. The project proposes using the Wind Atlas Analysis and Application Program (WAsP), a software application from Denmark, to
further analyze the current met tower data and investigate options for the installation of 3-4 small met towers for additional resource data collection and analysis. The end result
would be a conceptual design report in compliance with the Alaska Wind Program Guidelines for Conceptual Design Reports that includes in broad categories a wind resource analysis, electrical
system overview, and heat load overview.
This project seeks funding for completion of a reconnaissance and feasibility study for wind generated energy in Atka. The study will analyze whether wind power used in combination with
the recently completed Chunixsax Creek Hydro-Electric project and diesel generated power can provide additional power needed to support electric heat to the entire Atka community and
a planned expansion of Atka Pride Seafoods (APS) to a year-round processing operation with increased energy needs. Atka Pride Seafoods is a subsidiary of the Aleutian/Pribilof Community
Development Association(APICDA) and is partially owned by the community of Atka. The ultimate goal is to meet 90% or more of Atka energy needs using renewable energy sources.
ORPC Alaska 2, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC, (collectively, ORPC), is a global leader in the development of hydrokinetic power systems and ecoconscious
projects that harness the power of ocean and river currents to create clean, predictable renewable energy. ORPC works in partnership with coastal and river communities to create and
sustain local jobs while promoting energy independence and protecting the environment. Its technology includes the proprietary TidGen? Power System, which includes one or more TidGen?
devices connected to an on-shore station with power and data cables. In ORPC?s TidGen? Array Project, ORPC will install a four-device TidGen? Power System in Cook Inlet with a rated
generating capacity of 600 kW in a 6- knot current. ORPC?s REF Round 4 grant (award document signed) will help fund the first device of what eventually will be a four device TidGen?
Power System. REF Round 6 funding will help fund the TidGen? Array Project to expand to a four-device system by adding an array of three TidGen? devices.
The Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) proposes the installation of a wood pellet boiler at the Ticasuk Brown Elementary School. Phase 1 of this project is currently underway through
an AEA managed grant agreement with the FNSB. The $550,000, funding for Phase 1 of this project was provided by the 2012 Legislature through a DCCED grant to AEA. This proposed project,
or Phase 2 of this project, will be comprised of: 1) Modular pellet boiler unit anchored to concrete sleepers, 2) heat loop to existing school boiler room. The boiler room is to be
equipped with new heat exchanger for heat transfer to school system, including heat exchanger, manifolding, controls and re-circulating pump, 3) connection of electrical service from
a panel in the existing boiler room, assuming required electrical capacity is available and 4) install pellet silo and auger system for pellet fuel storage and fuel supply stream. To
ensure project continuity, the FNSB proposes this final phase of the project also be an AEA Managed Project.
Wrangell has recently experienced an unprecedented increase in our electrical distribution load. The increase is a result of customers removing their expensive diesel fuel burning heating
systems and replacing them with lower cost (hydro) electric units. During the 2011/2012 winter season Wrangell bad a record peak load demand of 9.5 MW. Currently the Wrangell Power
Plant is capable of producing 8 MV A. If there were a catastrophic event that disrupted Wrangell\'s hydroelectric power supply from Tyee, such as the landslide that affected the Juneau
area in January of 2009, our standby generators could not supply electricity to all of our customers. Preliminary indications are that Wrangell must install an additional standby generator.
This project will evaluate, recommend, design and install the upgrades needed at the Wrangell Power Plant that will insure our ability to continue to support all of our customers and
their renewable energy choices.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Shishmaref. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower, geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a reconnaissance-level geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual
design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. This project will also consider other turbines that can be relocated, if the
village decides to move to another location.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Goodnews Bay. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be
created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control will be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is seeking $5,581,800 from this Grant Program to construct an electrical intertie between the communities of St. Mary?s and Pilot Station,
the total cost of which is $6,202,000. AVEC will contribute $625,000 cash as its match. The intertie will be designed with 14 miles of new connection through undeveloped terrain. The
completed design work-to-date indicates the three-phase electrical intertie will require two river crossings and six slough/lake crossings, must be constructed in winter months, and
will need pole spacing of 185 feet. Completed design work on the intertie is included in Tab F. At present, St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point are connected by a distribution power line,
but Pilot Station is a stand-alone, diesel-powered community. This project would connect the electric system of Pilot Station to the St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point system. Standby generation
capability will be provided with a new standby generation module in Pilot Station, but primary generation will be delivered by the existing St. Mary?s power plant and an EWT wind turbine.
Another Round 6 Renewable Energy Grant Program application requests funding to build a wind energy system for the intertied communities of St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point. This project
will add Pilot Station, about eleven miles from St. Mary?s, to that proposed wind system.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is seeking $332,500 from this Grant Program to (final) design and permit an electrical intertie between the communities of St. Mary?s
and Mountain Village. AVEC will contribute $17,500 as a cash match. The intertie will be designed with fourteen (14) miles of new connection along the existing gravel road that connects
the two communities and will require an upgrade from single-phase to three-phase of an existing eight (8) miles. The conceptual design work indicates the intertie will not require any
water crossings; it can be constructed in summer months and will need pole spacing of 125 feet. At present, St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point are connected by a distribution power line,
but Mountain Village is a stand-alone diesel powered community. This project would electrically intertie Mountain Village to the St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point system. Standby generation
capability will be maintained in Mountain Village but primary generation will be delivered by the existing St. Mary?s power plant. AVEC has submitted another Round 6 Renewable Energy
Grant Program application to build a wind energy system for the intertied communities of St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point. This project will add Mountain Village, about 20 miles from St.
Mary?s, to that wind system.
The Northwest Arctic Borough is very large and the communities are small and isolated. Typically larger transmission systems have not been possible due to challenging construction and
steep economics. Constructing an intertie is a large capital investment. The intertie between Noorvik, Kiana, and Selawik would intertie three AVEC utilities and would be over 50 miles
in length. The construction of an intertie could reduce the cost of energy in the community by equalizing the cost of diesel to that of the community with the cheapest fuel: in this
case, Noorvik. Additionally, an intertie would provide generation support and increased reliabi lity for the overall electrical system. The construction of an intertie would also allow
for installation of distributed generation at the most ideal location, in this case Hotham Peak which, through observations and modeling, has a superb wind resource. A greater wind
resource provides the opportunity for installation of larger scale wind turbines. According to modeling completed in the 2012 Noorvik Wind-Diesel Conceptual Draft Report, the most ideal
location for a larger turbine would be on the southwest slope of Hotham Ridge, between Noorvik and Selawik.
The Northwest Arctic Borough is very large and the communities are small and isolated. Typically larger transmission systems have not been possible due to challenging construction and
steep economics. Constructing an intertie is a large capital investment but can reap significant benefits in the form of reduced energy costs. This proposed project will include the
completion of a Wind Resource Assessment in Cosmos Hills near Wesley Creek. The placement of the met tower will be north of Shungnak approximately five miles. In order to fully reap
the benefits of wind energy in the Upper Kobuk region, and to reduce the cost of electricity for those communities, an intertie between Ambler and Shungnak will also be evaluated. All
three communities are members of Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) who has completed other similar studies for greater community benefit. AVEC has installed numerous interties
between communities, some with wind turbine generators, and has been able to successfully reduce the cost of power.
Building on the results of the already completed wind resource (V3 Energy LLC), economic modeling (Northern Economics, Inc.) and conceptual design reports (HDL Engineering Consultants),
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is proposing to complete the final design and permitting to install one EWT 900 wind turbine to supplement the existing diesel-fired
power generation systems in St. Michael and Stebbins. Work under this grant would also be expended to design necessary wind integration controls for the power generation system at the
new power plant in Stebbins. AVEC has completed the final design and obtained permits for the intertie between St. Michael and Stebbins. Once work done under this grant is completed,
AVEC could seek funding to construct the turbines and an intertie to serve both communities.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Russian Mission. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be
created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control will be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Kotlik. The work will involve obtaining
a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location, studying
the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created
based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control will be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
AVEC proposes to install two wind meteorological (met) towers and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Wales in order to get a better
understanding of the good wind regime in Wales. The work will involve obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met towers and geotechnical fieldwork,
permitting, transporting and installing met towers at two locations, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions
and needed engineering at the sites. A conceptual design at one site will be created based on the outcome of the met towers? recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site
control will be obtained for the project.
Building on the results of the already completed Concept Design Report (attached in Tab F), Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is proposing to complete the final design
and permitting to install two Northern Power Systems Northern Power 100 ARCTIC turbines for a 200 kilowatt (kW) installed wind capacity, to the existing diesel power generation system
in Marshall. Once work done under this grant is completed, AVEC would seek funding to construct the turbines.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is seeking $585,000 from this Grant Program to add a solar energy component to the existing diesel power generation system that serves
two communities. It will construct a new 50kW array of 288 Photovoltaic (PV) modules in Shungnak, Alaska. The array will be inclined at 34 degrees from May through September, and 90
degrees the remainder of the year to take advantage of the solar angle at this northerly location, and would serve Shungnak and Kobuk via an existing electrical intertie. The annual
power production of the array is estimated to be approximately 44,623 kWh (with shading). The solar array will be located on a lot just northwest of the existing Shungnak power plant
which has been committed to AVEC for this use. Total project cost is $650,000 and AVEC is prepared to match grant funds with $65,000.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is seeking $5,538,592 from this Grant Program to add a wind energy component to the existing diesel power generation system that presently
serves St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point. The project will construct one 900 kW EWT turbine at a location 2.5 miles from St. Mary?s and 1 miles east of Pitka?s Point, and will connect it
to the existing power generation system. The EWT is expected to produce 2,717,000 kWh annually at 80% turbine availability. This project would also involve upgrading the existing power
line between St. Mary?s and the new wind turbine site from 2-phase to 3-phase. The total estimated project cost is $6,153,991 with AVEC contributing $615,399 as its match. This project,
using previously awarded REF funds, is currently under design. Geotechnical work has been completed and permit applications have been submitted. The FAA approval has been obtained.
Permits are expected to be in hand by December 2012. Final design will be completed by the end of 2012.
This project includes upgrades to the AVEC power plant cooling system, installation of heat exchangers at the AVEC plant and school boiler module with appropriate pumps and controls
at both sites and 700 feet of underground piping between the plant and school boiler module.
Organic Incineration Technology (OIT) incinerates non-hazardous petroleum contaminated soils, absorbent pads and sludges generated by Alaskan industries in a regulated, environmentally
safe facility in Moose Creek, AK. The waste treatment process generates a substantial amount of energy which is currently exhausted and therefore wasted. Through the installation of
a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG), a steam turbine generator system and condenser, OIT intends to capture the waste heat from the existing incineration process and turn that energy
into electricity to be used on-site and placed onto the grid for use by the surrounding community. Through the implementation of this system, OIT would be utilizing an existing energy
resource to reduce the community?s dependence on traditional utility power sources fueled by the burning of fuel oil.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant/washeteria. The estimated fuel oil savings to the community water plant and
washeteria is projected to be 6,000 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached Tuntutuliak, Alaska 2012 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant. The estimated fuel oil savings to the community water plant is projected to
be 18,600 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached Noorvik, Alaska 2012 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water treatment plant and village store. The estimated fuel oil savings to these two facilities is
projected to be 7,700 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached Marshall, Alaska 2012 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide recovered heat from the new AVEC power plant to the new water treatment plant {WTP}, existing WTP, washeteria, clinic, Head Start Building, and school. The
estimated fuel reduction for the six buildings combined is estimated to be 57,000 gallons a year with an expected savings of $240,000 annually.
The purpose of this project is to further investigate the known geothermal resource at Tenakee Inlet and evaluate its potential to produce power and to evaluate alternative uses of the
source. Hot springs encountered during our reconnaissance study have the highest recorded surface temperature (176? F) of any of the numerous geothermal springs tested on Chichagof
Island. The reconnaissance study has indicated a viable resource with fluids having encountered subsurface temperatures of 260? F, and that the resource is larger in size than originally
anticipated. We request funding for a feasibility study and conceptual design project with a timeline of approximately 28 months. We are currently completing a reconnaissance study
that included mapping, remote sensing, and geochemical sampling of water and soils. A paper presented at the Geothermal Resource Council in October 2012 is attached. We also submitted
a draft interim report to AEA in December 2011 with all of the data collected at that point. We propose for this feasibility study to continue our investigations by advancing one to
two slim drill holes, conducting a feasibility analysis and developing a conceptual design of how best to develop the resource. Future work would include production level drilling,
permitting, and power plant and infrastructure construction.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the washeteria and combined utility building. The estimated fuel oil savings to the combined utility
building and washeteria is projected to be 14,200 gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached Quinhagak, Alaska 2012 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the water system. The estimated fuel oil savings to the community water plant is projected to be 1 ,400
gallons of heating oil per year. For more detailed information, see the attached Chuathbaluk, Alaska 2012 Heat Recovery Feasibility Study.
This project will provide waste heat from the existing electrical power plant to the washeteria. Waste heat infrastructure will include waste heat transmission lines and upgrades necessary
in the power house and washeteria. For more detailed information, see the attached feasibility study by Alaska Energy and Engineering.
Currently, AVEC is not utilizing either the jacket heat from its diesel engines or the heat generated by the electric boiler installed to dispose excess wind energy. This project would
recover heat from both sources at the AVEC plant and send that heat to the water treatment plant to heat the building, the circulated water loops, and the water storage tank. The AVEC
power plant and the Savoonga water treatment plant are located next to each other in Savoonga. A feasibility study has been done for this project, the design has been completed and
a construction cost estimate has been prepared. These are attached. Funds are being requested
for construction only.
The seven communities named in this proposal- Alatna, Allakaket, Northway, Grayling, Shageluk, Beaver and Stevens Village- have all participated in energy planning meetings with IRHA
and other organizations and have identified wood heating in public facilities as a key opportunity to displace fuel oil, reduce energy costs, utilize locally available renewable resources
and create local employment. This proposal calls for feasibility assessments that include the study of public facilities where wood heating may be applicable, pre-engineering analysis
of the size and type of boilers that would be required (including "boiler in a box" option), estimated fuel displacement and cost savings, capital cost and payback period, and forest
inventory and wood harvest plan. Of the seven communities selected for this project, Stevens Village, Beaver and Northway had Preliminary Feasibility Assessments conducted in 2008.
The 2008 studies suggested that biomass was a viable option for the communities, but that further analysis was necessary. For these three communities, the 2008 studies will be updated
and expanded upon. Forest inventories will be completed as well. For the communities of Shageluk, Allakaket, Alatna and Grayling, IRHA proposes a two-pronged approach: (1) subcontract
with a qualified biomass energy specialist to conduct a 1-2 day site visits in each community and prepare a feasibility assessment for each community, (2) subcontract with Will Putman,
head forester for Tanana Chiefs Conference to conduct forest inventory and wood harvest planning. Following completion of these reports, project staff Kim Carlo and Nadine Winters of
IRHA will continue to communicate with residents of the communities and facilitate their internal planning processes to determine whether each community wants to move forward with final
design and construction phases of the respective wood-heating projects, pending available funding . It bears mentioning that this proposal is identical in scope to one submitted by
IRHA under Round 4 of the Renewable Energy Fund. It was funded and eight biomass feasibility studies are completed as a result. This represents a deliberate approach whereby the applicant
is proceeding in stages with conducting feasibility work prior to conceptual design, final design and construction. It is anticipated that the phased approach will allow IRHA to conduct
full assessments for most communities in the region.
Alatna 66.566920 N 152.666390 W, Allakaket 66.562610 N 152.647560 W, Shageluk 62.682220 N 159.561940 W, Grayling 62.903610 N 160.064720 W, Northway 62.982220 N 141 .951670 W, Beaver
66.359440 N 147.396390 W, Stevens Village 66.006390 N 149.090830 W
The project will design and construct wood heating systems in three Interior Alaska rural communities. IRHA has conducted eight feasibility assessments including forest inventories and
wood harvest assessments in eight Interior communities. Based on the feasibility studies, design and construction of biomass systems and wood storage facilities will begin design and
construction in spring 2013 in Nikolai, Koyukuk, and Anvik. Round 6 funding is being requested for three more biomass systems in three more communities in the region. Projects will
be selected based the likelihood of successful project implementation which includes identification of a project champion in the community, projected simple payback and adequate, sustainable
forest inventory. IRHA will partner with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the individual tribes. Renewable Energy Fund Round 4 IRHA received funding for biomass feasibility
studies for: Koyukuk Nikolai Anvik Holy Cross Nulato Hughes Ruby Kaltag Renewable Energy Fund Round 5 IRHA received funding for design and construction for three biomass projects to
be determined by Round 4 feasibility studies( completed in August 2012) Nikolai, Anvik and Koyukuk are selected for design and construction based on the highest annual savings, lowest
simple payback and biomass stocking figures that indicate sustainable harvest plans. Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 IRHA submitting a Round 6 application for construction of three more
biomass projects to be determined suing feasibility studies and forest inventories. IRHA submitting a Round 6 application for feasibility studies for seven more communities in the
Interior- Alatna, Allakaket, Beaver, Stevens Village, Grayling, Shageluk and Northway.
The location of the three biomass systems to be designed and constructed will be in three of the following communities:
Hughes (66.048890 N, 154.255560W), Ruby (64.739440 N 155.486940W), Nulato (64.719440 N 158.103060 W), Kaltag (64.327220 N 158.721940 W), Holy Cross(62.199440 N 159.771390 W), Alatna
(66 .566920 N 152.666390 W), Allakaket (66.562610 N 152.647560 W), Shageluk (62.682220 N 159.561940 W), Grayling (62.903610 N 160.064720 W), Northway (62.982220 N 141.951670 W), Beaver
(66.359440 N 147.396390 W) or Stevens Village (66.006390 N 149.090830 W).
The ?Pre-Feasibility Assessment for Integration of Wood-Fired Heating Systems Final Report? dated July 24, 2012 states that, ?Connecting the school with several nearby buildings with
a wood fired district heating system appears to be an economically viable project.? (p. 2 of 13) The buildings for the City of Nenana include the Water Plant and the Fire Department.
The building included for the Nenana Native Council is the Youth Educational Resource Center (YERC), which houses the Early Learning, Head Start, and Youth Center programs. The school
district buildings included in the project are the Nenana City Public School, the Administration Building, the Warehouse/Vocational Education Building, and the Nenana Student Living
Center. Though the Nenana Student Living Center is located approximately six blocks from the Nenana City Public School, the ?Pre-Feasibility Assessment? states, ?The additional energy
saved by connecting several buildings together offsets the significant additional cost of underground piping and pumping costs. . . . Even with the significant piping costs, the extra
pumping energy, and the extra wood fuel needed to offset the heat loss of the long pipe runs, this option remains the strongest relative to other options.? (p. 2 & 3 of 13)
The Allison Creek Project is a run of the river (ROR) alternative involving construction of a diversion structure on Allison Creek at elevation 1,300 feet. Water will be diverted from
the creek into a 42 inch surface / buried penstock to a 6.5 megawatt powerhouse near tidewater. Attachment A is the Final Feasibility Study which provides details on this project as
presented and approved by the CVEA Board of Directors.
This project will be a modest, run-of-the-river hydroelectric facility using Waterfall Creek and consisting of a concrete diversion/intake structure, 4,500\' HOPE penstock pipeline,
16\'X40\' metal powerhouse on concrete slab, Pelton Impulse Turbine and induction generator, remote automatic control system, and 5,000\' access road. This facility will be a working
partner to the City\'s existing and highly successful Delta Creek hydroelectric project, which has been operating for the last seventeen years.
This phase of the overall project is recommended in the completed feasibility report regarding extending Kodiak Electric Association?s Monashaka feeder line to the City of Ouzinkie,
dated April 2011. (attached) The line extension will tie KEA?s current electrical grid, including hydro and wind power generation, to the City of Ouzinkie. Necessarily, the inter-tie
will include a submarine electrical cable of approximately 1 to 1.4 miles (depending on route) in length between the Island of Kodiak and Spruce Island. The report reads, ?as the project
moves forward, the recommendation is to perform bathymetric surveys and marine geophysical studies to refine and verify the submarine feasibility.? The City of Ouzinkie currently has
both electrical and hydro power generation but of limited capacity and reliability. Connecting Ouzinkie to the KEA power grid will provide virtually unlimited, primarily renewable,
reliable power to the community and thereby facility community growth and economic development. The feasibility report, attached, was jointly funded by the Ouzinkie Native Corporation
and Kodiak Electrical Association.
The City of Galena is requesting AEA Round 6 funding to provide a sustainable and predictable energy resource for its school district. The Galena Community Wood Heat Project will substantially
reduce high costs for heat for the Galena Interior Learning Academy School (GILA) by utilizing woody biomass harvested and processed from local forests. The project will implement Phase
III Final Design and Phase IV Construction over a two (2) year period to install a biomass boiler system for the GILA campus. Local coordination among the stakeholders group is strong,
infrastructure and administrative resources are in place to support the project, and the Galena City School District has committed to purchasing the resulting heat. Existing Feasibility
Studies and strategic community planning documents align with the project.
The Alaska Gateway School District (AGSD) Heat Loop Project request is for Phase III Design and Phase IV Construction of a waste heat recovery application for AGSD?s existing 5.5 MMBTU
woody biomass energy facility. The project will recover waste heat which would otherwise be rejected and distribute it to ten (10) State-owned and Community building-clusters. The district
heat loop will directly replace heat from the existing fossil fuel heating systems, offsetting the equivalent of 49,100 gallons of fuel oil #1 per year. Heat customers will be charged
for heat on a cost-based rate, and the hydronic heat sales are exempt from RCA regulations. Over the 18-month project period, AGSD plans to explore various collaborative business structures
with the local utility, Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T) and other potential contractors to operate and maintain the heat loop. AGSD is prepared to independently operate and maintain
the district heat loop.
Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T) proposes to conduct a Phase III project that will complete the Final Design and Permitting for a 2MWe biomass CHP (combined heat and power) system. The
system will offset up to 1M gallons of fossil fuel per year and create a market for approximately $1M of locally sourced woody biomass, much of which would otherwise be wildfire hazardous
fuels. AP&T, with support from the Alaska Gateway School District, the Tok Umbrella Association, the Upper Tanana communities of Tok, Tetlin, Dot Lake and Tanacross, the State of Alaska
Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and working with contracted Consultants, Foresters and Economists, is collaborating to develop a CHP system utilizing locally sourced woody biomass
as fuel. The project will create the final design for the system, and thoroughly assess and prepare the permitting process for the biomass energy project.
NOTE:
Most of the detail in this grant application is from pre-feasibility work and the (full) Feasibility Study (FS Final Report pending November 2012, however excerpts are added to this
document as attachments). AP&T is completing a screening level study of alternative generation strategies, as part of the Biomass CHP Feasibility Study. Also being considered in comparison
to Biomass CHP are the following power generation scenarios: Diesel, Wind, Wind with pumping and storage, (trucked) Natural Gas, and Hydro.
The proposed project will undertake final design and construction of a wood-fired hydronic heating system in three Seward schools. A Feasibility Study (FS) was completed in July, 2011
by Dan Parrent, USDA Forest Service, which served the purpose of both Reconnaissance and Feasibility. The Feasibility Study was also reviewed in a document prepared by Lew McCreery
(USDA FS) of the USDA Wood Education and Resource Center (WERC). Both reports (attached to this application) attested to the viability and readiness of the project, which is now ready
to proceed to Final Design and Construction Phases. This proposed Seward Schools Biomass Heating System project will implement the following multi-phased process:
? Phase III, Final Design of a wood-fired hydronic heating system to heat the combined Seward High, Middle and Elementary School campus with woody biomass fuel.
? Phase IV, Construction, Commissioning, and Operation of the heating system and follow up reporting on operation and maintenance.
The project is designed to proceed without the delay of additional grant year cycles. Reports from the 2011 feasibility assessment and a 2011 District energy evaluation will serve as
the reference documents for this project.Location ? latitude and longitude or street address or community / communities served:
The proposed project will serve the community of Seward, AK, located on the Kenai Peninsula.
The three locations for the project are:
1. Seward Middle School, 304 Sea Lion Avenue, Seward, AK 99664 (60.132177,-149.431508)
2. William H. Seward Elementary School, 606 Sea Lion Avenue, Seward, AK 99664 (60.132209,-149.431658)
3. Seward High School, P.O. Box 1049, Seward, AK 99664 (60.133855,-149.422388)
To conduct a study on the feasibility of installing a biofuel system at the Kodiak High School to provide fuel/heat to the building, decrease the overall waste going into the Kodiak
landfill and provide a biofuel education service through the Kodiak High School Career and Technical Program.
The Gartina Falls Hydroelectric Project (Project) will include construction of a small diversion dam and intake structure just above Gartina Falls, installation of a steel penstock,
a powerhouse at the base of the falls, a new access road, 0.1 miles of transmission line buried in conduit, and installation of power poles for 3.8 miles of overhead transmission line
within the access road right-of-way. The purpose of the Project is to divert water from above the waterfall into the power plant and then discharge water back to the base of the waterfall.
The new hydroelectric system will have an installed capacity of 455 kilowatts (kW) and will therefore be used to avoid an estimated 30 percent of Hoonah\'s current diesel-powered electricity
through hydro generation.
AVCP Housing intends to construct a Wood Biomass Heating System plant within its campus to reduce high energy costs. The wood biomass heating system is expected to supplant 85% of the
estimated heat usage. The current diesel fuel cost is $6. 78/gal. in Bethel. Without the benefit of a biomass heating system, it is estimated we will be using 67,766 gallons of heating
fuel annually beginning in the winter of 2012-2013.
Tlingit-Haida Regional Electrical Authority (THREA) is applying for funding to conduct feasibility, design, and obtain a FERC license for the Walker Lake Hydro Project. THREA filed a
preliminary FERC permit application on June 11 , 2012 since it has municipal preference. THREA proposes to work with Inside Passage Electric Cooperative (IPEC) the certificated utility
for the service area of Klukwan and the Chilkat Valley in order to provide the lowest cost power for the benefit of IPEC\'s members/customers. The proposed project includes constructing
two small dams at Walker Lake; intake and reservoir outlet works; a 24" penstock of approximately 12,000 feet in length; a powerhouse with installed capacity of approximately 1 MW;
a tailrace of approximately 50\' length; and a 12.4 KV underground transmission line of approximately 4 miles in length interconnecting with the existing transmission system of IPEC.
The existing lake is at an elevation of 1,180 MSL and drains into Walker Creek and the Little Salmon River.
The project is located on USGS maps shown on both Skagway B-3 and B-4
Please refer to Appendix A Map of Walker Lake Hydro Project Application
The proposed Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie is a 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan Public Utilities
(KPU). The Intertie will include 14 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line to be constructed on Annette Island between Metlakatla and Walden Point and an approximate three mile
submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Walden Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation. The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for the integrated
operation of the interconnected systems? generating plants. Final design of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie is underway. Construction of the line began in June 2010 and all poles
are set for the overhead line. Approximately 20% of the conductor is installed along the line. The control system upgrades were completed in July 2011.
The Municipality of Skagway (Municipality) proposes to construct the West Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on West Creek, approximately 7 miles west of Skagway and adjacent
to the small community of Dyea. The primary purpose of the Project would be offsetting diesel generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway from May through September each year. Up
to five cruise ships per day dock in Skagway for 12-15 hours and continuously operate their diesel plants to provide for on-board electricity consumption. The continuous stack emissions
spread a blue haze at about the 1,500 foot elevation where vegetation has been noticeably affected. The Project will improve air quality and save vegetation in the area (there may be
other unknown environmental benefits). To emphasize how serious the air quality of the area is being taken, the National Park Service, Municipality of Skagway, and Alaska Power & Telephone
Company (AP&T) have a cooperative agreement to place and maintain equipment at AP&T?s Dewey Lakes Hydro project site to monitor this pollution. Preliminary results of this monitoring
are attached as an appendix. A secondary purpose of the Project is to provide winter energy to the local utility when they have a shortfall of hydro energy from their hydroelectric
projects (2011 = Dewey Lakes Hydro, Lutak Hydro, Goat Lake Hydro, Kasidaya Creek Hydro) as well as to sell winter energy to other utilities in the area.
The City & Borough of Sitka proposes to raise the project dam from spill elevation 342 feet mean sea level (msl) to elevation 425 feet msl; construct a new powerhouse containing three
5.3-megawatt (MW) units; install new intake works and a surge chamber; and modify the power conduit to accommodate higher hydraulic pressure and connect new or relocated project features.
In addition, the existing 0.670-MW fish valve unit generator would be replaced with a new 1-MW unit and the existing 0.870-MW pulp mill feeder unit would be decommissioned. The total
authorized capacity of the project would rise from 7.5 MW to 16.9 MW.
This project involves placing supplemental cord wood fired boilers in the schools. The supplemental heating system would be located at the Hydaburg City Schools in Hydaburg, AK on
Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska.
We intend to use wood biomass to heat the school buildings, replacing diesel as the energy source. The project involves placing two Garn type wood fired boilers adjacent to the school
site and running underground pipes from the wood fired boiler to plumb into the school?s heating system.
The Eagle Solar Array Project will provide renewable energy to the communities of Eagle and Eagle Village. The Project will consist of one hundred sixty three solar panels, six three
phase inverters, a programmable logic controller, SCADA system, and diesel powerplant interface for the towns of Eagle and Eagle Village. Energy derived will be used to offset diesel
fueled generation; particularly during the summer months.
Connelly Lake is an 85 acre alpine lake, and drains into the Chilkoot River. The Project facilities will include a dam at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW
powerhouse with two generating units, a 14-mile-long buried 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Phase III has not been completed yet with field studies, permitting
and final design continuing. The Project will be developed by the Applicant to provide additional generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems (existing 15-mile
submarine cable), to provide backup renewable power to Haines should the submarine cable fail, or should the only other storage project in Upper Lynn Canal, Goat Lake Hydro, have a
major problem with a long term shutdown. And in the early years of operations to possibly provide summer power to cruise ships moored at Haines or Skagway to help pay off any debt as
quickly as possible. The Project will be on state and private land, including the Haines State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve.
As a condition of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing of the Cooper Lake Plant in 2007, Chugach agreed to construct a project to divert water from Stetson Creek
into the Cooper Lake reservoir and a related structure to release water into Cooper Creek. The project will enhance fish habitat and add water to Cooper Lake which will result in additional
hydroelectric energy generation. Most importantly, constructing this project allows the license for the Cooper Lake hydro facility to be renewed for 50 years. A schedule showing how
the project will proceed is attached.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough seeks funding to conduct a wind reconnaissance study on the behalf of the City of Egegik. The project will consist of the installation of a needed 10-meter
or 30-meter, whichever is appropriate, wind tower within the city to gather one year of wind data. The wind data will be analyzed by a professional firm that specializes in the interpretation
of wind data. Following the completion of the data gathering, the firm will prepare a report that will give the LPB and Egegik an indication on whether or not the wind resources merit
a feasibility study on the eventual construction of a wind turbine.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough seeks funding to conduct a wind reconnaissance study on the behalf of the Levelock Village Council and its utility Levelock Electric Cooperative, inc.
The project will consist of the installation of a needed 1 0-meter wind tower within the city to gather one year of wind data. Rich Stromberg of AEA has indicated the study can be done
for approximately $10,000 using a smaller, 10-meter tower. The wind data will be analyzed by a professional firm that specializes in the interpretation of wind data. Following the completion
of the data gathering, the firm will prepare a report that will give the LPB and Levelock an indication on whether or not the wind resources merit a feasibility study on the eventual
construction of a wind turbine.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough seeks funding to design an approximate 1 OOkW wind turbine system in the village of Igiugig. The design of the turbine will include its integration into
the new generation system recently installed to maximize output and efficiency. The wind study is not complete, but the 11-month data point for the feasibility report includes the winter
months when winds and demand are highest. LPB will finish the grant with a design that can be put out to bid.
The total for the project is $250,000 and LPB is offering a $45,000 match.
The City of Saxman was issued a license for the Mahoney Lake hydroelectric project by the FERC on 01-22-98 (Project No. P-11393). The project was licensed to be a storage-type project
with a lake tap of Upper Mahoney Lake, a tunnel-and-pipe penstock, a single unit powerhouse, and an overhead transmission line con-necting to the existing KPU transmission system at
the Beaver Falls substation. The licensed capacity is 9.6 MW and the estimated potential annual generation is 41.7 GWH. Design documents were submitted to FERC for review in 2001 in
anticipation of starting construction in 2002. However, at that time a decision was made to construct the Swan-Tyee Intertie instead of the Mahoney Lake project; the Mahoney Lake project
license was stayed until requested by Saxman, but no later than 6 years after completion of the Swan-Tyee Intertie. Saxman has until 2015 to request lifting of the stay. The design
documents submitted to FERC in 2001 proposed to construct the penstock using horizontal directional drilling (HDD), which was a different penstock design than licensed and an untested
tech-nology for the hydroelectric industry. FERC had not commented on the design submittal prior to the stay being issued. Load growth in the SEAPA-interconnected systems and the potential
for new industrial loads now makes it timely to resume the development of the Mahoney Lake project. However, because of the long delay, it is necessary to reexamine some aspects of
the project, in particular:
? Re-evaluate the HDD-based design based on advances in the HDD industry in the last decade. It now appears possible to simplify the design and eliminate some expensive elements.
? Re-evaluate the storage potential of the upper basin, either by lowering the lake tap in Upper Mahoney Lake or adding storage in two natural lakes above Upper Mahoney Lake. Additional
storage would allow more wintertime generation by the project, which is critical for the SEAPA-interconnected system.
? Route the transmission line north along the existing road system on Cape Fox land to an interconnection to the Swan Lake line at the White River, rather than south over USFS land to
the Beaver Falls substation.
? Review permit status, and renew or revise permit applications as appropriate.
? Update the design drawings, specifications, and design report as appropriate for changes in the design concept.
? Update the cost estimate and economic analysis for the project, including any revisions to the design as described above.
? Begin power sales negotiations, and prepare a business and operational plan based on the anticipated power sales agreement.
At the completion of this work, KEC will be ready to begin construction on the project as soon as final financing is arranged.
INNEC proposes to conduct a feasibility study related to increasing tne capacity pf tne existing Tazimina Hydroelectric Project by replacing eitner one or two of tne existing generating
units witn larger generating units. Tne study will evaluate existing energy use and future energy requirements for tne region. An economic analysis will compare tne costs of future
generation under a variety of scenarios. A procurement package will be prepared if tne project is found to be feasible.
The proposed project will evaluate the technical and financial feasibility for integration and optimization of renewable energy based heating technologies to offset heating oil and electricity
usage in the following Petersburg facilities: Stedman Elementary School, Mitkof Middle School, Petersburg High School, Petersburg Aquatic Center, Mountain View Manor Elderly Housing,
and the City Municipal Building.
This project would provide a renewable energy intertie to part of the City of Coffman Cove, Alaska that presently are self-generating because they are not on the islands micro-grid.
The City of Coffman Cove was connected to Prince of Wales Island (POW) renewable energy microgrid in 2011, shutting down the diesel generators serving the community. However, significant
portions of the community are not connected to the distribution system. There are 91 privately owned lots that must self-generate at an approximate cost of $2.35/kWh (based on the cost
of residential fuel; small generator costs; and, the monthly average kWh used by those on the islands grid); the formula for determining this can be found below in the application.
The renewable energy micro-grid on POW has a rate of $0.2243/kWh for a residential rate, which would provide a significant savings to these unserved lots .
This project will encompass performing a feasibility study to determine if a proof of concept hydrogen (or Ammonia) prototype should be designed, constructed, and operated as an alternative
to spill during times of low production and high inflows of the hydroelectric plants in the SEAPA system, which serves the loads of Ketchikan, Wrangell, and Petersburg, Alaska. This
stored energy would then be used for generation either by supplementing diesel combustion or through the operation of fuel cell technology during times of hydroelectric shortages. When
surplus hydro generation conditions occur, typically all hydro operators in the region are not fully utilized. With an isolated system, there is no alternative other than spilling surplus
energy over a spillway. The region is also experiencing significant winter load growth that has caused and will continue to cause both energy and capacity shortages. These shortages
are met with diesel-electric generation that dispatches at a cost differential of four-to-one over the current hydro cost of 6.8 cents/kWh. The information obtained from performing
this feasibility study will also be directly transferrable to all hydroelectric and wind utilities in Alaska.
The City & Borough of Juneau is proposing the design and construction of a geothermal HVAC system to serve the heating and cooling needs at the new Dimond Park Library. The community
of Juneau recently received a $7 million grant from Alaska Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development to construct the new library in Juneau?s Mendenhall Valley. The
City & Borough of Juneau Assembly is interested in reducing the carbon footprint of Juneau and reducing the operating costs of their facilities. The use of a geothermal HVAC system
rather than traditional oil-fired boilers and chillers provides an opportunity to achieve both goals of the City & Borough of Juneau and to expand the use of renewable energy in city
facilities.
This project expands on a previous Feasibility study that has been ongoing for 2 years. In 2010 a Single 175W Solar A"ay was installed at the proposed location to see if Solar PV would
be feasible for the Northwest Arctic. The panel has been facing south-east and is connected to a single Enphase inverter that is cogenerating with the Kotzebue Electric Association
(KEA) grid. It was found that it produced 165 Kwh during 1 year average. @ $ 0. 54/Kwh this equals a savings of$ 89. 1 0/year A build-out of the a"ay to 10 Kw would save the Northwest
Arctic Borough approximately $ 5, 132. 00/year in electric bills.
? This would also be a good match as the Borough operate mainly day time, when the sun is available.
? The project aims to match the load of the building and offset just enough energy to try to get to stop the electric meter, this is important as we do not want to be paid for any generated
electricity by the KEA Coop.
? The project would consist of 42 pc. 240 watt panel, for a total of 10KWatts configured on the roof of the building in a configuration to match the load of the building.
? It would be a "fixed" array, non tracking.
? It would also be configured in 2 directions, southeast and south, to match the electric needs of the building, so not to overproduce with one large peak power during the day.
? Each individual panel will have it\'s own enphase micro-inverter.
? The entire array will be displayed and monitored on a website that can be accessed for educational purposes.
Cantwell is currently served by GVEA via the power transmission line between MEA and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and
lower the cost of the community of Cantwell?s power system. To accomplish this we propose to build a storage hydroelectric project on the Jack River, a short distance from Cantwell.
The reconnaissance study currently under way has identified several project configurations with capacities between 700 kW and 7 MW that may be feasible. A feasibility study is necessary
to identify which of these configurations would best meet the community?s needs.
Karluk is located on the west cost of Kodiak Island in Alaska. The village is cut-off from any road system. Fuel oil has to be shipped by barge to Karluk. Therefore, it is a high energy
cost village with fuel oil at 4.92 $/gal. This project will perform a feasibility study and complete the design & permitting for a wind energy system and a heat recovery system to serve
the existing power plant in Karluk, Alaska. For the wind energy system, wind data from a meteorological monitoring tower already installed at the proposed wind turbine location will
be available for the analysis and design. The wind energy systems would consist of wind turbines installed on the mountain 0.7 miles south of the existing power plant, the transmission
line to the power plant, and the electric boiler for excess energy utilization. The heat recovery system would consist of upgrading the existing power plant generators with waste heat
recovery units and installing a total length of up to 1000ft hydronic heating loop to connect the power plant with the community buildings.
The project seeks to optimize existing installations and in-progress wind projects in the community. NJUS is utilizing REF?Round I funding to install a 900 KW wind turbine in summer
2012. Another REF?Round I project allowed NJUS to construct a power transmission line to Banner Wind, an independent power producing facility privately owned by Sitnasuak & Bering Straits
Native Corporations, from which NJUS purchases wind power under a contract. Through installation of a new wind integration control system and modification of the diesel generation system
at NJUS? Power Plant, the project focuses on the optimization of existing diesel generation equipment within the community in order to maximize benefits from renewable energy supplies.
Under the scope of this project smaller, peaking diesel generator sets will be integrated into Nome?s Power Plant and plant controls will be reconfigured to provide system wide benefits
of reduced operating costs, greater stability, and improved efficiency. In the event NJUS or Banner Wind expands wind generation capacity in the future, the community can potentially
recognize additional benefit from the project.
Native Village of Port Graham is proposing the construction of GARN Boiler hot water distribution system to provide heat to five community buildings, homes throughout the Port Graham
community, and eventually be connected to a central CHP biomass fired facility. A conceptual design and feasibility review for a central combined heat and power (CHP) biomass-fired
plant was completed in 2009. Detailed engineering and economic evaluations were included. The existing diesel-fired hot water heating equipment will be retained and used for backup.
The proposed biomass system will displaces 80-85% of the diesel to heat these community buildings.
Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) is building a new electric generating facility in Eklutna, Alaska that will have a generating capacity of 103 to 171 MW and an operational date of
late 2014. The estimated recoverable waste heat resource associated with this power plant is 154,000 MMbtu annually. Eklutna, Inc. (EI) holds rights to the waste heat that will be generated
by this plant, and owns land adjacent to the plant where waste heat uses would be sited. EI proposes to perform a reconnaissance study of potential uses of this waste heat resource.
The reconnaissance study will define the potential uses of this waste heat resource, evaluate the technical and economic viability of these uses, and make recommendations for further
study.
The Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project is a low-impact run-of-river renewable energy project proposed near Seward, Alaska. The project would be located east of the Spring Creek
Correctional Facility and Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park, across Resurrection Bay from the City of Seward. The project is anticipated to have an installed capacity of 5.4 MW and
provide an estimated 21,700 MWh of energy annually. The project would supply approximately 1/3rd of Seward Electric System\'s annual energy requirements. This proposed project phase
(design and permitting) is contingent upon the favorable outcome of a feasibility study that is scheduled to start in September 2011. In the event the feasibility study determines that
the project is not viable, Independence Power, LLC (IP) intends to withdraw this application from consideration.
The wastewater treatment facility is the single largest electrical consumer in the city of Alakanuk, averaging 16,000 kWh per month or $5009.51 $1 kWh based on current PCE rates. The
city is provided power by AVEC, some of which is wind that is or will be generated in Emmonak. This proposal is to evaluate, design, permit and install a stand-alone wind generator
to service the wastewater treatment facility sized to provide a base loading of electrical equipment as decrease the utility spend for this facility.yy
Reconnaissance Study of Thomas Bay Hydrological Resources.
The continued objective of this project is to install a RISEC (River In-Stream Energy Conversion) device on the Kvichak River near the village of Igiugig. This lake outlet location
provides an ideal site for the study, testing and implementation of river in-stream energy conversion (RISEC) that will also benefit other Alaska communities considering this renewable
energy. A RISEC plant will convert available river kinetic energy into electric power, and feed into the existing Igiugig electric grid to reduce diesel fuel consumption at the Igiugig
power plant.
The project builds on existing reconnaissance level engineering work recently completed for a hydroelectric power plant in Adak, and makes use of Adak?s existing infrastructure such
as dams, access roads, and possibly an existing penstock. The reconnaissance studies show that a series of alpine lakes in the immediate vicinity of the city have the potential to displace
the diesel power plant as the primary energy source for Adak. Resource availability, engineering considerations, land ownership and permitting issues were all considered. The diesel
power plant would still be required for backup, and would be available to parallel with the hydroelectric facility during high load conditions. TDX?s engineering feasibility studies
will focus on two areas;
-Quantifying the hydroelectric potential. Work will include a detailed mapping and hydrology studies, a permitting evaluation including onsite studies and agency consultations, assessment
of alternatives, a detailed cost analysis for the selected project and development timeline; and,
- Interconnection requirements for integration with the utility, including analysis and selection of optimum generator and hydro-turbine size, type, and configuration; identification
of requirements for paralleling switchgear and controls, and all other major power system components.
An anemometer tower to collect wind data will be installed the Fall of 2011 by the Lake and Peninsula Borough. The met tower will also be equipped with a pyranometer for monitoring the
solar resource. We have an MOU in place to work with Marsh Creek, LLC to analyze the data and produce resource reports. A hydrokinetic assessment study is in progress by Alaska Energy
and Engineering. Marsh Creek, LLC will report on the technical and economic feasibility of integrating renewable solar, wind, and the potential hydrokinetic resources with our diesel
plant and to incorporate battery storage with the system to maximize the offset of diesel for both heat and electricity in the community.
We propose to complete the integration of the existing 65 kW Vestas V-15 Wind Turbine Generator (WTG) with our existing diesel generation plant by adding a synchronous condenser, an
additional thermal load to the Waste Heat Recovery System, and revisiting the effort to modify the supervisory controls. We intend for the WTG to be fully operational with the diesel
plant and for the excess energy to maximize reduction of diesel used to provide heat to large community building.
The project would provide design and construction of a ground source heat pump system consisting of a water-to-water heat pump and loopfield as the primary source of heat for the new
Kodiak High School. It is estimated that the heat pump will supply 85% of the heating load and the fuel oil boilers will supplement the remaining load.
This project will be a modest, run-of-the-river hydroelectric facility using Waterfall Creek and consisting of a concrete diversion/intake structure, 4,500? HDPE penstock pipeline, 16?x40?
metal powerhouse on concrete slab, Pelton Impulse Turbine and induction generator, remote-automatic control system, and 5,000? access road. This facility will be a working partner
to the city?s existing and highly successful Delta Creek hydroelectric project, which has been operating for the last fifteen years.
The proposed Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project consists of four major components, including:
-A creek diversion structure- The diversion structure would create a small impoundment that would divert a portion of flow from Fivemile Creek into a pipeline (penstock).
-A penstock. The penstock is a pipeline that will transport water from the intake structure to the turbine powerhouse. The penstock for this project will be around 12-inches in diameter
and 10,000 linear feet long. Its primary purpose is to pressurize and deliver the water from the creek to the turbine power plant.
-A hydroelectric turbine power plant ? The power plant will house the turbine and electrical generating equipment and controls. Water from the penstock will spin the turbine and generators
and produce electricity. The power plant will include a tailrace that will return water from the penstock to the creek bed.
- Electrical tie-in ? An overhead high voltage line will connect the turbine power plant to the existing electrical distribution system near the airport.
-Diesel integration ? The proposed hydro will be linked to the community?s existing, AEA type, diesel powerhouse module.
The proposed project is a high penetration wind diesel system for the community of Kipnuk. Kipnuk is located at the western mouth of the Kuskokwim River, and has a population of 690
permanent residents. The project will be owned and operated by the Kipnuk Light Plant and the community of Kipnuk and will consist of three Northwind 100 wind turbines. These turbines
are to be integrated into the current power system through the use of a control module and two heat recovery boilers. The control module will house new switchgear, metering, and controls.
The module will be designed to interface with the existing and proposed new diesel power plants, as well as provide space and electrical connections for future energy storage system
options such as a battery or a flywheel system. The control module will be located nearby the existing and proposed future diesel plant. The wind turbines will connect to the existing
power grid through a 5 pole, 12470 volt 3 phase power line extension. Wind diesel power will be regulated using two controlled 200 kW electric boilers - one located in the community
center and one located in the newly commissioned washeteria/water plant. The wind turbines are well proven in Alaska and the control and integration method is well understood. Geotechnical
investigations have already been conducted and the wind turbines, power poles and power/control module will be placed on driven piles. Property has been provided by the community for
the installation of up to 5 wind turbines. Kipnuk?s electrical load has grown by nearly 30% since the commissioning of the new water system in December of 2010. A new school is being
constructed in Kipnuk during the winter of 2012/2013. This new school will increase the average electrical load from 50 to 75 kW with a commensurate increase in heating fuel usage estimated
at over 20,000 gallons. Construction of the school in Kipnuk is scheduled to begin the Fall 2012 and continue through 2013. Coordination with the school construction could result in
cost savings sufficient to install a 4th wind turbine. Significant savings would result from the day rental of heavy equipment such as cranes, loaders and pile drivers, and specialized
personnel that will be mobilized for the school construction. The control and integration capacity in the proposed design can accommodate up to 5 wind turbines. Power produced from
a possible fourth wind turbine would result in additional fuel savings of up to 18,000 gallons. Cost savings would result from unburdening the wind project from carrying the full cost
of heavy equipment mobilization, rental, and over-wintering from the Fall of 2012 to the Spring of 2013. This wind diesel system architecture is scalable through the addition of wind
turbines, new diesel gensets, and energy storage. Kipnuk is a productive wind site in which each Northwind 100 turbine has the potential to annually produce 300,000 kWhrs of electricity.
This equates to a per turbine potential fuel displacements of 18,000 to 20,000 gallon of diesel fuel and a total displacement for 3 turbines of upwards of 55,000 gallons.
The Nenana Student Living Center (NSLC) is a 27,000 sq ft student dormitory in Alaska?s Interior village of Nenana that houses and feeds 88 students and 10 staff members during the school
year. The building is owned by the City of Nenana, but operating costs are paid by the Nenana School District. This building has in-floor radiant heating across approximately 20,000
square feet. Due to the architecture of the building (1-story, view from above looks like a U) there is more than 11,000 square feet of exterior wall. Over a typical year, the building
burns 27,000-30,000 gallons of heating fuel, consuming 150-200 gallons each day during the coldest parts of the Interior Alaskan winter. Operating costs are passed directly onto the
already burdened school district. Integrating a large solar hot water array with heliodyne flat-plate solar collectors, a large solar hot water storage tank, dual coil DHW tank, forced
air heating preheat loops and already planned insulation upgrades we can offset up to 30% of the building?s heating costs. With heating fuel at $3.50 gal coming into this winter that
will save $30,000 in the first year alone.
Cook Inlet Region, Inc. (CIR]), created a special purpose entity called Fire Island Wind, LLC (FIW) to develop a wind farm on Fire Island. The Fire Island Wind Farm ("the Wind Farm")
is a utility-scale wind generation facility under development, ultimately planned to have a nameplate capacity of 52.8 MW and to be comprised of 33 wind turbine generators. Pursuant
to a recently completed Power Purchase Agreement (PP A), Chugach, as Buyer, has agreed to purchase the electrical output from Phase I of the Wind Farm, which will be comprised of 11
General Electric ("GE") 1.6MW type XLE turbines for a total Phase] of 17.6 MW. The Project that is the subject of this grant application includes the construction of the transmission
line, which will interconnect the Fire Island Wind Farm (as well as a few retail electric customers on Fire Island), with Chugach\'s 34.5kV system at the International Substation. The
Wind Farm will initially consist of 11-1.6MW OE wind turbines that will be consolidated into a single 34.5kV feeder. The feeder will be routed to a collector yard. The collector yard
will connect to a double-circuit 34.5kV overhead transmission line running approximately 2.8 miles to the northeast coast of Fire Island. At that point, it will be connected to two
34.5kV 3 phase submarine cables. The submarine cables will run approximately 3.2 miles under the Cook Inlet to the mainland coast near Point Campbell and Anchorage International Airport.
At Point Campbell, the conductors will be separated into single conductors and buried in a trench. The transmission lines will then continue approximately 6.2 miles to the International
Substation and connect to the 34.5kV bus at the International Substation. Portions of underground mainland section will be installed in conduit. Splice cabinets will be required at
various points on the underground section of the project. A map and drawing outlining the wind farm site and transmission Project is attached as Appendix 1.
Mentasta?s predicament, as is the case for most of rural Alaska, is its dependence on imported expensive petroleum heating oil for space heating of essential community facilities and
infrastructure which support the provision of valuable social, health and safety services to residents of Mentasta. This Project will construct one centrally located woody biomass space
heating plant to substitute for expensive, imported heating oil use and will heat 80% of Mentasta?s public facilities with high efficiency bio-mass (wood-fired) heating. Mentasta?s
community facilities are centrally located and can be serviced by one woody biomass heating plant strategically located adjacent to Mentasta?s clustered public facilities (see Map Attachment).
Mentasta Traditional Council is requesting AEA Round 5 in the amount of $400,000 and will construct a single woody biomass plant to heat five (5) community facility which is estimated
to displace 10,800 gallons of imported heating oil and create local wood-harvesting employment/small business opportunities.
Tanacross? predicament, as is the case for most of rural Alaska, is its dependence on imported expensive petroleum heating oil for space heating of essential community facilities and
infrastructure which support the provision of valuable social, health and safety services to residents of Tanacross. This Project will construct one centrally located woody biomass
space heating plant to substitute for expensive, imported heating oil use and wil heat 80% of Tanacross? public facilities with high efficiency bio-mass (wood-fired) heating. Tanacross?
community facilities are centrally located and can be serviced by one woody biomass heating plant strategically located adjacent to Tanacross? clustered public facilities (see Map Attachment).
Tanacross Village Council is requesting AEA Round 5 in the amount of $420,000. Tanacross Village Council will contribute $170,000 of in-kind building materials to this exciting Project.
Combined, Tanacross Village Council will construct a single woody biomass plant to heat four (4) community facility which is estimated to displace 26,500 gallons of imported heating
oil and create local wood-harvesting employment/small business opportunities.
The Tanana Solar Thermal Public Facilities Spacing Heating Project seeks to demonstrate and implement the market transformative benefits of combining biomass space heating technologies
currently being installed at Tanana?s public facilities with solar thermal collectors. During the winter months the heat energy generated by the biomass boilers offsets a substantial
amount of the fuel oil normally required. The cordwood fuel source also allows many of the operating costs to remain in the community since the supply of the cordwood and manpower required
to feed and boilers is local. During the summer the biomass boilers are a less desirable alternative. The focus and energies of the community are diverted to essential traditional cultural
activities. The solar thermal, which is a passive heat energy source that can operate largely unattended, allows those activities to continue uninterrupted. Thus it is an excellent
companion to the biomass and can contribute substantially to the heat energy requirement for at least nine months of the year. The combination of the two heat energy sources virtually
eliminates the dependency on fuel oil as the heat energy source.
The City believes that the integration of solar thermal is essential to the continued development and expansion of the biomass program in Alaska. The resulting combination system is
more compatible with the life styles and cultural activities of people in rural Alaska, further reduces the ongoing operational costs of the heat energy system, and reduces the long
term impact on the area biomass resource due to the system operation. For this project, the City of Tanana has selected four buildings in Tanana that have biomass systems ? the washeteria,
the tribal complex, the teacher housing duplex, and a single residence teacher housing unit. This mix represents a good cross section of both commercially and residentially oriented
systems. Due to the highly variable temperatures found in the biomass systems, the City has selected indirect, glycol based evacuated tube collectors with variable speed circulation
pumps and supplemental heat storage tanks for the solar thermal systems. In the washeteria, the integral storage of the GARN boilers will be utilized. In the other facilities that are
utilizing Econoburn gasification boilers with limited internal storage capacity, supplemental storage tanks will be installed in conjunction with the solar thermal.
AVEC is proposing to complete final design and permitting for four wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation systems in St. Michael and Stebbins. Work under this grant
will also be used to design controls for the power generation system at a power plant in Stebbins. AVEC has completed the design and obtained permits for the intertie between St. Michael
and Stebbins. Once work done under this grant is completed, AVEC will seek funding to construct turbines and an intertie to serve both communities.
This project would add two additional NW100B turbines to the existing wind farm (consisting off our NW100B turbines) in Emmonak to complete the originally planned wind farm serving the
communities of Emmonak and Alakanuk.
AVEC proposes to install a 10 kWh solar array in Upper Kalskag. The array would be installed on the side of the existing power plant facility that is owned and operated by AVEC. Work
would involve shipping materials to the community, installing, integrating, testing, and commissioning the array. A small solar array in Upper Kalskag would help AVEC evaluate the
benefits of solar arrays installed at power generating facilities.
Currently, AVEC?s three wind turbines (Northern Power Systems 100A models) in Gambell generate in excess of community requirements when there is moderate to heavy wind and when the community
load is light. Much of this excess is not captured,since there is no economic way to store the energy. AVEC, together with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium with input from the
City of Gambell, are planning to design and construct a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy to power water treatment plant space heating, drinking water loop circulation
heating, and water storage tank heating. Design of the proposed equipment would be based on the secondary load installations and adapted to installation into the water treatment plant.
Currently, AVEC?s four wind turbines (Northern Power Systems 100B models) in Chevak generate in excess of community requirements when there is moderate to heavy wind and when the community
load is light. Much of this excess energy is not captured, since there is no economic way to store the energy. AVEC, together with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium with input
from the City of Chevak, are planning to design and construct a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy to power space heating at the water treatment plant and drinking
water storage tank heating. Design of the proposed equipment would be based on AVEC?s other secondary load installations adapted to installation into the water treatment plant.
The primary financial benefit from this project would be to determine whether the wind resources are suitable to provide power to the community and to prepare a conceptual design of
a wind facility. Assuming installation of one NW100 turbine, it could produce 230,000 kWh annually. The possible displacement of diesel fuel used for village power generation in Goodnews
Bay could be 13,000 gal/yr (HOMER simulation, assuming 80% turbine availability, Tab G). This project could save about $72,400 during the first year of operation (2014). See the detailed
project benefits in Section 5.0.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met)tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Shishmaref. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the land owner for the placement of the met tower, geotechnical field work, permitting,transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year,and conducting a reconnaissance - level geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual
design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. This project will also consider other turbines that can be relocated, if the
village decides to move to another location.
AVEC proposes to complete erection,startup,and commissioning of wo NW100 wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation system for Mountain Village. AVEC would also upgrade
the switchgear and add remote control to the system.
AVEC?s two wind turbines (Northern Power Systems 100B models) in Shaktoolik when started up later this year will generate in excess of community requirements when there is moderate
to heavy wind and when the community load is light. Much of this excess will not be used, since there is no economic way to store the energy. AVEC, together with Alaska Native Tribal
Health Consortium, with input from the City of Shaktoolik, are planning to design and construct a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy to power water treatment plant
space heating, drinking water storage tank heating, and circulation loop heating. Design of the proposed equipment would be based on AVEC?s other secondary load installations and adapted
to installation into the water treatment plant.
A detailed feasibility study has been completed. This analysis has clearly shown that the project is both feasible and cost effective. These next two phases of the project(design and
construction) will build on the work that has been done to date. AVEC has already implemented electric boilers within its facilities in several villages. These efforts have clearly
demonstrated the ability to integrate the electric boilers into the existing systems. The challenge of this project will be to demonstrate that the electric boiler technology and controls
can be successfully used to provide heat to the various use points at the water treatment plant on an interruptible basis. The availability of the water tank for thermal storage greatly
reduces any risks. Currently, AVEC?s two wind turbines Northern Power Systems 100A models) in Mekoryuk generate in excess of community requirements when there is moderate to heavy wind
and when the community load is light. Much of this excess is not captured,since there is no economic way to store the energy. AVEC,together with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative,Inc. Mekoryuk Water System Surplus Wind Energy Recovery Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 3 of 138/26/2011
(ANTHC) with input from the City of Mekoryuk, are planning to design and construct a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy to power space heating at the water treatment
plant, drinking water storage tank heating, and washeteria hot water heating and clothes drying. Design of the proposed equipment would be based on AVEC?s other secondary load projects
adapted to installation into the water treatment plant.
AVEC proposes to complete construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of three Wind turbines and Secondary Load Controls (SLC) to supplement the existing power generation system
for currently intertied communities of St. Mary\'s and Pitka\'s Point. As a part of this project, AVEC would upgrade the electrical distribution line between St. Mary\'s and Pitka\'s
Point to a three phase line.
ORPC Alaska, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC (collectively, ORPC), develops technology and projects generating emission-free electricity from water
currents. Its technology includes the proprietary TidGen? Power System, which includes one or more TidGen? devices connected to an on-shore station with power and data cables. In ORPC?s
Cook Inlet TidGen? Project, ORPC will install a four-device TidGen? Power System with a rated generating capacity of 600 kW in a 6-knot current. AEA Round 4 funding to ORPC will help
fund a single-device TidGen? Power System. This Round 5 project, called the TidGen? Array Project, will expand the system to a four-device TidGen? Power System, by adding an array of
three TidGen? devices.
The purpose of this project is to investigate the geothermal potential of the Ivanof Bay area. The region is located at the base of the Kupreanof Volcano and there are reports of hot
springs in the general area of Stepovak Bay. Active volcanic systems such as Kupreanof volcano, and deep fracture and fault systems create favorable settings for development of geothermal
systems. Previous studies on geothermal resources of the Aleutian Arc have not identified a known hot springs or geothermal source however three areas of fumaroles have been reported
in the Stepovak Bay consisting of a chain of five volcanoes that includes Kupreanof (Wilson, 1990). The first area is at the head of Big River and is located near the center of the
Kupreanof volcanic edifice (Yount and others, 1985). The second, 5.5 miles southwest, was observed by Eakins (1970) on the southeast side of volcano 4, at the head of an unnamed stream
that flows into Ramsey Bay. At the time of the study, steaming fumaroles were visible at the west end of a sulfur deposit at about 2,950 foot elevation. The third, an unverified fumaroles
field, is inferred from 1940 air photos of unnamed volcano 1, north of Clark Bay (Wilson, 1990). These sites are about 28 miles east of Port Moller and 14 miles northwest of the Kupreanof
Peninsula. Kupreanof\'s latest activity was an ash/steam eruption in 1987 (Wilson, 1990). In addition to the surface manifestations, a wildcat well drilled by Philips Petroleum in 1976-1977,
Big River A-Ol encountered high temperatures at depth. The well was advanced approximately 7 miles west, northwest of Ivanof Bay, in the general area of the observed sulfur deposits.
The well chips/core is available for study. We request funding for a reconnaissance study of the region with a planned timeline of approximately 16 months. The study will include the
necessary fieldwork, the permitting and environmental analysis, preliminary design analysis, market analysis, simple economic analysis, and a final report. The fieldwork will include
mapping, remote sensing, aerial and ground based geophysics, and geochemical sampling of soils and waters. In addition, we will obtain samples from the Big River A-Ol Well in order
to conduct additional petrographic analysis of the core. This is the complete scope of work we are requesting funding for with this grant, but if this work is successful and promising,
future work would include the drilling necessary to confirm and develop the resource, necessary permitting, and power plant and infrastructure construction.
The project will include extending a new hot water heating / return loop from the recently completed Biomass Heating Plant to two (2) additional buildings on the Tok School Campus and
will include the required integration work within the two buildings. The first building is the multipurpose building which houses an ice hockey rink and shooting range. The intent is
to use the biomass plant to heat the shooting range and toilet group portion of the multipurpose building, approximately 10,000 square feet. The second building is the Zamboni garage
which would approximately 1,400 square feet. The heating loop will connect to the Tok School Biomass Plant that was completed in the fall of 2010. (The Tok School Biomass Plant was
developed using AEA Round I Grant Funding. The project consisted of a Biomass heating facility that contained an automated biomass heating system that now provides heat to the existing
K-12 School.) Since the completion of the Tok School Biomass Plant a steam turbine and electrical generation system have been added to create a combined heat and power (CHP) system.
The original biomass boiler was sized to allow for the CHP expansion and the additional load of the multipurpose building and Zamboni garage. The CHP project will be completed the fall
of 2011. When the CHP system is operational it will generate a substantial amount heat as a byproduct. The heat created will surpass the required heat demand of the existing K-12 School.
The intent is to recover the surplus heat and supply it to meet the heating demand of additional buildings mentioned above. The cost for maintenance and operation as well as for biomass
fuel will be negated for this project due to the planned operation of the CHP system.
The project will include extending a new hot water heating / return loop from the recently completed Biomass Heating Plant to a new 24?-0? x 100?-0? greenhouse and 20?-0? x 30?-0? processing
facility on the Tok School Campus. The greenhouse and processing facility would only use surplus heat from the Biomass Plant and would benefit from the electrical generation of the
Combined Heat and Power (CHP) system. Prodcue would initially be used to supplement the schools Food Service Program, providing fresh vegetables to student who otherwise would not have
access. The Biomass Plant has capacity to support additional greenhouses in the future if the demand for local produce in the region exceeds the anticipated yield capacity of the first
greenhouse.
The project will include extending a new hot water heating / return loop from the recently completed Biomass Heating Plant to a new 10,000 square foot net-zero Training and Administration
Center (TAC). The TAC would benefit from heat from the biomass boiler, surplus heat created as a byproduct of the electrical generation process of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP)
system, and would also benefit from the electrical generation of the CHP. The heating loop will connect to the Tok School Biomass Plant that was completed in the Fall of 2010. (The
Tok School Biomass Plant was developed using AEA Round I Grant Funding. The project consisted of a Biomass heating facility that contained an automated biomass heating system that now
provides heat to the existing K-12 School.) Since the completion of the Tok School Biomass Plant, a steam turbine and electrical generation system will be added to create a combined
heat and power (CHP) system. The original biomass boiler was sized to allow for the CHP expansion and the additional load of the multipurpose building and Zamboni garage. The CHP project
will be completed the fall of 2011. The TAC will be a net-zero facility. The facility will reduce utility demands through low energy building practices, such as super insulation, location
on site, natural ventilation, and day lighting. The TAC will also incorporate incorporating energy efficient building technologies such as high efficiency lighting, communication, and
back up HVAC systems.
The City of Elim and its partners, the Native Village of Elim, Elim Native Corporation, and the University of Alaska Fairbanks are proposing a Resource Assessment (Reconnaissance) /
Feasibility Analysis of potential geothermal sites near the community. A number of known moderate temperature hot springs as well as other identified thermal anomalies, based on local
knowledge, are located in the area surrounding Elim offering potential energy sources for the
community. Known sources include Kwiniuk/Elim Hot Springs (41?C at 22 gpm), and Clear Creek Hot Springs (65?C at 230 gpm). No significant geothermal exploration has occurred at Elim
to date, although the Alaska Energy Authority identified geothermal energy, along with wind, and wood, as potential energy options for Elim in the 2010 Energy Pathway. This project
will combine low cost airborne and ground-based reconnaissance and mapping techniques to develop a conceptual model of the system, and complete a preliminary design and cost analysis
to refine the numbers included in the Pathway.
False Pass is currently dependent on diesel fuel for all of its electrical generation and heat production. This project will perform a reconnaissance and feasibility study to determine
if tidal energy can be economically harnessed to provide electrical and perhaps heating loads to the community. The reconnaissance phase of the project will include gathering existing
energy usage data, including leveraging existing AEA funded efforts to assess the viability of tidal energy power at False Pass, preliminary geophysical data on ocean current velocities,
and conducting modeling efforts to determine if a feasibility study is warranted. The feasibility phase of the project will involve geophysical data collection including more rigorous
current velocity and bathymetric data collection to locate a viable deployment area. This data will be utilized to initiate consultations with permitting agencies and to perform an
economic analysis of a conceptually designed project utilizing one or more of Ocean Renewable Power Company?s (ORPC?s) TidGen Power Systems to determine if a tidal energy project is
economically, environmentally and technologically feasible at False Pass.
This project will conduct a reconnaissance study of potential renewable energy sources for use by the community of St. Michael to support our water and sewer utility and major community
structures. Our water and sewer utility has very high per capita energy use, and we need a more cost-effective energy source to help sustain this utility. This study will identify potential
renewable energy sources and examine their associated utilization methods, technical and economic feasibility, and other potential benefits, such as energy cost savings and reduced
operation and maintenance expenses.
The City, in partnership with the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC), is seeking funding to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines at the community water treatment
plant (WTP) to offset electrical costs with a renewable energy source. The City seeks to analyze the feasibility of utilizing wind turbines for capturing wind energy to provide electricity
for the existing WTP. The feasibility study will, at minimum, complete the following activities: ? Determine the available wind resources around the WTP site; ? Estimate the long-term
viability of the proposed project based on expected load growth; ? Provide a conceptual-level system design; ? Prepare a conceptual-level cost estimate for the construction effort and
the operations and maintenance of the proposed system; ? Identify easements and permits required; Prepare a comprehensive economical analyses of alternatives; ? Provide recommendations
to move forward with the project design activities; and ? Evaluate the potential uses of wind turbines to convert wind energy to electricity.
This project will determine the feasibility of a small wind farm to provide electricity and heat for the Native Village of Goodnews Bay water treatment plant. Goodnews Bay is classified
as a Class 5 Wind Power site in Appendix B of the Alaska Rural Energy Plan. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) considers Class 5 sites to be "excellent" for harnessing
wind power. Between electricity and fuel, the annual energy cost to operate the water treatment plant is approximately $21,000. Conservatively, it is estimated that electrical usage
can be reduced by 75% and fuel consumption by 30% through the use of renewable energy.
This project will provide a heat recovery system to support the heating requirements of five City operated and owned buildings in Togiak. The objective of this project is to reduce the
consumption of expensive heating fuel by utilizing available recovered heat. There are several community buildings within a 500 foot radius of the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
(AVEC) power plant, offering an excellent opportunity to capture a maximum amount of waste heat from the plant for hydronic heating. A detailed Heat Recovery Analysis was completed
for the City of Togiak and Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) in June 2010 by Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (Report Attached). The findings and preferred alternatives
developed by this analysis will be used as the basis for the project proposed in this application. The proposed project will design and construct a heat recovery system between the
AVEC power plant and the following end-user community buildings: 1) Water treatment Plant, 2) Clinic, 3) Police Station, 4) City Office, and 5) "Old School" Community Activity Building.
The new system will capture jacket water heat generated by the AVEC plant that is currently wasted to the atmosphere by power plant radiators. The recovered heat will be transferred
by insulated glycol piping to the end-users. The new system will tie into the end-users\' heating systems using heat
exchangers, control mechanisms and any required upgrades to the existing building hydronic systems.
Currently, AVEC is not utilizing either the jacket heat from its diesel engines or the heat generated by the electric boiler installed to dispose excess wind energy. This project would
recover heat from both sources at the AVEC plant and send that heat to the water treatment plant to heat the building, the circulated water loops, and the water storage tank. The AVEC
power plant and the Savoonga water treatment plant are located next to each other in Savoonga. A feasibility study has been done for this project and the design will be completed in
the near future with other funds. Funds are being requested for construction only.
The City of Shishmaref proposes to design construct a heat recovery system in the community in accordance with the findings and recommendations of a heat recovery study conducted by
Alaska Energy and Engineering Inc. The project will recover available jacket water heat from diesel generators that produce electricity at the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
power plant and convey the heat to core city facilities. The heat currently produced by the generators is released to the atmosphere via radiators. This project is estimated to reduce
the annual diesel heating fuel consumption of nearby community
buildings by about 7,900 gallons/year. The construction scope will include the installation of the waste heat transmission line, pumps, heat exchanger, and other system appurtenances.
This project will involve coordination with the City of Shishmaref (City), AVEC, and the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC).
This project will provide a feasibility study to determine the benefits of installing a wind turbine system in Old Kasigluk. The wind turbines will be used to convert wind energy to
heating and electrical energy that will be used to heat and power the water treatment and washeteria facility located in Old Kasigluk. The project will:
? Determine the feasibility of installing a wind turbine system for heating and electricity needs
? Estimate the long-term viability of the proposed project based on expected load growth,
? Provide a conceptual level system design,
? Prepare a conceptual level cost estimate for the construction effort and the operations and maintenance of the proposed system,
? Identify easements and permits required,
? Prepare a comprehensive economical analyses of alternatives,
? Update the utility business plan, and
? Make a recommendation to move forward with the project design activities.
This project will complete a study to determine the feasibility of a biomass fuel system for the existing water treatment plant (WTP) and wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) in Klawock,
Alaska. It is proposed that a biomass heating system will be used to heat the WWTP buildings and supply heat to other ancillary building components that require a heat source. Resources
for the City to supply the proposed biomass system are readily available in and around the community of Klawock and throughout Prince of Wales Island, on which Klawock is located. This
study will demonstrate the cost savings that will be
associated with the implementation of a biomass fuel system at the City\'s WTP and WWTP. The project will complete the following tasks:
? Determine the amount of energy required for both facilities;
? Estimate the long-term viability of the proposed project based on expected load growth;
? Provide a conceptual-level system design;
? Prepare a conceptual-level cost estimate for the construction effort and the operations and maintenance of the proposed system;
? Identify easements and permits required;
? Prepare a comprehensive economical analyses of alternatives for selection by the City;
? Update the utility business plan; and
? Make a recommendation to move forward with the project design activities.
This project will study the feasibility of a heat recovery system to displace fuel oil heat used by the city water utility. This study will look at the heat available from the electric
power plant and the heat demand of the water distribution and storage system. An estimate of the energy savings and cost savings to the utility will be developed. This project will
provide a recommendation based upon energy savings, benefits/cost, and other criteria.
This project will determine the feasibility of constructing a heat recovery system and/or an excess wind energy electric boiler to supplement the heat used to serve the City of New Stuyahok
owned water utility. A new Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant is being built in an area approximately I mile from town, adjacent to the newly constructed school
and a new water storage tank that is under construction. The school currently has an agreement with AVEC to purchase recovered heat from the new power plant. AVEC plans to construct
an electrical intertie with Ekwok in the near future, providing electricity from the New Stuyahok electric plant. When this occurs, it is possible that recovered heat will be in excess
of the school\'s needs, leaving some available to heat the adjacent water storage tank. AVEC also anticipates installing some wind turbines in this location, making the availability
of excess wind energy to operate an electric boiler at the large tank likely, which is another potential source of water tank heating this study will investigate.
This project will determine the feasibility of capturing excess heat energy from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power generation plant in Toksook Bay and utilizing
it to provide heat for community buildings. The project will: ? Determine the amount of excess heat energy available for reuse, ? Estimate the long-term viability of the proposed project
based on expected load growth, ? Provide a conceptual-level system design, ? Prepare a conceptual-level cost estimate for the construction effort and the operations and maintenance
of the proposed system, ? Identify easements and permits required ? Prepare a comprehensive economical analyses of alternatives, ? Update the utility business plan, ? Make a recommendation
to move forward with the project design activities, and ? Evaluate the potential uses of waste heat.
The proposed project will complete a feasibility study to review the potential for a biomass heating system for the City of Lower Kalskag (City) water treatment plant (WTP). Specifically,
the feasibility study will include the following scope items: 1. Site Visit to assess facilities to be served 2. Land use assessment 3. Forest inventory and harvest assessment (Subcontract)
4. Report Development 5. Presentation to Community. The report development will focus on site assessment; conceptual mechanical and civilAEA 12-001 Application 7/1/2011 engineering
recommendations; financial evaluation; and review of required permits. A new WTP for the City is currently being designed by the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) through
a cooperative project agreement (CPA) with the City. Currently, the design for the WTP is 65% complete and is projected to be completed in mid-20l2. Following the completion of design
activities, the City and the ANTHC will apply for construction funding for the WTP improvements and it is anticipated that construction activities will commence in 2013. If the feasibility
study shows that the biomass boiler is a viable renewable energy resource, then the City will also apply for funding for design and construction of a new biomass boiler system for the
WTP. This will be during the same time frame that the application for the rest of the improvements associated with the new WTP are. The new biomass system would be used to heat the
WTP in addition to supplying heat to any fixtures that require it which may include heat add systems, etc. This project will involve coordination with the City and the ANTHC via a CPA.
This project will provide a site specific wind study to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines at the vacuum sewer plant in Selawik, Alaska. Specifically, the feasibility
study will include the following scope items: Equipment purchase; Initial site visits and equipment setup; Monitoring and Data collection; Report Development; Equipment Demobilization;
Presentation to Community. The report development will focus on site assessment; conceptual electrical and civil engineering recommendations; financial evaluations; and review of required
permits.
Currently, Middle Kuskokwim Electric is not utilizing the jacket heat from its diesel engines. This project will recover heat from the engines at the Middle Kuskoquim Electric plant
and send it to the water treatment plant to heat the building, the circulated water loops, and the water storage tank. The Middle Kuskoquim Electric power plant and the Sleetmute water
treatment plant are located in Sleetmute. A feasibility study has been done for this project as part of an energy audit of the water treatment plant, and the design will be completed
soon with other funds. Funds are being requested for construction only.
AVEC records from 2007 show that approximately 127,463 gallons of diesel fuel were consumed for power generation in Scammon Bay to generate 1,651,855 kW of electricity. This project
will displace 1,031,865 kWh per year (Scammon Bay Feasibility Study 2003) equating to a net 82,549 gallons of displaced fuel or $569,829.27 per year at a current retail price of$7.23/gal.
This project will be able to produce power at a rate significantly lower than the cost of present electrical generation, resulting in reduced cost of power for residents. Paying for
basic power generation has become much more of a challenge, and reduction of the power costs to the consumer will provide an economic boost to individuals trying to make ends meet for
their families. Reducing the cost of power will also be a boon to economic development in the community. Any project providing stimulation to the economy cannot be cost effective without
going hand-in-hand with a reduction in utility rates to help generate revenue. Other benefits to the Alaskan Public: The anticipated benefits of installation of the wind turbines include
reducing the negative impact of the cost of energy by providing a renewable energy alternative. This project could help stabilize energy costs and provide long-term socioeconomic benefits
to village households. Locally produced, affordable energy will empower community residents and could help avert rural to urban migration. This project would have many environmental
benefits resulting from a reduction of hydrocarbon use.
These benefits include:
? Reduced potential for fuel spills or contamination during transport, storage, or use (thus protecting vital water and subsistence food sources)
? Improved air quality
? Decreased contribution to global climate change from fossil fuel use
? Decreased coastal erosion due to climate change.
This project will determine the feasibility of a small wind farm to provide electricity and heat for the City-owned water treatment plant and sewer vacuum station. Kotlik is classified
as a Class 4 to 5 Wind Power site in the Renewable Energy Atlas of Alaska. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) considers Class 5 sites to be "excellent" for harnessing wind
power. The estimated annual electricity cost to operate the Kotlik water treatment plant and vacuum station is about $35,000.
The City of Noorvik in partnership with the Alaska Native Tribal health Consortium (ANTHC) is seeking to determine the feasibility if installing a heat recovery system in the community
for heating the community water treatment, water storage and water distribution systems. The City of Noorvik seeks to determine the feasibility of capturing excess heat energy from
the existing AVEC generator plant and utilizing it to provide heat for the existing water treatment plant and water distribution system and other community buildings. The feasibility
study project will: ? determine the amount of excess heat energy available for reuse,
This project will provide the design and construction of a heat recovery system that will utilize waste heat from the existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) power plant
for use at the WTP and three L YSD teacher housing units in Russian Mission, Alaska. The design will be developed based on recommendations from the Russian Mission, Alaska Heat Recovery
Study (see attached) that was completed by Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E). The construction scope will include retrofitting the AVEC generators and installing a waste heat
transmission line, circulation pumps, heat exchangers, and other system appurtenances. The proposed project will involve coordination with the AVEC, the City, L YSD, the Alaska Native
Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC), as well as the Alaska Rural Utility Collaborate (ARUC).
The Atmautluak washeteria, the only sanitation facility community owned by Atmautluak Traditional Council, has high energy costs for heating water for use in washers, showers, and building
heat. This facility includes the water treatment plant. Safe drinking water is made here and used by local residents. This project will provide recovered heat for the washeteria. This
project will be combined with an Indian Health Service (IHS) project rehabilitating the washeteria to meet the community\'s water needs and reduce the associated costs. This project
will construct an enclosure (utilidor) for the sewage force main and recovered heat lines and move heat from the power plant to the sewage lift station and washeteria. The IHS project
will repair the washeteria foundation and make internal improvements to effectively use the recovered heat.
The City of Golovin in partnership with the Alaska Native Tribal health Consortium (ANTHC) is seeking to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in the community for heating
the water treatment facilities. Golovin currently stores approximately 2 million gallons of treated water to provide safe drinking water to community residents. In addition, Golovin\'s
water storage is due to increase to approximately 3 million gallons in two years with the construction of a new water storage tank, which will serve homes that currently do not have
running water. This stored water, as well as the community piped water distribution system, is heated using multiple oil-fired boilers. The energy requirement and fuel consumption to
keep this water from freezing each year is extremely high, and escalating fuel price have the potential to limit Golovin\'s ability to provide adequate sanitation services to its residents
due to prohibitive heating costs. The City of Golovin now seeks to determine the feasibility of utilizing wind turbines for capturing wind energy to provide heat and electricity for
the existing water treatment plant, water storage and water distribution system. The feasibility study project will:
? determine the available wind resources around the water treatment plant,
? estimate the long-term viability of the proposed project based on expected load growth,
? provide a conceptual level system design,
? prepare a conceptual level cost estimate for the construction effort and the operations and maintenance of the proposed system,
? identify easements and permits required, prepare a comprehensive economical analyses of alternatives,
? update the utility business plan, ? make a recommendation to move forward with the project design activities,
? Evaluate the potential uses of wind turbines to convert wind energy to heat.
The City of Kake Hydroelectric Resource Analysis study will review the potential hydroelectric energy sources within or near the community of Kake, Alaska. The proposed project will
complete a resource (feasibility) analysis of the potential, readily accessible hydroelectric resources available to the community and will provide a conceptual design for the selected
hydroelectric alternative. Traditional hydroelectric turbines and infrastructure and low head, hydrokinetic technologies including Archimedes Screws will be considered as a part of
this resource analysis. Alternatives that could potentially be retrofitted to the existing Gunnuck Creek Dam will be considered as a part of this resource analysis. Previous hydroelectric
studies for the Kake area will be reviewed and incorporated into this analysis, which will include updated estimated capital and annual operation and maintenance costs. The resource
analysis will compare the alternative project costs and will determine the most feasible alternative to offset some or all of Kake\'s diesel-driven electrical supply. A conceptual design
of the preferred alternative will be prepared as part of the resource analysis.
The City of Kobuk seeks to incorporate a biomass boiler system in their water treatment plant facility. This project will provide design and construction for a wood burning boiler system
in Kobuk, Alaska. The intent for this project is to increase the use of locally available, biomass energy for thermal heating. This project will include:
? System Design
? Right of way and Survey requirements ? Construction Permitting
? Installation of a wood burning boiler system (Gam unit proposed)
? Construction of a covered wood splitting and storage shed
? Gravel Pad/Foundation
? Perimeter fencing
? Hydronic piping and other mechanical components ? Electrical Controls
? Harvesting and Processing Equipment (Saws, wood splitters, etc.)
? Freight and travel costs.
This is a combination of applications 839 and 898. The 839 project involves the expansion of NJUS? awarded REF Round I wind power project (installation of a 900 kW wind turbine) through
the installation of a second 900 kW wind turbine at the planned project site. The project aims to take advantage of economies of scope to incorporate the installation of a second wind
turbine generator during the construction of NJUS? Round I awarded project. At this time, conceptual design and feasibility studies have been completed and the project is ready to continue
with final design, permitting, and construction activities.
The 898 project seeks to optimize existing installations and in-progress wind projects in the community. NJUS is utilizing REF?Round I funding to install a 900 KW wind turbine in summer
2012. Another REF?Round I project allowed NJUS to construct a power transmission line to Banner Wind, an independent power producing facility privately owned by Sitnasuak & Bering Straits
Native Corporations, from which NJUS purchases wind power under a contract. Through installation of a new wind integration control system and modification of the diesel generation system
at NJUS? Power Plant, the project focuses on the optimization of existing diesel generation equipment within the community in order to maximize benefits from renewable energy supplies.
Under the scope of this project smaller, peaking diesel generator sets will be integrated into Nome?s Power Plant and plant controls will be reconfigured to provide system wide benefits
of reduced operating costs, greater stability, and improved efficiency. In the event NJUS or Banner Wind expands wind generation capacity in the future, the community can potentially
recognize additional benefit from the project.
The proposed project is to build and install a Combined Wood Pellet Boiler and Solar Thermal System that would provide heat for both a 3,200 sq ft shop/office building and a 1,160 sq
ft administrative building. This project includes construction of a building addition to house the boiler system, purchase and installation of the solar thermal and pellet boiler, and
focused monitoring and evaluating of the project. This project would be used as a demonstration project for the community to learn about solar thermal and wood pellet boiler systems
and to encourage the use of local renewable resources for heating.
The Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential hydroelectric resource in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley with an estimated installed capacity of 6.5 MW and annual energy generation
of 34,100 MWh. The preliminary estimated project cost is $25 million, and estimated benefit-cost ratio is 3.29. This proposed feasibility study is contingent upon the favorable outcome
of a reconnaissance study that is scheduled to start in August 2011. In the event the reconnaissance study determines that the project is not viable, Eklutna Inc. intends to withdraw
this application from consideration.
The proposed project is a high head run-of-river hydroelectric power plant on Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon with an installed capacity of 177 kW. Project will include a 9-foot tall
concrete dam, 3,260 foot long 18- inch and 16-inch diameter penstock and access trail; 400 square foot power house; 1,550 foot long access road with a bridge across Packers Creek to
the powerhouse; and a 1,750 foot long overhead power line extension to the existing distribution system and 3,000 foot long control connection to the existing diesel power plant.
The City of Ouzinkie (?City?) proposes to replace an existing timber buttress dam at Mahoona Lake, located approximately 1.5 miles east of the City on Spruce Island near Kodiak, Alaska.
Funds requested in this Renewable Energy Grant application are needed to perform a feasibility analysis and conceptual design for a proposed replacement dam located downstream of the
existing wooden dam. The feasibility analysis will include evaluation of the existing 6,000 foot, 18-inch diameter PVC penstock, a 1.5 mile access road, and a (125 kW) hydroelectric
powerhouse. The replacement dam will be designed to allow for an increase of holding capacity from a current 400 acre-feet, to a post-construction capacity of 600 acre-feet. This 50%
increase in capacity will provide uninterrupted use of the hydroelectric generators, a potential increase in power production capacity, and eliminate the need for supplemental diesel-generated
power. The scope of this project will be consistent with the requirements of Phase II Feasibility Analysis, Conceptual Design, as set forth in Section 2.4 of the Round V grant application
instructions dated 1 July 2011.
The proposed project will finalize the feasibility and conceptual design, build, and install a wood-fired hydronic heating system in three Seward schools. Phase I, Reconnaissance Study
was completed in July, 2011. (See attached reports) This proposed Seward Schools Biomass Heating System project will implement the following multi-phased process:
? Phase II, Finalize Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design.
? Phase III, Final Design of a wood-fired hydronic heating system to heat the combined Seward High, Middle and Elementary School campus with woody biomass fuel.
? Phase IV, Construction, Commissioning, and Operation of the heating system and follow up reporting on operation and maintenance.
The project is designed to proceed without the delay of additional grant year cycles. Reports from a 2011 preliminary feasibility assessment and a 2011 District energy evaluation will
serve as the reference documents for this project.
The Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility would consist of 5 MW of installed capacity with an average annual output of 20,600 MWh of energy, installed on the Grant lake watershed near Moose
Pass, Alaska. The proposed Project is comprised of a diversion dam at the outlet to Grant Lake (under consideration), an intake structure in Grant Lake, a tunnel, a surge tank, a penstock,
a powerhouse, a tailrace detention pond, a switchyard with disconnect switch & step-up transformer, and an overhead or underground transmission line. The intake would be in Grant Lake
near its outlet. Water would be conveyed from the intake through a 3200? penstock to a powerhouse containing two Francis-type turbines. The powerhouse would be located near the bank
of Grant Creek and would discharge through a second penstock into Grant Creek. A transmission line would connect the facility to the Railbelt grid near Moose Pass. Please see the attached
Project Description that was filed with FERC on August 13th, 2010. Kenai Hydro LLC, whose sole member is the Homer Electric Association (HEA), was created in 2008 to evaluate and possibly
develop this site as a low impact hydroelectric facility.
This biomass project will replace one of our existing boilers with a pellet boiler system. The project will also entail adding a small addition next to the boiler room for storage
and loading of the pellets.
We will build a sewage sludge destruction and energy co-generation facility at or near one of Juneau?s sewage treatment plants. The sludge will be destroyed using a thermo-chemical process
of supercritical water oxidation (SCWO, rhymes with ?grow?). The SCWO technology is quite simple, essentially being a very high pressure, very high temperature pressure cooker. We heat
water to 600? Celsius (1,100 Fahrenheit) under 4,000 psi of pressure at which point it is no longer a liquid or a gas. It is then a ?supercritical fluid?. It penetrates and diffuses
into compounds like a gas, but dissolves like a liquid. The reactions are incredibly rapid at only 60 seconds and very thorough with all organics, carbon, and hydrogen compounds converted
to gases. The effluent is cooled and separated. It would be adequate at that point. But we take it a step further by injecting liquid oxygen, which oxidizes all of the compounds produced
to their highest state. All carbon is converted into CO2 (carbon dioxide). All hydrogen is converted into H2O (water). We actually produce more water than that with which we started.
All minerals are rendered to inert oxides. The oxidation process is exothermic, which makes the process self-sustaining through the production of phenomenal amounts of heat. That heat
perpetuates the reaction and can be converted into surplus electricity or district heating. At the end you have only clean industrial gases, really clean water, and a mineral ash high
in marketable silica and phosphorus.
This project is to help ascertain the feasibility of using biomass and/or other wood-based alternative energy source to provide long-term sustainable energy sources for a 30,000 s.f.
Multi-Disciplinary Combined Facility (?MDCF?) in the Copper River Valley region. The planned facility located in Tazlina, AK, has already been accepted as a Phase II Site Selection
and Evaluation Report (?SSER?) schematic approved eligible Joint-Venture Project by the Indian Health Service. The results of such an analysis will help determine if alternative energy
sources can reduce long term operating costs over the life of this planned primary care facility, help to ascertain if an expansion of existing CVEA power facilities utilizing biomass
sources nearly Glennallen is warranted, or, if separate, stand-alone biomass-based power units housed within or attached to separate facilities is a more efficient business model.
lPEC proposes to use Renewable Energy grant funds to perform a feasibility study of a small hydroelectric project at Walker Lake. Walker Lake is located close to existing distribution
facilities for the Chilkat Valley, Klukwan Village, and the 10 Mile Haines Highway interconnection point with AP&T\'s Haines/Skagway communities. The feasibility study will include
an alternative analysis and selection of a preferred alternative. A stream gage will be installed to measure flow. A reconnaissance level geotechnical investigation will also be made.
The results of these tasks will be presented in a report which will include a written project description, energy generation estimate, cost estimate, cost of energy calculation, a description
of licensing and permitting issues and conceptual design drawings.
The proposed Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie is a 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan Public Utilities
(KPU). The Intertie will include 14 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line to be constructed on Annette Island between Metlakatla and Walden Point and an approximate three mile
submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Walden Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation. The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for the integrated
operation of the interconnected systems? generating plants. Final design of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie is underway. Construction of the line began in June 2010 and approximately
three miles of the overhead line is complete. The control system upgrades were completed in July 2011.
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development consists of a 1 +MW run of the river hydropower project located in the Tongass Forest within the Admiralty Island National Monument based on a proposal
that Kootznoowoo submitted in March 2000 which is described more full in the Angoon Hydrologic Project Feasibility Evaluation Report currently on file with the AEA (Project). The development
would be located on Thayer Creek approximately 6 miles north of Angoon. Thayer Creek flows out of Thayer Lake (64 square mile reservoir) at a gentle grade through a broad forested valley
then steepens for 6,800 feet through a narrow forested canyon and finally flattens again for 2000 feet before flowing into Chatham Strait. The development will tap the energy potential
in the steep section of the stream and will avoid any impact on anadromous fish that use the lower portion of the creek. The average flow of Thayer Creek is approximately 370 cfs and
can vary from 25 cfs during the coldest periods of the winter to over 2000 cfs during storms in the fall and winter. The generating facility has a head of 250 feet which is approximate
because of the wording of the Forest Service Record of Decision (ROD) requiring maintenance of fish habitat. An additional restriction set forth in the ROD which is not considered in
the HDR proposal requires the overland transmission line be buried where feasible along the access road to the community of Angoon. The transmission line funding will be submitted in
a separate companion application for Round V funds.
The City & Borough of Wrangell in conjunction with Trident Seafood?s proposes to purchase and install a capacitor bank that will offset fish processing reactive power demands and voltage
instability over the Tyee Transmission System.
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development consists of a 1 +MW run of the river hydropower project located in the Tongass Forest within the Admiralty Island National Monument based on a proposal
that Kootznoowoo submitted in March 2000 which is described more full in the Angoon Hydrologic Project Feasibility Evaluation Report currently on file with the AEA (Project). The development
would be located on Thayer Creek approximately 6 miles north of Angoon. Thayer Creek flows out of Thayer Lake (64 square mile reservoir) at a gentle grade through a broad forested valley
then steepens for 6,800 feet through a narrow forested canyon and finally flattens again for 2000 feet before flowing into Chatham Strait. The development will tap the energy potential
in the steep section of the stream and will avoid any impact on anadromous fish that use the lower portion of the creek. The average flow of Thayer Creek is approximately 370 cfs and
can vary from 25 cfs during the coldest periods of the winter to over 2000 cfs during storms in the fall and winter. The generating facility has a head of 250 feet which is approximate
because of the wording of the Forest Service Record of Decision (ROD) requiring maintenance of fish habitat. An additional restriction set forth in the ROD which is not considered in
the HDR proposal requires the overland transmission line be buried where feasible along the access road to the community of Angoon. The generating facilities funding will be submitted
in a separate companion application for Round V funds.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a combination of geothermal energy and waste heat recovery to enhance district space heating for residential use. Existing waste heat includes
the power plant and warm processed wastewater from the treatment plant. This reconnaissance study is intended to determine if known underground resources are capable of providing geothermal
energy in combination with waste heat recovery to support space heating of residential homes, commercial and public buildings. The study will include collection of existing data, identification
of additional resources, and analysis to prepare recommendations.
This project proposes to add waste heat recovery heat exchangers by connecting the Tatitlek Generator system to the adjacent Tatitlek Community Center thereby providing the majority
of the heating and domestic hot water needs. This project was fully engineered and designed as an alternate additive to a renovation project of the building in 2006; the plans will
need to be updated and a new fire marshal permit received for the project to be ready for construction. The generator system was originally designed by Alaska Energy Authority to utilize
waste heat recovery and the community center mechanical system was designed and replaced so that it will be able to utilize the generator waste heat to heat the entire building with
an oil fired boiler as a back-up and/or supplemental system. Oil heat is the current heating system. Program objectives:
? Reduce heating costs within the community.
? Recover wasted energy
? Reduce barging requirements into the community and conflicts between generator requirements and homeowner fuel needs.
? Provide more reliable heating systems
? Reduce total community energy cost
The seven communities named in this proposal: Northway, Tanacross, Nenana, Circle, Eagle, Stevens Village, and Minto, have all participated in energy planning meetings with Interior
Regional Housing Authority (the applicant), Tanana Chiefs Conference, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, Denali Commission, Alaska Energy Authority, and others, and have identified
wood heating in public facilities as a key opportunity to displace fuel oil, reduce energy costs, utilize locally available renewable resources, and create local employment. This proposal
calls for feasibility assessments that include study of public facilities where wood heating might be applicable, pre-engineering analysis of the size and type of boilers that would
be required (including the "Garn-in-a-box" option), estimated fuel displacement and cost savings, capital cost and payback period, and forest inventory and wood harvest plan. The applicant
proposes a three-pronged approach: (1) subcontract with a qualified biomass energy specialist (e.g., Thomas Deerfield, who is presently evaluating wood heating feasibility in eight
Interior villages with a RE Fund-Round 4 grant) to conduct 1- to 2-day site visits in each community and prepare feasibility assessments for each, (2) subcontract with Alaska Native
Tribal Health Consortium for staff engineer with expertise in water and sewer systems to conduct site inspection and prepare feasibility assessment for those systems, and (3) subcontract
with Will Putman, head forester for Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) to conduct forest inventory and wood harvest planning. Following the completion of these reports, project staff Kim
Carlo of Interior Regional Housing Authority (lRHA) will continue to communicate with residents of the communities and facilitate their internal planning processes to determine whether
each community wants to move forward with final design and construction phases of the respective wood-heating projects, pending available funding. It bears mentioning this proposal
is identical in scope to one submitted by IRHA under Round 4 of the RE Fund for wood heating feasibility work in eight other Interior communities. This represents a deliberate approach
whereby the applicant is proceeding in stages with conducting feasibility work prior to conceptual design, final design, and construction. It is anticipated that the phased approach
will allow IRHA to conduct full assessments for most communities in the region.
The project will design and construct a manual cordwood wood energy system in the community of Huslia, Alaska. The wood energy system will provide heat for the community water plant,
washeteria and health clinic. The project is projected to save approximately $41,516 annually in fuel costs for the three facilities out of a total fuel expenditure of $30,416/year.
The water plant and washeteria are co-located and are adjacent to the health clinic. All three facilities will be served by a common wood-fired heating plant consisting of two Gam WHS
2000 boilers and a fuel storage building. The biomass resource will be purchased from residents of the community by the Huslia Traditional Council.
The project will design and construct wood heating systems in three Interior Alaska communities. IRHA is currently conducting feasibility assessments including forest inventories and
wood harvest assessments in eight Interior Communities. Once the assessments are complete, three out of the eight communities will be selected for design and construction of high efficiency,
low-emission biomass boiler systems. Projects will be selected based on the highest likelihood of successful project implementation. Factors considered will include the amount of fuel
oil displaced, cost savings to the community, commitment by the community and facility personnel and a reliable and consistent supply of fuel. IRHA will partner with ANTHC and the individual
tribes for the project.
As a condition of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing of the Cooper Lake plant in 2007, Chugach agreed to construct a project to divert water from Stetson Creek
into the Cooper Lake reservoir and a related structure to release water into Cooper Creek. The project will enhance fish habitat and add water to Cooper Lake which will result in additional
hydroelectric energy generation. Most importantly, constructing this project allows the license for the Cooper Lake hydro facility to be renewed for 50 years.
The project will be a small scale "Wood Products for Heat" (Biomass) operation with a heavy emphasis on the development of a viable small scale wood pellet production facility. The project
will work to achieve the following three (3) strategic objectives (SO): 1) SO1: Displace 100% of the very expensive fossil fuels used for heat production in our community. 2) SO2: Manage
our wood products for heat production operation to ensure sustainability and, 3) SO3: Create local jobs in our rural community supported by our natural resources. Small scale pellet
operations do not enjoy the "economies of scale" of their larger cousins and experience higher production costs "per ton of pellets produced". This fact makes it important to identify
all the production costs and manage them properly, to remain a self-supporting, on-going concern. Higher production costs in rural Alaska are not a problem unless they exceed the sales
income and result in \'Jobs\' in rural Alaska". This reality of the lack of "economies of scale", leads to the importance of SO2 "Sustainability": The sale of "wood products for heat",
especially wood pellets must return enough financial resources (sales) to maintain, over time, the production and capital replacement costs of the operation. The operation must "breakeven"
to be sustainable. A preliminary analysis determined, based on the current market, the production costs must be at or below $120 per ton with attention to all the cost factors to sustain
an on-going pellet producing operation. This cost is not set and is dependent on the level of actual sales. We currently have "unsolicited" orders for 60 tons of pellets per year for
boilers being installed in the region. 60 tons won\'t support the operation, however it is an indication wood pellets are in demand and commodity in the region. Based on research there
are 1099 housing units in the area and 31% of these units utilize some type of wood products for heat. It is expected as the global economy recovers and the cost of energy increases
the use of wood for heat will increase.
CVEA is currently in the process of purchasing a new runner for Unit 2 at the Solomon Gulch hydroelectric facility. This project will increase CVEA?s renewable energy capacity. The new
runner will be manufactured utilizing state of the art flow analysis which will result in efficiency gains of approximately 10%. The installation of the runner along with the overhaul
of Unit 2 will occur in late fall 2012.
The Allison Creek Project is a run of the river (ROR) alternative involving construction of a diversion structure on Allison Creek at elevation 1,300 feet. Water will be diverted from
the creek into a 42 inch surface / buried penstock to a 6.5 megawatt powerhouse near tidewater. Attachment A is the Final Feasibility Study which provides details on this project as
presented and approved by the CVEA Board of Directors.
(Hydrokinetic) Atmocean proposes to deploy 600 of our Wave Energy/Sequestration Technology (?WEST?) devices about 1-2 miles off Cannon Beach near Yakutat, Alaska to generate up to 90%
of Yakutat?s annual kWh, at projected fuel cost savings of 44%. Payback for this project is estimated at about 4 years. WEST devices convert wave energy into hydraulic pressure which
is transmitted by seafloor hose then onshore pipe or hose (as appropriate) to hydraulic motors driving existing electrical generators ? avoiding the high cost of seafloor electrical
cable, and utilizing existing onshore generation, transmission, and distribution. Using this hybrid system architecture, WEST provides primary generation and the existing diesel system
provides backup and peak generation.
This Project is for the installation of a biomass boiler system to provide heat and hot water for the Glennallen School Facilities ( Glennallen High School/Elementary School Building,
Vocational Training Building, District Office/Distance Learning/Rural Cap Building) of the Copper River School District. The system will utilize a Messersmith Boiler System similar
to those already employed at the Tok School and Delta High School and will use readily available chips in the Copper Valley. Glennallen Campus Biomass Heating Project will be a similar
system to that of the Tok and Delta Schools. This project is a result of regional biomass planning and collaboration between government agencies, local businesses and regional stakeholders.
The Whitman Lake Project will install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at an existing dam, supporting near-term capacity demand increases in the Ketchikan area and displacing
diesel generation as the existing Tyee Lake (SEAPA) resource becomes fully utilized. It will also replace the aging water supply system of the SSRAA Whitman Lake hatchery, providing
increased water quantity, reliability and redundancy to a facility that is critical to the region?s commercial fishing, seafood processing and sportfishing industries.
AVTEC will partner with the City of Seward to renovate, refurbish, and upgrade the City\'s existing Marathon Hydroelectric plant, which is currently unused. The plant will become an
educational and training tool that supports AVTEC\'s Hydro Power Plant Operator training program, sponsored by the Alaska Energy Authority. The intent is to return the plant to productive
use and maximize the training benefits it can provide.
Power deliveries from SEAPA to Kake across the proposed Kake to Petersburg Intertie would affect the voltage profile across the SEAPA network if new supplementary equipment is not installed
in Petersburg and possibly Wrangell, Alaska. Additionally, changes to existing equipment located in either Petersburg or Wrangell may be necessary as a result of the proposed Kake -
Petersburg line. Since the May 2009, Kake-Petersburg Intertie Report (D. Hittle & Associates), substantial load growth has occurred in Petersburg, Wrangell and Ketchikan. This project
consists of engineering analysis and preliminary design work that will identify the effects on the SEAPA system that result from power deliveries to Kake. The engineering analysis will
determine existing equipment changes, and new equipment rating, new equipment location, and estimations for new equipment life cycle costs. Cost estimates will include: final design,
site specification, procurement, installation, commissioning, ongoing O&M costs, and future replacement costs. A final report will organize the analysis results by proposed KPI path
(route). Previous electrical engineering studies such as the Kake-Petersburg Intertie. Study Update by D. Hittle & Associates for the Southeast Conference, and SEAPA\'s internal studies
(power flow and power transient) will be used as reference works.
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA) requests funding of $72,630 from Round V of the Renewable Energy Fund, with a matching contribution from SEAPA of $8,070 for a total cost of
$80,700, for a Phase I (reconnaissance) wind site assessment in Ketchikan and the region surrounding High Mountain on Gravina Island, and funding of $142,500 from Round V of the Renewable
Energy Fund, with a cash contribution from SEAPA of $7,500, for a total cost of $150,000 for Phase II (feasibility analysis and conceptual design/permitting) from Round V of the Renewable
Energy Fund. The total project cost for both phases is projected to be $230,700. SEAPA is the grantee and Dave Carlson, CEO, has overall authority for the project. Eric Wolfe, Director
of Special Projects, will be the primary contact representing SEAPA and has day-to-day responsibility to ensure that the project is on schedule and within budget. SEAPA, or its retained
contractor, will install a wind-measuring meteorological ("met") tower and complete geotechnical work to solidify the options of installing wind turbines at or near Ketchikan. The work
will include conducting an initial site assessment, obtaining a letter of non-objection for placement of a wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting,
and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for one year and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site.
A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. This design will address the current hydropower and distribution
system to identify any upgrades that are needed to integrate wind power. A variety of wind turbine models and quantity configurations will be considered. The study is proposed to determine
if it is feasible to use wind power to supplement the energy needs and conserve water used for hydropower for the communities it services, which include Ketchikan, Petersburg, and Wrangell,
with the long-term objective and goal of serving the power needs of additional communities, including Kake.
The Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA) requests funding of $72,630 from Round V of the Renewable Energy Fund, with a matching contribution from SEAPA of $8,070 for a total cost of
$80,700, for a Phase I (reconnaissance) wind site assessment along transmission line paths owned by Southeast Alaska Power Agency, which extend from the City of Ketchikan, Alaska, located
on the western coast of Revillagigedo Island, near the southernmost boundary of Alaska, to the City of Petersburg, located on the north end of Mitkof Island in Southeast Alaska. SEAPA
is the grantee and Dave Carlson, CEO, has overall authority for the project. Eric Wolfe, Director of Special Projects, will be the primary contact representing SEAPA and has day-to-day
responsibility to ensure that the project is on schedule and within budget. The project seeks funding for analyzing the raw wind data and preparing a wind assessment report. Based on
the wind assessment results/report, a subsequent proposal may be submitted for a Phase II feasibility analysis and conceptual design. The study will also analyze the potential impacts
to existing and migrating avian species. The study is proposed to determine if it is feasible to use wind power to supplement the energy needs and conserve water used for hydropower
for the communities serviced by SEAPA, which include Ketchikan, Petersburg, and Wrangell, with the long-term objective and goal of serving the power needs of additional communities,
including Kake.
The overall 34kV power line route is approximately 12 miles long. Approximately 0.9-mile of the westernmost section is an existing APC 2kV distribution line that will be overbuilt. The
line will cross Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island. The route primarily follows existing logging roads. The power line will begin at a point along Hydaburg Road about 0.45 miles northeast
of the town. It will continue northeast along the existing logging road passing north of Deer Bay and intersecting Hetta Inlet opposite Jumbo Island. This section is adjacent to private
forested land with a small section of Muskeg and is 7.0 miles long. The logging roads are mostly mild to moderate cut sections with a few rock cuts. The first 0.9 miles of this section
is an existing APC corridor adjacent to the road established for a 2kV line. The water crossing over Hetta Inlet will be accomplished with 3 multi-pole structures with one on each side
of the inlet and one at the pinnacle of Jumbo Island. Jumbo Island slopes steeply toward the water on both sides and is heavily forested. A new corridor will need to be established.
The structure on the island will likely be set by helicopter. This crossing is 0.9 miles across. The power line will continue in a new corridor for 0.3 mile to the east until it intersects
an existing logging road. Approximately 1500 feet of temporary or permanent access road spurs will need to be constructed to access 2 line structures along this section. The line route
then turns south and follows existing logging roads 3.8 miles southeast to the powerhouse/switchyard location near Copper Harbor. This section is adjacent to private, recently harvested
forest land with very steep and rocky terrain prone to slides. The logging road is primarily full bench construction with several rock cut sections. There are danger trees (and boulders)
above the power line route on the eastern side slopes that may need to be removed/secured to protect the power line.
Connelly Lake is an 85-acre alpine lake and drains into the Chilkoot River. The Project facilities will include a dam at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW
powerhouse with two generating units, a 14-mile-long 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Field studies, permitting and final design for this Project will be completed
during Phase III. The Project will be developed by the Applicant to provide additional generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems, to possibly provide summer
power to cruise ships moored at Haines, and to provide backup renewable power to Haines, should the submarine cable fail. The Project will be on state and private land, including the
Haines State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve.
The Project is to interconnect communities reliant on diesel generation to Tok where a renewable energy project will be constructed in the next 3-4 years. By beginning the interconnection
during the summer of 2012, completion of the distribution lines will coincide closely with the startup of the renewable energy project. There would be two stages for this project:
Stage 1: Would consist of a 25 mile 34.5 kV distribution line on wood pole structures to Tok from the APC closed grid that currently connects Slana, Chistochina, and Mentasta. These
communities are on the Tok Cutoff of the Glenn Hwy, south of Tok. Stage 2: Would consist of a 40 mile 34.5 kV distribution line on wood pole structures to Tok from the APC closed grid
that currently connects Northway, Northway Junction, and Northway Village. These communities are located southeast of Tok along the Alaska Highway.
The Applicant proposes to construct a 17-foot-high by 100 feet long rockfill dam and spillway at the outlet of Black Bear Lake (BBL) to raise the lake 12 feet and increase the active
storage by 2,420 acre feet (from 2,870 acre-feet to 5,290 acre-feet). The storage increase will provide for additional generation during the winter and spring when diesel generation
is often required currently due to low lake inflows during those periods. In addition, the storage increase will allow the Applicant to more easily meet the minimum instream flow requirements
of the FERC license for the project, which has become difficult with normal operation. The incremental average annual generation is estimated to be 1,264 MWh/yr.
Chugach is proposing to continue the process of permitting and design for a new transmission line linking a geothermal project being developed on the west side of Cook Inlet to the existing
Chugach system. The specific proposal for a Round V renewable energy grant is the design of the substations at each end of the transmission line. One substation would be at Ormat\'s
facility and the other at Beluga Power plant. Ormat Nevada, Inc. (Ormat), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Omlat Technologies, Inc (NYSE "ORA"), secured 15 geothermal leases on Mt. Spurr
from the State of Alaska in 2008 and has since embarked on a multi-phased exploration and development plan, with a goal to explore and build a utility scale 50-100 MW geothermal plant
to be connected to the Railbelt power grid around 2016. Ormat has built over 1,600 MW of geothennal plants during the last 3 decades all over the western United States and several locations
internationally. Ormat\'s Mt. Spurr project is progressing with the drilling this summer of a 3,500\' deep core hole. They recently announced drilling results for this well and the
results were not as positive as hoped or expected. While Onnat assesses its future development plan, Chugach is moving forward with this grant application to stay on a parallel path
with Ormat. Chugach\'s proposed project would include one or more high voltage transmission lines which would connect to the existing substation and transmission lines at Beluga. The
line would be built for a maximum operating voltage of 230 kV but could initially be operated at a lower voltage to match first stage development of 50 MW of the geothermal project.
The line would cover a distance of at least 40 miles, depending on the routing. Chugach received a Round IV renewable energy grant which will soon be used for the route selection phase
of this project. The plan is for Round V renewable energy grant funds to be for the design of substations at each end of the line. Subsequent phases of the project would be for final
design and permitting of the transmission line and for construction.
The Pillar Mountain High Penetration Wind Project is the integration and installation of three General Electric (GE) 1.5 megawatt (MW) wind turbines along with an energy storage system
that allows the stable integration of high wind penetration rates onto KEA?s isolated grid. This project is the next step in a series of KEA?s renewable energy developments aimed at
displacing the use of diesel fuel for electric generation which will allow KEA to achieve its vision to endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost effective renewable power solutions
by the year 2020. The energy storage system will regulate system frequency on a short-term basis as the wind resource unpredictably comes and goes. Terror Lake will provide the long-term,
macro-energy storage of wind energy on an annual basis. Therefore, the Pillar Mountain High Penetration Wind Project is not simply a wind turbine construction effort, but an innovative
demonstration of how high generation rates of wind can be stably integrated onto an isolated electric grid through the installation of a energy storage system that bridges Pillar Mountain?s
variable wind energy resource with the Terror Lake hydroelectric Project?s dispatchable hydropower.
The City of Petersburg is proposing construction (Phase IV) of a hybrid ground source heat pump system to serve the heating needs at the City of Petersburg\'s new public library facility.
The new Petersburg Public Library is a 9,770 sq. ft. facility to be located in downtown Petersburg. It will serve primarily Petersburg residents, as well as visitors and temporary workers
in our community. Construction of the facility is scheduled to begin in the spring of 2012 and be completed in the summer of 2013. The City of Petersburg Administration, Community Development
and Public Library Departments are directly involved with the design and construction of the facility. The hybrid system consists of a ground source heat pump system to meet the facility\'s
heating needs and a supplemental electric heat system serving as a back up. The use of a hybrid ground source heat pump system in lieu of conventional oil or electric heat systems
at the new Petersburg Public Library facility is supported by the City of Petersburg Administration, Community Development, and Public Library Departments, and the City of Petersburg
City Council. The Renewable Energy Fund Grant request herein is for the additional construction cost for the ground source heat pump system. This funding request is only for the costs
associated with the ground source heat pump portion of the hybrid system; the costs associated with the supplemental electric boiler and water heaters are excluded from this request.
The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwell?s power system. Currently, they obtain power from the line between MEA
and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). To accomplish this, they propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River, a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this
plant will be in excess of 1 MW. It will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
The Municipality of Skagway (Municipality) proposes to construct the West Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on West Creek, approximately seven miles west of Skagway and
adjacent to the small community of Dyea. The primary purpose of the Project would be off-setting diesel generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway from May through September each
year. Up to five cruise ships per day dock in Skagway for 12-15 hours and continuously operate their diesel plants to provide for on-board electricity consumption. The continuous stack
emissions spread a blue haze at about the 1,500 foot elevation where egetation has been noticeably affected. The Project will improve air quality and save vegetation in the area (there
may be other unknown environmental benefits). To emphasize how serious the air quality of the area is being taken, the National Park Service, Municipality of Skagway, and Alaska Power
& Telephone Company (AP&T) have a cooperative agreement to place and maintain equipment at AP&T\'s Dewey Lakes Hydro project site to monitor this pollution. Preliminary results of this
monitoring are attached as an appendix. A secondary purpose of the Project is to provide winter energy to the local utility when they have a shortfall of hydro energy from their hydroelectric
projects (2011 - Dewey Lakes Hydro, Lutak Hydro, Goat Lake Hydro, Kasidaya Creek Hydro) as well as to sell winter energy to the Yukon Territory, Canada through their generation company
Yukon Energy. The Alaska Power Authority had a feasibility study conducted for the Project by R. W Beck and Associates in 1981-82. That study focused on a development that would meet
the electricity needs of Skagway and Haines rather than the nascent cruise ship industry. It recommended an installed capacity of 6.0 MW and a 20,000 acre-foot reservoir formed by a
120-feet high concrete-faced rockfill dam. The proposed Project will be significantly different than proposed by Beck in that the installed capacity will be greater and the reservoir
storage will also be greater. Nevertheless, the Beck study provides an excellent starting point for the proposed reevaluation of the site, and therefore the Municipality believes that
a Phase I reconnaissance study is not necessary. West Creek drains from an ice field into the Taiya River. The Municipality has already requested the Project site land from the State
as Municipal Entitlement Land. Since the stream is glacial, flows are very high in the summer, which is also when the cruise ships are active. Preliminary analysis indicates that a
Project with a capacity to serve one large cruise ship could be operated on a run-of-river basis. Increasing the capacity so the Project could serve two or three cruise ships is possible
and a storage reservoir would be required to make the generation dependable. The costs and benefits of these capacity/storage alternatives will be a primary focus of the proposed Phase
II studies.
Application to AEA for $30,000 grant to evaluate the technical and financial feasibility for integration and optimization of heat pump technologies to offset heating oil and grid electricity
usage in Centennial Hall and the adjacent Kettleson Memorial Library on the waterfront in downtown Sitka.
Application to AEA for $20,000 grant to evaluate the technical and financial feasibility for integration and optimization of heat pump technologies to offset heating oil and grid electricity
usage in the Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant on the waterfront on Japonski Island Sitka.
The City and Borough of Sitka is proposing the design and construction of a hybrid ground source heat pump system to serve the heating needs at the City and Borough of Sitka\'s Japonski
Island Boathouse Historical Rehabilitation Project. The Japonski Island Boathouse Historical Rehabilitation Project is an historically accurate renovation of the small boat repair and
launch facility originally constructed by the U.S. Navy in 1941. The Japonski Island Boathouse Heat Pump project hybrid system will consist of a ground source heat pump system that
will meet approximately 81% of the facility\'s heating needs, with a supplemental electric heat system to make up the difference during periods when the facility\'s heat loads exceed
the capacity of the ground source heat pump system. The proposed hybrid ground source heat pump system will be installed in tidelands adjacent to the Boathouse. The Renewable Energy
Grant Fund request herein is for the additional design and construction costs for the hybrid ground source heat pump system.
(Project description edited for length and clarity)
This is a proposal to add electric thermal and battery energy storage to the existing Kwigillingok wind/diesel system in order to increase the village?s use of wind energy and further
displace the use and expense of diesel fuel. The project will increase power conditioning capabilities of the Kwigillingok facility through the installation of a lithium-ion battery
battery and power conditioning system capable of providing 250 kWhrs of energy for 15 minutes, which is sufficient time to start a diesel generator after a long period of diesel off
operation, and the installation of an additional 92 kW Electric Thermal Storage (ETS) units in community facilities. The installation of the 250kW Battery Storage System in the existing
power facility will provide: 1) adequate fault ride-through; 2) voltage and frequency support; 3) excess wind energy storage and 4) sufficient energy for extended periods of ?Diesel
Off? operation. When successful, this project will provide a cost effective smart grid system which can be widely replicated throughout the state.
This is a proposal to add electric thermal and battery energy storage to the existing Tuntutuliak wind/diesel system in order to increase the village?s use of wind energy and further
displace the use and expense of diesel fuel. The project will increase power conditioning capabilities of the Tuntutuliak facility through the installation of a lithium-ion battery
and power conditioning system capable of providing 250 kW of energy for 15 minutes, which is sufficient time to start a diesel generator after a long period of diesel off operation,
and the installation of an additional 92 kW of Electric Thermal Storage (ETS) in community facilities. The installation of the 250kW Battery Storage System in the existing power facility
will provide: 1) adequate fault ride-through; 2) voltage and frequency support; 3) excess wind energy storage and 4) sufficient energy for extended periods of ?Diesel Off? operation.
When successful, this project will provide a cost-effective smart grid system which can be widely replicated throughout the state.
Proposed project is a high head run-of-river hydroelectric power plant on Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon with an installed capacity of 145 kW. Project will include a 9 foot tall timber
dam, 3,220 foot long 16 inch diameter penstock and access trail; 400 square foot power house; 1,500 foot long access road with a bridge across Packers Creek to the powerhouse; and a
1,700 foot long overhead power line extension to the existing distribution system.
The City of Palmer owns and operates the Palmer Ice Arena which is located at 480 E. Cope Industrial Way, Palmer Alaska. The Ice Arena was built in 2004, and opened in 2005, though the
building is new, the compressors and refrigeration system are a 1950 design and were acquired from the decommissioned Bonnie Cusack Ice Arena. Wolf Architecture, Inc. performed the
energy audit of the Ice Arena and identified the refrigeration system accounting for 45%, and the heating accounting for 32% of the annual costs. The energy audit recommended replacing
the current equipment with new, more efficient, correctly sized equipment for the facility. With more modern compressors, the facility would easily be able to increase efficiency by
20% or more. It was recommended to use a central Geothermal Ground Source Heat Pump system for the cooling and heating demands. Additionally, waste heat recovery could be implemented
with the new equipment in order to use the heat created in the required heating areas of the building. This project would be competitively bid according to the City ordinances and managed
by the Public Works Department. The City Council has adopted resolution no 10-042 and 10-060 establishing a budget for the Ice Arena Expansion project.
The proposed project is a medium- to high-penetration wind system for the community of Kipnuk, Alaska. The project will be owned and operated by the Kipnuk Light Plant and the community
of Kipnuk, and consists of three Northwind 100 wind turbines, a modular hybrid wind diesel power conditioning control module, a 200 kW frequency controlled heat recovery boiler, 20
residential electric thermal storage devices. This hybrid power system is designed to fit with the existing diesel power plant, and wrap into any new plant proposed for the future.
The wind turbines are well proven in Alaska, the power conditioning and controls module is able to be located next to the existing or new power plant. The power control and conditioning
module will contain new wind-diesel controls and switchgear, a grid regulating inverter and energy storage unit for grid stabilization. The 20 electric thermal storage devices will
capture any excess available wind energy and store it as heat for residential heating. The wind turbines and hybrid controls and power conditioning module will be mounted on pile foundations
on property provided by the community. This wind diesel system architecture is scalable through the addition of wind turbines, new diesel gensets, addition of more real energy storage
in the form of batteries, flywheel or capacitors. The system is also capable of accommodating the addition of residential electric thermal storage devices when additional wind energy
capacity becomes available.
Community Energy Information and Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Assessment The purpose of this project is to remove barriers to improving the energy efficiency, using renewable
energy and increasing the reliability of existing energy infrastructure and is based on collecting and analyzing the information needed to make good decisions.
This project has four elements that will result in a comprehensive community-based renewable energy plan based on wood, wind and solar power. The four elements of the work plan consist
of the following:
1. Community Energy Surveys
2. Community Energy and Resource Monitoring
3. Wood Energy Assessment
4. Wind and Solar Energy Assessment
This project demonstrates the use of flywheel energy storage to stabilize any village power grid. Grid stability is needed to achieve increased use of wind and other renewable energy
sources in diesel mini grids. The proposed project consists of installation of a Powerstore flywheel energy storage system, along with a state-of-the-art Distributed Digital Control
System, to create a very high-penetration wind diesel system with residential thermal storage in Kongiganak, Alaska. The demonstration of this system will enable the effective sizing
and cost reduction measures to be identified so that the system can be widely replicated throughout the state and other power systems throughout the country.
Besides photovoltaic power, the only clean emissions free renewable power source with the potential for significantly lowering energy costs in Napakiak, (pop. 370) is wind energy. The
community has selected a wind site on land owned by the corporation along a newly-constructed 8.9 mile, 12470 V, 3 phase tieline over which the community receives all of its electricity
from Bethel Utilities. This tieline is capable of handling up to 2 MW of power. Funding is being sought to complete final designs, construction cost estimates and integration studies
needed for a construction ready project. The preliminary feasibility favors the installation of sufficient wind capacity to meet the majority of the community energy requirements and
potentially sell wind energy back across the tie line into Bethel.
The project will utilize landfill gas (LFG) generated by wastes at the former Merrill Field Landfill site to fuel one or more boiler units at the adjacent Anchorage Fire Department (AFD)
Fire Training Complex. The complex has four buildings which use boilers for primary heat. The project would include either installation of a central boiler system feeding into the existing
boiler heat systems or modification of existing boilers at individual buildings. The project will also include expansion of existing LFG collection systems at the landfill site, as
well as gas process, compression and transmission equipment, as needed. Ultimately the current gas production could support local generation of electricity (100 to 200 kw) or an expanded
district hating system providing base heat load for facilities adjacent to the Fire Training Center. Because of uncertainties in gas impurities, off site facility configurations and
other limitations, this grant proposal has been developed toward a district heat system for the Fire Training Facility only. The first phase of the grant project would be a feasibility
study to develop other options, optimize the system and identify potential revenue streams which could flow from this project.
Replace diesel generation of electricity for the community of Tenakee Springs with renewable hydroelectric power. The City of Tenakee Springs proposes to construct a hydroelectric project
on Indian River. This will be a low head, run-of-river plant displacing the use of 44,400 gallons of diesel fuel annually. Design, engineering, and construction will involve the City
of Tenakee Springs, multiple state and federal agencies, private contractors, and the Alaska EnergyAuthority.
Conduct a comprehensive reconnaissance study of small hydro resources on the southern railbelt. The study would focus on alpine rivers and streams in proximity to the areas currently
served by MEA, CEA, HEA, MLP, and SES. The emphasis of the study would be on low-impact run-of-river resources between 500 and 5,000 kW installed capacity. Investigated resources would
include rivers and streams shown on USGS 1:63360 maps located in economic proximity to existing electrical transmission and distribution infrastructure. The study would be conducted
in three screening stages. The first stage would include a desktop assessment of the resources to estimate power potential and fatal flaws (technical, environmental, economic and/or
political barriers). The second stage resource screening would be a desktop technical and financial analysis of the resources that pass stage 1 to identify the most cost effective resources.
The third stage resource screening would be a field visit to those resources that pass stage 2 to collect further data about the resource and provide reconnaissance-level technical
and financial analyses. The budget allows for up to 30 projects to receive stage 3 review and analysis. The final deliverable for the project would be a report detailing the resources
investigated and the results of all screening stages. The outcome of the study would be the most comprehensive list yet compiled of the most promising hydropower resources in the southern
railbelt region, ranked by development viability. This would guide AEA, utilities, and other regional decision makers to implement more effective planning efforts for power supply in
the railbelt.
The Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project is a low-impact run-of-river renewable energy project proposed near Seward, Alaska. The project would be located east of the Spring Creek
Correctional Facility and Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park, across Resurrection Bay from the City of Seward. The project is anticipated to have an installed capacity of 5.4 MW and
provide an estimated 21,700 MWh of energy annually. The project would supply approximately one third of Seward Electric System\'s annual energy requirements.
The project will include a run-of-river hydroelectric project between Crooked Creek and Jim?s Lake (the upper project), and a second storage hydroelectric project between Jim?s Lake
and tidewater (the lower project). According to Polarconsult?s June 2010 Reconnaissance Study, the upper project would have an estimated installed capacity of 50 kW, and the lower project
would have an estimated installed capacity of 150 kW. These projects will meet an estimated 97% of Elfin Cove?s existing electrical demand, and also provide a substantial amount of
interruptible excess electricity
The Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project is an approximately 75 MW storage project proposed for the Glacier Fork of the Knik River. Electricity from the project would be delivered into
the railbelt transmission grid via a new approximately 20-mile transmission line to existing transmission infrastructure in the vicinity of the Old Glenn Highway bridge over the Knik
River. A map of the project is included at the end of the application in Attachment I.
The Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential hydroelectric resource in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley with an estimated installed capacity of 6.5 MW. This proposed reconnaissance
study will investigate the resource to determine if a project is viable and to also perform preliminary feasibility work on the project location, size, and resource availability.
Port Graham Village Council and Chugachmiut are planning implementation of a 1.45 mmBtu biomass community building heat utility for Port Graham, Alaska. A feasible biomass technology
option has been identified to utilize a GARN Boiler to provide hot water heat from a woody biomass fuel source that can be obtained from Port Graham Village Corporation lands on a sustained
basis. An existing road system supplies access to the fuel source. The project will provide hot water to heat Port Graham community buildings (New Fire Hall (and accessory building
housing a 4-wheeler foam fire trailer), the Old Fire Hall, the Port Graham Health and Dental Clinic, the Port Graham Village Council Office, the Port Graham Museum/HeadStart Center
and the Port Graham Corporation Office) at a price sufficiently below the cost of current heating costs using fuel oil to justify investment. Existing community buildings fuel oil heating
systems can be retro-fitted to accommodate hot water from the proposed wood-burning GARN Boiler and rely on the existing fuel oil-fired hot water heating equipment for backup. The GARN
Boiler community building heating option will provide heat at less than the current fuel oil based system displacing more than an equivalent amount of diesel fuel on a Btu basis.
(Project description edited for length and clarity)
The City of Pelican proposes to complete the renovation and upgrade of the existing community hydroelectric project to replace the current failing, obsolete, inefficient and unsafe facility,
and to expand the use of underutilized available hydroelectric power to meet unserved electric needs in the community
IPEC proposes to construct a heat recovery project in the community of Hoonah. The Project will recover available jacket water heat from IPEC-Hoonah diesel generation that is currently
being rejected to the atmosphere via radiators and reduce annual diesel heating fuel consumption of nearby community buildings by over 55,000-gallons/year.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough, along with the City of Port Heiden, proposed to install a single commercial-grade wind tower in Port Heiden to reduce the amount of fuel burned and to
lower electricity rates for customers. Prompted by the success of small-scale wind towers and recommendations laid out in the 2008 Lake and Peninsula Borough Regional Energy Plan, the
Borough commissioned a private firm, Knight-Piesold, to analyze Port Heiden. The results of this wind study indicated a favorable cost/benefit ratio and the Borough plans to move forward
with the project. Drawing on the unique methods used by the Borough in a successful wind tower installation in the Village of Kokhanok, the Borough proposes a four-step process to reach
the end goal of a successful installation of a wind tower. The first step will be the Borough selecting an owner?s representative to provide engineering and technical support. The second
step will be the Borough, Port Heiden, and the owner?s representative to create an RFP for the actual wind tower construction and maintenance, and evaluate the bids on the RFP. The
third and fourth stages are construction of the wind turbine and systems upgrade, followed by a five-year maintenance and operation contract with the winning bidder that incorporates
training for local employees. This will be discussed in further detail later in the application.
The City of Napaskiak requests funding for a wind study which includes an avian study and feasibility report as the first and second steps towards supplementing the high cost of diesel
generators currently in use. These studies will satisfy both Phase I Reconnaissance and Phase II Feasibility components of the AEA\'s basic outline of the Wind Resource Development
Partnering Plan Procurement. The studies will result in a feasibility report on the benefits, costs and guidelines for implementing the next three phases of a wind turbine system, both
in terms of a stand-alone system operated independently by Napaskiak Electric Utility and in the context of a possible sub-regional intertie. The feasibility study will include a Heat
Recovery System that utilizes jacket water from the diesel generators and excess electricity from wind generated power. This project will solicit community participation from the beginning
and will promote wind-diesel O&M training opportunities to appropriate candidates.
The New Koliganek Village Council respectfully requests project funding for a Wind and Heat Recovery Feasibility Study. Analysis of the raw meteorological data by V3 Energy, LLC indicate
a Class 4 wind regime which merits investigation. The project will result in a report of the technical, economic, financial and operational viability of installing a wind-diesel system
for electric distribution and heat recovery in the village of Koliganek.
The grant will be managed by the New Koliganek Village Council. Marsh Creek Energy Systems has been selected to carry out the technical, analytical and reporting tasks of the project.
The Bristol Bay Native Association (BBNA) and Marsh Creek will also be available to provide support, as needed, to the Project Manager and Koliganek Tribal Administrator in the preparation
of financial reports stipulated in the grant.
The waters of Cook Inlet offer a clean and renewable power source for the communities of South Central Alaska. Our project will utilize existing infrastructure, namely the King Salmon
platform, and proven submersible technologies to capture the tidal energy of the Inlet. Baker Hughes Centrilift develops electrical submersible pumps (ESP) for the oil industry and
given our product?s reliable history in very demanding oil well environments, their ESP system was chosen as the power generating unit. The smaller diameter of an ESP Generator allows
for higher speed operation and lower impact to fish than propeller-based systems. The ESP Generator would consist of: 1) aquatic life diverters to protect the environment and minimize
the environmental impact of the system, 2) rotating multistage turbine anchored in water at optimum flow velocity depth, 3) submersible electric power cable would carry the energy to
shore connecting to 4) local utility substation or transformer. Buoys would be placed strategically near the system to alert boat traffic. The existing platform would act as an anchoring
structure and intermediate for power distribution.
By partnering with UAF, we will utilize existing in-stream testing sites, thus allowing the deployment of prototypes aimed at providing power to rural communities. With that said, our
project will also target rural communities situated on a viable year long hydro-resource. The system will be designed to produce adequate energy during low-flow conditions of the winter
season. Our anchoring system will look to anchor the system throughout the year, yet enabling a break-away during significant ice/debris flow. Enabling retrieval of the system without
significant damage to the internal components of our equipment, which will allow a quick turnaround once the obstruction has passed.
The proposed Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project consists of four major components, including:
>A creek diversion structure- The diversion structure would create a small impoundment that would divert a portion of flow from Fivemile Creek into a pipeline (penstock).
> A penstock ? The penstock is a pipeline that will transport water from the intake structure to the turbine powerhouse. The penstock for this project will be around 12-inches in diameter
and 8,500 linear feet long. Its primary purpose is to pressurize the water from the creek.
> A hydroelectric turbine power plant ? The power plant will house the turbine and electrical generating equipment and controls. Water from the penstock will spin the turbine and generators
and produce electricity. The power plant will include a tailrace that will return water from the penstock to the creek bed.
> Electrical tie-in ? An overhead high voltage line will connect the turbine power plant to the existing electrical distribution system near the airport.
Provide wood boilers for community facilities in Igiugig, Illiamna, Kokhanok, and Port Alsworth. Wood boilers in these villages have been the subject of a detailed feasibility/design
study, which shows they are economically and technically feasible. The project would allow the borough to advertise for a design/build RFP to construct these facilities, and to have
the expertise to evaluate potential designs and inspect finished construction. The competitive process would ensure the best and most appropriate design. Community organizations with
a record of maintaining community facilities are supporting and have committed to use and maintain the wood boilers. Landowners where the wood will be gathered also support the project.
Cold Bay requests funding for this wind study as the first step towards supplementing the high cost of diesel generators currently in use. The wind study and avian study will satisfy
Phase I, Reconnaissance and Phase II, Feasibility, and the study will result in a feasibility report on the technical, economic, financial and operational viability and guidelines of
implementing the next three phases of a wind energy system.
The grant would be managed by the Aleutians East Borough and calls for the solicitation of a contractor to perform the analysis and a community meeting with the contractor for presentation,
review and discussion of the results.
Participants in the project will include:
1. G&K Electric Utility
2. Aleutians East Borough who will provide overall project management.
3. A contracted firm who will provide civil and electrical system engineering.
4. Contractor to perform the avian and environmental studies.
5. A supplier for the met towers.
Nelson Lagoon requests funding for this wind study as the first step towards supplementing the high cost of diesel generators currently in use. The wind study and avian study will satisfy
Phases I, Reconnaissance and Phase II, Feasibility, and the study will result in a feasibility report on the technical, economic, financial and operational viability and guidelines
of implementing the next three phases of a wind energy system.
The grant would be managed by the Aleutians East Borough and calls for the solicitation of a contractor to perform the analysis and a community meeting with the contractor for presentation,
review and discussion of the results.
Participants in the project will include:
1) Nelson Lagoon Electrical Cooperative (owned by the Native Village of Nelson Lagoon)
2) Aleutians East Borough who will provide overall project management
3) A contracted firm who will provide civil and electrical system engineering
4) Contractor to perform the avian and environmental studies
5) A supplier for the met towers.
False Pass currently produces all their electricity from diesel generators and heating from burning fossil fuels. Data from a met tower set up several years ago was compromised and has
data gaps when bears damaged the equipment, but the data still may be useful if analyzed using appropriate assumptions and software. The wind resource may prove to be good, but we won?t
know until the data is analyzed and a wind resource report is completed. In addition, an avian study will determine if birds will be of concern and/or if mitigation measures are necessary.
This project seeks funding for analyzing the raw wind data and preparing a wind assessment report for False Pass. Based on wind assessment results/report a subsequent proposal may be
submitted for conceptual design. In addition, an avian study will determine if migrating or nesting birds present concerns to a wind project and determine mitigation measures. The principal
goals of baseline bird studies are to quantitatively describe the temporal and spatial use by birds of the study area and provide baseline information on avian species and their habitat
sufficient to use in evaluating the probable impact of installation of a wind turbine. The specific goals are to provide avian monitoring protocol training to local agent(s), collect
avian data to determine bird activity at the delineated areas around the turbine site, record any dead or downed (injured) birds at the site that may be the result of collisions with
the meteorological tower, and prepare avian monitoring reports including back-up information and complete avian data.
The Kuskokwim River meanders above and below the community of Akiak leaving it on a peninsula which at its widest point is approximately 3 miles across. The bend immediately above Akiak
compress\' the flow of the river resulting in increased water velocity (speed). We intend to place an intake at that point in the bend with the greatest speed, and pipe the water we
collect, 1) across the peninsula, 2) to a small slough behind the village, or 3) parallel to the river to a point further down the bend depending on the results of a feasibility study.
The intake will be deep enough to avoid icing issues, permitting year round operation of a run of the river hydro facility. The reconnaissance will identify annual flow and the placement
of all facilities necessary for the hydro plant, pipeline, intake and transmission needs.
The Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential run of river hydroelectric resource located near Sutton, AK with a capacity up to 1.5 MW.
This is a project to divert water from the upper watershed of the middle branch of Battle Creek into Bradley Lake. Based on Battle Creek stream flow measurements from 1991 to 1993, diverting
a portion of the stream flow to Bradley Lake has the potential to increase annual energy output by 27,000 to 45,000 MWh, depending on the amount of flow diverted. Environmental, geotechnical,
preliminary engineering and analytical work is needed to evaluate fish habitat, the potential energy resource, and diversion dam and conveyance (i.e., tunnel, pipe, open channel) alternatives
to divert the water.
As part of the FERC relicensing of the Cooper Lake plant in 2007, Chugach agreed to spend up to $11.04 million ($12.5 million in 2009 dollars) to construct a project to divert water
from Stetson Creek into the Cooper Lake reservoir and a related structure to release water into Cooper Creek. The purpose of the project is to enhance fish habitat. It will add water
to Cooper Lake and result in additional hydroelectric energy generation.
Based on the conclusions of our completed feasibility and conceptual-design efforts, the Village of Atmautluak (Village) will, with Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) assistance, complete
the design process to successfully install a wind-diesel system in the community. This includes automated controls and the equipment necessary to regulate, control and deliver reliable
energy to the residents of the community. The project will produce the final designs and plans and complete the necessary permitting for two projected wind turbines and the associated
equipment installations to upgrade the existing power generation and distribution system to produce power from a wind turbine-diesel engine configuration. The Village of Atmautluak,
will hire and contract with WH Pacific to complete this design project and provide management oversight of any subcontracted engineering/design firms. WH Pacific will also complete
the RFP process: provide overall project management oversight of the necessary civil work and work closely with Northern Power to install Northwind100/21 B model wind turbines, manage
the startup and commissioning.
A conceptual design report has been completed for the six towers of highest avalanche risk (LaRue, 2010). The report was based on experience and engineering resources gained during
the 2008 and 2009 avalanche repairs. The recommended mitigation construction cannot be completed in one year; hence the requested funds would be used over a 2011-2012 period. In 2011,
we propose to construct the replacement of tower 3/4 and structural modifications to existing towers 4/1, and 4/2 for an estimated $1,562,000. In 2012, we propose to construct a large
steel diversion structure above tower 4/5 similar to one constructed in 2009 above tower 4/6. We also would construct a smaller diversion structure above tower 4/4 for an additional
combined cost of $2,457,600.
See Proposal #670
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development consists of a 1 +MW run of the river hydropower project located in the Tongass Forest within the Admiralty Island National Monument based on a proposal
that Kootznoowoo submitted in March 2000 which is described more fully in the Angoon Hydrologic Project Feasibility Evaluation Report (Project). The development would be located on
Thayer Creek approximately 6 miles north of Angoon. Thayer Creek flows out of Thayer Lake (64 square mile reservoir) at a gentle grade through abroad forested valley then steepens
for 6,800 feet through a narrow forested canyon and finally flattens again for 2000 feet before flowing in to Chatham Strait. The development will tap the energy potential in the steep
section of the stream and will avoid any impact on anadromous fish that use the lower portion of the creek. The average flow of Thayer Creek is approximately 370 cfs and can vary from
25 cfs during the coldest periods of the winter to over 2000 cfs during storms in the fall and winter. The generating facility has ahead of 250 feet which is approximate because of
the wording of the Forest Service Record of Decision (ROD) requiring maintenance offish habitat. An additional restriction set forth in the ROD which is not considered in the HDR proposal
requires the overland transmission line be buried where feasible along the access road to the community of Angoon. The transmission line funding will be submitted in a separate companion
application for Round III funds.
This proposal is being evaluated as a combined proposal with #671.
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development consists of a 1 +MW run of the river hydropower project located in the Tongass Forest within the Admiralty Island National Monument based on a proposal
that Kootznoowoo submitted in March 2000 which is described more fully in the Angoon Hydrologic Project Feasibility Evaluation Report (Project). The development would be located on
Thayer Creek approximately 6 miles north of Angoon. Thayer Creek flows out of Thayer Lake (64 square mile reservoir) at a gentle grade through a broad forested valley then steepens
for 6,800 feet through a narrow forested canyon and finally flattens again for 2000 feet before flowing into Chatham Strait. The development will tap the energy potential in the steep
section of the stream and will avoid any impact on anadromous fish that use the lower portion of the creek. The average flow of Thayer Creek is approximately 370 cfs and can vary from
25 cfs during the coldest periods of the winter to over 2000 cfs during storms in the fall and winter. The generating facility has a head of 250 feet which is approximate because of
the wording of the Forest Service Record of Decision (ROD) requiring maintenance of fish habitat. An additional restriction set forth in the ROD which is not considered in the HDR proposal
requires the overland transmission line be buried where feasible along the access road to the community of Angoon. The transmission line funding will be submitted in a separate companion
application for Round III funds.
To determine and document the feasibility and conceptual design of a wind diesel turbine facility in the community of Akiachak, Alaska. Akiachak Native Community (ANC) proposes to install
a wind meteorological (met) tower and to complete the necessary geotechnical work to determine the economic feasibility of installing wind turbines in Akiachak, Alaska. The work will
involve:
(1) obtaining a letter of non-objection for placement of the wind tower and
(2) geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower,
(3) studying the wind resource for one year and documenting the results and
(4) conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site.
A conceptual design will be created based the met tower data recordings and geotechnical investigation. This will provide adequate information to determine whether there is enough wind
resource to justify taking a project to design and ultimately the construction of a wind-diesel system for the community of Akiachak.
The intent of this project is to increase the use of locally available, biomass energy for thermal heating and biomass needs. This project will be located in the upper Kobuk River Valley
and will serve the villages of Ambler, Kobuk, and Shungnak. The applicant is Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority (NIHA).Other project partners include NANA Regional Corporation, Maniilaq
Association, WHPacific Inc., and the Kobuk, Shungnak and Ambler Village Councils. There are four phases to this project and this application is for phase three.
The purpose of this project is to determine the feasibility of converting paper, cardboard and other wood-based waste into thermal energy for heating the municipal water system of Kotzebue,
Alaska. The City of Kotzebue proposes to complete a feasibility study and conceptual design for a paper/wood waste thermal energy system. To this end, the City will study the paper/wood
waste stream in Kotzebue, environmental impacts of the combustion process, and the economics of the process. This total project concept could be segmented into the following phases:
Phase 1. Feasibility study & conceptual design.
Phase 2. Financing and paper/wood waste collection agreements.
Phase 3. Permitting, design and engineering.
Phase 4. Construction.
Phase 5. Operations and maintenance.
Kenai Winds LLC has received AEA support to develop and erect a 10 MW wind energy facility located in the Nikiski industrial area on the Kenai Peninsula. Through prior discussions with
Homer Electric Association, the project size is being increased to 15MW. This proposal is submitted to secure funding needed for the expansion. The facility will consist of 5 to 10
wind turbines disbursed throughout the site, electrically interconnected to either HEA?s Nikiski substation or Chugach Electric Association?s Bernice Lake substation. The project will
sell its electrical output to CEA. Letters of support from HEA and CEA are including in Appendix E and Appendix L. Kenai Winds LLC was included on the Round III renewable energy projects
approved by the Alaska state legislature for funding. Due to budget cuts, those funds were not received. This application will help restore funding which will directly result in lower
power price to the Alaska ratepayer.
Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T) proposes to conduct a Phase II project that will complete the Feasibility Analysis, (Biomass) Resource Assessment and Conceptual Design for a 2MWe biomass
gasification CHP (combined heat and power) system. AP&T, in partnership with Nexterra Systems, and with support from GE Energy, the Upper Tanana communities of Tok, Tetlin, Dot Lake
and Tanacross, the State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Contracted Consultants, Foresters and Economists, will collaborate to assess the feasibility of a system utilizing
locally sourced woody biomass as fuel. The project will thoroughly assess the long-term sustainability and projected costs of the biomass resource. The project will also develop the
conceptual design, assess the project site, and identify any remaining technical and operational barriers. This will refine the Benefit/Cost Ratio projections and better define public
benefits. Most of the detail in this grant application is from pre-feasibility work previously done by AP&T. All the data presented herein will be thoroughly assessed for confirmation
or adjustment in the proposed analysis.
Organized Village of Kwethluk (OVK) requests funding for an AEA Round IV Phase II Feasibility Analysis to further assess technical, economic, financial and operational viability of
a wind system for Kwethluk and to narrow the focus of final design and construction of such a system.
During this project, we will install a wind meteorological (met) tower to solidify the options of installing wind towers in Kwethluk. The work will involve obtaining a letter of non-objection
for placement of the wind tower, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location and studying the wind resource for one year. A conceptual design for a wind farm
will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings.
(Project description edited for length and clarity)
Alaska Mental Health Trust (AMHT) is applying to the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Renewable Energy Fund Round IV Phase IV grant program, seeking funding for equipment purchase and installation
of a GARN biomass heating system for the community of Ionia. The Ionia community is building a two-story 6,000 square foot community center/barn on their property near Kasilof for the
purpose of demonstrating renewable energy systems and sustainable living strategies for their neighbors of Kenai Peninsula and other rural Alaskans.
(Project description edited for length and clarity)
We are constructing a facility to manufacture wood fuel pellets utilizing local wood and biomass that has no other commercial value and would normally go to waste as feedstock. Our
operation will involve harvesting, chipping, and processing the material into wood fuel pellets for residential and commercial markets.
The first phase of the project is under construction. We are erecting a 30? by 40? metal building for the pellet plant. The first pellet production line will be installed in the building.
We will shortly be accepting delivery of the equipment for this first line, which will produce one ton of pellets per hour. Based on the number of inquiries and orders we have already
received, we anticipate this will not keep up with demand. We anticipate expanding the operation by installing additional production lines as demand warrants.
The Turnagain Arm Tidal Electrical Generation Project (TATEP) consists of the installation of patented and proven Rance tidal electrical generation turbines housed in a barrage located
in Cook Inlet. (See Map, p. 107.) TATEP is modeled on the La Rance tidal electrical generation plant built at La Rance, Brittany, France in 1966 at a cost of $88 million. The turbines
are housed in a barrage approximately one-half mile long. (See illustration, p. 109, 110.) The tidal electrical plant has been in operation since 1966, with 240 MW of electrical capacity.
The plant produces electricity at 1.2? / kWh to France?s consumers. There have been no mechanical breakdowns in 44 years with normal maintenance. The Rance turbines work in areas with
at least 80 ft. of water at high tide and 54 ft. low tide, similar to Turnagain Arm tides. TATEP turbines will be housed underwater horizontally and will turn the same direction on
incoming and outgoing tides with generators located on top of the barrage. Specific sites of the turbines will be selected after further research into environmental, hydrodynamics of
tides and water movement. The La Rance plant has twenty-four 10 MW generators for a total of 240 MW. TATEP?s plan calls for fifty to one hundred twenty 10 MW generators which would
produce 500 MW to 1200 MW net electricity. The project will be developed in stages. The first stage calls for 50 turbines which would be sufficient to provide 500 MW net electricity:
100% of the baseline demand currently in the railbelt region. Cost of the project at that point would be $1.5 billion instead of $2.5 billion. At that point, tidal power would be used
in combination with utilities? current gas turbines, wind, coal, and hydroelectric power for the peak demand and slack period. The tidal electrical production can be expanded as needed
over time by adding more turbines. Turbines will be connected by transmission lines; and submarine cable will bring the electricity produced to Chugach Electric on the Anchorage side
and to Homer Electric on the Kenai side, accessing existing utility corridors as much as possible to produce inexpensive electricity to Alaska Railbelt consumer. The project is priced
for all stages to be built: however, the first stage would produce enough electricity to be competitive with hydroelectric, geothermal, natural gas, and other renewables.
ORPC Alaska, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC (collectively, ORPC), develops technology and projects generating emission-free electricity from tidal,
river and ocean currents. ORPC requests Phase IV funding for the TidGen? Project to complete the first stage of ORPC?s larger Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project. The TidGen? Project involves
installing a 4- device TidGen? Power System with a total rated generating capacity of 600 kW in a 6-knot current. ORPC?s TidGen? Power System consists of one or more TidGen? devices
(which include a turbine generator unit [TGU] mounted on a bottom support frame) connected to an on-shore substation using underwater power and control cables. ORPC expects to receive
the pilot project license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) by December 2011. ORPC will release the initial TidGen? Project components for manufacture by January
2012 and will ship the components of the first of four TidGen? devices to Anchorage by May 2012. The TidGen? Power System will be assembled at the Port of Anchorage and will be installed
in phases from June 2012 to July 2013. ORPC will then monitor the system to collect essential site development and environmental data. In subsequent stages of the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy
Project, which are not in the scope of this application, ORPC will deploy an OCGen? Power System to increase the rated capacity to 0.9 MW by the end of 2013 and to 3 MW by the end of
2014. ORPC will ultimately increase the rated capacity to commercial scale ? up to 100 MW ? by 2020 under a FERC operating license that ORPC will obtain before the end of the pilot
project license period.
The proposed project will assess the tidal energy potential and development feasibility of four sites within Kachemak Bay. With assistance from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), the project will utilize historical water level and current data, recent sea floor mapping data, and new ocean current measurements to construct a comprehensive ocean circulation
model of the entire Kachemak Bay region. The model and tidal current data analyses will provide detailed information on tidal energy potential throughout Kachemak Bay. With this tidal
power information and consideration of effective tie-in to the electric grid, four sites will be selected and power production costs, output, and availability, as well as potential
environmental issues, will be assessed to determine initial feasibility of tidal energy projects. For all feasible sites, a conceptual design to optimize tidal energy production will
be produced, along with a construction cost estimate for that design.
This proposal represents the second phase (field testing) of ?Optimizing Heat Recovery Systems for Power Generation in Rural Alaska,? a proposal funded by the Denali Commission ($250,000)
and the Alaska Energy Authority ($54,306). The project involves laboratory testing of a 50 kW precommercial ORC unit to test the efficacy of generating power using recovered waste heat
from a mid-sized rural power plant. The testing will take place at the University of Alaska Fairbanks in winter 2010-2011, with the Phase 2 field testing called for in this proposal
to begin in October 2011. The Phase 2 testing includes performance data collection and analysis, evaluation of operation and maintenance requirements, economic analysis of potential
power generation / cost savings, and establishing guidelines for future ORC applications throughout rural Alaska and a methodology for selecting appropriate village sites. Both phases
of the overall project include data collection and comparison of a 250 kW ORC unit presently being tested in Cordova, Alaska. No funding is requested in this proposal for monitoring
the Cordova project.
AVTEC, in partnership with the City of Seward, intends to renovate, refurbish, and upgrade the City of Seward\'s existing unused Marathon Hydro-electric plant to be used as an education
and training tool in support of AVTEC\'s Hydro Power Plant Operator training program sponsored by the Alaska Energy Authority. The intent is to return the plant to productive use and
maximize the training benefits it can provide.
The proposed Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie is a 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan Public Utilities
(KPU). The Intertie will include 14 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line to be constructed on Annette Island between Metlakatla and Walden Point and an approximate three mile
submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Walden Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation. The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for the integrated
operation of the interconnected systems? generating plants. Design of the Metlakatla- Ketchikan Intertie is nearly complete. Transmission poles have also been procured and are currently
stored in Metlakatla.
The proposed Triangle Lake hydroelectric project will be located on the west side of Annette Island near the route of the proposed Metlakatla- Ketchikan Intertie. The project as presently
envisioned will be comprised of a small embankment dam at the outlet of Triangle Lake, a 1.3 mile long penstock and a powerhouse containing a single horizontal Francis turbine generating
unit with a capacity of 4.0 MW. The Triangle Lake project will provide additional hydroelectric power to Metlakatla and, with construction of the Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie, to the
interconnected electric systems of Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg. MIC will develop and own the Triangle Lake project.
The Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal system was extensively studied in the late 1970s and early 1980s using a variety of geological, geochemical, and geophysical techniques. Unfortunately
the execution of these surveys and interpretation of the data did not result in a thorough understanding of the area, and the most important conclusions for potential future development
? such as locating the upflow zone of the geothermal fluid ? was not determined.
In 2010, the University of Alaska Fairbanks began Phase I of an intensive new exploration program of the Pilgrim Hot Springs resource, funded mainly through a Department of Energy grant
with cost share provided through a $613,174 award under Round III of the Renewable Energy Grant Fund. This first Phase, which is currently underway, involves the use of an innovative
geophysical remote sensing techniques (including forward looking infrared radiometry, or FLIR) intended to map the spatial extent and total heat flow to the surface and make a preliminary
estimation of the developable extent of the reservoir. These remote sensing techniques are being coupled with more traditional ground-based exploration techniques to pinpoint the location
of the upflow zone, map the spatial extent and total heat flow to the surface, and estimate the temperature and depth of the reservoir.
This proposal addresses Phase II and III of this project. Phase II involves drilling and testing two 500 ft temperature gradient holes and two 2500 ft confirmation holes into the resource
to confirm the results from Phase I. The third Phase will involve developing a more complete understanding of the reservoir through flow testing and water sampling of the holes, and
development of a numerical reservoir model. The end result of this project will be an economic and geothermal resource model of the Pilgrim Hot Springs site and surrounding area to
determine if it can be economically developed, and to what extent.
The Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydroelectric Project proposes to install a third hydro turbine capable of producing an additional 11.25 megawatts (MW) in the existing Terror Lake plant. The
original engineers of the Terror Lake facility had the foresight to design the facility for the expansion to three turbines. The original design assumed the day would arrive when additional
capacity would be required. That day has arrived. Kodiak?s growing electrical demand has surpassed the current capacity of Terror Lake. Expanding the capacity at Terror Lake by 11.25
MW with a third turbine generator will enhance the stability of KEA?s isolated grid system allowing additional forms of renewable energy to be integrated and Kodiak?s dependence on
diesel fuel to be minimized. The third turbine at Terror Lake is the cornerstone necessary for KEA to achieve its? Vision Statement: Endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost
effective renewable power solutions by the year 2020.
Mount Spurr represents what currently appears to be the best opportunity in Alaska to develop a Utility-scale base-load geothermal energy power plant. Located 80 miles west of Anchorage
on state lands leased by Ormat Nevada Inc. in October of 2008, a successful power project at Mt. Spurr would serve communities along the Railbelt through power purchased by one or more
of the Railbelt electric utilities.Ormat is leading a rigorous exploration campaign, to be partially cost shared by AEA using a grant to be awarded in the framework of round III of
the Renewable Energy Fund. Exploration to date includes desktop studies based on exploration work done by the Alaska Volcano Observatory and others during the mid 1980?s; a field reconnaissance
trip and geochemical analysis done by Ormat in August 2009; intense geological and geophysical exploration (including mainly a heli-magnetic survey, satellite imagery, LiDAR survey,
ground-based Magneto-Telluric survey and ground-based gravity survey) performed during July and August
2010 and initial results of core drilling that started early September 2010 and is currently ongoing. Analysis of all data collected during the above mentioned exploration work is very
encouraging as to the potential existence of a commercial size geothermal resource. However, further exploration ? planned for this fall and for summer of 2011, before funds described
in this application are requested - is required in order to confirm it. This grant request is for the next phase of project development ? to be sometimes referenced in this application
as ?phase III? - which is to start construction of the geothermal well field and later on (beyond the scope of this grant application), the power plant itself. The first step in construction
of a commercial geothermal well-field is to drill a full-size deep geothermal production well, in order to tap into the geothermal reservoir and flow test the geothermal fluid in order
to measure its temperature, pressure, chemical composition and other attributes. The location of this well will be based on a synthesis of 2010 and 2011 exploration work mentioned before.
Follow-up steps (beyond the scope of this grant application) will include drilling additional production wells; drilling one or more injection wells; performing a long-term multi-well
flow test to measure the size of the geothermal reservoir; drilling additional production and injection wells and building a power plant, including a geothermal gathering system, utility
interconnection facilities etc.
Phase IV: Construction, Testing, and Assessment ? Naknek-G #3. The Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project has drilled Naknek-G#1 to depth and is ready to begin assessing
its geothermal fluid production characteristics. Drilling Naknek-G #2 is scheduled to begin in October 2010 and completed before the end of the year. After Naknek-G #2 has been drilled
and the capacity for geothermal fluid production for electric and heat energy generation is thoroughly understood NEA will contract for design, permitting, and construction of a modular
generation facility. In addition to traditional geologic and geophysical logging in the Naknek wells includes a logical and well-considered set of activities undertaken during and
after drilling that will serve to characterize the reservoir and communication between the first two wells in the production field. Naknek-G #3 drilling tasks are scheduled to begin
September 2011, and the costs of achieving its drilling (construction), testing and evaluation objectives are the substance of NEA?s request for REFGP Round IV funding. Preliminary
results support temperatures and flow adequate for the production of electricity. Well field construction including production and injection wells will continue until required MW capacity
is met.
The Chefornak Wind Turbine Feasibility, Design and Permitting project involves all preconstruction activities to support the installation of three (3) 100 kW wind turbines on the eastern
edge of the City of Chefornak. This proposal requests funding to complete Phase II and Phase III project activities. Funding received through this application will be utilized to accomplish
the following scope of work:
1. Procure and install a MET tower at the proposed wind turbine installation location
2. Collect one year of resource data and process recordings through appropriate modeling software
3. Perform geotechnical analysis at the project site
4. Develop final project designs and cost estimates
5. Apply for and obtain relevant project permits
This scope of work proposed in this application will support the eventual installation of a 300 kW wind power installation that will be owned by the City of Chefornak and operated by
the Naterkaq Light Plant (NLP). The NLP is wholly owned by the City of Chefornak and the electricity produced by the installed turbines will be distributed to the utility without charge.
The wind turbines will be connected into NLP?s electrical distribution system through a new three-phase distribution line running from the project site to the existing power plant.
The project will offer benefits to the community of Chefornak and its electric customers through a system-wide reduction and stabilization of energy prices. The City of Chefornak has
assembled a project team headed by STG Incorporated that is prepared to immediately begin work on an accelerated schedule. Among others, the project team includes members from Powercorp
Wind Diesel North America, DNV Global Energy Concepts Inc, Erricos Engineering, Alaska Line Builders, Duane Miller Associates, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell, BBFM Engineers and Aurora
Consulting. All aspects of the feasibility, design, and permitting project, detailed in the following pages of this application, can be completed within one year from the receipt of
funding.
The Copper River School District (CRSD) proposes to install a 1.8MBTU wood pellet fueled boiler at the Kenny Lake School. This boiler will displace 18,625 gallons of fuel oil every year.
The current boilers will be used for backup, low load and peak heat periods. This project will involve school district personnel, local contractors, design engineers and the Alaska
Energy Authority (AEA). This project will employee local residents in construction, keep energy money within the State of Alaska and utilize regional biomass resources from the Fairbanks
area. This project will introduce bulk delivery of pellets from the Superior Pellet Plant, located in North Pole, AK, to the Copper River Valley. Local residents may be able to expand
use of pellets for home heating use.
To determine the feasibility of installing wind towers in Stebbins, AVEC proposes to continue to monitor the existing wind meteorological (met) tower that was erected this year using
funding from the Denali Commission. AVEC would also perform geotechnical work to support an engineering effort. The work would involve obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner
for geotechnical fieldwork, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site.
A conceptual design would be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control would be obtained for the conceptual design
of this project.
To determine the viability of upgrading the Selawik wind turbines from the existing AOC machines to Northern Power NW100s, AVEC proposes to conduct a feasibility study and conceptual
design. AVEC will analyze and report findings to partners and community members. By reusing the existing site, we anticipate to drive down the total installed cost significantly. This
total project concept, with wind generation, could be segmented into the following phases:
Phase 1. Feasibility study & conceptual design.
Phase 2. Financing and negotiation of any power purchase agreement.
Phase 3. Design and engineering.
Phase 4. Installation of transmission and wind energy.
Phase 5. Operations and maintenance.
This proposal only covers phase 1.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Scammon Bay. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design would be
created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits would be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
AVEC proposes to complete final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of two wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation system for currently
intertied communities of St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), the electrical utility provider in Old Harbor, Alaska, is proposing to complete final design and permitting of hydroelectric project in
Old Harbor, Alaska. The proposed project is a 300 kW run of the river hydroelectric plant with a diversion structure, pipeline, powerhouse, and electric line. The project involves collecting
up to 7 cfs of water year round from Mountain Creek tributary of Barling Bay Creek and transporting it to a tributary of Lagoon Creek. The project would meet the existing electricity
demand of the community.
To better determine the feasibility of wind power in Marshall, AVEC proposes to build on the results of the already-completed wind resource study by commissioning a geotechnical study
for the site and performing a conceptual design study to determine the most optimal equipment configuration and layout. The geotechnical work would involve obtaining permanent site
control from the landowner with the intent of supporting follow-on turbine construction in a future project.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Koyuk. The work would involve obtaining
a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the wind tower(s) and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design would be
created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control would be obtained for the placement of the met towers and wind turbines.
AVEC proposes to install a 10 kW solar array in Kaltag. The array would be installed on the side of the existing power plant facility that is owned and operated by AVEC. Work would involve
shipping materials to the community, installing, integrating, testing, and commissioning the array. As a pilot study, installation of this small array in Kaltag would help AVEC evaluate
the benefits of solar arrays installed at power generating facilities
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Elim. The work would involve obtaining
a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location, studying
the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design would be created
based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control would be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Eek. The work will would involve
obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design would be
created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Permits and site control would be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
The project will be a study of the phenomena of river debris with an emphasis on developing technologies and protocols to mitigate the impact of the debris on the operation of hydrokinetic
turbines, in general, and specifically the hydrokinetic turbine operating in the Yukon River at Eagle, AK.. The Yukon River Hydrokinetic Project [YRHP] is a multiyear pilot study being
performed by AP&T to determine the viability of hydrokinetic technology in a remote isolated Alaskan community. The YRHP originally funded by the Denali Commission is currently operating
from funds granted by the Alaskan Center for Energy and Power [ACEP]. The YRHP will be operated for two more years through the operating seasons of 2011 and 2012. Recognizing that debris
mitigation is a critical issue to the success of the hydrokinetic concept AP&T will contract the University of Alaska-Fairbanks [UAF] to perform debris studies during the 2011 and 2012
operating seasons and analyzing and evaluating mitigating techniques from the data collected in the studies.
Please refer to the UAF Statement of Work [SOW] attached for more details. During the 2010 operating season a debris boom was deployed upstream of the hydrokinetic device. This first
generation debris mitigation system [DMS] failed to perform but lessons were learned and AP&T along with it contractors will manufacture a second generation DMS-2 through the winter
of 2010 that will be deployed with the hydrokinetic device at the beginning of the 2011 operating season. This new debris system will be designed primarily to deflect the surface debris.
Subsurface debris moving through the water column also needs to be deflected and the results of the UAF study will be used to upgrade the DMS-2 over the winter of 2011. The upgraded
third generation system DMS-3 will be deployed in 2012 and UAF will complete its studies with the collection of data through the 2012 operating season and its evaluation. If feasible
the hydrokinetic unit will be deployed in the years subsequent to the pilot study period. If this is the case the results of the UAF study will be utilized to determine if new improvements
should be made to the debris mitigation system.
The eight communities named in this proposal?Hughes, Ruby, Koyukuk, Nulato, Kaltag, Nikolai, Anvik, and Holy Cross?have all identified wood heating in public buildings as a priority
energy opportunity that can displace fuel oil, save the communities money, utilize locally available renewable resources, and create local employment opportunities. These communities
are interested in installing high-efficiency, low emission biomass boilers similar to the Garn boiler system currently in use in the Tanana washeteria and other Alaska communities.
The first step in this process is the preparation of a feasibility assessment that identifies potential buildings for wood heating, the size and type of boilers that would be required,
estimated fuel displacement and cost savings, capital cost and payback period, forest inventory and wood harvest plan, and so on. The applicant proposes to subcontract with Dan Parrent,
wood utilization specialist of the Juneau Economic Development Council, to conduct 1- to 2-day site visits in each community and prepare feasibility assessments for each. Parrent has
extensive experience in this area and has prepared numerous such reports for other Alaska communities. The forest inventory and wood harvest planning work will be conducted by Will
Putman, head forester for Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC). Following the completion of these reports, project staff Kim Carlo of Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) and Ross Coen
of TCC and the Alaska Center for Energy and Power at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) will continue to communicate with residents of the communities and facilitate their internal
planning processes to determine whether each community wants to move forward with final design and construction phases of the respective wood-heating projects. The applicant anticipates
submitting final design and construction proposal(s) to the RE Fund (Round 5) for those communities named in this proposal that wish to proceed.
This project consists of the construction of biomass heating system, using high efficiency, low emissions wood fired boilers to heat the school and the athletic complex. It includes
construction of wood-fired boiler heat building and a cordwood storage building, at the Thorne Bay School. An alternative plan could be to use the new self contained wood boilers housed
in a connex unit used at Stebbins if the unit becomes approved and proves efficient to use.
The Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility would consist of 5 MW of installed capacity with an average annual output of 20,600 MWh of energy, installed on the Grant lake watershed near Moose
Pass, Alaska. The proposed Project is comprised of a diversion dam at the outlet to Grant Lake (under consideration), an intake structure in Grant Lake, a tunnel, a surge tank, a penstock,
a powerhouse, a tailrace detention pond, a switchyard with disconnect switch & stepup transformer, and an overhead or underground transmission line. The intake would be in Grant Lake
near its outlet. Water would be conveyed from the intake through a 3200? penstock to a powerhouse containing two Francis-type turbines. The powerhouse would be located near the bank
of Grant Creek and would discharge through a second penstock into Grant Creek. A transmission line would connect the facility to the Railbelt grid near Moose Pass. Please see the attached
Project Description that was filed with FERC on August 13th, 2010. Kenai Hydro LLC, whose sole member is the Homer Electric Association (HEA), was created in 2008 to evaluate and possibly
develop this site as a low impact hydroelectric facility.
The Nikiski Combined Cycle Conversion (NCCC) project will convert the existing simple cycle 42MW gas turbine into a highly efficient combined cycle plant by adding a Steam Turbine Generator
(STG) and re-commissioning the existing Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG). The STG will recover waste heat from the existing gas turbine and produce an additional 18MW of capacity
with no additional fuel required. The plant conversion will increase the base load plant efficiency by 45% without increasing fuel consumption. AEEC is seeking grant funds for the construction
phase of this waste heat recovery project.
The Nushagak Community Wind Power Project proposes to erect two wind turbines (approximately 200-300 kW. e.g. Aeronautica 29-225kW) and connect them into the adjacent electric grid operated
by Nushagak Electric and Telephone Cooperative (NETC) serving Dillingham and Aleknagik, Alaska. This installation will deliver annually up to 900 mega watt hours of electric power and
replace more than 64 thousand gallons of diesel fuel.
The proposed Kanakanak site has enough wind to be considered a commercially viable site for a small commercial sized mid-scale turbine. Such a device would produce in excess of $155,000/yr.
Further, such wind turbines will serve as an important educational tool for NETC to gain the important skills and expertise to operate and maintain state of the art renewable technology.
Such knowledge is a central component to NETC developing a sustainable energy system that will integrate renewable power sources with existing diesel technology.
The purpose of this project is to investigate the potential of using the known geothermal resource at Tenakee Inlet to produce power and evaluate alternative uses of the source. Springs
near the head of Tenakee Inlet have the highest recorded surface temperature (176? F) of any of the numerous geothermal springs tested on Chichagof Island and listed on the Geothermal
Resources of Alaska Map. Geochemistry of the spring waters indicates a maximum subsurface temperature of 243? F. The surface flow rate of the spring has been measured at 90 L/min and
the convective heat discharge estimated at 0.5 MW. We request funding for a two-phase reconnaissance study of the resource with a planned timeline of approximately 18 months. Phase
I will include mapping, remote sensing, aerial and ground based geophysics, and geochemical sampling. If justified by the first phase, we will commence with Phase II - exploratory well
drilling. In this second phase, two wells would be drilled, although the second would have to be justified by the combined results of Phase I and the first well. This is the complete
scope of work we are requesting funding for with this grant, but if this work is successful and promising, future work would include additional drilling necessary to confirm and develop
the resource, necessary permitting, and power plant and infrastructure construction.
APC proposes to construct the 1.5 MW Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on Yerrick Creek, approximately 20 miles west of Tok. The Project would off-set diesel generation
in the communities of Tetlin, Tanacross, Dot Lake and Tok. The Project will consist of a small diversion structure, approximately 15,000 feet of penstock, powerhouse with a single generating
unit, tailrace, small substation, and transmission line. The Project operation will be run-of-river; annual generation is expected to be approximately 4,900 MWh/yr (approximately 40%
of the interconnected load). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than
diesel generation.
APC is actively looking to add another hydroelectric storage facility to its Upper Lynn Canal (ULC) system serving Haines, Skagway, and nearby communities. To date, APC has considered
Connelly Lake near Haines and Walker Lake near Klukwan, with Connelly Lake being preferred because of its much greater energy potential. However, some Haines citizens are opposed to
development of Connelly Lake, and have expressed their interest in APC evaluating the Schubee Lake site as an alternative. APC has made a very preliminary evaluation of the Schubee
Lake site and believe there is some potential; therefore the proposed grant is to study the Schubee Lake site to approximately the same depth as Connelly Lake so that a fair comparison
can be made between the two. In our view, this means bypassing the reconnaissance phase (Phase I) and proceeding directly with conceptual design and feasibility work (Phase II).
The overall 34kV power line route is approximately 12 miles long. Approximately 0.9-mile of the westernmost section is an existing APC 2kV distribution line that will be overbuilt. The
line will cross Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island. The route primarily follows existing logging roads. The power line will begin at a point along Hydaburg Road about 0.45 miles northeast
of the town. It will continue northeast along the existing logging road passing north of Deer Bay and intersecting Hetta Inlet opposite Jumbo Island. This section is adjacent to private
forested land with a small section of Muskeg and is 7.0 miles long. The logging roads are mostly mild to moderate cut sections with a few rock cuts. The first 0.9 miles of this section
is an existing APC corridor adjacent to the road established for a 2kV line. The water crossing over Hetta Inlet will be accomplished with 3 multi-pole structures with one on each side
of the inlet and one at the pinnacle of Jumbo Island. Jumbo Island slopes steeply toward the water on both sides and is heavily forested. A new corridor will need to be established.
The structure on the island will likely be set by helicopter. This crossing is 0.9 miles across. The power line will continue in a new corridor for 0.3 mile to the east until it intersects
an existing logging road. Approximately 1500 feet of temporary or permanent access road spurs will need to be constructed to access 2 line structures along this section. The line route
then turns south and follows existing logging roads 3.8 miles southeast to the powerhouse/switchyard location near Copper Harbor. This section is adjacent to private, recently harvested
forest land with very steep and rocky terrain prone to slides. The logging road is primarily full bench construction with several rock cut sections. There are danger trees (and boulders)
above the power line route on the eastern side slopes that may need to be removed/secured to protect the power line.
APC proposes to construct a small run-of-river hydroelectric project at Neck Lake, a 1,000 acre lake located 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island.
The Project would supply power to the community of Whale Pass, and would offset diesel generation, which is currently the sole source of electricity. The relatively high and modulated
flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end of the outlet stream provide a good opportunity for a small run-of-river hydroelectric development. Facilities would
include an access road, intake structure, 400 feet of penstock, a containerized power plant, a tailrace channel, and upgrade of 4 miles of transmission line. The hydroelectric facilities
will be designed to avoid interference with the existing salmon rearing and collection facilities operated at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA).
APC conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2008, and determined that there is sufficient potential to almost always provide enough generation for Whale Pass loads (see Section
10 for a copy of the reconnaissance report). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for APC?s Whale Pass customers.
The Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project (Project) will be located in Southeast Alaska, approximately 14 miles northeast of the City of Haines and 10 miles southwest of the City of Skagway.
Connelly Lake (formerly known as Upper Chilkoot Lake) is an 85 acre Alpine Lake, and drains into the Chilkoot River. The project will be on state and private land, including the Haines
State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve. The project facilities will include a dam at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW powerhouse with two generating
units, a 14-mile-long 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Final dimensions and capacities of these facilities will be determined by optimization studies to be
conducted during Phase II. The Project will be developed by APC to provide additional generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems.
APC proposes to construct the 300 kW Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project), which will be located approximately 8 miles north of Slana on the Glenn Highway (Tok Cutoff). The
Project would off-set diesel generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Slana, Chistochina, and Mentasta. The Project will consist of two small diversion structures,
approximately 13,200 feet of penstock, a powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and a very short length of transmission line. For about half the year,
the Project operation will be run-of-river, but during the colder months the Project will draw water from Carlson Lake. The potential annual generation is estimated to be approximately
1,200 MWh/yr, which is about equal to the current annual requirements of the three communities.
Therefore, the Project has the potential to almost offset 100% of the current diesel generation. The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization.
The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation.
AEA Renewable Energy Fund grant guidelines require a multi-phase approach to project development. The Borough is requesting funds for the first two phases in this application: Reconnaissance
and Feasibility/Conceptual Design Studies. The tasks for this project are described in Section 2.4 of the grant application instructions
This project is a conceptual design/feasibility study of localized testing and evaluation of electric vehicles and related infrastructure in an Alaska community, using locally-generated
renewable electricity to displace the use of gasoline and diesel vehicle fuel. The community served by this project is Wrangell, Alaska. Directly involved in this project is the City
and Borough of Wrangell (City), through Wrangell Municipal Light and Power (WMLP), and the Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA). The City is requesting grant funds for a feasibility/design
study/cost estimate of an electric vehicle charging station in Wrangell, presumably to be located at City-owned buildings such as the WMLP/public works, well as a feasibility/market
study of the types of electric vehicles most appropriate for use in Wrangell. Different business models, including an EV rental car pool, would be explored. Cost estimates for partially
converting the city?s vehicle fleet to EVs could also be prepared.
The proposed project is to design and build a redundant wood fired heating plant to heat the Susitna Valley High School with fuel wood which will be sustainably harvested from an appropriately-scaled
, designated, land-base selected from nearby Borough timber lands. It includes the Energy Building which houses the boilers, the connection piping to the building and the controls required
to monitor and control the system. The project also includes the on site storage of the split cordwood. A long-term management plan for the designated timber lands will be developed
in which a Secondary Vocational-Education curriculum can be enfolded that will directly involve student and community participation in ongoing studies of forest regeneration, biodiversity,
timber harvest, wood products development, trail development and managing for multiple use.
The Native Village of Eyak proposes a feasibility study to evaluate the potential of installing a biomass heating system to heat one or more community buildings. The community would
utilize wood waste from the community burn pile and cardboard from the landfill. Alder from right-of-way clearing of roads would also be considered as a fuel source. The community
would develop a community energy audit protocol as part of the feasibility process.
(Project description edited for length and clarity.)
This project is the continuation of the Hot Springs Bay Valley Geothermal Reconn. Project, previously funded under AEA REF Grant Agreement #2195475. Surface exploration & analysis, a
preliminary technical feasibility assessment and economic assessment were completed in 2009-2010. With the City?s commitment of an additional $1.2 million, exploratory drilling of two
test wells was completed 8/10. Drilling program confirmed presence of a geothermal resource sufficient for final design & permitting as described in Phase III requirements listed in
Section 2.5 of RFA AEA 11-005. This Round IV grant application is a request for funds to complete Phase III, Final Design & Permitting.
The proposed Whitman Lake Project will install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at an existing dam, supporting near-term capacity demand increases in the Ketchikan area and
displacing diesel generation as the existing Tyee Lake (SEAPA) resource becomes fully utilized. It will also replace the aging water supply system of the SSRAA Whitman Lake Hatchery,
providing increased water quantity, reliability and redundancy to a facility that is critical to the region?s commercial fishing, seafood processing & sportfishing industries.
The City of Coffman Cove and Craig partnered in a King Salmon Enhancement Program. We built a hatchery at the Craig water treatment plant with Pacific Sustainable Salmon Funds. This
was the first year of return for Port St Nick?s fish. Upwards of 6,000 fish returned to the area. Next year will be Coffman Cove?s first year of returning fish. The Port St. Nick
site was chosen due to the availability of generous quantities of high pressure water feeding the Craig water plant. An 8 inch line is currently side tapped into a 12 inch line to
feed the hatchery. Inside the hatchery there are pressure reduction valves to step down the pressure from 250 lbs to an operational pressure of 10 PSI. This results in a waste of
hydro energy that could be used to drive a small hydro electrical plant effectively producing power and depressurizing and providing the hatchery needs simultaneously. Electricity
produced from a small hydro plant could be used to provide power to the grid, be used to supplement or provide power to the water plant and be purchased to provide funds for rearing
of King Salmon smolts.
The primary purpose of this application for preliminary permit is to secure the right to investigate the power potential at Silver Lake and determine the best adapted use of that power
potential in the geographic area, including CVEA?s system. Detailed maps showing the project boundary and study area are provided in Exhibit 3-Project Maps & Photos. CVEA proposes to
step down from generation voltage at the project to serve local requirements in the immediate area. The transmission segment that would connect the proposed Silver Lake project to CVEA?s
system in Valdez is therefore not jurisdictional as a ?primary line? and would be constructed under State of AK approvals. Two alternative approaches to this line are provided in Exhibit
4.1, Alternative Transmission Line Routes.
Phase I of the Tok School biomass heating project is scheduled to be complete Oct. 2010. Project was developed using AEA Round I Grant funding. Project consisted of a biomass heating
facility that contained an automated biomass heating system that will heat the existing K-12 school. Phase II which is seeking AEA round IV grant funding, is an extension of the Tok
School biomass heating project and will consist of the bid alternates that were developed during Phase I but not constructed. Bid alternates that would be of most benefit to the facility
& will be part of the scope of work for Phase II will consist of: 1)Bid Alternate 1: Extending a hot water heating loop & related mechanical & electrical integration from the biomass
heating facility to a detached multipurpose building which houses an ice hockey rink and shooting range and also to an additional detached Zamboni garage. Both buildings are located
on the Tok School campus. 2) Bid Alternate 3: Adding a heat exchanger in the K-12 school building to isolate new biomass boiler system fluid from existing K-12 school heating system
fluid.
GVEA plans to award the EPC contract and wind turbine purchase contract in April 2011. The wind turbine purchase contract will require a 10% down payment based on discussions with possible
wind turbine suppliers. GVEA will be purchasing 12-24 wind turbines depending on the results of a wind turbine evaluation. The turbines under review are sized from 1-2.2 MW. The total
planned output of the Eva Creek Project is 24 MW.
Chugach is proposing to bring the process of route selection and permitting for a new transmission line linking potential renewable energy projects on the west side of Cook Inlet to
the existing Chugach system. Ormat Nevada, Inc. (Ormat), a wholly owned subsidiary of Ormat Technologies, Inc. (NYSE ?ORA?), secured 15 geothermal leases on Mt. Spurr from the State
of Alaska in 2008 and has since embarked on multi-phased exploration and development plan, with a goal to explore and build a utility scale 50-100 MW geothermal power plant to be connected
to the Railbelt power grid around 2016. Ormat has built over 1,000 MW of geothermal plants during the last 3 decades all over the western United States and several locations internationally.
Phase 1 of Ormat?s exploration, focusing on both aerial and ground based geological and geophysical surveys was completed in August 2010. Phase 2a, focusing on drilling four 500? to
1000? core holes, to measure temperature gradients and other geological features, started early September 2010 an is expected to be completed by the end of the month. Phase 2a will
move on to drilling additional, deeper, slim holes in 2011. Both phases (1 and 2a) will be partially cost shared by Oramat and AEA as part of Round IIII of the Renewable Energy Grant
Program. Future Ormat exploration and development phases, planned for 2012-2013, will focus on additional drilling in an attempt to confirm and delineate the geothermal resource. Subsequent
geothermal field development and power plant construction and commissioning are expected to take place in 2014-2016. Hydroelectric resource assessment at Lake Chakachamna is not as
far along, but a project in the future is possible.
Chugach?s proposed project would include one or more high voltage transmission lines which would connect to the existing substation and transmission lines at Beluga. The line would
be built for a maximum operation voltage of 230 kV but could initially be operated at a lower voltage to match first stage development of 50 MW of the geothermal project. The line
would cover a distance of at least 40 miles, depending on the routing. The initial phase would investigate feasible routes and select a preferred route, including permitting and right
of way acquisition. While Chugach would own and operate the line, all purchases (presumably all Railbelt utilities) would be able to access the renewable energy. The line would be
designed to accommodate future development of a hydro resource at Lake Chakachamna.
This proposal is for a 700 watt Solar PV array, to be installed on each of the ten NWAB high schools in the Borough, co-generating with the grid. The project explores modular inverter
technology for redundancy and also provides a platform for understanding Solar (PV) technology for our student base, supporting an upcoming curriculum-addendum at high school-level
and a class at Chukchi College. With an ongoing program for alternate energy in our curriculum, the schools could expand the alternate energy program every spring to the extent allowable
by the local utility (KEA) and AVEC and also communicate the technology & teachings to other schools in the State of AK. Over time, the schools could become more and more efficient
in their use of energy as each high school finishing class would contribute a project to offset the energy usage in the school. As we incorporate alternate energy sources in Alaska?s
rural communities, it is important to make a way available for our coming generations to become proficient in the new implementation of the resources. After all, they will live with
what we create and have to be able to understand and work with the systems. If this doesn?t happen and we have to rely on outside expertise to service the new energy systems, then
the cost of operation will be excessive and our effort of lowering energy cost for the region will be hampered. We need to take responsibility now for what we create for future generations.
This project will be a start.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a wind energy and area-wide energy management system, consisting of wind diesel integration, end-use energy efficiency, automated building controls,
and conservation. This phase of the project involves the final design and permitting for three anticipated wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Wainwright. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough, a contracted engineering/design firm, and Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont (wind
turbine experts and supplier). The contractor will provide overall project management and electrical system engineering for the project, as well as, in the final phase of the project,
the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100B model
wind turbines plus startup & commissioning services.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a wind energy and area-wide energy management system, consisting of wind diesel integration, end-use energy efficiency, automated building controls,
and conservation. This phase of the project involves the final design and permitting for three anticipated wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Point Lay. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough, a contracted engineering/design firm, and Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont (wind
turbine experts and supplier). The contractor will provide overall project management and electrical system engineering for the project, as well as, in the final phase of the project,
the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100B model
wind turbines plus startup & commissioning services.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a wind energy and area-wide energy management system, consisting of wind diesel integration, end-use energy efficiency, automated building controls,
and conservation. This phase of the project involves the final design and permitting for three anticipated wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Point Hope. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough, a contracted engineering/design firm, and Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont (wind
turbine experts and supplier). The contractor will provide overall project management and electrical system engineering for the project, as well as, in the final phase of the project,
the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100B model
wind turbines plus startup & commissioning services.
The North Slope Borough (NSB) envisions a wind energy and area-wide energy management system, consisting of wind diesel integration, end-use energy efficiency, automated building controls,
and conservation. This phase of the project is the feasibility study phase of a three phase project which will include phases for design and permitting, and construction and commissioning
for three anticipated wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution system for the community of Kaktovik. Participants in the project include North Slope
Borough, a contracted engineering/design firm, and Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont (wind turbine experts and supplier). The contractor will provide overall project management
and system engineering during this phase of the project. During the construction phase, MSB will recruit an engineering and construction contractor for design and installation of all
civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100B model wind turbines plus startup & commissioning
services.
This phase of the Barrow to Atqasuk Power Transmission Project will initiate the engineering phase of the project concept that was proven to be the most viable in the feasibility study.
The intent of the feasibility study was to first determine if there is an economical solution for providing electric power to Atqasuk from a low cost energy source. That source, of
course, is the natural gas that is available in the Barrow area. The next goal of the study determines which power transmission concept is the most economical and compatible with the
prevailing technical, environmental and social constraints. In short, the most attractive power transmission concept will be the result of the feasibility study.
The winning concept then enters the preliminary engineering phase. The purpose of the preliminary design is to adequately define the project so that all stakeholders can understand
it. These stakeholders include the owners, end-users, financiers and the concerned regulatory bodies. It is the basis for gaining approval and agreement to go forth with the project.
It should be noted that this preliminary phase of engineering constitutes about 30% of the entire engineering effort. The 70% balance is for final design engineering and is required
solely for constructing the project. The final design consists of detailed drawings, specifications and other materials relevant to the construction phase.
Tasks involved during this preliminary engineering phase include the following:
? Establishing the transmission line route
? Determine physical constraints such as rivers, lakes, roads, infrastructure
? Analyze ice and wind loading
? Determine optimum structure types
? Plan structure height, spacing and conductor sag curves
? Determine wire sizes
? Determine grounding requirements
? Identify insulation and hardware requirements
? Assess environmental permit requirements
? Schedule critical procurement and contracting
? Produce cost estimates
This feasibility study will be used to elect the best technology and to develop a preliminary design for a renewable biomass based CHP (combined heat and power) system to replace diesel
fuel for --
1. The Galena electrical power supply and
2. To provide district heating for the utilidor system that serves the Galena Interior Learning Academy (GILA).
The proposed system will provide about 1000 kilowatts of electrical generation capacity and will provide recovered heat for the utilidor. The CHP project is expected to replace about
a million gallons of diesel fuel per year by using locally harvested biomass in the form of wood chips.
The technology options appear to be either a steam powered generator and heating system or a biomass gasification system. A reconnaissance study is already in progress to provide the
baseline information for this feasibility study. The reconnaissance survey by WH Pacific is scheduled for completion by December 31, 2010.
Between 1995 and 2001, Lime Village became the first community in Alaska to develop a hybrid solar and diesel fuel generation electrical system. Hybrid systems use more than one power
source to meet its community energy needs. This proposal is to upgrade and retrofit the existing solar system, develop remote monitoring system and provide for ongoing maintenance of
the system. The system consists of an array of solar panels that can produce 12KW of electricity. The electricity generated by the solar panels is stored in a battery system. The
community\'s electrical energy needs are then supplied by the batteries and supplemented by a diesel generator. The existing cost of diesel fuel in Lime Village is approximately $8.00
per gallon. This generates an average electrical cost of $1.00 to $1.50 per kilowatt. The community uses approximately 7,000 KW per month and has 30 units using electricity. The proposed
retrofit is predicted to result in a significant reduction in the cost of electrical energy.
The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwell?s power system. Currently, they obtain power from the line between MEA
and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). To accomplish this they propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River, a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this
plant will be in excess of 1 MW. It will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
The project consists of acquiring & installing equipment that will dry approx. 13,000 tons of wood waste per year produced as a byproduct of the sawmilling process. Dried wood would
then be burned in publicly owned facilities to provide reduced cost, district-style heat for these facilities at a reduced cost to the public entities that operate these facilities.
The project enables recipient facilities to burn renewable fuels to provide heat at lower costs over time than the cost to burn fossil fuels to produce heat.
Phase II includes a site survey; wind resource monitoring installation, data gathering and reporting on 10 month?s data in conjunction with existing wind data and will result in completion
of feasibility & conceptual design within two quarters of wind data compilation. The project will include the feasibility of building new wind energy capacity and leveraging in other
wind projects being planned by the City of Bethel and the Housing Authority. TDX Power is a seasoned rural energy operator with extensive wind turbine experience. TDX Power will complete
a Phase III final design by the end of the second year of the project. Phase IV construction will commence in the first quarter of year 3 and will be completed by the end of year 4
with an operating 1 MW rated wind turbine producing 3,050,000 kWh and leveraging a potential additional wind farm capacity of 1 MW to provide a total of 6,100,000 kWh from the combined
2MW of renewable energy to the Bethel utility grid.
Development of hydroelectric power at Takatz Lake would include construction of a 200-foot high main concrete arch dam, a small 30-foot high secondary saddle dam, power intake, unlined
tunnel, power penstock, power plant, tailrace, and transmission line segments including: underground, submarine, and overhead sections. the project would produce approx. 106,900 MWh
per year via two 13.8 MW turbine-generators.
Phase 1: Reconnaissance & project feasibility was funded. It includes a site survey; wind resource monitoring installation, data gathering and reporting on first year?s data; Feasibility
Study and conceptual design. This activity is a preliminary engineering and financial analysis of the potential for a hybrid renewable project. The proposal is for Phase II, Preliminary
Design: this proposal will advance the assessment and engineering evaluations conducted in Phase 1 with the preliminary design efforts necessary to advance the potential project to
the stage that it?s ready for final design, permitting and construction. Phase III (Final Design & Permitting) will include the final design of the winning resources. Phase IV (Construction)
will cover the construction portion of this project.
The project, located in Valdez, AK will capture waste heat generated at the Petro Star Refinery. Waste heat will be collected by a shell & tube glycol medium recovery system. The medium
will drive 2 technologies operating in a series. Ammonia absorption technology will create cooling for 45 million pound -20 degree cold storage facility. An organic Rankin Cycle Generator
will use the medium once it has exited the ammonia absorption system to create 600 wk?s of power which will be used to operate the cold storage facility as well as the Solomon Gulch
Hatchery. The final benefit will be to use the cold cycle of the generator to create a salmon rearing facility.
The purpose of the AVCP Housing Wind Turbine Project is to construct two turbine towers for wind generated energy, with the purchase of land from the City of Bethel for the site, a power
generation/controls building, and complete Operations and Maintenance training of permanent employees. The calculated annual projected kWh usage of the Low Income Rental units, Lulu
Herron Congregate housing and the AVCP RHA Office Complex and warehouses is 581,573 kWh.
Application combined with #517 - only this one (#523) scored
Project Type: Hydro, including run of river, Transmission of Renewable Energy.
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development consists of a 1MW + run of the river hydropower project located in the Tongass Forest within the Admiralty Island National Monument based on a proposal
that Kootznoowoo submitted in March 2000 which is described more full in the Angoon Hydrologic Project Feasibility Evaluation Report (Project). The development would be located on
Thayer Creek approximately 6 miles north of Angoon. Thayer Creek flows out of Thayer Lake (64 square mile reservoir) at a gentle grade through a broad forested valley then steepens
for 6,800 feet through a narrow forested canyon and finally flattens again for 2000 feet before flowing into Chatham Strait. The development will tap the energy potential in the steep
section of the stream and will avoid any impact on anadromous fish that use the lower portion of the creek. The average flow of Thayer Creek is approximately 370 cfs and can vary from
25 cfs during the coldest periods of the winter to over 2000 cfs during storms in the fall and winter. The generating facility has a head of 250 feet which is approximate because of
the wording of the Forest Service Record of Decision (ROD) requiring maintenance of fish habitat. An additional restriction set forth in the ROD which is not considered in the HDR
proposal requires the overland transmission line be buried where feasible along the access road to the community of Angoon. The transmission line funding will be submitted in a separate
companion application for Round III funds.
Project Type: Wind and Storage of Renewable.
We currently generate power with diesel generators and hydro electric. There are periods of time the hydro is not capable of operation due to weather conditions and we wish to maximize
our efficient generation of power to our customers benefits. We already have a track record of passing benefits on to the customers that we gain from hydro operations.
Project Type: Heat Recovery from existing sources, Transmission of Renewable Energy.
City of Houston wished to demonstrate the feasibility of using natural gas fired fuel cells to produce lower cost electricity and heat.
To accomplish this they will hire an engineering firm to design the siting and transmission requirements, determine KW and BTU requirements and size the system.
They will hire a project manager who will gather data on current electrical and thermal needs and submit that to the engineers, research and fill out all required permits, meet with
the school and potential commercial recipients of heat and/or power Coordinate with city staff and fill out all required reports.
The Angoon Commercial Demonstration Tidal Power Project will install a Midrange 375KW nominal nameplate capacity free stream tidal power converter made up of triple counter rotating
units of 125KW each. The neutrally buoyant steel hulled unit will be anchored in position with pilings at one of two sites identified within intertie distances from the existing diesel
power house. The tidal power diesel intertie will form an integrated mini grid where the diesel will provide peaking, emergency, tide slack coverage and the predictable tidal power
component will become the new base power supply. Part of the study will determine a phase two installation where the distance between the two installations provides offsetting slacks
and then the existing diesel can be designated emergency power only.
The project consists of installing and operating frequency-based equipment at specified public facilities using a programmable priority system selected by the community. The equipment
?captures waste energy off a utility system? and determines (dispatches) and uses the excess electricity generated. The system senses low electrical demand which causes the frequency
to rise. Controls located at each building sense the increased frequency and adds loads based on its sequencing priority. As loads are added the frequency drops and the controls take
the buildings off-line again based on prioritizing. Independent solid state frequency modulators monitor each load governor and its relays have the ability to react to changes rapidly
cutting in and out as required. This efficiency enables the hydro power plant to convert its water up to capacity.
Rural residents in NW Alaska are facing some of the highest costs anywhere in the nation. In order to proactively address the region?s energy crisis, KEA is working to implement long
term energy options. While there are a variety of alternative energy options available to the Kotzebue region, such as wind, solar, and geothermal; wind energy has a proven track record
of success in this community.
The goals of the proposed project are:
1. To increase the wind capacity of KEA from 1.14MW to 2.95MW using 2 EWT 900KW wind turbines.
2. To integrate the increased wind capacity with a 500KW/3.7 MW Premium Power Flow Battery.
3. To utilize the excess electricity in a distributed heating system. This is a two year project. year one involves performing all pre-construction and foundation
construction tasks. Year two involves the wind turbine erection and commissioning.
Application combined with #523 - only that one (#523) scored and not this one.
Project Type: Hydro, including run of river and Transmission of Renewable Energy.
Thayer Lake Hydropower Development consists of a 1MW + run of the river hydropower project located in the Tongass Forest within the Admiralty Island National Monument based on a proposal
that Kootznoowoo submitted in March 2000 which is described more full in the Angoon Hydrologic Project Feasibility Evaluation Report (Project). The development would be located on
Thayer Creek approximately 6 miles north of Angoon. Thayer Creek flows out of Thayer Lake (64 square mile reservoir) at a gentle grade through a broad forested valley then steepens
for 6,800 feet through a narrow forested canyon and finally flattens again for 2000 feet before flowing into Chatham Strait. The development will tap the energy potential in the steep
section of the stream and will avoid any impact on anadromous fish that use the lower portion of the creek. The average flow of Thayer Creek is approximately 370 cfs and can vary from
25 cfs during the coldest periods of the winter to over 2000 cfs during storms in the fall and winter. The generating facility has a head of 250 feet which is approximate because of
the wording of the Forest Service Record of Decision (ROD) requiring maintenance of fish habitat. An additional restriction set forth in the ROD which is not considered in the HDR
proposal requires the overland transmission line be buried where feasible along the access road to the community of Angoon. The transmission line funding is the subject of this funding
and is a companion to the separate companion application for Round III funds.
Project Type: Wind & Transmission of Renewable Energy.
This project includes final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of four wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
systems for the villages of Saint Mary?s, Mountain Village, and Pilot Station.
At present, Saint Mary?s and Pitka?s Point are connected by a distribution power line, but Mountain Village and Pilot Station are stand-alone diesel powered communities. This project
would:
? Electrically intertie Mountain Village and Pilot Station to Saint Mary?s
? Install 900 kW of wind between Pitka?s Point and Saint Mary?s to create a wind-diesel
hybrid power system
? Install a secondary load boiler to dump excess wind power
? Manage the new integrated power system with a new SCADA system
Standby generation capability will be maintained in Mountain Village and Pilot Station but primary generation will be delivered by the existing St. Mary?s power plant.
A meterological (met) tower installed in New Stuyahok between 2003 and 2005 found that winds were class 3 (fair to good); however, placement of the met tower was hindered by the active
runway at the time (location new airport has now been constructed out of town), and it is expected that the wind resource could be better. Before going forward with the final design
and construction of wind turbines, AVEC would like to better determine the wind potential in the community.
The work would involve permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine
the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
A meterological (met) tower installed in New Stuyahok between 2003 and 2005 found that winds were class 3 (fair to good); however, placement of the met tower was hindered by the active
runway at the time (location new airport has now been constructed out of town), and it is expected that the wind resource could be better. Before going forward with the final design
and construction of wind turbines, AVEC would like to better determine the wind potential in the community.
The work would involve permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine
the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
The project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of three wind turbines to supplement a new power generation system for the communities
of Teller and Brevig Mission. AVEC is currently working on preliminary design and permitting of the wind turbines under a Round 2 AEA grant award. This work will be accomplished in
the next year, prior to initiating this phase.
Project Type: Wind, Transmission of Renewable Eneryg.
To determine the feasibility of installing wind towers in the vicinity of Kivalina, AVEC proposes to complete a wind power study and conceptual design. To this end, AVEC will install
a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work. AVEC also proposes to conduct a feasibility study and conceptual design to examine the extension of a power intertie
from Kivalina to the power system at the AIDEA-owned DMTS Port, 17 miles to the southwest, with the addition of wind power generation along the intertie. AVEC will analyze and report
findings about both areas to partners and community members. AVEC This total project concept, with wind generation and an intertie, could be segmented into the following phases:
? Phase 1. Feasibility study & conceptual design.
? Phase 2. Financing and negotiation of power purchase agreement.
? Phase 3. Design and engineering.
? Phase 4. Installation of transmission and wind energy.
? Phase 5. Operations and maintenance.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Stebbins. The work will involve obtaining
a letter of non-objection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location, studying the wind resource
for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome
of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
The Slana Wind Project is located approximately seven miles west of Slana and will contribute up to one MW of clean, renewable wind power to the Alaska Power Company Slana distribution
system. Grant monies from this application will initially be used to help erect and monitor one 50-meter meteorological tower to confirm that favorable wind energy is available at
the site to justify commercial development. A favorable resource assessment will result in final design, permitting and construction.
The communities served will include all communities within the Alaska Power Company (APC, an Alaska Power & Telephone Company public utility subsidiary) service area including Slana
(2009 population 110), Chistochena (81) and when it is connected, Mentasta (126). The total population of the served area will be 313.
The project will include construction of a 1.7 mile long transmission line across Ahtna Corporation and state-owned land from the Tok Cutoff to the proposed wind power generation facility
on the ridgetop. The power generation facility will include approximately one MW of wind turbines, the size and type subject to final design. These turbines will be founded in shallow
bedrock prevalent on the ridge crest. Power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation. Overhead transmission lines (distribution
voltage) from the transformer substation will extend 1.7 miles to the existing APC distribution line on the Tok Cutoff.
The grant participant is Village Wind Power LLC who has three Alaska wind projects under development (Tok, Slana, and Bethel). There will be a number of contractors involved in completing
the project. In addition to our own in-house efforts, other experienced contractors will be chosen to carry out selected components of the project. These components may include:
? State Land Use Permit for Wind Resource Assessment ? already completed
? State and Native Corp easement for the transmission line
? State land lease acquisition for the wind farm site
? Topographic mapping for the wind farm and transmission line
? Wetlands mapping for the wind farm and transmission line
? Archeological review for the wind farm and transmission line
? Detailed design for the wind farm and transmission line
? Power Purchase Agreement with APC
? Transmission line construction
? Wind farm construction
? Electrical hookup
? Commissioning and testing
This Phase II project will investigate, evaluate, and provide a conceptual design for partially stabilizing wind-generated power at the Delta Wind Farm with locally-produced natural
gas. It is intended to address the technical, economic, financial, and operational viability of producing natural gas from the Jarvis Creek area 30 miles south of Delta Junction. If
sufficient natural gas is present, the conceptual design will include piping that gas to Delta Junction for use within the community for space heat and stationary power uses.
Stabilizing wind power with a rapidly controllable natural gas generator will allow the wind project to better serve its customers with a more stable power supply. Rapid variations in
the amount of wind energy available can be smoothed using natural gas generation, and operational procedures involving anticipatory wind turbine shutdowns, or sequential wind turbine
startups, as well as wind forecasting.
The waters of Cook Inlet offer a clean and renewable power source for the communities of South Central Alaska. Our project will utilize existing infrastructure, namely the King Salmon
platform, and proven submersible technologies to capture the tidal energy of the Inlet. Baker Hughes Centrilift develops electrical submersible pumps (ESP) for the oil industry and
given our product?s reliable history in very demanding oil well environments, their ESP system was chosen as the power generating unit. The smaller diameter of an ESP Generator allows
for higher speed operation and lower impact to fish than propeller-based systems. The ESP Generator would consist of 1) aquatic life diverters to protect the environment and minimize
the environmental impact of the system, 2) rotating multistage turbine anchored in water at optimum flow velocity depth, 3) submersible electric power cable would carry the energy to
shore connecting to 4) local utility substation or transformer. Buoys would be placed strategically near the system to alert boat traffic. The existing platform would act as an anchoring
structure and intermediate for power distribution.
Project Type: Wind, Hydro, including run of river, Geothermal, including Heat Pumps.
We propose to accomplish the four phases of a project to integrate one or more renewable energy resources with a properly sized efficient diesel plant in Adak, Alaska.
Phase I (Reconnaissance) was funded.
Phase II, this proposal, addresses Resource Assessment/Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual Design.
Phase III (Final Design and Permitting), will include the final design of the winning resource(s). Phase IV (Construction) will cover the construction portion of this project.
The Tatitlek IRA Council, in partnership with Tatitlek Corporation, has a teaming agreement with TDX Power to complete the wind resource assessment, feasibility study, and conceptual
design with funding from Round II of the Renewable Energy Grant Program. Assuming the resource proves adequate and the project economical, we propose to proceed with the final design,
permitting, and construction of a high penetration wind-diesel project. We understand our current diesel plant will require a new low-load diesel gen-set and new automated controls
in order to successfully integrate wind energy.
Project Type: Wind, Hydro, including run of rivers, Geothermal, including Heat Pumps.
The west side of Cook Inlet contains several energy projects that may well provide the majority of future electrical energy supply for the Railbelt region of Alaska where 70% of the
Alaska populations resides. These projects include the Chakchamna hydropower project, Mt. Spurr geothermal project, in-situ coal gasification, and wind generation. While there are limited
existing pioneer roads in the area of consideration, if any or all of the potential projects move forward, infrastructure needed for the development and operation of these projects
could be significant. Funds provided under this application would be used to conduct field inventories of fisheries and wildlife resources in the area and their habitat. The project
would evaluate the individual and cumulative infrastructure needs of the energy projects and the subsequent environmental impact that this infrastructure might have on area fisheries
and wildlife. The largest majority of the funding will be utilized to inventory area fisheries, and their seasonal and
aerial distribution throughout the study area. Infrastructure of concern which may impact these
resources include temporary and permanent access roads, bridges, airfields, and transmission lines.
Project Type: Wave Power.
TDX Power will work with Voith Hydro Wavegen to deliver this project. Voith Hydro Wavegen is an industry leader in the development of wave power technologies and a long track record
of success with the deployment of their nine year old commercial wave power generation facility in Scotland. Management from TDX Power have worked with Wavegen since 1999 and have formed
a joint relationship to pursue the development of Alaska\'s first wave power generation facility together. It is our intention that this project will be a continuation of a study that
has already been started by the project team and will be completed prior to grant award. The objective of the initial phase will be to identify 3 suitable sites for fixed Oscillating
Water Column wave energy plants in Alaska. The initial phase will be carried out using publicly available data from NOAA and other public bodies. This data will be used to generate
a preliminary assessment of wave resource, transmission infrastructure, other site users and energy demand for various sites throughout the state. The data will then be used to expand
and update the report \'Wave power in Alaska: Community Profiles\' written by Nick Goodman in 1999. From this report 3 sites will be selected and a full technical, economic and environmental
assessment will be carried out. It is this full site assessment that is the subject of this grant
application. Upon completion of the study, it is anticipated that the project team will be in possession of all the data required to apply for a full FERC license for the sites selected.
TDX Power will assess the existing diesel plant owned by the City of St. Paul electric utility. TDX will design and engineer the necessary modifications so that this plant will efficiently
integrate wind energy from the POSS Camp Wind Farm. TDX will design and engineer modifications to the controls at the POSS Camp Wind Farm in order to sell electrons to the City of St.
Paul electric utility. TDX Power will assess, engineer, and construct all required distribution line additions and upgrades.
Acceptance of any funding from this grant is contingent upon a power purchase agreement
between TDX Power and the City of St. Paul. In the event TDX cannot secure a PPA with the City of St. Paul, and agree on the TDX conceptual design for the integration, no project funds
will be requested.
ORPC Alaska, LLC (?ORPC?) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC (?the Company?), which was founded in 2004 to develop technology and projects generating
reliable, economical, emission-free electricity from tidal, river and deep-water ocean currents. ORPC is currently developing two projects in Alaska: the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project
and a river in-stream hydrokinetic project in Nenana. The Company?s proprietary ocean current generation technology is adaptable, and is used in different design configurations depending
on the current and water depth of the application. The bottom-mounted RivGen? Power System is designed for small river applications, particularly in remote communities without a centralized
power grid; the bottom-mounted TidGen? Power System is designed for shallow tidal current applications; and the buoyant, moored OCGen? Module is designed for deeper tidal and ocean
current applications.
The Company expects to receive a Pilot Project License for the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (?FERC?) by October 2010. This license permits
the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project to be built to a rated peak generating capacity of 5 megawatts (?MW?) in a 6-knot current. The first part of this 5 MW project will involve installing
the TidGen? Power System, with a rated peak generating capacity of 1 MW in a 6-knot current. The TidGen? Power System will consist of four (4) TidGen? devices; each TidGen? device is
made up of a single TidGen? turbine generator unit (?TGU?) and a bottom support frame. The TidGen? Project will begin in the third quarter of 2010, and will incorporate environmental
and site characterization studies performed to date; consultations with federal and state agencies; and data obtained in the summer 2010 testing of a TidGen? Power System prototype
in Maine. The TidGen? Project will include detailed engineering and specifications for all project components, including the TidGen? TGUs, the bottom support frames, the power electronics
and transmission system, the deployment and retrieval systems, the environmental monitoring systems, and the data acquisition systems. Upon completion of this phase and receipt of the
FERC Pilot Project License, ORPC will release the TidGen? Project components for manufacture by February 2011, allowing for the completion of fabrication and shipment of the first of
four TidGen? devices to Anchorage by May 2011. The TidGen? Power System will be assembled at the Port of Anchorage, and installed in phases from May to October 2011. ORPC will extensively
monitor the system to collect data essential to further site development.
In the second round of the Alaska Renewable Energy Fund, the Alaska Energy Authority (?AEA?) recommended ORPC for full funding of the reconnaissance and feasibility phases of the Cook
Inlet Tidal Energy Project; however, due to state budget concerns, this funding was never awarded. Despite the lack of state funding, ORPC was able to raise sufficient private funds
to complete these two phases of the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project. As the first stage of the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project, the 1 MW TidGen? Project is estimated to cost $6,501,066,
of which $4,514,650 will be funded by the Company and $392,426 will be funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy. Through this proposal ORPC requests that the AEA fund the
remaining $1,954,000 for the final design and construction phases of the TidGen? Project. The subsequent stages of the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project, which are not in the scope of
this application, will follow one year of testing and monitoring of the TidGen? Power System. These subsequent stages will include the deployment of OCGen? Modules to gradually increase
the generating capacity to 2 MW by the end of 2012, to 5 MW by the end of 2013, and ultimately to a commercial scale (up to 100 MW) development of the site. In order to develop to this
level, ORPC will obtain a FERC Operating License before the end of the Pilot Project License term in 2019, in all likelihood by 2015. The TidGen? Project will be interconnected to the
Railbelt power grid through the Chugach Electric Raspberry Substation; the electricity generated will be sold to the Railbelt utilities under purchase agreements yet to be negotiated.
ORPC will complete the TidGen? Project work with the cooperation of Terrasond LTD, HDR|DTA, The University of Alaska Anchorage, LGL Alaska Research Associates Inc., Aquacoustics, PND
Engineering, the Port of Anchorage, Port MacKenzie, and other local contractors.
This project is to investigate the potential of using the known geothermal resource at Tenakee Inlet to supply a geothermal power plant. Springs near the head of Tenakee Inlet have
the highest recorded surface temperature (176? F) of any of the numerous geothermal springs tested on Chichagof Island and listed on the Geothermal Resources of Alaska Map. Geochemistry
of the spring waters indicate a maximum subsurface temperature of 243? F. The surface flow rate of the spring has been measured at 90 L/min and the convective heat discharge estimated
at 0.5 MW. Using geophysical and geochemical exploratory methods, we propose to conduct a field exploration of this resource in order to choose a location for two exploratory wells.
This phase of the project will culminate with the drilling and testing of two exploratory wells, which will allow for an economic and technical assessment of the potential power generation
from this resource. This work is a necessary first step in determining the viability of generating region-wide power from this resource.
The proposed project will assess the tidal energy potential and development feasibility of four sites within Kachemak Bay. With assistance from the National Oceanic and Atmos-pheric
Administration (NOAA), the project will utilize historical water level and current data, recent sea floor mapping data, and new ocean current measurements to construct a comprehensive
ocean circulation model of the entire Kachemak Bay region. The model and tidal current data analyses will provide detailed information on tidal energy potential throughout Kachemak
Bay. With this tidal power information, four sites will be selected and power production costs, output, and availability, as well as potential environmental issues, will be assessed
to determine initial feasibility of tidal energy projects. For all feasible sites, a conceptual design to optimize tidal energy production will be produced, along with a construction
cost estimate for that design.
There are numerous projects that are planned or are being implemented, especially in rural Alaska, that will use biomass as the sole or major energy source for heat and/or power. These
projects have dealt with such questions as how much energy needs to be produced, boiler size and type, and capital costs for installation of biomass burning equipment, and in some cases
actual construction. However, they have for the most part ignored the supply side of the equation. Some important questions that must be addressed before Alaska communities can expect
to successfully and sustainably use biomass as an energy source are: how much biomass is needed for any given energy producing system; how much biomass is currently available; how much
land is needed to supply the biomass; what is the total cost of supply including harvest and logistics of handling, storage, and transport; how fast will biomass regrow with or without
management; and it is feasible to farm biomass in Alaska? All must be considered before the myriad of biofuel projects proposed and envisioned can successfully move forward, and before
existing, commercially available technologies that use biomass to produce energy for heat, fuel, and power can be most effectively, and most successfully, deployed. Although some information
exists to address these questions, it is scattered and often in formats not readily available. This
project addresses the availability, quality and feasibility of sustainable, economic use of agricultural and forestry biomass in Alaska. The goal of the project is to 1) assimilate all
existing information on the total forest and crop biomass available in Alaska into one data base, 2) determine the gaps in the data base and the information needed to fill the gaps,
and 3) when possible, determine the biological, physical, and economic feasibility of using Alaskan biomass as biofuels. The project will have major statewide application as it will
serve as the basis for all agricultural and forestry biomass-based energy projects; the greatest number of which are being proposed for rural and village communities. Project cooperators
are the School of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences(SNRAS) and the Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station(AFES) at the University of Alaska Fairbanks(UAF) (project primary/agricultur
al energy crops and forest biomass), Fairbanks Economic Development Corporation(FEDC) (logistics, data support, and information dissemination), Alaska Division of Forestry (forest biomass,
and harvest, transport, and storage technologies), and Tanana Chiefs Conference (current biomass assessment projects, forest inventories)..
The City of Napaskiak requests funding for a Wind Study as the first and second steps towards supplementing the high cost of diesel generators currently in use. This Wind Study will
satisfy Phases I, Reconnaissance and Phase II, Feasibility of the AEA?s basic outline of the Wind Resource Development Partnering Plan Procurement. The study will result in a feasibility
report on the benefits, costs and guidelines of implementing the next three phases of a wind turbine system, both in terms of a stand-alone system operated independently by Napaskiak
Electric Utility, and in the context of a possible sub-regional intertie.
Project Type: Storage of Renewable
This project uses flywheel energy storage to stabilize the Tuntutuliak wind-diesel power grid. Grid stability is needed to achieve increased use of wind and other renewable energy sources
in diesel mini grids. The proposed project consists of installation of a Powerstore flywheel energy storage system, along with a state of the art Distributed Digital Control System,
to create a very high-penetration wind diesel system with residential thermal storage in Tuntutuliak, Alaska. The demonstration of this system will enable the effective sizing and cost
reduction measures to be identified so that the system can be widely replicated throughout the state and other power systems throughout the country.
The Copper River School District (CRSD) plans to install a wood pellet-fired heating system at the Kenny Lake School. With this application, CRSD is requesting grant monies for Phase
IV ? Construction. This will include purchase of pellet-fired boiler, pellet storage bin, delivery system, and boiler building construction. Public bid solicitations will be advertised
for purchase of the wood pellet boiler system and facility infrastructure construction. Local contractors will be targeted.
The Hoonah City Schools desires to upgrade our heating system to employ the use of low-emission nontoxic wood biomass as the source for wood-fired boilers to provide heat (through an
insulated pipe distribution system) initially to the K-12 School building and the combined gymnasium/pool building. The school will reduce our dependence on costly fossil fuels, while
employing cleaner, renewable, and locally available resources, through the use of locally available wood biomass material. A resource assessment and preliminary feasibility study was
completed in October 2008. The resulting report was directed toward the use of hand-stoked hydronic heaters with background information on bulk fuel boilers. An in-depth feasibility
study is required to identify land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis. A conceptual design analysis and cost estimate will be included, followed by a 35% conceptual
design plan set.
The Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric Project is a low-impact run-of-river renewable energy project proposed near Seward, Alaska. The project would be located east of the Spring Creek
Correctional Facility and Fourth of July Creek Industrial Park, across Resurrection Bay from the City of Seward. The project is anticipated to have an installed capacity of 5.4 MW and
provide an estimated 21,700 MWh of energy annually. The project would supply approximately 1/3rd of Seward Electric System\'s annual energy requirements.
The Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project is an approximately 75 MW storage project proposed for the Glacier Fork of the Knik River. Electricity from the project would be delivered into
the railbelt transmission grid via a new approximately 20-mile transmission line to existing transmission infrastructure in the vicinity of the Old Glenn Highway bridge over the Knik
River. A map of the project is included at the end of the application in Attachment H.
The Archangel Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential hydroelectric resource located in Hatcher Pass, AK with a capacity of 1.7 MW. A feasibility study is required to determine the
appropriate project size and to scope development issues.
Chugach is proposing to begin the process of route selection and permitting for a new transmission line linking the potential geothermal renewable energy resource at Mt. Spun to the
existing Chugach system. The project would include one or more high voltage transmission lines which will connect to the existing substation and transmission lines at Beluga. The line
would be built for a maximum operating voltage of 230kV but could be initially operated at a lower voltage to match first stage development of 50 MW of the geothermal project. The line
would cover a distance of at least 40 miles, depending on the routing. The initial phase would
investigate feasible routes and select a preferred route, including permitting and right of way
acquisition. While Chugach would own and operate the line, all purchasers (presumably all Railbelt utilities) would be able to access the renewable energy. The line would be designed
to also accommodate the development of a hydro resource at Lake Chakachamna.
Project Type: Wind, Hydro, including run of river, Geothermal, including Heat Pumps, Heat recovery from existing sources, solar, biomass or biofuels, transmission of renewable energy,
hydrokinetic and storage of renewable.
This project will develop a comprehensive Tribal Energy Plan for the community of Chistochina that includes a reconnaissance study of various renewable energy resources, preliminary
engineering on renewable energy systems for the most abundant and available resources, and a technical/cost analysis of constructing an intertie system that would connect Chistochina
to the appropriate electrical grid (Copper Valley or AP&T). The project will also contribute funds to support Ahtna, Inc.?s efforts to complete a regional energy plan to ensure that
Chistochina?s Tribal Energy Plan is compatible with the broader regional energy plan.
This GIS-based project will conductould be a detailed statewide run-of-river hydropower resource assessment with, but a particular focus on southwest, south central and southeast Alaska.
If the project scope and budget do not allow for a full statewide assessment, the project team will indentify priority areas for study in consultation with AEA staff. The study will
determine the current hydropower resource and estimate the future hydropower resource (in 2060) using available data on climate trends. The project will benefit from synergies with
the active AEA-funded statewide hydrokinetic energy assessment and with the AEA-supported and DOE-funded nationwide hydrokinetic energy assessment project which wilthat willl begin
in Dec. 2009.
The study will be conducted using river/stream discharge data generatedconsolidated by the University of Alaska team and using the Rapid Hydro Assessment Model (RHAM), a GIS tool developed
by Kerr Wood Leidal of Burnaby, BC. RHAM calculates the amount of hydroelectric power available on all streams in a study area, screening out sites within protected or environmentally
sensitive areas, and estimates project costs. RHAM can also assess the suitability of hydroelectric development in a given area, taking into account economic, environmental and social
factors, and can assess storage hydro and clustered developments. The resulting data and GIS maps would improve and build upon existing public data sources on Alaska hydropower including:
? Alaska Energy Authority hydroelectric site database
? US Department of Energy, Hydropower Program (Idaho National Laboratory): statewide hydropower resource computer models done in 2006, 2004 and 1997.
? USGS hydrology data from all over the state
? Other data sources from state and federal agencies such as topographic maps (digital elevation models, and existing public GIS files with layers for existing road and power
transmission line and generation infrastructure, power plants, land status, protected areas, and fish habitat information.
Port Graham Village Council along with its regional non-profit corporation Chugachmiut are working to implement (develop and operate) a 1.5-megawatt biomass combined heat and power (CHP)
system for Port Graham, Alaska. A feasible biomass technology option was identified in 2007 by an independent research group, Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC) at the University
of North Dakota (a copy is supplied in the CD for this RFA). This research identified feasibility of generating three-phase 220-volt electrical power from a woody biomass fuel source
that can be obtained from Port Graham Village Corporation lands and local Native allotment lands on a sustained basis. An existing road system supplies access to the fuel source. The
project will provide electrically generated heat to Port Graham?s and Nanwalek?s community buildings and homes at the price comparable to current heating costs using fuel oil. Heating
cost from biomass-generated electricity is anticipated to increase at a much lower rate than heating with fuel oil. Community buildings and homes can be retrofitted for electrical heating
at a much lower cost than installing a community wide biomass heated hot water distribution loop and hot water heating systems in each community building and home. Current oil-fired
hot-water baseboard heating will remain as a backup heat system in each community building and home. The electrical heating option and electrical power will provide power cost without
the need for state sponsored price cost equalization supplement and would experience less cost increase over time.
Project Type: Storage of Renewable.
This project demonstrates the use of flywheel energy storage to stabilize any village power grid. Grid stability is needed to achieve increased use of wind and other renewable energy
sources in diesel mini grids. The proposed project consists of installation of a Powerstore flywheel energy storage system, along with a state of the art Distributed Digital Control
System, to create a very high-penetration wind diesel system with residential thermal storage in Kwigillingok, Alaska.
The demonstration of this system will enable the effective sizing and cost reduction measures to be identified so that the system can be widely replicated throughout the state and other
power systems throughout the country.
The proposed project consists of the installation and integration into the Pilot Point community diesel power system, one Northwind 100, 21 meter wind turbine wind, on a 38 meter tubular
steel tower. The project will include the upgrading of approximately 1.5 miles of 3 phase power line, diesel plant controls, and communications improvements, and installation of a heat
recovery boiler in the school. The proposed system provides scalable village wind-diesel power system architecture, using proven components, which can be expanded to add wind capacity
as well as other sources of alternative energy sources.
On February 3, 2009, the City of Angoon (Angoon) filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for a three-year preliminary permit under Section 4(f) of the
Federal Power Act (FPA) to study the feasibility of the proposed Scenery Lake Hydroelectric Project No. 13365-000. On October 2, 2009, the City of Angoon received the FERC preliminary
permit for the project. The project would be located on Scenery Creek and Scenery Lake near Petersburg, Alaska. The project would be located within the Tongass National Forest, which
is administered by the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service). The proposed project would consist of: (1) a 15-foot-high concrete dam with a spillway impounding Scenery Lake; (2) a lake
tap or siphon; (3) a 13,000-foot-long by 8-foot-diameter buried steel penstock; (4) a powerhouse containing two to four new generating units having a total installed capacity of 30
megawatts; (5) a 7-mile-long, 69-kilovolt (kV) and a 22-mile-long, 138-kV transmission line; and (6) appurtenant facilities. The proposed Scenery Lake Hydroelectric Project would have
an estimated average annual generation of 130 gigawatt-hours. On October 2, 2009, the City of Angoon received the FERC preliminary permit for Scenery Lake.
Project Type: Storage of Renewable.
This project demonstrates the use of flywheel energy storage to stabilize any village power grid. Grid stability is needed to achieve increased use of wind and other renewable energy
sources in diesel mini grids. The proposed project consists of installation of a Powerstore flywheel energy storage system, along with a state of the art Distributed Digital Control
System, to create a very high-penetration wind diesel system with residential thermal storage in Kongiganak, Alaska.
The demonstration of this system will enable the effective sizing and cost reduction measures to be identified so that the system can be widely replicated throughout the state and other
power systems throughout the country.
The proposed project is a village wind power and heating system for the community of Kipnuk, Alaska. The project will be owned and operated by the Kipnuk Light Plant and the community
of Kipnuk, and includes the installation of 675 kW of wind generation capacity, using three Vestas V- 2 7 wind turbines, new wind diesel controls and switchgear, a Power store flywheel
energy storage unit for grid stabilization and 30 thermal electric heating and energy storage devices distributed throughout the community. The wind power and heating system ties in
with the power plant and power store module through the existing power distribution grid. The wind turbines and power store module will be mounted on pile foundations, on property provided
by the community. The power store and control/switchgear modules will be placed near the diesel power plant The system is designed to produce, capture and meter excess wind energy separately
from diesel generation. Thirty electric thermal heating stoves will be placed in residential homes and three-80 KW electric thermal boilers will be placed in community building. These
storage units will be used to capture excess energy to lower heating costs. The Power store flywheel will provide the grid stability allowing the village energy system to accept any
and all contributions from the wind turbines. This wind diesel system architecture enables ease of e xpansion by adding more wind turbines and more electric thermal storage devices
Project Type: Transmission of Renewable Energy and Hydrokinetic (Tidal Energy).
The Turnagain Arm Tidal Electrical Generation Project (TATEP) consists of the installation of patented and proven Davis tidal electrical generation turbines in areas with at least 80
ft. of water at high tide and 54 ft. low tide, housed in piling supported platforms designed to allow ice flow beneath the platforms. Specific sites of the platforms will be selected
after further research into environmental, hydrodynamics of tides and water movement in specific areas of the inlet. The plan calls for 200 10MW generators with a total capacity of
2000 MW at 60% efficiency which produces 1200MW net electricity. Platforms will be connected by transmission lines and submarine cable will bring the electricity produced to Chugach
Electric on the Anchorage side and to Homer Electric on the Kenai side, accessing existing utility corridors as much as possible. Electricity produced by the project will be available
for purchase by all the electric utilities in the railbelt area at a rate between 6? to 8? per kilowatt hour, which will reduce the cost of electricity to railbelt consumers by 50%
to 67% and will benefit the70% of the Alaskan population who live in this area. (See Map.)
Construct 16 x 20 building adjacent to Tok Main office building to house pellet boiler, water storage tank and pellet storage.
Install pellet boiler, water storage and radiant heating system in the Tok Main office. Purchase pellets on contract with local pellet manufactures in Dry Creek (50 miles from Tok
with trees harvested from the Tanana Valley State Forest) currently producing pellets. Track use of pellets for three year period and compare cost to fuel oil usage and cost. Invite
other state and federal agencies and general public to visit the facility to learn the local renewable biomass heating options, the environmental benefits, local economic benefits and
the cost savings, This is a very simple, straight forward, proven, dependable system with a high quality dependable fuel source that we have already used 6 tons in small pellet stove
this last year in the office. Radiant heating systems are used extensively in the Tok area with the outside wood boilers. No
engineering will be required. We will also displace a 50 gallon electric hot water heater with
domestic hot water exchanger to provide all the hot water we could use.
Project Type: Solar and Biomass or Biofuels.
Alaska Mental Health Trust is applying to the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Renewable Energy Fund Round III grant program, seeking funding for equipment purchase and installation of
a GARN biomass heating system for the community of Ionia. The Ionia community is building a two-story 6,000 square foot community center/barn on their property near Kasilof for the
purpose of demonstrating renewable energy systems and sustainable living strategies for their neighbors of Kenai Peninsula and other rural Alaskans.
Ionia has been a successful example of sustainable and healthy ?intentional community? living for many years and is now expanding its outreach to a more active demonstration and educational
center. There are many books, magazines, websites, and videos about sustainable living, intentional communities, and conscious living. Ionia is a living-breathing village where seekers
and the merely curious can interact and get a real feel for viable alternatives.
The Ionia Renewable Energy Training Center (RETC) will be the first renewable energy educational center located on the Kenai Peninsula. The Center, in its design and use of sustainable
and renewable energy technology, will serve as an educational resource and conference center for the demonstration of renewable energy technologies specific to local ecosystems. A wind
?met tower? (anemometers and wind vane on a 100 foot tower connected to a data logger computer) was recently installed nearby to assess the wind resource for proper sizing of a wind
turbine, as part of the overall suite of community scale renewable energy systems. A combination of grants and private funds has been raised for the construction of the RETC building.
The Ionia Community has provided all the labor and the log milling for the project.
GARNs use cordwood, (not chips or pellets), burned hot and fast?cleanly--in a boiler to heat a large reservoir of liquid, which is pumped through tubes in floors and radiators to heat
the building. This request also includes funding for a solar-thermal heating system to augment the biomass system for this unique community. Both systems will provide heat for the RETC
and for the South-facing greenhouse on the side of the building.
The Ionia RETC building is already under construction and is approximately 30% finished (as of October ?09). When completed, the building will serve as barn/storage, classrooms, meeting
and office space, and conference center. The building itself will be an integral part of the demonstration of energy efficient building techniques, a renewable energy heating system
and food production, preparation and storage. The anticipated date of the commissioning and start-up of the educational center is October 1, 2011.
This funding request is to complete Phase IV (Construction and Commissioning) of renewable energy systems to heat the educational center, which includes the Garn cordwood boiler, solar
thermal system, radiant heat flooring and hydronic radiators. The project will establish an integrated, alternative energy heating system for the building that effectively models energy
conservation while using local renewable resources (wood and solar).
Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T), in partnership with Nexterra Systems, and with support from GE Energy, the Upper Tanana communities of Tok, Tetlin, Dot Lake and Tanacross, and the State
of Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR), propose a Phase IV Construction project with grant support from the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA). This collaborative project will demonstrate
the AEA?s commitment to community-scale renewable energy systems for rural Alaskans through the deployment of a 2MWe CHP (combined heat and power) system utilizing locally sourced woody
biomass as fuel. The system combines Nexterra?s proprietary gasification technology and syngas conditioning systems with GE Energy?s high-efficiency internal combustion engines. The
system is an Internal Combustion (IC) engine powered by conditioned syngas produced from the gasification of locally sourced woody biomass, with excess heat being made available for
district heating. The system will serve the rural Alaskans on the local (isolated) power grid of Tok, Tetlin, Dot Lake and Tanacross, now fueled by diesel generators.
Project Type: Wind, Geothermal, including Heat Pumps and Solar.
The Kodiak Island Borough is proposing to perform analysis or assessment to evaluate the potential for use of alternative energy sources to supplement the use of oil in the Kodiak High
School facility. Specifically, we will investigate the potential for utilization of the following:
? Ground source heat pumps utilizing latent ground heat tapped through a closed loop wellfield and distributed throughout the building via conventional heat pumps;
? Site generated wind power;
? Photovoltaic power generation;
? Solar heat and power generation in conjunction with daylighting.
Mount Spurr represents what currently appears to be the best opportunity in Alaska to develop a utility-scale base-load geothermal energy power plant. Located 80 miles west of Anchorage
on State lands leased by Ormat in October of 2008, a successful power project at Mt. Spurr would serve communities along the Railbelt through power purchased by one or more of the Railbelt
electric utilities. Preliminary analysis of data from field reconnaissance of the region conducted by Ormat in July-August 2009, coupled with historical exploration work from the mid-1980\'s,
is encouraging as to the potential existence of a commercial size geothermal resource. However, further exploration is required in order to confirm it. The grant request is for a two-phase
program for continued resource studies and assessment surveys with a planned timeline of roughly one year (from July 2010 to mid summer of 2011). Phase I ? reconnaissance - will include
mapping, further geochemical sampling, remote sensing, and aerial and ground-based geophysics. These studies will eventually culminate in gradient/slim hole drilling to be performed
in the second phase, if justified. If successful, future work beyond the scope of this grant application will include further slim/production hole drilling in 2011-2012, and if the
resource is confirmed, construction of a power plant and drilling of additional geothermal production and re-injection wells will follow.
Project Type: Solar and Biomass or Biofuels.
The City of Tanana in collaboration with the Tanana Tribal Council proposes to install a biomass heating source and solar panels for the Assisted Living Facility for elders in Tanana,
the Tanana Tribal Offices and the Internet high tech training center in Tanana. All three buildings are located close to one another. The City of Tanana will oversee the construction
and implementation of this project; the Tribal Council will provide in-kind and collaborative oversight of the project. The project site is on 4.3 acres of land dedicated to this project.
The Biomass Center building will be located in the middle of the complex of three buildings within 100 feet of the center of these building. The Biomass Center will house three (3)
GARN heating units that will provide hot water heat to each of the buildings. The biomass heating units will greatly reduce the use of expensive fuel oil and save money for the Assisted
Living Facility and Tribal Council. The installation of 63 solar panels will provide electricity to the three buildings during the summer months significantly reducing the cost of
electricity.
The Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential hydroelectric resource in the Matanuska-Susitna valley to may be able to economically produce 6.5 MW or more. This phase of the
project, a reconnaissance study, involves investigating the resource to determine if a project is viable and to also perform preliminary feasibility work on the project location, size,
and resource availability.
The Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project is a run-of-river hydroelectric project located on Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon. The 190 kW project can provide for most of the communities
current power needs, which peak at about 125 kW. The project involves construction of an intake, a 4650 foot long, 18 inch diameter pipeline, a powerhouse, a 2000 foot long transmission
line, and access roads.
The Resurrection Valley Projects have a combined capacity of 7.0 MW based on a review existing maps. A reconnaissance study is required to determine the viability of the projects and
select the preferred developments.
The Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential hydroelectric resource located near Sutton, AK with a capacity of 1.5 MW. A feasibility study is required to determine the appropriate
project size and to scope development issues.
The Virgin Creek Hydroelectric Project is a potential hydroelectric resource in the Girdwood valley with a capacity of 1.2 MW. A feasibility study is required to determine the appropriate
project size and to scope development issues.
This project is the continuation of the Hot Springs Bay Valley Geothermal Reconnaissance Project, previously funded under Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Renewable Energy Grant Fund application
#246. A surface investigation, detailed analysis of geological data, an economic analysis and project permitting are being completed under the existing grant authorization. The purpose
of this request for funding is to provide the supplemental funds necessary for test well drilling during the 2010 field season (June ? October). A heliportable coring drill rig will
be employed to drill four (4) slimholes, three at 1500 feet in depth and one at 3,500 feet. A baseline comprehensive well testing program will be conducted shortly after well completion,
followed by long-term well monitoring. The project will result in confirmation of the geothermal resource sufficient for final design and permitting as described in the Phase III requirements
listed in Section 2.5 of RFA AEA 10-015.
This grant request identifies the repairs and upgrades required to bring the system back on line and to improve its long term efficiency, output, and sustainability. Therefore, this
grant application is requesting funds for:
? Phase IV Final Design, Construction, Commissioning,
Operation
The tasks for this project are as defined in Sections 2.5 and 2.6 of the grant application instructions.
Wind Powering America and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) launched the Wind for Schools project in 2005 by conducting a pilot project in Colorado that resulted in one
small wind turbine installed in Walsenburg, wind energy curriculum development, and a great deal of enthusiasm for the Wind for Schools project\'s potential. The Wind for Schools project
will be replicated in Alaska by installing many more small wind turbines, engaging local citizens in a wind energy discussion, and developing a knowledge base for wind energy within
schools.
The general approach of the Wind for Schools project is to install small wind turbines at rural elementary and secondary schools (hosts) while developing Wind Application Centers at
higher education institutions. Teacher training and hands?on curricula are implemented at each host school to bring the wind turbine into the classroom through interactive and interschool
wind?related research tasks. The students at the Wind Application Centers assist in the assessment, design, and installation of the small wind systems at the host schools, acting as
wind energy consultants. They also participate in class work and other engineering projects in the wind energy field, preparing them to enter the energy workforce pursuing fields, such
as engineering and technical trades, as wells as economics, social science, education, and environmental sciences.
This project will incorporate a technical and economic feasibility assessment for replacing the University of Alaska coal-fired power plant with a waste-to-energy biomass energy project.
This study will compare three scenarios ? 1) the base case of coal only fuel, 2) a mixed fuel consisting primarily of municipal waste from the campus only and/or renewable energy from
local resources, and 3) 100% municipal waste and biomass, a portion of which would be diverted from the Fairbanks North Star Borough Landfill. In addition to comparing the economics
of these options, we will complete a comprehensive survey of waste-to-energy technologies that could be applicable for Alaskan communities. We will not limit the technical feasibility
assessment component to this site alone. There are a number of potential technologies that have been proposed for use in Alaska, including gasification, combustion, and plasma gasifiers.
We will consider each of these configurations, plus specific products and manufacturers and the market-readiness of their products.
The Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal system was extensively studied in the late 1970s and early 1980s with a variety of geological, geochemical, and geophysical studies. Unfortunately
the execution of these surveys and interpretation of the data from these earlier studies did not result in a thorough understanding of the area, and the most important conclusions for
potential future development ? such as locating the upflow zone of the geothermal fluid ? were not conclusively determined. This proposal will fund a ground-based survey to complement
a Department of Energy award under DE-FOA-0000109 in the amount of $4,616,879. A similar submission was recommended for funding under Round II, but fell below the cutoff for the $25
million in projects that was ultimately funded. The goal of the larger project (combining DOE and State funding) will be to pinpoint the upflow zone using advanced geophysical survey
techniques, and to verify the location, depth to the resource, and temperature through a new drilling program. Both the existing wells and the new hole will be flow tested to obtain
water samples for chemical
analysis, and to conduct pressure interference surveys between the wells. These data, combined with an airborne thermal imaging survey to determine total heat flow to the surface
should be adequate to determine total potential output of the system for sustainable long term
development. The proposed project is a joint effort between the Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) and the Catholic Bishop of Northern Alaska, (owner of Pilgrim Hot Springs).
The project will be led by ACEP. In addition to the project partners, letters of support have been provided by Mary?s Igloo Native Council (owners of property adjacent to Pilgrim) and
Nome Joint Utilities, both of whom would be impacted in their organizations? long-term decision making by conclusions reached through this study. Letters of support from both of these
organizations is included as attachments.
The Ruby Tribal Council is proposing to partner with the Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) to perform a geothermal Resource Assessment of the Horner and Melozi Hot Springs geothermal
resources for potential power generation and space heating for the City of Ruby and the neighboring areas. The project includes using available thermal infrared images to generate a
land surface temperature and emissivity map of the study area; using available optical data to create a landcover classification map; acquiring and processing hundreds of airborne thermal
infrared images; collecting in-situ field data for geometric rectification of airborne images, driving the remote sensing data analysis, and validating analysis results; conducting
economic analysis of the area?s energy resource potential; and community outreach.
The AVCP Housing Wind Turbine Project is to purchase land from the City of Bethel for the site of the two turbine towers, construct the power line extension to the new AVCP RHA Office
Complex, purchase and construct the wind turbines and the generator building. The total annual projected kWh usage of the Low Income Rental units, Lulu Herron Congregate Housing and
the AVCP RHA Office Complex and warehouses is 581,573 kWh. The two wind turbines are projected to supply 582,486 kWh annually.
Project Type: Wave Energy
The City and Borough of Yakutat is pleased to propose a Phase III Final Design and Permitting Project leading to the first Alaska Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration.
A Phase I Reconnaissance and Phase II Feasibility Analysis Phase was completed in 2009 by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) under Yakutat Power funding ($44,000) which evaluated
and assessed in detail the technical, cost, economic and operational viability of a WEC project. The study scope included; (1) a shallow water wave energy resource assessment, (2) a
conceptual design based on the Aquamarine Power Oyster shallow water wave energy conversion technology, (3) a cost assessment (capital and O&M), and (4) a economic analysis. The Aquamarine
Oyster was chosen after a trade-off analysis showed that a the 500 kW to 1 MW plant scale, a near-shore device would make most sense. Aquamarine Power?s shallow water wave energy conversion
technology Oyster has been identified as the best suited wave energy technology for the deployment site. Oyster is a wave actuated hydraulic pump that pumps fresh water to shore at
a pressure level of about 120 bars, where it is converted into electricity using a conventional hydroelectric system and then returns it to the Oyster in a closed
loop. The major project elements include; (1) the Oyster WEC device, (2) a high pressure (120 ) bar pressure supply sub sea pipeline and a low pressure (3 bar) return sub sea pipeline,
(3) a onshore turbine generator power station, and (3) a distribution line extension to connect the power station to the city electrical grid network. The proposed deployment location
and related project elements are shown in the following figure.
Oyster is well suited for the Yakutat location. The system elements that are most prone to require maintenance are located on-shore where the equipment can easily be accessed.
The EPRI study showed that Yakutat has an excellent wave climate for wave energy conversion. A shallow water wave transformation model (SWAN) was used to propagate a full-year of wave
data to the deployment location and 13m water depth. Shallow water power densities at the deployment site of interest were assessed at between 19kW/m and 22kW/m. Based on this wave
energy resource data, the resulting capacity factor of the 650 kW rated Oyster machine was assessed at 45.6%.
Cost elements, including; (1) device, (2) sub sea pipeline, (3) on-shore power station, (4) overland distribution line extension, (5) installation, and (6) operation and maintenance
were assessed for the plant at 4 different sizes (1,2, ,4 and 8 units at 650 kW per unit). Cost of electricity was then computed using a Municipal Utility Ownership economic model.
Cost of electricity is estimated to be about 45 cents/kWh (in constant Jan 1, 2010 dollars) for a 20 year plant-life. Cost and economic uncertainties at this early stage of project
development are still quite substantial and based on EPRI?s experience with similar projects at a conceptual stage of development is on the order of +/- 30%.
The cost at this relatively small scale (as far as sizes of utility power plants in the lower 48) is clearly dominated by infrastructure and operational considerations related to the
installation of the device in this somewhat remote location. However, present busbar cost of electricity from the existing diesel-based generation facility comes in at about 27 cents/kWh
and will only increase in the future. This is comparable to Oyster at an 8 unit scale plant and removes the issue of price volatility of diesel fuel generation. Diesel fuel cost has
dramatically increased since the year 2000 and is only temporarily lower at present because the global recession has reduced the demand on fossil fuels, creating a temporary more attractive
pricing structure. In the long-term energy cost are expected to increase, which creates an additional economic burden to small communities like Yakutat, that are heavily reliant on
diesel fuel.
One of the key results of the EPRI feasibility study was that the level of cost-reduction potential that could come from optimization is substantial. These cost reductions can only be
quantified through detailed design and engineering analysis because most cost elements are driven by site-specific considerations. A key part of the proposed next phase is to investigate
some of the identified alternate design options and detail the ?optimal? solution for the site of interest. Many cost reductions could come from improved installation and operational
procedures, economies of scale, and the potential to locate the plant closer to shore. These alternate topologies will be optimized in this proposed phase of development.
Therefore, we propose progressing to Phase III based upon the results of this study. And, if the results of Phase III show adequate benefit cost ratio, Yakutat intends to implement a
Phase IV Construction and Operations/Maintenance Phase
Alaska has more than 50% of the wave energy resource (about 1,200 TWhr/year) of the entire United States of America off its shores (and that is excluding the Bering Seas to the north
of the Aleutian Islands). We believe that wave energy will play an important role in meeting the energy needs of the State of Alaska in the future. With this pilot demonstration project,
wet propose to be an early adopter and evaluator of emerging Wave Energy Conversion (WEC) technology.
The goal of this Phase III is complete a detailed construction design of the wave pilot pant and perform permitting/licensing activities required to obtain a FERC 5 year pilot license
to construct and operate the plant. The goal of a future Phase IV to construct, operate and maintain the pilot plant rated at 650kW for 5 years. The results of this pilot demonstration
plant project will enable Yakutat Power to make an informed evaluation as to whether wave energy should be included in its energy portfolio and whether the technology is ready for building
out a full scale plant at Yakutat or anywhere else along the coast of Alaska. If successful, it will be possible to re-license the project to extend the project life to 20-years and
additional units could be added to displace additional loads within the village. This increase in deployment scale would further reduce cost of electricity (economies of scale) and
allow heating fuel to be displaced.
The specific objective of Phase III Final Design and Permitting is to conduct all work necessary to complete engineering design, conduct baseline environmental studies and submit all
license applications required for a pilot wave energy demonstration plant offshore Yakutat.
The specific objective of Phase IV is to implement the technology in the actual environment near Yakutat to obtain real operational experience, environmental, performance and other data
gathering and evaluation/analysis.
Results of this project could open up the possibility of more wave energy conversion plants at many sites in Alaska.
IPEC proposes to construct a run-of-the-river 1,300 kW hydroelectric project powered by Gartina Creek and Water Supply Creek (Project). The Project will supplement existing IPEC-Hoonah
diesel generation capacity and reduce annual diesel fuel consumption by almost 60% - over 250,000-gallons/year.
BRI proposes an 18-month program incorporating a field deployment of six (6) pre-production, 1kW Thermal Engine Generator System (TEGS) units for waste heat conversion to electric power
in Ugashik for the 2010 winter season. Unlike larger Renewable Energy (RE) resources (i.e. wind/hydrokinetic) that interface to an existing power grid, TEGS will produce energy for
individual structures. TEGS is designed for deployment in remote areas where electrical power is a scarce, but valued, commodity. The system is designed as a retrofit for existing heating
stoves, converting waste heat into mechanical energy. The heart of the system is a proprietary, single-cylinder, beta-type Stirling cycle heat engine. The project includes installation
to meet safety standards, assessment of mechanical and electrical performance, reliability, maintainability, and overall suitability for commercial sales. Appropriate instrumentation,
spares, operating instructions, training, data analysis, and reporting are included in this effort. Stoves used in tests will be renovated or replaced following the conclusion of the
test.
AVTEC, with the concurrence and approval of the City of Seward, intends to renovate and update the City of Seward?s existing unused hydro power plant to be used as an operation training
tool in support of AVTEC?s Hydro Power Plant Operator training program sponsored by the Alaska Energy Authority.
TGER is a ?Hybrid System? incorporating two complementary technologies:
? Bioreactor to convert carbohydrates, sugars, some cellulosic waste into vaporous ethanol
? Thermo chemical gasifier to convert bioreactor residuals into ?fuel gas?
? Fuel gas and vaporous ethanol are fumigated into the diesel engine as a substitute for diesel fuel
? System of energy & materials exchange between subsystems for o/a system efficiency
? System outputs are benign ash and CO2*
* With exception of Petroleum-based plastics conversion, system is ?carbon-neutral?
How it Works:
? Mixed waste is loaded into a chute where wet food waste is separated for fermentation
? Solid waste is ground up and converted into fuel pellets for delivery to a downdraft gasifier
? Hydrous ethanol from fermentation and syngas from thermal decomposition are blended and aspirated into a 60kW generator to produce electricity
Products:
? Electricity ? can be used immediately, diverted to a power micro-grid, or used to charge batteries
? Ash ? environmentally benign
? Engine exhaust ? EPA certified
? Grey water ? environmentally benign (filtered and boiled)
? Excess thermal energy-250,000 BTUs captured for heat, hot water, field sanitation, etc.
Kenai Winds LLC has received AEA support to develop and erect a 10 MW wind energy facility located in the Nikiski industrial area on the Kenai Peninsula. Homer Electric Association has
requested that the capacity of the facility be expanded from 10 to 15 MW. This proposal is submitted to secure funding needed for the expansion. The facility will consist of 5 to 10
wind turbines disbursed throughout the site, electrically interconnected to HEA?s Nikiski substation.
Project Type: Solar and Biomass or Biofuels.
This proposed $1.86M program including 50% applicant cost share will develop and demonstrate a 10kW hybrid solar/biomass system powered entirely by renewable resources with more than
65% combined cycle efficiency, more than 95% thermal efficiency, and very low emissions. Using a high efficiency biomass boiler, high efficiency solar collectors, and organic Rankine
cycle (ORC) technology to make this possible. The carbon-neutral emissions may be contained for use in greenhouses to aid the year round growth of produce and net reduction of CO2 GHG.
The program will be completed in 1 Y2 years and the product can then be commercialized for markets in Alaska and the lower 48.
The main objective of this project is to demonstrate a 10 kW carbon neutral combined heat and power (CHP) systems using entirely renewable resources. The CHP system is designed to utilize
heat from a biomass boiler and solar sources to power an ORC turbine system and produce electricity. The excess heat from the ORCs and thermal energy source will be used for water and
space heating and directed into colocated greenhouses where produce will be grown. The carbon dioxide from the biomass combustion will be sequestered for the produce in the greenhouses.
The main objective of this project is to develop and operate a 2 MW Waste Energy Recovery power plant system at the Flint Hills Resources North Pole Refinery. The power plant is designed
to produce electricity using organic Rankine cycle (ORC) systems to extract heat from the heated post-distillation oil. The heated post-distillation oil has the potential to produce
4 MW of electricity that will be sold to the refinery. This project will increase the overall efficiency and reduce operating costs at the refinery providing a model for utilizing waste
heat other refineries and plants in the state can follow
The vision for this project is to construction a small scale hydroelectric plant to serve the Native Village of Chenega Bay, Alaska. In 1992, Phukan Consulting Engineers and Associates,
Inc. prepared a hydroelectric study for the Alaska Energy Authority which identified a viable project site and estimated costs for two alternative designs for completing the project.
In 2008-09, an AEA-funded grant allowed the engineering firm of HDR Alaska, Inc to complete a reconnaissance study which confirmed a feasible development site for construction of a
hydroelectric facility. This grant funding request is for the design and permitting which are the next steps for this hydroelectric generation project.
Project Type: Geothermal, including heat pumps and Transmission of Renewable Energy.
Naknek Electric Association, Inc. is committed to lowering utility rates and the cost of living in the Bristol Bay Region. To that end the utility has begun characterizing; developing
and testing the geothermal resource for production of utility scale electric, home heating and direct use applications. A transmission network will extend the benefits of indigenous,
clean and renewable energy to the region. The project will create sustainable ?New Energy? jobs during construction and career employment opportunities in operations and maintenance
throughout the life of the project. Long-term and regional in scope, both energy generation and distribution aspects of the project are multi-phased to achieve near and long-term economic
development, energy security and independence. Initially a 25 MW generation plant, district heating system and interconnection will serve eight communities in the Northern Bristol Bay
area, and later up to 50 MW for a larger region of Southwest Alaska. The project will increase economies of scale, replace not displace the use of No.1 and No.2 diesel fuel, and reduce
costly and potentially hazardous transportation of fossil fuels along habitat sensitive waterways in Bristol Bay, home of the world?s largest wild salmon runs.
The City of Seward (City) is owner of the Alaska SeaLife Center (ASLC), which is leased and operated by the Seward Association for the Advancement of Marine Science (SAAMS). In conjunction
with SAAMS, the City proposes construction of Phase II an innovative heating system that utilizes an emerging heat pump technology that will "lift" latent heat from raw seawater and
transfer this energy into low temperature building heat. The proposed seawater heat pump system will serve as a demonstration project designed to test and prove an emerging energy technology
that shows promise for providing financial benefits to Alaskans in coastal communities. Construction costs will be reduced by making use of the ASLC\'s existing seawater intakes and
seawater pumping system. Demonstration of this innovative system to the public will be facilitated through creation of a public display that will show ASLC visitors and other communities
the benefits and mechanics of the system in real-time.
Project Type: Hydro and Transmission of Renewable Energy.
A preliminary visit to the site in July 2009 was made by Hatch Acres, CVEA?s consultant for Allison Lake and a draft of the project layout was presented below. In fall 2009 CVEA installed
two stream gages, one located on the Duck River and one near the outlet of Silver Lake. In the spring of 2010 water quality data will be collected and further evaluated.
Project Type: Wind and Solar.
The Matanuska-Susitna Borough proposes to conduct a renewable energy reconnaissance study for the existing and planned public facilities within the borough to evaluate options to decrease
energy costs and reduce dependence on fossil fuels. A reconnaissance report will summarize the assessment and findings. This project will be administered and managed by the MSB and
will be conducted by a consultant chosen by the MSB. Locations shown to have significant renewable energy potential will undergo a feasibility study and include a conceptual design
for identified renewable energy resources.
The proposed Triangle Lake hydroelectric project will be located on the west side of Annette Island near the route of the proposed Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie. The project as presently
envisioned will be comprised of a small embankment dam at the outlet of Triangle Lake, a 1.3 mile long penstock and a powerhouse containing a single horizontal Francis turbine generating
unit with a capacity of 4.0 MW. The Triangle Lake project will provide additional hydroelectric power to Metlakatla and, with construction of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie, to
the interconnected electric systems of Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg. MIC will develop and own the Triangle Lake project.
The proposed Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie is a 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan Public Utilities
(KPU). The Intertie will include 16 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line to be constructed on Annette Island between Metlakatla and Walden Point and an approximate two mile
submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Walden Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation. The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for the integrated
operation of the interconnected systems? generating plants.
Design of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie is presently underway. Transmission poles have also been procured and are currently stored in Metlakatla.
The project would be constructed at the existing utility power plant and adjacent buildings. A new low fuel consumption diesel 4,160v generator and switchgear would be installed to replace
existing older 480v inefficient diesel generator unit #2. Existing waste heat system from the power plant would be extended by this project to provide space heat to the gas station,
bulk fuel office and bulk fuel pump house to replace existing electric baseboard heat. Increase fuel efficiency and reduced electric heat load would benefit all existing electric customers
through lower power generation costs. New diesel generator would reduce current high overhaul and maintenance cost for old generator to be replaced. The City would administer the
project and contract out to qualified consultants for the final design, and contract with a qualified contractor to install the diesel generators, switchgear and waste heat piping.
The existing city workforce would operate and maintain the new equipment.
Replace diesel generation of electricity for the community of Tenakee Springs with renewable hydroelectric power. The City of Tenakee Springs proposes to construct a hydroelectric project
on Indian River. This will be a low head, run-of-river plant displacing the use of 44,400 gallons of diesel fuel. Design, engineering, and construction will involve the City of Tenakee
Springs, multiple state and federal agencies, private contractors, and the Alaska Energy Authority.
The full project is a hydroelectric power plant, and associated infrastructure for access and connection, to serve the community of Elfin Cove. We are currently contracted with Polarconsult
for a feasibility study of the project. As part of the feasibility study, in addition to collecting further data from the Crooked Creek/Jim?s Lake site, the contractors recommended
we examine the potential of Roy?s Creek as an alternative project site. Roy?s Creek is much closer to the existing power plant, reducing construction and connection costs, and simplifying
operation and maintenance. If Roy?s Creek is found to be a feasible location, the hydroelectric plant would be a run-of-river project on Roy?s Creek. Otherwise, the power plant will
be located at the mouth of Crooked Creek, a tributary of Port Althorp in Cross Sound. If located on Crooked Creek, the hydroelectric facility will include: a diversion structure on
Crooked Creek; an 800 to 1,200-foot long diversion conduit from Crooked Creek to Jim\'s Lake; and a 1,700-foot long penstock from Jim\'s Lake to a powerhouse located at tidewater near
the mouth of Crooked Creek. The powerhouse would house a Turgo-type turbine, a generator, programmable automatic paralleling switchgear and controls. The project would also include
access trails and a 5,800-foot power line and communications from the powerhouse back to the existing distribution system at the back of the Inner Cove. Dedicated communications may
extend an additional 3,000 feet to the existing diesel powerhouse. On Roy?s Creek, a hydro development would include a diversion structure at about the 500-foot elevation on Roy?s Creek;
a 1,300 foot penstock down to tidewater in Elfin Cove; and a powerhouse at tidewater housing a Turgo or Pelton-type turbine, generator, programmable automatic paralleling switchgear
and controls. The powerhouse would be located on the boardwalk, and the project would include a boardwalk to the intake site for access. The project would include approximately 50 to
100? of power line to tie into the distribution system, and 2,000 feet of communications cable back to the diesel powerhouse. At the end of Phase 3 (proposed here) we should be prepared
to begin construction on the hydroelectric power project.
Project Type: Heat Recovery from existing sources, biomass or biofuels, transmission of renewable energy and storage of renewable.
This application supports a wood-heating project in Fort Yukon, Alaska. Gwitchyaa Zhee Corporation Board is
the authorizing Board for the Applicant, Gwitchyaa Zhee Utility. Local partners include the Council of Athabascan Tribal Governments (DOE recipient of biomass grant support $1.2 million),
Gwitchyaa Zhee Native Corporation & Utility, Gwitchyaa Gwich?in Tribal Government, Yukon Flats School District and the City of Fort Yukon. A wood energy supply analysis, a feasibility
and 35% conceptual design analysis has been completed for a destrict heating loop for primary commercial buildings. This analysis has been integrated with heat capture from a new power
plant to be co-located with the wood boiler plant. The feasibility included Net Simple Payback for several size plants and a sensitivity analysis for displacing heating fuel oil based
on costs of $4-$6/gallon. A centralized wood chip fired boiler will require approximately 1,500-2,000 tons of chips annually, depending on moisture content, to displace up to 149,000
gallons of fuel of 90+% of the oil used in commercial buildings. The cost is approximately $18/MMBTU )($175/ton @ 25% moisture) for chips, as compared to $29-43/MMBTU for fuel oil ($4-6gal).
This project is being conducted in concert with a project funded by Denali Commission, US DOE through an Alaska Village Initiatives earmark, and GZ Corporation to develop a wood harvesting
system, wood yard and a wood energy utility to supply and maintain the boilers. Both projects have been developed through technical support from Alaska Village Initiatives, Alaska Wood
Energy Associates, CATG Resource Department, e-Four Engineering, and ALaska Energy and Engineering. Principle personnel to date include Bill Wall PhD, Peter Olsen, Ben Stevens, Jerry
Carroll, Greg Koontz (ME) and Steve Stassel (Alaska Energy and Endgineering).
Project Type: Wind, hydro, including run of river, Hydrokinetic, geothermal, including heat pumps and transmission of renewable energy.
This project is a combination of reconnaissance, resource assessment and feasibility analysis. The deliverable resulting from the expenditure of grant and matching funds is the first
Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) for the interconnected cities of Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg as well as the cities of Kake and Metlakatla. Interties to Kake from Petersburg and
to Metlakatla from
Ketchikan are presently in the planning phase. Some funding is already in place for both of these interconnections. Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg currently benefit from existing
SEAPA and local utility-owned hydro which has provided for very stable power rates. The City of Kake, served by IPEC, is a 100% diesel-dependent community with rates that are 5 or 6
times higher. Providing renewable power to Kake with hydroelectric generation or other alternatives is a
critical part of this IRP. Building a transmission line to Kake would not be prudent if adequate
renewable generation resources have not been identified to meet their existing and future loads.
In general, an IRP identifies the future resource portfolio that achieves a set of objectives that have been established by stakeholders of the IRP process. The stakeholders will include
the
local utilities, communities, commercial and industrial customers, Federal and State agencies and the general public. The resource portfolio is a set of supply-side and/or demand-side
improvements that eliminate any identified energy or capacity deficits. Supply-side improvements would be new generation construction, or modifications to existing generation assets,
such that energy production or available capacity is increased. This would include the addition of existing generation through an interconnection to Metlakatla. Demand-side improvements
are system efficiency improvements or peak load modification measures. The stakeholders and the IRP issuing body (SEAPA) establish the objectives that govern how the resource portfolio
is established. Most IRP objectives are governed by the 3 major categories of cost, risk and environmental impact. The IRP process includes stakeholder input with final content decisions
made by the issuing body (SEAPA).
Developing an IRP requires an analysis of the regions generation and transmission system, and an estimation of the regions load growth. Generation and load forecasts are modeled to determine
when and to what extent future energy and/or capacity deficits occur. Energy and capacity deficits are resolved by a combination of constructing new generation facilities and through
load growth rate or peak hour value reduction via demand side management. The IRP then documents a short term and long term plan to address the energy and capacity deficits.
AP&T proposes to construct the 300 kW Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project), which will be located approximately 8 miles north of Slana on the Glenn Highway (Tok Cutoff). The
Project would off-set diesel generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Slana and Chistochina. The Project will consist of two small diversion structures, approximately
13,200 feet of penstock, a powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and a very short length of transmission line. For about half the year, the Project
operation will be run-of-river, but during the colder months the Project will draw water from Carlson Lake. The potential annual generation is estimated to be approximately 1,200 MWh/yr,
which is greater than the current annual requirements of the two communities. Therefore, the Project has the potential to offset 100% of the current diesel generation. The Project
will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation.
The Project would be located on two bays and adjacent lands in Port Frederick, which is an inlet off of Icy Strait near the city of Hoonah in Southeast Alaska. As currently envisioned,
the Project would be a two-basin tidal energy development wherein the two bays (known as North Bight and South Bight) are isolated from Port Frederick by dikes and gate structures,
with a low-head power plant located between the two bays. During high tides, water would be let into South Bight from Port Frederick, and during low tides water would be released from
North
Bight into Port Frederick. Water would be continuously released from South Bight into North Bight through the power plant. By controlling the flows, a head can be maintained between
the two basins, thus generating power continuously in spite of the variability of the tides. This continuous generation will allow the power to be usable in the small isolated electrical
system of Hoonah.
AP&T is actively looking to add another hydroelectric storage facility to its Upper Lynn Canal (ULC) system serving Haines, Skagway, and nearby communities. To date, AP&T has considered
Connelly Lake near Haines and Walker Lake near Klukwan, with Connelly Lake being preferred because of its much greater energy potential. However, some Haines citizens are opposed to
development of Connelly Lake, and have expressed their interest in AP&T evaluating the Schubee Lake site as an alternative. AP&T has made a very preliminary evaluation of the Schubee
Lake site and believe there is some potential; therefore the proposed grant is to study the Schubee Lake site to approximately the same depth as Connelly Lake so that a fair comparison
can be made between the two. In our view, this means bypassing the reconnaissance phase (Phase I) and proceeding directly with conceptual design and feasibility work (Phase II).
AP&T proposes to construct a small run-of-river hydroelectric project at Neck Lake, a 1,000 acre lake located 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island.
The Project would supply power to the community of Whale Pass, and would offset diesel generation, which is currently the sole source of electricity. The relatively high and modulated
flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end of the outlet stream provide a good opportunity for a small run-of-river hydroelectric development. Facilities would
include an access road, intake structure, 400 feet of penstock, a containerized power plant, a tailrace channel, and upgrade of 4 miles of transmission line. The hydroelectric facilities
will be designed to avoid interference with the existing salmon rearing and collection facilities operated at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA).
AP&T conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2008, and determined that there is sufficient potential to almost always provide enough generation for Whale Pass loads (see Section
10 for a copy of the reconnaissance report). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for AP&T?s Whale Pass customers.
The overall 34kV power line route is approximately 12 miles long. Approximately 0.9-mile of the westernmost section is an existing APC 2kV distribution line that will be overbuilt.
The line will cross Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island. The route primarily follows existing logging roads. The power line will begin at a point along Hydaburg Road about 0.45 miles northeast
of the town. It will continue northeast along the existing logging road passing north of Deer Bay and intersecting Hetta Inlet opposite Jumbo Island. This section is adjacent to private
forested land with a small section of Muskeg and is 7.0 miles long. The logging roads are mostly mild to moderate cut sections with a few rock cuts. The first 0.9 miles of this section
is an existing APC corridor adjacent to the road established for a 2kV line. The water crossing over Hetta Inlet will be accomplished with 3 multi-pole structures with one on each side
of the inlet and one at the pinnacle of Jumbo Island. Jumbo Island slopes steeply toward the water on both sides and is heavily forested. A new corridor will need to be established.
The structure on the island will likely be set by helicopter. This crossing is 0.9 miles across. The power line will continue in a new corridor for 0.3 mile to the east until it
intersects an existing logging road. Approximately 1500 feet of temporary or permanent access road spurs will need to be constructed to access 2 line structures along this section.
The line route then turns south and follows existing loggings roads 3.8 miles southeast to the powerhouse/switchyard location near Copper Harbor. This section is adjacent to private,
recently harvested forest land with very steep and rocky terrain prone to slides. The logging road is primarily full bench construction with several rock cut sections. There are danger
trees (and boulders) above the power line route on the eastern side slopes that may need to be removed/secured to protect the power line.
AP&T proposes to construct the 2.0 MW Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on Yerrick Creek, approximately 20 miles west of Tok. The Project would off-set diesel generation
in the communities of Tetlin, Tanacross, Dot Lake, and Tok. The Project will consist of a small diversion structure, approximately 15,000 feet of penstock, powerhouse with a single
generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and transmission line. The Project operation will be run-of-river; annual generation is expected to be approximately 4,900 MWh/yr (approximately
40% of the interconnected load). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower
than diesel generation.
The Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project (Project) will be located in Southeast Alaska, approximately 14 miles northeast of the City of Haines and 10 miles southwest of the City of Skagway.
Connelly Lake (formerly known as Upper Chilkoot Lake) is an 85 acre alpine lake, and drains into the Chilkoot River. The project will be on state and private land, including the Haines
State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve. The project facilities will include a dam at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW powerhouse with two generating
units, a 14-mile-long 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Final dimensions and capacities of these facilities will be determined by optimization studies to be
conducted during Phase II. The Project will be developed by AP&T to provide additional generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems.
The Port Alsworth Improvement Corporation, the Tanalian Electric Cooperative, Tanalian Incorporated, Lake Clark National Park and Preserve, and the Lake and Peninsula Borough support
AGE?s proposal to conduct Reconnaissance and Feasibility studies related to locating a micro-hydroelectric facility on the Tanalian River. The project will reduce the community?s dependence
on expensive diesel fuel that must be flown into Port Alsworth to provide heat and power.
The reconnaissance phase will include preliminary engineering, environmental determinations and hydrological studies and analyses on the Tanalian River to identify its hydroelectric
resource potential. This phase will include scoping meetings with the community and agencies
to identify issues and study needs that will need to be addressed during the feasibility phase. From a land use and permitting perspective, it will be especially important to work with
the National Park Service (NPS) to determine NEPA requirements for work within the Lake Clark National Park and Preserve and to determine the appropriate legal framework and permitting
requirements for the potential construction of a micro-hydro facility within the National Park?s boundary that serves users in addition to the NPS. It is anticipated that an environmental
assessment will be required at a minimum and the reconnaissance level assessment will establish the scope and level of NEPA documentation required during the feasibility phase. It should
be noted that the project lies outside the wilderness boundary and the NPS is cooperating with the State of Alaska and private in-holders to issue easements across the Tanalian River
to access the new State airport and private property. Conceptual designs and cost estimates will be provided during this phase and presented in the final report. The final report will
also include a preliminary economic analysis and an energy cost and market analysis.
The Grant Lake site facility would be constructed with a dam at the upper falls and diversion tunnel to maximize the power potential at approximately 3.12 MW (397 feet-net head). However,
to minimize the impact on salmon resources in Grant River below the dam site the construction as proposed would consist of a canal from behind the dam to an intake structure located
in an adjacent dry channel. The dam constructed at the upper falls will be a concrete dam with an uncontrolled spillway. With a maximum height at El 504 and a 225 foot wide spillway
at El 500 the spillway flows will be diverted away from the toe of the dam via a concrete apron onto bedrock nearby. The @1 mile diversion canal, 20 foot deep (1/1 side slopes), with
an invert 468 El will have a minimum drawdown of 23 feet to El 477. A dike in the canal will direct the water flow into the low pressure 60 inch 6,600 foot long pipeline leading to
the surge tank and penstock. The 3,100 foot 48 inch penstock will link the surge tank to the power house. The powerhouse will contain two 1,350 kW generators driven by two 2,000 hp
turbines under a rated net head of 233 feet (average 215 ) with 92cfs. This project will necessitate the construction of approximately 45-65 miles (depending on routing) of new underground
three phase transmission tie line from the project site to a new power substation constructed near the village of Aleknagik.
Project Type: Waste Energy Recovery.
The project, located in Valdez, Alaska, will capture waste heat generated at the Petro Star Refinery. Waste heat will be collected by a shell and tube glycol medium recovery system.
The medium will drive two technologies operating in a series.
Ammonia absorption technology will create cooling for a 45 million pound, -20degree cold storage facility. An organic Rankin Cycle Generator will use the medium once it has exited the
ammonia absorption system to create 600kw?s of power which will be used to operate the Cold Storage facility as well as the Solomon Gulch Hatchery.
The final benefit will be to use the cold cycle of the generator to create a salmon rearing facility.
The city of Seldovia would like to ask for grant funding to study the feasibility of utilizing wind energy to help alleviate the winter demand and temporary failure of the current gas
generation facilities. The city of Seldovia sees an increase of demand for electricity in the winter months that has outpaced their production capabilities. The proposed plan calls
for the study and possible installation of Four 15kw Proven wind generators. The city would like to test several sites for wind and accessibility, the relatively small size of the turbines
is beneficial in helping the city locate an area that will be readily accessible with the current infrastructure, this may reduce overall costs while maintaining performance of the
wind systems.
Installation of testing equipment for feasibility information gathering with installation of Two 15KW Proven Turbines with a future development of one or more turbine installations.
The Native Community of Tyonek would like to install one 15kW Proven on a 82ft monopole and a 6kW Proven on a 82ft Momopole on top of a bluff looking over the cook inlet. These turbines
would be connected directly into the power line to produce clean power to our Native Community.
On February 3, 2009, the City of Angoon (Angoon) filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for a three-year preliminary permit under Section 4(f) of the
Federal Power Act (FPA) to study the feasibility of the proposed Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project No. 13366-000. On November 5, 2009, the City of Angoon received the FERC preliminary
permit for the project. The project would be located on Delta Creek and Ruth Lake near Petersburg, Alaska. The project would be located within the Tongass National Forest, which is
administered by the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service). The proposed project would consist of: (1) a 170-foot-high concrete arched dam at the exit of the natural Ruth Lake; (2) the
existing 130-acre Ruth Lake (at a current surface elevation of 1,350 feet above mean sea level (msl)) would be impounded by the proposed dam to provide an estimated storage capacity
of 17,000 acre-feet at a surface elevation of about 1,520 feet msl; (3) a proposed 12,600-foot-long, 6- to 12-foot-diameter combination bored tunnel and steel penstock; (4) a powerhouse
containing three generating units having a total installed capacity of 20 megawatts ?MW?; (5) a
proposed tailrace channel up to 600 feet long; (6) a proposed 2.8-mile-long access road; and (7) appurtenant facilities. The proposed Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project would have an estimated
average annual generation of 70 gigawatt-hours ?GWh?, which would be sold to local utilities currently serving the communities of Petersburg and Wrangell, eventual proposed service
to the communities of Ketchikan, Kake and Angoon. The proposed Ruth Lake Project would be located partially on federal lands in the Tongass National Forest, which is administered by
the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service).
The ultimate goal of this project is to produce electricity, training and employment both sustainably and locaally. Thus the name ?Keep It Sustainable and Keep it Local (KISKIL) Renewable
Energy Project.? The project will be located thirty miles east of Delta Junction. The KISKIL Renewable Energy project will serve much of the Interior by providing electricity for Golden
Valley Electric Association (GVEA) via the grid. Additionally, the project will serve Delta Junction, Healy Lake, Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tok and the surrounding areas by hiring regionally
and purchasing wood for fuel locally. The project will produce electricity using 105 KW Sterling generators and raw wood gas as the fuel source. Delta Mine Training Center has the expertise
to build and operate a power plant. Additionally, DMTC can and will develop the curriculum needed to provide training for Alaskans to learn the process of building the plant, developing
the fuel resource and operating and maintaining the plant. This training is more valuable than the electricity itself.
This project will evaluate the potential for cultivating short rotation woody biomass crops in varied regions of Alaska, and will help to establish growing practices specific to each
region. This work is a necessary precursor to implementing biomass cropping as a sustainable energy solution in rural Alaska. The work will complement a project currently being performed
by the University of Alaska Fairbanks and Division of Agriculture to determine adaptability of various plant species to management as biomass crops under Alaskan agricultural conditions.
Our work will also be performed in conjunction with a project being conducted by the Chugachmiut tribal organization to determine the potential for biomass production by various willow
species under non-intensive management in interior Alaska. Specifically, this project will seek to address the following questions:
1) What is the current nutrient status of typical soils in regions likely to establish biomass
plantations in the near future?
2) What are the nutrient requirements for woody species likely to be used as biomass crops?
3) Can biosolids, an abundant and inexpensive resource potentially available in many Alaskan communities, be successfully utilized as a fertilizer to maximize biomass production?
4) Would the utilization of biosolids as a fertilizer for biomass crops present unintended environmental consequences such as pathogen mobility or heavy metal emissions?
This proposal, ?Greenhouse Feasibility and Application in Rural Alaska,? seeks to expand on a project currently recommended for funding by the Environmental Protection Agency to construct
and operate a greenhouse in Galena, Alaska, that utilizes recovered heat from the city power plant to extend the growing season by a few months in both the spring and fall, and provide
fresh, affordable produce for the community and schools. This proposal builds on that project in four ways: (1) provide additional staff time for project managers and equipment to ensure
successful greenhouse operation, (2) provide summer employment for six Galena high school students on the project to build organizational capacity and community support, (3) use the
Galena project as a model to conduct feasibility studies for similar greenhouse projects in six communities in rural Alaska, and (4) prepare a final report that includes economic analysis
and an engineering assessment of the pre-project heat recovery system and subsequent
load placed on the system by the greenhouse. In addition to the goals of the EPA-funded greenhouse itself (e.g., fresh produce, economic development, energy efficiency), this proposal
will result in a template for establishing community greenhouses in villages throughout rural Alaska by expanding local capacity, providing training, and evaluating technical and economic
feasibility.
This proposal represents the second phase of two current projects: (1) Test Evaluation of Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) Engines Operating on Recovered Heat from Diesel Engine Exhaust (funded
by the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Environmental Conservation through the Alaska Energy Authority), and (2) Optimizing Heat Recovery Systems
for Power Generation in Rural Alaska (presently recommended for funding by the DenaliCommission). Both projects employ pre-commercial ORC technologies to test the efficacy of
generating power from recovered heat in power plants in rural Alaska. The first phase of both projects includes laboratory testing at the University of Alaska Fairbanks of an ammonia-water
cycle engine and a glycol-based engine. This proposal calls for Phase 2 field testing of both units?the first in Ruby and the second in Galena?and data analysis, including economic
analysis, that will result in a report on the applicability of such systems throughout rural Alaska and a methodology for selecting appropriate village sites.
The proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 11841 (Project) will be located approximately four miles east of the City of Ketchikan, Alaska, and will be connected to the
existing Ketchikan Public Utilities (KPU) distribution system. KPU will install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at the existing Whitman Lake Dam, providing a source of clean
renewable energy for customers in the Ketchikan Gateway Borough and displacing diesel generation. The project will help support significant capacity demand increases anticipated in
the short term, as well as continuous load growth over time. The new facilities associated with the Project will also benefit the existing Whitman Lake Hatchery by providing a continued
supply of temperature-controlled water.
Project Type: Wind, Transmission of renewable energy, storage of renewable.
The Chefornak Wind Turbine Installation involves the installation of three (3) 100 kW wind turbines on the eastern edge of the City of Chefornak. The completed project, with a total
size of 300 kW, will be owned by the City of Chefornak and operated by the Naterkaq Light Plant (NLP). The NLP is wholly owned by the City of Chefornak and the electricity produced
by the installed turbines will be distributed to the utility without charge. The wind turbines will be connected into NLP?s electrical distribution system through a new three phase
distribution line running from the project site to the existing power plant. The project will offer benefits to the community of Chefornak and its electric customers through a system-wide
reduction and stabilization of energy prices. The City of Chefornak has assembled a project team headed by STG Incorporated that is prepared to immediately begin work on an accelerated
schedule. Among others, the project team includes members from Powercorp Wind Diesel North America, DNV Global Energy Concepts Inc, Erricos Engineering, Alaska Line Builders, Duane
Miller Associates, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell, BBFM Engineers and Aurora Consulting. All aspects of the Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, detailed in the following
pages of this application, can be completed by March 2011 or sooner if grant funds are made available prior to July 1, 2010.
Project Type: Geothermal, including heat pumps. Solar. Solar thermal system. Storage of Renewable.
Examine the feasibility and develop a conceptual design of a hybrid ground source heat pump (GSHP) system that utilizes solar thermal collectors and storage capacity (STC&SC) to offset
the year-round non-renewable energy resources currently being consumed in a group of City and Borough buildings. This project would demonstrate that a hybrid GSHP system combined with
a STC&SC system is a viable alternative to reduce the consumption and costs associated with the current heating system. The integration of solar thermal system with a ground source
heat pump could compliment each system?s strengths. The result could be a significant year-round source of renewable-generated heat for water and space heating needs at the Denali Borough
School District?s school and the City of Anderson?s public buildings.
Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) proposes to conduct the preliminary feasibility study, feasibility analysis, and resource assessment to determine the necessary conceptual design
and construction to build and operate a community greenhouse located in Healy, Alaska, and to determine the optimal business structure for the operation. The greenhouse will utilize
waste heat from the Healy Clean Coal Plant as its main energy source, and will create a working partnership between several public and private entities in the Healy community to demonstrate
teach and encourage resource recycling, alternative energy, and local food production
Project Type: Wind, Hydrokinetic, Storage of Renewable.
The variability of the output of wind power projects is a major technical and economic obstacle. Energy storage systems can mitigate the variable output, but are often so expensive that
they are not practical. Through a fortunate coincidence, GVEA expects to be able to provide energy storage for a wind project by taking advantage of improvements in the battery technology
that will be installed at the BESS to support the Healy Clean Coal Plant (HCCP). This project will determine the feasibility, develop a conceptual design, and implement control system
modifications to allow the BESS to respond to variations of wind energy or hydrokinetic generation.
Project Type: Hydro, run of river. Transmission of renewable energy.
The AK-BC Intertie would provide a further opportunity to secure the energy future for Southeast Alaska. The AK-BC Intertie is a 26.5 mile transmission line from the existing Tyee Lake
Project to the AK-BC border.
A feasibility study was conducted by Hatch Energy in 2005. This phase of the project would continue the project from the feasibility stage into the permitting engineering phase. The
purpose of this project is to export surplus power for sale in British Columbia/Pacific Northwest which would encourage development of new projects and provide additional reliability
benefits. The ability to export power would encourage early development of new hydro generation, as well as provide revenue from exports, which will help ensure future maintenance of
the current overall status of a clean hydro-powered region, offer operating flexibility for the southeast Alaska power system, and provide future benefits to the region under the proposed
marketing oversight proposal. Power sales agreement for power generated projects encouraged by the AK-BC Intertie could be structured to return payment to the state.
Power sales agreements could be structured to include a call-back provision when load in southeast Alaska grows and power is needed to serve the native load. The proposed AK-BC Intertie
would extend from Tyee Lake along the Bradfield river to the AK-BC border and along the Craig River to a proposed substation at Forrest Kerr in British Columbia.
The export of energy through the AK-BC Intertie will enable the completion of interties throughout Southeast Alaska. Energy export could lead to the development of a number of hydro-electric
projects in many locations in Southeast Alaska meeting domestic power needs and providing a surplus for export. The goal is to provide the energy needed for economic development in
Southeast Alaska resulting in jobs for Alaskans and providing reliable, less costly alternatives to diesel generated energy for Alaskan communities.
Project Type: Lower Energy Consumption.
Purchase and installation of new Low-Emitting Diode (LED) street lighting fixtures, replacing existing High Pressure Sodium (HPS), Low Pressure Sodium (LPS) and Mercury Vapor (MV) fixtures.
Engineering design, survey services, permit acquisitions, material purchase and constructions for the extending the existing distribution line on Spur Road with an additional 17 pole
spans.
Project Type: Hyrdo, run of river. Transmission of renewable energy.
The City and Borough of Wrangell would like to install new underground distribution systems on Front Street, replacing the existing overhead distribution systems. This project can be
incorporated with the current Downtown Revitalization Plan which has already secured funding to upgrade the water, sewer, roadway and sidewalks along Front Street.
Project Type: Hydro, including run of river. Transmission of renewable energy.
The City and Borough of Wrangell would like to develop an alternative source for both power and water. Every summer the Tyee Hydroelectric Facility, which supplies power to Wrangell,
shuts down for annual maintenance and the City uses diesel generators for power. Additionally the City?s reservoir has periodically run very low, critically endangering Wrangell?s water
supply. Sunrise Lake is an economically feasible source to provide both to Wrangell. In 1997, The Bentley Company performed a reconnaissance study to determine the feasibility of developing
hydroelectric power at Sunrise Lake. The Sunrise Lake Project can be easily interfaced into the Tyee Transmission Line, thus supply power to the City of Wrangell. This power can be
used as a back-up when Tyee shuts down as well as in the event of catastrophic failure, similar to the one experienced in Juneau in the summer of 2008. By utilizing the outflow from
the Sunrise Hydroelectric project?s turbines the City would have an additional water source to access when the reservoir drops below critical levels again.
Clearwater Wind Farm is located 3 miles East of Delta Junction on Road HHH one mile North of Nistler Rd. The farm will deliver 1.8 MW of clean renewable wind power to Golden Valley Electric
Association (GVEA) through the distribution grid.
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of three wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Point Hope. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough, a contracted A&E firm, a contracted General Contractor, and a supplier for the wind
turbines and supporting towers. The North Slope Borough will provide overall project management. The contracted A&E firm will provide civil and electrical system engineering for the
project. The General Contractor will be responsible for the installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines and supporting towers, and installation of all ancillary electrical
systems. The supplier for the wind turbines and supporting towers will also provide startup & commissioning services.
Note: Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont, is supplier of wind turbines and supporting towers that have been proven to work effectively in Alaska. References to
Northern Power provided Northwind 100/21 B model wind turbines within the remaining sections of this application are for descriptive purposes only to indicate that product or a comparable
product.
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of three wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Point Hope. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough, a contracted A&E firm, a contracted General Contractor, and a supplier for the wind
turbines and supporting towers. The North Slope Borough will provide overall project management. The contracted A&E firm will provide civil and electrical system engineering for the
project. The General Contractor will be responsible for the installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines and supporting towers, and installation of all ancillary electrical
systems. The supplier for the wind turbines and supporting towers will also provide startup & commissioning services.
Note: Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont, is supplier of wind turbines and supporting towers that have been proven to work effectively in Alaska. References to Northern Power provided
Northwind 100/21 B model wind turbines within the remaining sections of this application are for descriptive purposes only to indicate that product or a comparable product.
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of three wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Point Lay. Participants in the project include North Slope Borough, a contracted A&E firm, a contracted General Contractor, and a supplier for the wind turbines
and supporting towers. The North Slope Borough will provide overall project management. The contracted A&E firm will provide civil and electrical system engineering for the project.
The General Contractor will be responsible for the installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines and supporting towers, and installation of all ancillary electrical
systems. The supplier for the wind turbines and supporting towers will also provide startup & commissioning services.
Note: Northern Power Systems of Barre, Vermont, is supplier of wind turbines and supporting towers that have been proven to work effectively in Alaska. References to
Northern Power provided Northwind 100/21 B model wind turbines within the remaining sections of this application are for descriptive purposes only to indicate that product or a comparable
product
IAE proposes to develop the Anchorage geothermal district heating project. The reconnaissance study will be followed by a more detailed pre-feasibility study. The purpose of this additional
step will be to conduct a more comprehensive field exploration and evaluation of potential geothermal resources that could supply the heat for the Anchorage project. IAE has signed
a Memorandum of Understanding with the Municipality of Anchorage to facilitate these studies. The Municipality of Anchorage has agreed to support the pre-feasibility study efforts by
providing to IAE information about the potential for geothermal energy use in Anchorage as well as right-of-way information. If the results of the pre-feasibility study prove to be
positive for development, IAE will work towards developing the Anchorage district heating project.
The project consists of acquiring and installing equipment that will dry approximately 13,000 tons of wood waste per year produced as a byproduct of the sawmilling process. The dried
wood would then be burned in publicly owned facilities to provide reduced-cost, district-style heat for these facilities at reduced cost to the public entities that operate these facilities.
The project enables recipient facilities to burn renewable fuels to provide heat at lower costs over time than the cost to burn fossil fuels to produce heat.
The City & Borough of Juneau is proposing the design and construction of a ground source heat pump system to serve the heating needs at the Juneau School District?s Gastineau Elementary
School. The community of Juneau recently approved the sale of $11.8 million in bond debt to fund a comprehensive renovation of the school facility. The building?s heating plant and
distribution system are to be replaced as part of the project. The City & Borough of Juneau Assembly is interested in reducing the carbon footprint of Juneau and the Juneau School District
is interested in reducing the operating costs of their facilities. The conversion of the school?s heat plant from oil-fired boilers to a ground source heat pump provides a unique opportunity
to achieve goals of both the City & Borough of Juneau and Juneau School District.
The Renewable Energy Fund Grant request herein is for the additional design and construction
costs of the ground source heat pump system as compared to a traditional oil-fired heat system.
We are proposing to conduct a biomass feasibility study for the utilization of waste wood from the community to heat one or a few public buildings. Astronomical heating costs are inspiring
new creativity in planning for sustainable and affordable energy sources for our community in Cordova, Alaska. We have collaborated as a community to develop solutions for our energy
needs. Affordable fuel sources have been identified, chief among them the waste cardboard that is currently taken to the landfill and the wood waste generated at the community burn
pile. Historically, the community has squandered these potential energy sources by burning them in an open pit. The burn pile will better serve the community when transitioned from
a community dump into local-source heating fuel. The community will also save valuable landfill space by converting waste cardboard into a fuel source. The purpose of this project is
to develop a system
that will take advantage of the valuable resources currently being underutilized. The wood and cardboard waste will become fuel for a biomass boiler to heat one of our community buildings
such as the city baler, pool, hospital or school. We need financial assistance to fully develop this project, which can then become self-sustaining. The first step in a renewable energy
project such as this is to conduct a feasibility study that will examine our community?s energy needs and identify areas where improvements can be made. The feasibility study will look
at how and where energy is being used and examine the available BTUs that can be generated by our waste stream. We must also conduct energy audits on the potential buildings to determine
which building would be the most efficient and economical candidate for a waste-wood boiler. A community-wide energy audit has not been done in Alaska before, and so we can use this
study to create protocol for conducting community energy audits that can be applied to other communities throughout Alaska. This information will be analyzed to determine which building
would be the best fit for the project. We must also determine the heat load available so that we can then examine potential buildings and pair the current waste heat load with a building
of a comparable load. The study will also investigate the potential methods of fuel treatment and system equipment and create parameters for the system design. The design will determine
required purchases ? a boiler, wood chipper and other components ? and identify required integration work. The City of Cordova owns and operates the burn pile and has endorsed this
project. The Cordova School District, a potential beneficiary of the project, is also very supportive. See letters of support on pages 30-31.
Cordova Electric Cooperative (CEC) is requesting $4 million to implement a construction-ready, state-of-the-art hydroelectric facility on Humpback Creek that would generate up to 4 million
kWh per year, meeting 16% of Cordova?s annual energy needs with a renewable energy source. CEC operates an isolated electric system and therefore is solely responsible for serving
its 1,560 customers. Cordova?s high electricity costs have been cited in several formal and informal community planning documents as a primary inhibitor of economic development, and
this project would assist in making electricity rates more affordable for residents and businesses as well as displacing diesel fuel, and reducing our particulate emissions. Competitive
bids for project construction exceeded expected cost by $5,500,000, so CEC is requesting additional funding to that provided in AEA round 1 RE grant.
This proposal is for a 4Kw Solar PV array, to be installed on each of the 11 NWAB High-schools in the Borough, Co-generating with the grid.
The project explores modular inverter technology for redundancy and also provides a platform for understanding Solar(PV) technology for our student base, supporting an upcoming curriculum-addendum
at High-school level and a class at Chuckchi College.
With an ongoing program for Alternate Energy in our curriculum, the Schools could expand the arrays every spring to the extent allowable by the local utility (KEA) and AVEC and also
communicate the technology and teachings to the other schools in the State of Alaska.
Over time the Schools would become more and more efficient in their use of Energy as each high-school finishing class would contribute a project to offset the Energy usage in the School.
As we incorporate Alternate Energy sources in Alaska?s rural communities, it is important to make a way available for our coming generations to become proficient in the new implementation
of the resources. After all, they will live with what we create and have to be able to understand and work with the systems.
If this doesn?t happen and we have to rely on outside expertise to service the new Energy systems, then the cost of operation will be excessive and our effort of lowering Energy cost
for the Region will be hampered.
We need to take responsibility, now for what we create for the future generations.
This project will be a start..
Development of hydroelectric power at Takatz Lake would include construction of a 200-foot high main concrete arch dam, a small 30-foot high secondary saddle dam, power intake, unlined
tunnel, power penstock, power plant, tailrace, and transmission line segments including; underground, submarine, and overhead sections. The project would produce approximately 106,900
MWh per year via two (2) 13.8 MW turbine-generators.
Louden Tribal Council is taking the lead in this application to purchase, install, and commission a new steam powered Combined Heat and Power (CHP) facility that will eventually be owned
and operated by the City of Galena as an Independent Power Producer. The new project will include assessment and management of the local biomass resources, formation of a partnership
with the biomass owner (Gana-a?Yoo Native Regional Corporation), purchasing and installation of the harvesting equipment, boiler, steam powered generator, and heat recovery systems
including Organic Rankine Cycle generators, and providing steam heat for the existing utilidor and buildings occupied by the Galena City School District. We hope and anticipate that
the project will eventually be expanded to provide wood pellets for home heating fuel to villages in the local region, and to radically reduce the cost of electric power through interties
to other villages.
The Division of Forestry at Milepost 267.5 Richardson Highway, Delta Junction is proposing a project using wood pellets for heating two governmental buildings. The boiler system will
combine two heating systems, a 3,840 square foot (sf.) main office building, proposed 3,000 sf. addition, and a 1,792 sf. warehouse/shop/maintenance facility. The boiler will be located
in a separate building which will house a heating system and pellet storage. The grant will involve local contractors for construction of the building and retrofit of the plumbing systems.
A request for proposal (RFP) or a bid process will be used for all aspects of the project. Maintenance of the boiler will be performed by local contractors.
The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwells power system. Currently they obtain power from the line between MEA
and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). To accomplish this they propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River, a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this
plant will be in exccess of 1 MW. It will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
The Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydroelectric Project would install a third turbine capable of producing an additional 10 MW in the existing Terror Lake plant. The original engineers of the Terror
Lake facility had the foresight to design the facility for the expansion to three turbines. The original design assumed the day would arrive when additional capacity would be required.
That day has arrived. Kodiak?s growing demand has surpassed the current capacity of Terror Lake. Expanding the capacity at Terror Lake by 10 megawatts (MW) with a third turbine generator
will enhance the stability of KEA?s isolated grid system allowing additional forms of renewable energy to be integrated and reduce KEA?s dependence on diesel fuel. The third turbine
at Terror Lake is the cornerstone necessary for KEA to achieve its? Vision Statement: Endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost effective renewable power solutions by the year
2020.
The Delta/Greely School District proposes a Wood Chip Boiler Heating System to heat 77,000 sq. ft. of educational space in the sub-arctic. The legal description of the Delta High School
complex is 64 degrees 02? 35.66? N 145 degrees 42? 57.10?W. The building would be located 50 feet away from the Delta High School new mechanical room. This Wood Chip Boiler Heating
System constructs and installs the following: Cement building to house wood chip boiler, chip storage room, 4 chip storage trailers, and a chip feeding and chip drying process.
The direct impact of this Wood Chip Boiler Heating System will be the Delta High School complex staff and students as well as the community groups that use this facility on a weekly
basis. The following communities are served by this facility: Delta Junction, Fort Greely Garrison and its contractors, Gerstle River, and the greater Deltana area. The businesses,
non-profit agencies, Farm Forum, Relay for Life, Fish and Game, Department of Motor Vehicles, Delta Chamber of Commerce, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts to name a few groups. All use the
Delta High School complex during the year. Future plans include hooking the boiler to our Vocation/Agriculture building and Career Advancement Center building. There is also the
possibility of adding a large greenhouse that would supply the schools in the district with fresh
2.4Project Description continued
produce year round. Finally, the following groups will be involved in this project: Delta/Greely School District (DGSD), the Delta/Greely School Board, DGSD Facilities Committee, Alaska
Department of Natural Resources Forestry, CTA, CE2 Engineers, T.R. Miles Technical Consultants, Delta Logging and Milling Associates, Salcha Big Delta Soil & Water Conservation District.
USKH (an architecture, engineering, land surveying and planning company).
SEE ATTACHMENT 2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION MAP
This new department will be responsible for 1. energy assessment 2. seek and secure funds related to energy 3. assist tribal members with : a. weathrization application and b. heating
assistant applications (to help with the high cost of fuel we pay in Noatak) 4. long term goals will be to look into alternative energy for Noatak.
There are many types of wood-fired boiler systems available on the market but they are very costly and the freight to bring them to the villages would likely triple the cost of the boiler
system. We are proposing to build a wood stove from local scrap metal, e.g., old fuel tanks that are no longer used, but the water containers must be shipped to the village because
we do not have the capabilities or the resources to manufacture them. The project will be located in the village of Marshall and the Ohogamiut Traditional Council EPA Department will
oversee the project.
Wood biomass for the production of bulk commercial wood pellets and briquettes, bulk and/or bagged residential wood
pellets, wood chips for commercial use and cordwood. Facility will be located at milepost 112 Richardson Highway, 190
miles from Anchorage and 250 miles from Fairbanks. Communities served will include all villages and cities in Alaska. The
grant project will incorporate varying degrees of assistance from Ahtna, Incorporated and its subsidiaries, State
agencies, Federal agencies, local borough, city and village government bodies and various contractors and consulting
firms.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough, the Lake and Peninsula School District and the Bristol Bay
Native Corporation have indicated written or verbal support for this project (see attached letters
of support). The Lake and Peninsula School District supplies power to the school and Chignik
Lake community with their diesel generators. They used over 65,000 gallons of diesel in the
2007/2008 school year which must transported 5000 gallons at time in a tanker truck from
Chignik via a small vessel that can navigate the Chignik River. Diesel cost $3.87 a gallon
delivered to Chignik plus a $1.10 per gallon surcharge to transport it from Chignik to Chignik
Lake for a total of $323,050 for the 2007/2008 school year.
The State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources February 2000 report titled Coalbed
Methane and Exploration Targets for Rural Alaska Communities identifies the Chignik Bay
Basin within the Alaska Peninsula Province as having potential CBM resources. The Chignik
Basin is underlain by bituminous coal. This project will confirm this potential resource by drilling,
coring and testing CBM resources in the Chignik Lake area. A specific drilling plan will be
prepared during the Reconnaissance Phase. Once the final location is determined, the drilling,
coring and testing will take place during the Resource Assessment/Feasibility phases.
While the community is assessing other alternative energy resources, CBM gas is the only
potential resource that could provide Chignik Lake with a sustainable, low cost fuel option 24/7,
365 days a year without interruption. This assessment project will determine CBM?s viability
and compare its potential to other alternative energy resources.
Results of the assessment will be presented in a report that will also make recommendations on
how best to delivery the CBM resource to Chignik Lake if commercially viable quantities of the
resource are found. The report will also identify possible means of delivering the CBM to
Chignik Lagoon and Chignik and identify additional study or testing requirements.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 14 9/3/2008
If viable quantities of CBM gas are found, AGE will work with the Chignik Lake community, the
Bristol Bay Borough, BBNC, Chignik Lake Traditional Council and Chignik River Limited to fund
future phases. The CBM development will employ Fowler Oil and Gas Company?s horizontal
drilling which allows a larger well spacing and minimizes land use impacts. Fowler?s technology
also employs down well dewatering to avoid above ground water management and its
associated environmental issues.
AWE is requesting additional funds for Phase 1 to add two Vestas V39 turbines to the existing power generation system to dramatically decrease the total consumption of diesel fuel and
stove oil in Sand Point, Alaska. The harbor community of Sand Point is located several hundred miles southwest of Anchorage on the Shumagin Islands, just south of the Aleutian chain.
This commercial fishing village of nearly 1,000 residents serves as a regional hub for crab and salmon fisheries, as well as other fisheries, and has generally enjoyed a healthy economy
over the past ten years. TDX Sand Point Generating (TSPG), a wholly owned subsidiary of TDX Power, owns and operaqtes the Sand Point electric utility. AWE will design, construct,
operate, and maintain the entire project.
Tatitlek, located in northeastern Prince William Sound, is about 30 miles south of Valdez on the eastern side of the Tatitlek Narrows. The community of Tatitlek will be served by this
project. With the "upwardly mobile" price of diesel these days, we can afford to leave no stone unturned in our quest to exploit an alternative energy resource. We are aware that
a good hydro resouce exists nearby. But, is it too far from our community to be economically developed? Local anecdotal information, the Renewable Energy Atlask of Alaska, and AEA\'s
Draft Regional Wind Study suspect that Tatitlek has an excellent wind resource. But we also have a mountain directly behind the village. Will the winds be too turbulent? Site specific
monitoring and feasibility studies can answer these questions and provide direction for further design, permitting, and construction. TDX Power has a Teaming Agreement with Tatitlek
Corporation and the Tatitlek Village IRA ouncil to manage this project with active participation from the IRA Council, Corporation, and Tatitlek School.
Adak is a former military base now owned by the Aleut Corporation (TAC). It is located on Adak Island near the end of Alaska Aleutian Island Chain. Presently there are approximately
75 residents at a base where a population of 6,000 military personnel and their families were once housed. The site was turned over to TAC by the US Navy in 1999. TAC aspires to re-populate
the island with shareholders and employees of the fishing industry. The location is in good fishing grounds and has an established processing plant. The US Navy houses and Missile
Defense Agency house an enormous radar facility in the harbor there for part of the year. This expensive piece of equipment requires reliable shore-based power.
The RCA recently ruled that the City of Adak was not capable of managing nor operating the utility electric utility. TDX Power agreed to take over the utility while the people of Adak
were under emergency conditions. TDX Adak Generating, LLC will complete the project using personnel from its parent company, TDX Power.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource
assessment and analysis at the community of McGrath, Alaska. The model would compile the
best available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and
restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and
proposed energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model
produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific
size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for
biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the
resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and
where is it?
? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass
energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of McGrath,
although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local conditions.
While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for McGrath, the model produced by this
project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template, or
framework, for data processing and compilation. As such, this project would interact with
similar projects being proposed in applications also submitted under this RFA for the
communities of Tanana, Nenana, and Tanacross. Also, by producing a tool that can be used to
examine the availability and sustainability of biomass resources in some detail, the project could
be integrated with alternative energy resource assessments prepared by AEA and others to
evaluate proposed projects. The project as proposed lies at the intersection of several
professional disciplines, including forest inventories and silviculture, community and forest
economics, and geographic information systems (GIS). The work will be conducted through
technical assistance provided by the Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) Forestry Program, with
coordination, direction, and consultation provided by staff at the McGrath Traditional Council
and McGrath community members.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 12 9/3/2008
In the first round of applications specified by this RFA, a separate proposed wood energy project
to AEA by McGrath Light and Power also included wood supply assessment and land-use
planning functions. This project would easily complement that effort, and full cooperation and
collaboration with that project would be an integral component of this proposed project.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource
assessment and analysis at the community of Nenana, Alaska. The model would compile the
best available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and
restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and
proposed energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model
produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific
size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for
biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the
resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and
where is it?
? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass
energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of Nenana,
although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local conditions.
While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for Nenana, the model produced by this
project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template, or
framework, for data processing and compilation. As such, this project would interact with
similar projects being proposed in applications also submitted under this RFA for several other
communities in interior Alaska. Also, by producing a tool that can be used to examine the
availability and sustainability of biomass resources in some detail, the project could be integrated
with alternative energy resource assessments prepared by AEA and others to evaluate proposed
projects. The project as proposed lies at the intersection of several professional disciplines,
including forest inventories and silviculture, community and forest economics, and geographic
information systems (GIS). The work will be conducted through technical assistance provided
by the Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) Forestry Program, with coordination, direction, and
consultation provided by staff at the Nenana Native Council and Nenana community members.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource
assessment and analysis at the community of Tanacross, Alaska. The model would compile the
best available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and
restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and
proposed energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model
produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific
size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for
biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the
resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and
where is it?
? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass
energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of
Tanacross, although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local
conditions. While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for Tanacross, the model
produced by this project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a
template, or framework, for data processing and compilation. As such, this project would
interact with similar projects being proposed in applications also submitted under this RFA for
the communities of Tanana, McGrath, and Nenana. Also, by producing a tool that can be used to
examine the availability and sustainability of biomass resources in some detail, the project could
be integrated with alternative energy resource assessments prepared by AEA and others to
evaluate proposed projects. The project as proposed lies at the intersection of several
professional disciplines, including forest inventories and silviculture, community and forest
economics, and geographic information systems (GIS). The work will be conducted through
technical assistance provided by the Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) Forestry Program, with
coordination, direction, and consultation provided by staff at the Tanacross Tribal Council and
Tanacross community members.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource
assessment and analysis at the community of Tanana, Alaska. The model would compile the
best available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and
restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and
proposed energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model
produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific
size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for
biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the
resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and
where is it?
? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass
energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of Tanana,
although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local conditions.
While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for Tanana, the model produced by this
project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template, or
framework, for data processing and compilation. As such, this project would interact with
similar projects being proposed in applications also submitted under this RFA for the
communities of McGrath, Nenana, and Tanacross. Also, by producing a tool that can be used to
examine the availability and sustainability of biomass resources in some detail, the project could
be integrated with alternative energy resource assessments prepared by AEA and others to
evaluate proposed projects. The project as proposed lies at the intersection of several
professional disciplines, including forest inventories and silviculture, community and forest
economics, and geographic information systems (GIS). The work will be conducted through
technical assistance provided by the Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) Forestry Program, with
coordination, direction, and consultation provided by staff at the Tanana Tribal Council and
Tanana community members.
ORPC has obtained a FERC Preliminary Permit for a tidal energy site in a portion of Cook Inlet and Knik Arm adjacent to the waterfront of Anchorage for the purpose of deploying a commercial
scale tidal energy project. The project will involve the deployment of ORPC\'s
proprietary ocean current generation (OCGen?) modules consisting of four turbine-generator units (TGUs). Each TGU consists of a proprietary underwater permanent magnet generator
with four (2 per side) advanced design cross flow (ADCF) turbines attached to and rotating on a common shaft. OCGen? technology is deployed well below the water surface and held in place
with a deep sea mooring system so as to be operable beneath the winter ice and avoid any conflicts with marine navigation. It will be licensed under the FERC hydrokinetic Pilot Project
License program and initially installed at a capacity of 1MW (a single OCGen? module) for testing and monitoring of its operation, including any potential environmental impacts. After
the initial OCGen? module has been operated for a year, additional OCGen? modules will be installed to bring the generating capacity of the project up to the limit of 5 MW allowed under
the Pilot Project License. Full build out of the project will occur after a long term FERC Operating License has been obtained, estimated to be in 2012 or 2013. The project will be
interconnected to the railbelt power grid through either Chugach Electric or ML&P and the electricity generated will be sold to the railbelt utilities. Preliminary site bathymetric
and current surveys have been performed, reporting and compliance required under FERC rules for the existing Preliminary Permit have been completed, meetings with regulatory and environmental
agencies and project
stakeholders have been held, strong relationships with the local communities have been established and the application for the Pilot Project License is well underway. The next phase
of development of the project involves significant field studies and data collection, including a detailed analysis of the tidal currents within the site boundary to identify the optimal
locations for turbine deployment and provide information pertinent to the engineering of the OCGen?
modules, mooring system, and power transmission system. The information gathered from these studies will be used to complete the conceptual design of the mooring system, the power transmission
system, the grid interconnect system, the deployment plan, and to refine the design of the OCGen? module specifically for the Cook Inlet environment. Environmental impact studies will
also be designed in this phase that will include potential impacts to marine life and sediment transport. This project work will be completed with the assistance and cooperation of
Terrasond LTD, Devine Tarbell and Associates, The University of Alaska Anchorage, LGL Alaska Research Associates Inc., Aquacoustics, PND engineering, Port
McKenzie, and the Matanuska-Susitna Borough.
Phase I of the project will involve assessment of the current diesel and fuel oil
users within the ONC controlled assets in Bethel; to estimate the volume of
CNG to be supplied, the extent of modification required to accommodate the
switchover7 to natural gas, and of course the willingness of the village
residents to be involved.
Phase II will build on the inventory data from the first stage, and will entail
development of conceptual design elements sufficient to support the
economic analysis noted above, in 2.3. The second stage will also emphasize
a firm supply of pipeline quality natural gas or LNG, as well as identifying
critical path schedule constraints such as environmental or transport permits.
2.4.1 Project Location
The host community for the Pilot Test Program ? Bethel LCNG Conversion
will be the City of Bethel (focusing on facilities owned by ONC). Refer to the
following websites for more information on the community and the its related
native council corporation, Orutsararmiut Corporation
City of Bethel: http://www.cityofbethel.org/
ONC: http://www.nativecouncil.org/
2.4.2 Communities Served
The only community to be served by this initiative is a sub-set of the City of
Bethel. However, as stated, if deemed economically feasible during the
Phase III and IV ?Pilot?, the concept may be generally applicable to the region
and state.
2.4.3 Project Partners
Table 2 lists the partners and their responsibilities for the project.
This project will convert Biomass waste (municipal wastes, and sawmill/wood wastes) to renewable electric power. Possible site locations include Eielson Air Force base near Fairbanks
and landfill locations near Anchorage, Kodiak and Juneau. Our plant will provide electricity to local communities (local/military schools, residential, Air Force base and civilian airports).
The project will involve Solena Group and its partners (GE, MPR Associates, Ford Bacon & Davis and Deutsche Bank).
This project will construct buried piping, pumps, heat exchangers, and other system components required to recover waste heat from the existing AVEC power plant and confer this energy
to the new City water plant and washeteria in Ambler. This project will involve coordination between the City of Ambler, Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC), the Northwest
Arctic Borough, and the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC).
The proposed project will benefit every electric utility ratepayer in Sand Point and also the
public radio station in Sand Point. As such, one hundred (100) percent of the electricity
generated by the wind turbine will benefit the public. KSDP Radio / Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting, Inc. is an AM public radio station licensed to Sand Point, Alaska. The station?s
listening audience consists of approximately 3,000 year-round residents and an additional 2,000
seasonal residents in Sand Point, Chignik, Perryville, Port Moller, Nelson Lagoon, King Cove,
Cold Bay and False Pass. Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting, Inc.?s General Manager Kells
Hetherington will oversee the project with his five member Board of Directors. Members of the
radio station?s Board are elected from within the station?s listening area. The wind turbine and
associated equipment will be installed at the station?s transmitter site. The work will be done by
ABS Alaska, an alternative energy contractor with offices in Fairbanks, Anchorage and
Washington State.
The Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project (Project) will be located in Southeast Alaska,
approximately 14 miles northeast of the City of Haines and 10 miles southwest of the City of
Skagway. Connelly Lake (formerly known as Upper Chilkoot Lake) is an 85 acre alpine lake,
and drains into the Chilkoot River. The project will be on state and private land, including the
Haines State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve. The project facilities will include a dam
at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW powerhouse with two generating
units, a 14-mile-long 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Final
dimensions and capacities of these facilities will be determined by optimization studies to be
conducted during Phase II. The Project will be developed by AP&T to provide additional
generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems.
AVEC proposes a resource assessment/feasibility analysis/conceptual design project of geothermal sites
on the Seward Peninsula region, simultaneously involving the NANA/NW Arctic Borough Regions and the
Kawerak/Bering Straights Native Corporation Regions.
Goal: The SGAP goal is to ascertain the feasibility of geothermal power generation for regional
communities and develop conceptual design documents/reports for geothermal generation on the
Seward Peninsula. The SGAP strategic objectives are as follows:
SO 1: Identify potential geothermal sites in the Seward Peninsula Region.
SO 2: Undertake a geological, geochemistry, and geophysical assessment of targeted
sites for geothermal power generation potential.
SO3: Undertake a geothermal drilling program to promote regional geothermal
interests
SO4: Develop conceptual design and business plan for follow?on phases of the
projects.
SO5: Conduct an optimization phase in the conceptual design wherein how to supply
power either from one centrally located geothermal plant or from many smaller
geothermal plants, to the communities involved can be evaluated. Included will
be evaluating the use of transmission lines for power versus supplying hot water
via a pipeline to one or several geothermal power plant(s).
The SGAP program will include, at a minimum, the following sites:
1. Kwiniuk HS (~ 8 miles from Elim) Lat: 64.7 Long: 162.467
2. Lava Creek HS (50 miles S of Deering, 70 miles SW of Buckland) Lat: 65.217, Long: 162.9
3. Granite Mountain HS (40 miles S of Buckland, 60 miles S of Deering) Lat: 65.367, Long: 161.25
4. Division HS (40 miles S of Kobuk?Shungnak area) Lat: 66.367, Long: 156.767
The scope of work has the potential to benefit multiple communities, including Golovin, Elim, White
Mountain, Koyuk, Deering, Buckland, Shungnak and Kobuk.
The geothermal potential of localized regions in the Seward Peninsula region, Alaska, based on available
literature and limited data, is well summarized in the review report for the NANA Geothermal Assessment
Project (Kolker, 2008). Based on this report and knowledge of this area, six local regions containing known/potential hot springs have been identified as targets for further exploration
(Figure 1). In addition, Pilgrim Hot Springs, located 70km north/northeast of the city of Nome, Alaska, is the subject
of a companion investigation which, if funded, is scheduled to occur in the same timeframe. The Pilgrim
project proposes to perform an updated resource assessment to support the potential development of
the geothermal resource at Pilgrim for both power generation and direct use (space heating), including a
Controlled?Source Audio?Frequency Magneto?Telluric (CSAMT) survey and aerial thermal infrared
imaging. If both the Pilgrim project and this greater regional assessment are both funded, equipment
sharing being the two projects will result in a cost savings of $278,000. In addition, the team is aware
of other complementary geothermal assessment proposals being submitted by the Aleutians East
Borough and the City of Akutan to Alaska Energy Authority. Efforts will be made to collaborate with these
entities.
Once the most promising sites have been established, the University will conduct further ground?based
geophysical assessments in coordination with the geologic surveys to be conducted by Hattenburg, Dilley,
& Linnell. The study will also include a drilling program that would collaborate with the USGS/BLM Drill
rig and associated state drilling program, if in operation. Finally, AVEC is proposing conceptual designs and transmission routing studies for the proposed sites. As
a whole, this study will serve as an essential decision support tool for making policy decisions, planning
strategies for further exploration and development.
The proposed effort will involve the Tribal and City Councils of the above communities, Kawerak, village
corporations, and industrial interests in the area. Key partners in the project will include Bering Straights
Native Corporation, Kawerak, NANA Pacific/NANA Regional Corporation, the UAF/Alaska Center for
Energy and Power, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell (HDL), and additional engineering/scientific consultants.
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of
two wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution system for the
community of Shaktoolik. Participants in the project include AVEC, STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will
provide overall project management and electrical system engineering for the project. STG will be the
general contractor, responsible for the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind
turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100
wind turbines and startup and commissioning services.
The project involves the final design, permitting, and construction of an electrical distribution
tie line between the villages of Emmonak and Alakanuk and the final design, permitting,
construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of eight wind turbines to supplement a new
power generation system for the communities of Emmonak and Alakanuk. Participants in the
project include AVEC, STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management
and electrical system engineering for the project. STG will be the general contractor,
responsible for the design and installation of all civil works, installation of the electrical
distribution lines, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical
systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100 wind turbines and startup and
commissioning services. Site control is under final review and is expected within a week of
submission of this application. Permitting was completed for the met tower currently at the site
of the wind turbines; we expect no unusual permitting requirements for the site.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to
determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Stebbins. The work will involve obtaining a letter
of non?objection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting
and installing a met tower at this location, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a
geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A
conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical
investigation.
A meterological (met) tower installed in New Stuyahok between 2003 and 2005 found that winds were
class 3 (fair to good); however, placement of the met tower was hindered by the active runway at the
time (location new airport has now been constructed out of town), and it is expected that the wind
resource could be better. Before going forward with the final design and construction of wind turbines,
AVEC would like to better determine the wind potential in the community.
The work would involve obtaining a letter of non?objection for placement of the wind tower and
geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the
wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions
and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the
met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
Wind generators placed at the old airport could reduce the annual fuel consumption of the diesel
generators, thus reducing the cost of electricity within New Stuyahok, as well as reducing the overall
volume of fuel that is handled within the community and risks associated with handling fuel.
The City of New Stuyahok, the New Stuyahok Tribal Council, Stuyahok Limited, and the Southwest
Regional School District (SWSD) have expressed support for the project. The New Stuyahok
Comprehensive Plan (October 2005), states that the high cost of fuel and energy is one of the major
regional challenges in the area and that to respond to this challenge the community and region must
promote lower energy costs.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine
the possibility of installing wind towers in Scammon Bay. The work will involve obtaining a letter of nonobjection
for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting,
and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical
investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design
will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
A meteorological (met) tower installed near Pitka?s Point (Saint Mary?s and Pitka?s Point are connected
by a road and an electrical intertie) in October 2007 has revealed an outstanding Class 6 wind resource
with highly directional winds. A second met tower was installed in August 2008 at lower elevation and
closer to Saint Mary?s. This second site was chosen to evaluate possible trade?offs of wind resource and
rime icing risk. The Pitka?s Point met tower data has indicated that rime icing conditions appear to
possibly be a significant issue at that location. While rime icing is presumed to also occur at the lower
elevation Saint Mary?s met tower site, the desire is to contrast and compare the two sites with respect
to wind power and predicted power loss due to rime icing. A third met tower is presently stored in Saint
Mary?s and available for installation at a third site should early winter data collection at the Saint Mary?s
(the second site) indicate significant rime icing.
AVEC proposes to continue the wind resource assessment for an additional one to two years to include
evaluation and comparison of the two existing met towers and possible installation of the third met
tower at a site further from back from the Yukon River. The primary focus of continuation of the wind
study will be to further evaluate the icing problem at the met tower sites and to estimate as accurately
as possible turbine downtime during icing conditions. The evaluation of rime icing risk in Saint Mary?s
will be coordinated with efforts underway by the Alaska Energy Authority to predict at a state?wide level
rime icing risk for potential wind power sites.
Also, given the relatively large population of Saint Mary?s and Pitka?s Point and possible intertie options
to the villages of Mountain Village and Pilot Station, continuation of the wind resource study will include
wind farm sizing and layout options to power these two villages as well.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to
determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Teller. The work will involve obtaining a letter of
non-objection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing,
transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for 1 year, and conducting a
geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A
conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical
investigation.
The Archangel Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in Hatcher Pass, Alaska. The project will be located on state land in the Archangel Valley. Energy
from the project would be provided into the Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid.
Archangel Green Power, LLC (AGP) is the project proponent, and would contribute funding, own, and operate the project. AGP has already completed reconnaissance studies of the Archangel
Creek resource, and finds that the project warrants further study. Construction would be completed by qualified contractors and subcontractors selected through a competitive bidding
process.
The Applicant owns and operates Motherlode Lodge located near Delia Creek. The 4.9 acre plot of land is privately owned but segments of the proposed project will be located on land owned
by the State of Alaska Park Service. The Motherlode Lodge currently utilizes 2 diesel fuel generators, 1 boiler and 2 wood stoves to power the facility and accounts for a significant
percentage of annual operating expenses. The company plans to construct a 50 kWh run of river project with a flow of 3.5 cfs through a 10? pipeline from Delia Creek to the Powerhouse.
Peak production is estimated to be 140 kWh with a minimum of 16 kWh. The proposed project, The Delia Creek Alternative Energy Project (DCAEP), will utilize water flow from the Delia
Creek to power electricity to the Motherlode Lodge. The project will include an intake site, underground penstock and powerhouse. The hydroelectric system will be integrated with the
new MEA power line extension. The existing energy system will be removed immediately and a 2.75 mile MEA power line extension developed to displace all fuel costs. The first phase of
development was estimated by MEA to cost $150,000. All three phases of development are estimated at $750,000 by MEA. DCAEP will be headed by Project Manager, Jill Reese, Owner and sole
member of HPML LLC and Polarconsult Engineering Firm. HPML LLC will match funds of $50,000 to the total cost of development. This does not include HPML?s initial investment in the lodge
(paid, free and clear) plus an additional $850,000 in upgrades, permits and licensing.
This application seeks funding to conduct a feasibility study on using high efficiency, low emissions (HELE) biomass heat and power systems for the Sitka Community Hospital and the proposed
adjacent Sitka Community Greenhouse. Specifically, we are following the example of the system being used in the city of Craig, which is a wood chip fired gasifier burner that transfers
heat via a low pressure hydronic system. This study will be accomplished by contracting with mechanical engineers who will determine the specific equipment necessary, the fuel requirements
and availability, and the costs and payback period of the project. If this project is selected by the AEA and approved by the Alaska Legislature, the award recipient will be the City
and Borough of Sitka. The City will contract with the engineers to do the study. Sitka Community Hospital will provide the engineers with all the data and access to their facilities
necessary for the study. Direct technical assistance regarding the community greenhouse requirements will be provided by the Sitka Community Greenhouse Committee and other members
of the Sitka Health Summit. The City will be responsible for reporting to the Authority and providing AEA with the final report.
The project is a wood energy district heating project located in Venetie for three buildings: the
school, school housing and washeteria/water system. The applicant is the Venetie Village
Council. The project will be a two year project with completion of project development Phases
2-3 to occur in 2009 and construction Phase 4 to occur in 2010. A level one feasibility boilers
and a reconnaissance of forest wood resources has been performed in the summer of 2008
under a DOE Tribal energy grant for Yukon Flats. A table comparing round wood boiler and
chip fed boilers is attached to demonstrate initial analysis and initial potential designs. It is
anticipated that round wood fired boilers will be used for simplicity of the harvest system. This
will require installation of 3 stick-fired boilers which will require firing up to 4 times per day on
peak heat days and will require approximately 300-350 cords of wood annually to displace
33,390 gallons of fuel oil for heat.
A forest survey by boat and plane revealed an excellent wood resource, and a large fire with
significant amounts of standing dry wood near the village and on a trail system, and thus easily
accessible. There is a small wood harvester entrepreneur interested in increasing his
operations to fill the needs of the district heating system. The village council owns equipment
which could be used for increasing harvest, or a small harvesting system built around a farm
tractor could be installed. A small amount of harvest equipment maybe part of the construction
phase. Partners in the project will be CATG Resource Department, Alaska Wood Energy
Associates which includes Bill Wall, PhD, Peter Olsen and Greg Koontz.
The project is a wood energy district heating project located in Chalkyitsik for two groups of
buildings: District Heat 1: the school, school housing and water system; District Heat 2: the
washeteria/water plant and Village/Tribal Office. The applicant is the Chalkyitsik Village
Council. The project will be a two year project with completion of project development Phases
2-3 to occur in 2009 and construction Phase 4 to occur in 2010. A level one feasibility boilers
and a reconnaissance of forest wood resources has been performed in the summer of 2008
under a DOE Tribal energy grant for Yukon Flats through CATG. A table comparing round
wood boiler and chip fed boilers is attached to demonstrate initial analysis and initial potential
designs. It is anticipated that round wood fired boilers will be used for simplicity of the harvest
system. This will require installation of 2 district heating systems one at the school with 3 stickfired
boilers and the second at the Chalkyitsik Village Council office which will require 2 boilers.
Each system will require firing up to 4 times per day on peak heat days and will require
approximately 450-500 cords of wood annually to displace 40,750 gallons of fuel oil for heat.
A forest survey by boat and plane revealed a good wood resource near the village. There is a
small wood harvester entrepreneur interested in increasing his operations to fill the needs of the
district heating system. The village council owns equipment which could be used for increasing
harvest, or a small harvesting system built around a farm tractor could be installed. A small
amount of harvest equipment maybe part of the construction phase. Partners in the project will
be CATG Resource Department, Alaska Wood Energy Associates which includes Bill Wall,
PhD, Peter Olsen and Greg Koontz.
This application specifically develops the capacity to harvest and deliver 2000+ tons of wood
annually to the Village of McGrath, Alaska and to process the wood into usable form and store
the wood for later use. The biomass project will link and integrate with the heat recovery project
in future iterations of design and cost analysis in order to capture the synergies from both to
create an optimum design. A side by side analysis of both chip boilers (K?b) and stick fired
boilers (Garn) with estimated cost analysis and net simple payback for individual buildings was
conducted in the feasibility assessment (calculations attached). This application supports a
district wood heating project already in development in a previous application. The funding will
be used to purchase harvest and processing equipment and develop a wood processing,
storage and delivery system and storage yard. Matching funding will be used for development
of a forest harvest plan, training and technical support. Since the harvest system must integrate
to the boiler system installed, final decision on specific harvest equipment and design of wood
yard will be determined in coordination with the development of the final design of the boiler
systems. An initial list of the harvest equipment, with costs, is attached with a diagnostic of
harvest and delivery costs.
Local partners include the School District, City of McGrath, Village Safe Water, MTNT
Corporation, and McGrath Power and Light (applicant). A wood energy supply analysis, and a
Level 2 Feasibility (in writing phase) and conceptual design analysis has been completed for a
district heating loop for downtown McGrath to include the School, Gym, AC Store, School
District Office, Captain Snow building, Water Plant, Post Office, New clinic (to be built). This
Level 2 study has not been coordinated with an analysis for a heat recovery project being
proposed by MP&L and AE&E. This project is planned to be conducted in concert with the
Village Safe Water project to replace the entire water main and sewage system in McGrath in
2009-2011. The integration of these two projects has the potential to produce significant cost
savings for installation of piping, the most expensive portion of the project. Both projects have
been developed through technical support from Alaska Village Initiatives, and McGrath Power
and Light and e-Four Engineering. Principle personnel to date include Bill Wall, PhD, Peter
Olsen, Ernie Baumgartner, and Greg Koontz, ME, George Wilson, ME of Village Safe Water.
Linkages are planned with Steven J. Stassel, P.E., and president AE&E.
The Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project is located on Packers Creek in Chignik
Lagoon. The 190 kW project can provide for most of the communities current power
needs, which peak at about 125 kW. The plant would eliminate about 85% of 50,000
gallons of diesel consumed by the generators annually. There will also be excess
energy that could be used for heating the school and other local structures. The project
would also enable the community to add a freezer/processing facility to further improve
the local economy.
The Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project is an approximately 75 MW storage project proposed for
the Glacier Fork of the Knik River near the mouth of Metal Creek, located approximately 20
miles east of the Eklutna Hydroelectric Project powerhouse and 25 miles southeast of Palmer,
Alaska. Electricity from the project would be delivered into the railbelt transmission grid via a
new approximately 20-mile transmission line to existing transmission infrastructure in the
vicinity of the Old Glenn Highway bridge over the Knik River. A map of the project is included
at the end of the application before Attachment A.
Glacier Fork Hydropower, LLC (GFH) would be the project owner, and would contribute
funding, develop, own, and operate the project. GFH is currently owned by the five engineers of
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., an engineering consulting firm based in Anchorage, Alaska that
specializes in hydroelectric project development throughout Alaska. GFH is currently in
discussions with Chugach Electric Association (CEA) regarding the project. GFH, jointly with
CEA, intends to work with other Railbelt utilities and the State to develop the project.
The project would be constructed at the City landfill in Ataqan Subdivision on Saint Paul Island, the existing utility power plant, and within existing utility easements. The new turbines
would be tied into the existing City electric utility grid and control cables installed to tie into the existing power plant switchgear. A new low fuel consumption diesel 4,160v generator
would be installed in the existing power plant to replace an older unused 480v generator. Wind generated electricity would benefit all existing electric customers through lower power
generation costs. The City would administer the project and contract out to qualified consultants for the final design, and contract with a qualified contractor to supply, install
and maintain the wind turbines for the first 5 years and train local wind turbine maintenance personnel.
The Tok Wind Project is located approximately 12 miles south of Tok near the 5,000 foot level of Seven Mile Ridge and will contribute 2 MW of clean, renewable wind power to the Alaska
Power Company Tok distribution system.
The communities served will include all communities within the Alaska Power Company (APC, an Alaska Power & Telephone Company public utility subsidiary) service area including Tok (2007
population 1,353), Tanacross (173), Tetlin (165), and Dot Lake (15). The total population of the served area is 1,706.
The project will include construction of a 12 mile long transmission line, and a five mile-long construction access road across state-owned land from the old Eagle Trail west to the
proposed wind power generation facility. The power generation facility will include approximately two MW of wind turbines, the size and type subject to final design. These turbines
will be founded in shallow bedrock prevalent on the ridge crest. Power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation. Overhead transmission
lines (distribution voltage) from the transformer substation will follow the access road and Eagle Trail approximately 12 miles to the existing APC distribution line on the Tok Cutoff.
The grant participants are Village Wind Power LLC who have three Alaska wind projects under development (Slana, Tok, and Bethel). There will be a number of contractors involved in completing
the project. In addition to our own in-house efforts, other experienced contractors will be chosen to carry out selected components of the project. These components may include:
? State Land Use Permit for Wind Resource Assessment
? State easement for the transmission line and road
? State land lease acquisition for the wind farm site
? Topographic mapping for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Wetlands mapping for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Archeological review for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Detailed design for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Power Purchase Agreement with APC
? Access road construction
? Transmission line construction
? Wind farm construction
? Electrical hookup
? Commissioning and testing
The Slana Wind Project is located approximately seven miles west of Slana near the 4,000 foot level at VABM Cobb, and will contribute up to 2 MW of clean, renewable wind power to the
Alaska Power Company Slana distribution system.
The communities served will include all communities within the Alaska Power Company (APC, an Alaska Power & Telephone Company public utility subsidiary) service area including Slana
(2007 population 108), Chistochena (93) and when it is connected, Mentasta (1,404). The total population of the served area will be 1,605.
The project will include construction of a 1.5 mile long transmission line and construction access road across Ahtna Corporation and state-owned land from the Tok Cutoff to the proposed
wind power generation facility on the ridgetop. The power generation facility will include approximately two MW of wind turbines, the size and type subject to final design. These turbines
will be founded in shallow bedrock prevalent on the ridge crest. Power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation. Overhead transmission
lines (distribution voltage) from the transformer substation will follow the access road 1.5 miles to the existing APC distribution line on the Tok Cutoff.
The grant participant is Village Wind Power LLC who have three Alaska wind projects under development (Tok, Slana, and Bethel). There will be a number of contractors involved in completing
the project. In addition to our own in-house efforts, other experienced contractors will be chosen to carry out selected components of the project. These components may include:
? State Land Use Permit for Wind Resource Assessment
? State easement for the transmission line and road
? State land lease acquisition for the wind farm site
? Topographic mapping for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Wetlands mapping for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Archeological review for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Detailed design for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Power Purchase Agreement with APC
? Access road construction
? Transmission line construction
? Wind farm construction
? Electrical hookup
? Commissioning and testing
The Delta Wind Project is located approximately 25 miles south of Delta Junction near the end of Coal Mine Road and is designed to contribute 50 MW of clean, renewable wind power to
the Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) railbelt energy grid.
The communities served will include all communities within the GVEA?s service area including Delta Junction, North Pole, Fairbanks, Fox, College, Nenana, and Healy. In addition to local
communities, a number of large facilities are currently served by GVEA?s transmission system including Alyeska Trans Alaska Pipeline Pump Station 9, Fort Knox Gold Mine, and Pogo Gold
Mine. More distant utilities could also benefit through the railbelt electric grid.
An Interconnection Study with GVEA is currently being conducted by Power Engineers, Inc. to identify costs associated with integrating Delta Project wind power and GVEA?s existing transmission
system. The results of the interconnection study will be used to help formulate a power purchase agreement between GVEA and the project sponsors.
The project will include construction of a 20 mile-long transmission line, and a ten mile-long construction access road across state-owned land from the Richardson Highway south to the
proposed wind power generation facility. The power generation facility will include thirty 1.65 MW AAER wind turbines or equivalent, mounted on 65 meter high towers (subject to final
design and site suitability) set on buried concrete foundations. Underground power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation. A
five-acre lay down yard with a control building/service facility/warehouse will be installed within the wind farm area. Overhead transmission lines from the transformer substation will
follow the access road and Richardson Highway approximately 20 miles to the existing GVEA power transmission grid near Alyeska Pump Station #9.
The grant participants include Alaska Wind Power LLC who have four Alaska wind projects under development (Delta, Tok, Slana, and Bethel), and First Wind Alaska Holdings, LLC, a subsidiary
of First Wind Holdings, LLC, an experienced wind developer and independent power producer with 39 wind energy projects in various stages of development. In addition to our own in-house
efforts, we are retaining experienced consultants and contractors to assist with project development, which may include:
? Performing wind integration studies
? Securing State easement for the transmission line and road
? Securing State land lease acquisition for the wind farm site
? Conducting topographic mapping for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Conducting wetlands mapping for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Performing archeological review for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Creating detailed design for the wind farm, transmission line, and road
? Finalizing a Power Purchase Agreement with utility(s)
? Constructing and operating the Project
Using the existing seven (7) ton per day municipal solid waste stream, renewable resource biomass and digester gas, we will evaluate the Tactical Garbage-to-Energy (TGER) self-contained
bio-refinery technology and other viable low-volume alternatives. The waste-to energy project will be co-located with the existing baler source separation facility located on municipally-owned
land known as the Public Works Compound in Kotzebue. The City of Kotzebue will work with Decision Sciences and Maniilaq Services to perform the reconnaissance study to determine the
feasibility of deploying the TGER technology to produce fuel for heating and electricity at the Public Works Compound. The fuel from the TGER can produce enough energy to power 60 Kwh
for every ton of municipal solid waste. The heat and power savings, if reconnaissance proves feasible, is $2,900,000 over cost today for ten years not including the substantial landfill
costs found in the project benefit.
The project addresses the availability, quality and feasilbility of sustainable, economic use of agricultural and forestry biomass for bioenergy in Alaska. This must be considered before
the myriad of biofuel projects proposed & envisioned can move forward, and before existing, commercially available technologies that use biomass to produce energy for heat, fuel, &
power can be most effectively, and most successfully, deployed. The goal of the project is to 1) assimilate existing information on standing forest and agricultural biomass in ALaska,
2) conduct research and demonstration projects addressing agricultural bioenergy crop varities and crop management and addressing harvest methods in preperation for natural and managed
regenertation in mixed, single-aged forest stands, and, 3) determine the biological, physical, and economic feasibility of using Alaska agricultural energy crops and existing forest
stands for biomass as biofuels. The impetus for the study is the biomass/coal-to-liquids plant proposed for the Fairbanks area of interior Alaska, and its need for commercial/industrial-scale
volumes of biomass fuel stocks.. However, the study will have major statewide application as it will serve as the basis for all agricultural and forestry biomass-based energy projects;
the greatest number of which are being proposed for rural and village comminities. Work will take place in Fairbanks and Palmer, Alaska. Project cooperators are the School of Natural
Resources and Agricultural Sciences (SNRAS) and the Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station (AFES) at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) (project primary/agricultural energy
crops and forest biomass), Fairbanks Economic Development Corporation (FEDC) (logistics, data support, and information dissemination) and the Alaska Division of Forestry (forest biomass,
and harvest, transport, and storage technologies).
The City of Homer, with participation from Seldovia Village Tribe and the Port Graham Village
Council, proposes to assess the tidal energy potential and development feasibility of four sites
within Kachemak Bay. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) will be the
lead technology provider through the Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and
Services (CO- OPS) and the Kasitsna Bay Laboratory, which is the Coastal Marine Ecosystem
Research Laboratory for NOAA in Kachemak Bay. NOAA will deploy both stationary and roving
Acoustic Doppler Current Profiling (ADCP) devices, conduct bathymetric mapping, and integrate
other existing and new data to construct a comprehensive tidal, energetic, and circulation flow
model of the entire Kachemak Bay region. This model will be focused on providing the necessary
outputs to determine power densities and to conduct detailed and site specific tidal energy
feasibility studies, but it will also have multiple public benefits beyond assessing tidal energy,
such as improved spill response, mariculture siting, and impact assessment of local development
projects. Terrasond, an industry leading terrestrial and marine floor mapping consultancy
firm, will provide additional technical assistance on data collection and spatial data analysis to
contribute to the circulation model and generate power density values. Re vision consulting
LLC, a lead investigator and author on numerous Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and
other utility ocean energy studies, will then process the NOAA- generated data and model to
conduct technical and economic feasibility studies on four selected sites within Kachemak Bay?
two near Homer and one each near Seldovia and Port Graham/Nanwalek. A conceptual design
for optimal tidal energy production will emerge from the feasibility studies. The Kachemak Bay
Research Reserve, a collaboration between NOAA and the Alaska Department of Fish & Game,
will investigate potential biological impacts, inventory biological resources in areas identified
for potential development, and assist with associated permitting issues. Deerstone Consulting,
a renewable energy consulting firm working with the City of Homer on implementation of the
City?s Climate Action Plan, will provide additional technical assistance in the areas of
permitting, data collection and analysis, and project coordination. An assumed project start
date of July 1, 2009 will result in project completion in 12 months, i.e., July 1, 2010. The total
project budget is $1,154,341, of which $482,387 is requested via this proposal, and the
remainder, $671,954, is provided as matching contributions, for a 58% cost- share. Of the
$482,287 requested from AEA, Phase 1 (reconnaissance) would require $79,910 of AEA funds
and phase 2 (feasibility and conceptual design) would require $403,387 of AEA funds.
The Tanana area is blessed with a multitude of possible alternative energy resources including:
1) Wind Energy at is T. 5 N., R. 21 W. Sec. 10 located approximately 10 miles from downtown Tanana
proper.
2) Wind Energy at T. 4 N., R 20 W. This resource was eliminated as a possible because of transmission
line costs from the site to Tanana. The transmission line would have to cross the Yukon River.
3) Wind and Kinetic Hydro at T. 6 N., R 17 W. commonly referred to as ?The Rapids?. This has both
wind and water energy available however transmission line costs from The Rapids to Tanana, given the
terrain, would be very costly.
4) Geothermal at Little Melozitna Hot Springs (65.459, 153.312). There has been cursory analysis done
on this resource using chalcedony geo-thermometer methods by Kolker. These results are encouraging.
However, the magnitude of the resource needs to be defined better to determine if it would be
economically prudent to develop.
5) Traditional Hydro at Jackson Creek located at T. 5 N., R. 21 W. and T. 6 N., R 21 W. The project has
been studied before by the APA in the 1980s. Information regarding the study can be found in
?Reconnaissance Study of Energy Requirements and Alternatives for Tanana? Report Summary.
6) Kinetic Hydro Energy production using the Yukon River at Tanana using drag turbines.
Grant funds would be used to do engineering assessments of resources 4 and 5 with the contributed funds
and in kind resources of Tanana Power and the community of Tanana devoted to quantifying the
resources 1 and 6.
The ultimate goal being to determine ?the best? resource to develop of the community to meet the
community of Tanana?s long term energy needs most cost effectively.
Project Location
The location of the project is Perryville, Alaska. Perryville is located on the south coast
of the Alaska Peninsula, 275 miles southwest of Kodiak and 500 miles southwest of
Anchorage. It lies at approximately 55.912780? North Latitude and 159.145560? West
Longitude. (Sec. 27, T049S, R064W, Seward Meridian.) Perryville is located in the
Aleutian Islands Recording District. The area encompasses 9.2 sq. miles of land and
0.1 sq. miles of water. As can be seen in this image, the village benefits from southern
exposure to the sun and longer days due to its southerly latitude.Community To Be Served
The community was founded in 1912 as a refuge for
Alutiiq people driven away from their villages by the
eruption of Mt. Katmai. Many villagers from Douglas
and Katmai survived the eruption because they were
out fishing at the time. Captain Perry of the ship
"Manning" transported people from the Katmai area
to Ivanof Bay, and later, to the new village site. The village was originally called "Perry,"
but the "ville" was added to conform to the post office name, established in 1930. The
population is approximately 110.
Project Team
Project management is a collaborative approach. The Native Village of Perryville is the
applicant will be responsible for the overall management of AEA funds. George Sikat III
of Mat-Su Energy will serve as the Project Manager. Mr. Anthony Caole will be the
grants administrator and will be assisted by Ms. Charlene Yagie. Mr. Tom Humphrey,
P.E. will serve as the project\'s consulting electrical engineer and assist with data
analysis and economic/feasibility calculations.
The Port Alsworth Improvement Corporation, the Tanalian Electric Cooperative, Tanalian
Incorporated, Lake Clark National Park and Preserve, and the Lake and Peninsula Borough
support AGE?s proposal to conduct all pre-construction activities related to the construction of a
hydroelectric facility on the Tanalian River. The project will reduce the community?s
dependence on expensive diesel fuel that must be flown into Port Alsworth to provide heat and
power.
The Reconnaissance Phase will be multi-faceted and will include initial engineering,
environmental and hydrological studies on the Tanalian River to confirm its hydroelectric
potential. The reconnaissance phase will include scoping meetings with the community and
agencies to identify issues and study needs that will need to be addressed during the feasibility
phase. It will be especially important to work with the National Park Service (NPS) to determine
NEPA requirements for work within the Lake Clark National Park and Preserve. It is anticipated
that an environmental assessment may be required. It should be noted that the project lies
outside the wilderness boundary and the NPS is cooperating with the State of Alaska and
private in-holders to issue easements across the Tanalian River to access the new State airport
and private property.
The Resource Assessment, Feasibility and Conceptual Design Phase will take the findings of
the reconnaissance phase and delve into the project in greater detail. Specific hydroelectric
systems will be analyzed to determine the most feasible alternative with the least impact to the
environment. Public and agency meetings will be held as alternatives are developed. The
environmental assessment will be prepared during this phase. A selection process, that will
include public and agency input, will be developed to recommend the most feasible alternative.
A recommendation and analysis report will be developed that will include a preferred alternative
for the continuation for the project. This alternative will become the final design option.
The Final Design and Permitting Phase will prepare the detailed design and bid documents for
the preferred alternative and secure all the remaining permits to allow construction. The final
design will include the services of a landscape architect to ensure that construction and visual
impacts are minimized and mitigated.
The Construction Phase will install the preferred alternative.
Rising energy prices and demand for renewable systems could create demand for solar for hot water heating throughout the nation- even in the Arctic. Solar is often dismissed as a non-starter
in the Arctic- it should not be. Some of the world?s most successful solar projects have been in places where the solar fraction is about 50%. By strategically targeting entities
and institutions with solar technology, this could be an effective demand-side management option.
This project focuses on the installation of solar hot water heaters on residential, commercial, and public buildings in the Northwest Arctic Borough. If the technology proves to be economically
feasible, the eventual goal would be to install many solar water heaters on buildings and residences throughout the region. Before solar water heaters are installed on many buildings
throughout the region, a solar hot water heating demonstration project would be installed as a test case. Presumably, this demonstration solar water heater would be installed on commercial
and housing interests where the NIHA has a strategic influence, in Kotzebue or the surrounding communities. Key partners in the project include NANA Pacific/NANA Regional Corporation,
the Northwest Arctic Borough School District and additional engineering and building maintenance consultants. It is the team?s desire to develop monitoring and evaluation parameters
that can prove/disprove the technology in an Arctic setting.
The strategic objectives of this project are as follows:
? SO1: Develop monitoring and evaluation criteria and test methodology to evaluate the effectiveness of solar thermal hot water heating in the Arctic;
? SO2: Identify up to 5 commercial entities and 25 residential entities that are viable candidates for a solar hot water heating program in the NW Arctic/NANA Region;
? SO3: Design, procure, and install an appropriate solar hot water heating system;
? SO4: Evaluate the effectiveness of solar thermal hot water heating in NW Alaska.
The proposed project is located in Angoon, Alaska which is a remote native community with a population of approximately 400 residents. Electricity is generated locally by diesel-electric
generation. Most homes and larger buildings, including the schools, use diesel as a heating fuel. The heat recovery project will provide heat to the local schools and reduce their
annual heating fuel requirement. IPEC is working closely with the engineering firm, Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. to make this project successful.
objectives that have been established by stakeholders of the IRP process. The resource portfolio is a set of supply-side and/or demand-side improvements that eliminate any identified
energy or capacity deficits. Supply side improvements would be new generation construction, or modifications to existing generation assets such that energy production or available capacity
is increased. Demand side improvements are system efficiency improvements or peak load modification measures. Stakeholders include concerned citizen groups, commercial and industrial
customers, utility or city government officials, and representatives of state agencies. The stakeholders and the IRP issuing body (The Four Dam Pool Power Agency, FDPPA) establish the
objectives that govern how the resource portfolio is established. Most IRP objectives are governed by the 3 major categories of cost, risk, and environmental impact. The IRP process
includes stakeholder input with final content decisions made by the issuing body (FDPPA).
A note on restructuring:
The FDPPA is also undergoing a restructuring whereby two of the Agency?s four projects are being transferred or sold back to the member utilities. The FDPPA is a Joint Action Agency
organized under State Statute and will remain the same although the name will be changed to the Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA). This planned restructuring is scheduled to close
in January, 2009. SEAPA will remain the owner of the Swan Lake and Tyee Lake hydroelectric facilities as well as associated transmission lines providing Agency power to Ketchikan, Wrangell
and Petersburg including the Swan-Tyee Intertie.
Developing an IRP requires an analysis of the regions generation and transmission system, and an estimation of the regions load growth. Generation and load forecasts are modeled to determine
when and to what extent future energy and/or capacity deficits occur. Energy and capacity deficits are resolved by a combination of constructing new generation facilities, and through
load growth rate or peak hour value reduction via demand side management. The IRP then documents a short term and long term plan to address the energy and capacity deficits.
This project involves constructing a powerhouse, diversion structure with penstock, and substation for a new hydroelectric facility located on the Nenana River upstream of the Healy
Creek confluence. The new substation would connect the hydroelectric power generation facility to GVEA\'s existing high voltage transmission infrastructure in Healy. Electricity from
the new power generation source would be distributed to GVEA\'s 33,000 members from Cantwell to Delta Junction.
The Project is a Reconnaissance Project to investigate the possibilities of installing supplemental or replacement renewable energy for the lighting needs for the public docks and harbors
operated by NPRHA in Tatitlek and Chenega Bay, Alaska. It will include quantifying the renewable energy resource available by erecting a monitoring tower, completing other items of
the reconnaissance phase including consolidating our data into this process, completing environmental screening, reviewing system benefits, proposing a system design, other phase requirements
and lastly the analysis and recommendations.
This is a request for funding to construct a high-penetration wind-diesel system for the community of
Tuntutuliak. The wind diesel system will displace 30% of the diesel fuel currently being used to generate
electricity and used to provide residential home heating. The work plan consists of the installation,
control and integration of five major components:
1. Five (5) Windmatic 17-S Wind turbines on 80 feet-tall lattice towers
2. Diesel power system control and integration upgrades
3. Energy recovery boiler at the school
4. Smart metering system
5. 40 Residential electric thermal room heating units
The wind turbines will be installed 250 feet apart on pile foundations on the abandoned runway.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 39 9/3/2008
Construction will take place during the Summer and Fall of 2009. Each turbine will be connected to the
electrical distribution system via a buried armored cable. A fiber optic cable will be buried alongside the
power cable to provide a communications link with the powerplant.
Three hierarchical methods of integrating the wind into the diesel grid include:
1. Heat recovery with frequency control
2. Adaptations to diesel generators to enable low-load operation
3. An integrated control system that operates both the wind turbines and diesel generators in a
coordinated manner with ceramic thermal storage.
Conceptual Design, Feasibility, and Energy Monitoring
Wind Diesel System
This purpose of this work is to provide a conceptual design and construction cost estimate for to
use wind power to displace diesel fuel for power generation and heating. The scope of work will
include conducting energy use baseline studies, energy resource monitoring and the
development of conceptual designs and cost estimates for construction. This work would also
explore the management and financial feasibility of a wind project. This project would be in
conjunction with other efforts such as those of the Chaninik Wind Group, which is working in the
Bethel region.
The average consistent power in the wind across our region is some of the best to be found in
Alaska, however, this general data must be supplemented with simultaneous electric load data
in each location to better integrate the available wind with the energy needs. Village energy
system and wind monitoring stations will be purchased in Fall of 2009 and installed this winter,
and monitored for one year.
This work is needed in order to move forward with a renewable energy project and obtain future
funding.
Waste Heat Recovery Project: This project will tap off of the excess heat from existing generators at the Dutch Harbor Powerhouse to run a new generator designed to convert the waste
heat to electrical energy. When the NEw Powerhouse is constructed, the waste heat recovery system will be expanded to include excess heat from increased power demands. The Dutch Harbor
Powerhouse serves the residents and various industrial processes in the City of Unalaska and the International Port of Dutch Harbor, which is the number one fishing port in the United
States.
This project will provide a 20-kilowatt solar photovoltaic array of the roof of the Student Recreation Center on the University of Alaska Fairbanks campus. This array will generate
electric power to the University of Alaska Fairbanks electric power grid. All power produced by this project will offset power that the University will not have to purchase or generate.
WCA proposes a hydrokinetic renewable energy project to be implemented on the nearby
Tanana River, approximately 2000-3000 feet downriver from the Richardson Highway crossing
near Big Delta, Alaska. This proposed project encompasses Phases III and IV of a four-phase
program. Reconnaissance and feasibility studies were performed by Electric Power Research
Institute, Inc. (EPRI) in 2007 and 2008. The purpose was to assess technical, economic,
financial, and operational viability of a project and to narrow the focus of final design and
construction. The reconnaissance and feasibility studies have shown that this proposed project
is warranted. Electronic copies of the reconnaissance and feasibility reports are available on
EPRI?s website at http://oceanenergy.epri.com/risec.html#reports.
Building on information gathered in Phases I and II, WCA shall establish the project
configuration and specifications that will be used to guide construction, further refine project cost
estimates, finalize business plans, and obtain land use and resource authorizations required for
construction. This proposed project encompasses the final design and permitting and
construction/operation phases for a pilot RISEC plant and subsequent expanded generating
plant serving the Whitestone Community on the Tanana River. The electricity produced by the
pilot generating plant will be operated in two modes; first, exclusively connected to the remote
Whitestone power distribution grid, and then, when deemed successful, connected to the GVEA
power transmission / distribution grid. This project will be managed by WCA, with technical
support provided by EPRI; system integration and construction management support from CE2
Engineers, Inc. (CE2); a RISEC technology developer to be selected; and other necessary
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 16 9/3/2008
support contractors to be identified and selected. This phased project will be progressively
conducted with a gated decision process allowing for data evaluation prior to proceeding with
construction.
This project will provide a central chilled water system for the West Ridge area of the University of Alaska Fairbanks campus. This central chilled water system will meet the cooling
needs of the buildings on the West Ridge and the needs of the computer center. This project will replace the electrically-driven chillers that are in each building with a central absorption
chilling facility. This cooling system will utilize steam heat that is currently being wasted as its energy source.
Tlingit Haida Central Council (CCTHIA) will construct two containerized mobile biodiesel processing plants to be operated in tandem to take advantage of available feedstock, while also
servicing distinct geographical regions in Alaska. As the relative isolation of the Southeast and Southcentral regions of the state make prices of feedstock and finished biodiesel dependent
upon transportation, we expect to use lower-cost local production and local feedstocks, in addition to imported feedstocks, to bring down the overall costs of the final wholesale and
retail costs of Bioheat, a blended Home Heating Oil that can be used in virtually any existing fuel oil stove for residential and public space heating. The operations will be conducted
by AlaskaSmart Eco-fuels as per a memorandum of agreement.
Birch Creek Village Council is seeking funds to install a solar array in conjunction with a 35kw generator in the community of Birch Creek. The Tribal Council operates the electric
utility and like many others, is experiencing the negative affects of the high cost of diesel. With the solar panels, we anticipate we can generate enough electricity six months of
the year to utilize a 35kw gen set, thereby replacing the need to run the larger 65kw diesel powered generator for a significant portion of the year. The project and the utility serve
the village of Birch Creek. The tribal council and the village corporation (project management/personnel) will be involved in the project.
The Village of Igiugig is located at the outlet of Lake Iliamna, 240 air miles southwest of Anchorage, on
the southern shore of the Kvichak River. Igiugig has a year-round population of 56 (predominantly
Yupik, Aleut, and Athabascan) rising in summer to about 75. Igiugig also provides goods and services to
six area tourism lodges and their respective clients and workforce of 90 additional persons per week.
This lake outlet location provides an ideal site for the study, testing and implementation of river in-stream
energy conversion that will also benefit other Alaska communities considering this form of renewable
energy. A RISEC plant will convert available river kinetic energy into electric power, and feed into the
existing Igiugig electric grid to reduce diesel fuel consumption at the Igiugig power plant. Direct
beneficiaries include the Lake and Peninsula School District (LPSD) and Igiugig electric service
customers.
IVC will be the Grantee under the Renewable Energy Fund project. IVC has teamed up with the
engineering firm of Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E), Electric Power Research Institute
(EPRI), and the Bristol Bay Research and Science Institute (BBSRI). AE&E also brings to the team the
geotechnical firm of Duane Miller Associates, LLC.
AE&E is an Alaska-owned, Anchorage-based firm incorporated in 1993 specifically to provide design
and project management services for rural energy projects. AE&E has built its reputation on the ability to
provide practical design solutions and hands-on construction support to effectively meet the challenges of
rural Alaska. We have fostered excellent working relationships with permitting and regulatory agencies,
which ensures that our projects comply with current interpretation of state and federal regulations. The
engineering staff of AE&E has extensive experience designing and constructing projects in remote sites
throughout the state with particular emphasis in western Alaska. Our primary field of expertise is electric
power generation and distribution, rural fuel storage and handling facilities, and energy systems
integration.
EPRI is a non-profit, public-benefit organization leading innovation in strategic areas of electricity
technology through public-private partnerships. Over the past two and half years, EPRI has performed
techno feasibility studies for offshore wave and tidal energy conversion; wave energy in 2004 and tidal in
2005 and early 2006. The tidal work evaluated the application of water turbines to convert the kinetic
energy in a tidal stream to electricity. The tidal feasibility studies, for good sites, made a compelling case
for investing in projects using this technology to diversify our energy supply portfolio. The case made
was so compelling that within a couple of months of the completion of the EPRI feasibility studies,
approximately 30 applications for preliminary permits were filed by private investors to the FERC and
Nova Scotia Power announced a multi-million dollar tidal in-stream pilot plant in that province.
BBSRI is an independent research institute established by the Bristol Bay Economic Development
Corporation and is one of its non-profit subsidiaries. This multi-disciplinary team uses its technical
expertise to devise and conduct scientific research and monitoring to improve management of fish stocks,
fisheries, and the environments of the Bristol Bay region. The Institute also provides scholarships and onthe-
job training to increase participation by area residents. BBSRI is currently under contract to the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game to manage an ongoing seasonal Kvichak River smolt outmigration
study. They have an established base camp near Igiugig with on-site personnel experienced in the
operation of both traditional single beam upward-looking sonar and side-looking imaging DIDSON sonar
equipment. The fact that this crew will already be situated near the proposed RISEC installation site will
result in substantial savings for the planned RISEC fish impact study. AE&E has a long history of
successful energy-related projects throughout Alaska, and has worked with both IVC and the school
district on numerous projects dating back to 1995. EPRI just concluded an intensive feasibility study of
RISEC technology in Alaska and at the Igiugig site in particular.
Yakutat Power is located in Yakutat, Alaska. The City and Borough of Yakutat has a population of 631,
and is located at the mouth of Yakutat Bay along the Gulf of Alaska, 225 miles northwest of Juneau and
220 miles southeast of Cordova. Yakutat receives monthly barge service during the winter and more
frequent service during summer. Yakutat is equipped with two jet-certified runways and receives jet
service daily. The U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service have offices in Yakutat. This project
will investigate the conversion of readily available wave energy with the long term goal of integrating the
resource into the Yakutat Power electric grid. Direct beneficiaries of this project include all Yakutat
Power electric service customers.
Yakutat Power will be the Grantee under the Renewable Energy Fund grant. Yakutat Power has teamed
up with the engineering firm of Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E) ) and Electric Power
Research Institute (EPRI). AE&E also brings to the team the geotechnical firm of Duane Miller
Associates, LLC.
EPRI is a non-profit, public-benefit organization leading innovation in strategic areas of electricity
technology through public-private partnerships. Over the past four and half years, EPRI has performed
techno feasibility studies for offshore wave and tidal energy conversion; wave energy in 2004 and tidal in
2005 and early 2006. The wave energy work evaluated the application of linear attenuators and
oscillating water columns to convert the potential and kinetic energy in ocean waves to electricity. The
wave energy feasibility studies, for good sites, made a compelling case for investing in projects using this
technology to diversify our energy supply portfolio. The case made was so compelling that within a year
of the completion of the EPRI feasibility studies, approximately 10 applications for preliminary permits
were filed by private investors to the FERC for wave power plants in Oregon and Northern California.
AE&E is an Alaska-owned, Anchorage-based firm incorporated in 1993 specifically to provide design
and project management services for rural energy projects. AE&E has built its reputation on the ability to
provide practical design solutions and hands-on construction support to effectively meet the challenges of
rural Alaska. We have fostered excellent working relationships with permitting and regulatory agencies,
which ensures that our projects comply with current interpretation of state and federal regulations. The
engineering staff of AE&E has extensive experience designing and constructing projects in remote sites
throughout the state with particular emphasis in western Alaska. Our primary field of expertise is electric
power generation and distribution, rural fuel storage and handling facilities, and energy systems
integration. AE&E has a long history of successful energy-related projects throughout Alaska, and has
worked with Yakutat Power on several energy-related projects dating back to 1991.
This proposal is to conduct a reconnaissance and feasibility study for alternative energy use
for the school facilities in the communities of Whittier, Chenega Bay, and Tatitlek operated
by Chugach School District. Development of sustainable alternative energy is a School
Board objective in Chugach School District where fuel costs consume an escalating
proportion of the annual budget, detracting from the primary mission of education. Chugach
School District has been an education leader and model for other rural Alaska school
districts for over 15 years and now wants to be one of the first to create a solution to a
problem plaguing rural Alaska. A description of each communities is included here.Chenega Bay is located on Evans Island at Crab Bay, 42 miles southeast of Whittier in
Prince William Sound. It is 104 air miles southeast of Anchorage and 50 miles east of
Seward. The area encompasses 28.8 sq. miles of land and .3 sq. miles of water. Winter
temperatures range from 17 to 28; summer temperatures range 49 to 63. Average annual
precipitation includes 66 inches of rain and 80 inches of snowfall. The village was destroyed
and over half of all residents perished by tsunamis in the Sound after the 1964 earthquake.
The village was reestablished twenty years later on Evans Island, at the site of the former
Crab Bay herring saltery. In the summer of 1984, 21 homes, an office building, community
hall, school, 2 teacher\'s houses, a church and community store were constructed. Chenega
Bay is an Aluti?iq Native community where most residents practice a subsistence lifestyle.
The Chenega School is a 6,000 square foot facility.Tatitlek is located on the northeast shore of Tatitlek Narrows, on the Alaska Mainland in
Prince William Sound. It lies 30 miles east of Valdez by sea near Bligh Island, and 30 air
miles northwest of Cordova. The area encompasses 7.3 sq. miles of land and 0 sq. miles of
water. Winter temperatures range from 17 to 28; summers average 49 to 63. Annual
precipitation includes 28 inches of rain and 150 inches of snowfall. Fish processing and
oyster farming provide some employment in Tatitlek. A dam provides water, which is
treated and stored in a 170,000-gallon tank. A piped water and sewer system serves all 34
homes. The piped community septic tank system discharges via an ocean outfall. The
Tatitlek School is 9,500 square feet.
Whittier is on the northeast shore of the Kenai Peninsula, at the head of Passage Canal. It
is on the west side of Prince William Sound, 75 miles southeast of Anchorage. The area
encompasses 12.5 sq. miles of land and 7.2 sq. miles of water. Winter temperatures range
from 17 to 28; summer temperatures average 49 to 63. Average annual precipitation
includes 66 inches of rain and 80 inches of snowfall. The major employers in Whittier are
the City and Crowley Maritime. Water is derived from wells and a reservoir. Water storage
capacity is 1.2 million gallons. The entire community is served by a piped water and sewer
system, and over 95% of homes are fully plumbed. The Whittier Community School is a
21,000 sf facility.
This project will be managed by Chugach School District with expertise contracted for both
the reconnaissance and feasibility phases. The qualifications of the contractors are discussed
under Section 3.4 of this proposal.
The Municipality of Skagway (Municipality) proposes to construct the West Creek Hydroelectric
Project (Project) located on West Creek, approximately 7 miles west of Skagway and adjacent to
the small community of Dyea. The primary purpose of the Project would be offsetting diesel
generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway from May through September each year. Up to
five cruise ships per day dock in Skagway for 12-15 hours and continuously operate their diesel
plants to provide for on-board electricity consumption. The continuous stack emissions spread a
blue haze at about the 1,500 foot elevation where vegetation has been noticeably affected. The
Project will improve air quality and save vegetation in the area (there may be other unknown
environmental benefits). To emphasize how serious the air quality of the area is being taken, the
National Park Service, Municipality of Skagway, and Alaska Power & Telephone Company
(AP&T) have a cooperative agreement to place and maintain equipment at AP&T?s Dewey
Lakes Hydro project site to monitor this pollution.
The Alaska Power Authority had a feasibility study conducted for the Project by R.W. Beck and
Associates in 1981-82. That study focused on a development that would meet the electricity
needs of Skagway and Haines rather than the nascent cruise ship industry. It recommended an
installed capacity of 6.0 MW and a 20,000 acre-foot reservoir formed by a 120-feet high
concrete-faced rockfill dam. The proposed Project will be significantly different than proposed
by Beck in that the installed capacity will be greater and the reservoir storage will be much less
(possibly run-of-river with no storage). Nevertheless, the Beck study provides an excellent
starting point for the proposed re-evaluation of the site, and therefore the Municipality believes
that a Phase I reconnaissance study is not necessary.
West Creek drains from an ice field into the Taiya River. The Municipality has already
requested the land the Project would be on from the State as Municipal Entitlement Land. Since
the stream is glacial, flows are very high in the summer, which is also when the cruise ships are
active. This fortuitous coincidence between flow and load allows for a relatively large installed
capacity with little or no storage. Preliminary analysis indicates that a Project with a capacity
to serve one large cruise ship could be operated on a run-of-river basis. Increasing the capacity
so the Project could serve two or three cruise ships is possible, but a storage reservoir would be
required to make the generation dependable. The costs and benefits of these capacity/storage
alternatives will be a primary focus of the proposed Phase II studies.
This project is to conduct an assessment of potential sources of alternative energy for the schools and communities served by the Yukon Koyukuk School District. These communities are
Alakaket, Hughes, Huslia, Kaltag, Koyukuk, Manley Hot Springs, Minto, Nulato and Ruby. Potential alternative energy sources in the District include hydrokinetic, geothermal, biomass
(wood ), waste heat and wind. There is a high degree of interest in developing alternative energy in the Interior. The District plans to coordinate with other agencies working in this
area. The Gwitchyaa Zhee Corporation in Fort Yukon is developing a much larger wood fuel project than would be required by YKSD communities but they provide a model to follow. The
District will contract with the consultants assisting in the development of that project, Dr. William Wall, Ph.D. and Peter Olsen. The biomass potential community of Kaltag will be
address in a separate grant application. The Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council (YRITWC) has an experimental hydrokinetic project in Ruby that might have application to our
other river based communities. Dr. Brian Hirsch of the Council will assist in the evaluation of harnessing river power. River conditions in the Region will be reviewed and the two
most promising site will be selected for evaluation. Gwen Holdmann of the Alaska Center for Energy and Power at the University of Alaska Fairbanks will complete a basic reconnaissance
of the geothermal potential in the District for direct use and power generation applications. The District will review waste heat options with local utilities. Manley may have good
waste heat potential.From initial review it appears wind generation opportunities are limited. This will be confirmed with AEA. Kathy Christy will serve as the District?s project manager
responsible for coordinating the work of the consultants and the compilation of the Phase I report and recommendations.
This project is to develop a wood energy project for the Kaltag school and community. The school is the largest consumer of power in the community so that it is appropriate for the District
to take the lead role in the development of this project, but for biomass utilization to be sustainable in the community and to possibly expand to other nearby communities a cooperative
effort is required. This project will be developed in phases. The first phase will be to identify the energy requirements and to confirm the availability of the resource. A preliminary
cost benefit analysis will be conducted to verify that the project and fuel supply has the potential to be sustainable and that the projected cost will justify the development costs.
Environmental issues will be identified and community meetings held to confirm support for the project. Potential business partners will be identified. If the first phase of development
yields favorable results the project will proceed to Phase II and a more detailed business plan and project concept design will be developed. The District plans to contract with William
Wall, PhD. who is developing the Ft. Yukon Bio mass project, to perform the reconnaissance, feasibility studies and harvest management plan. To proceed to final design, Phase III
the commitment of a wood supplier is required. The existing heating system at the Kaltag School is in very poor condition and the District has designed a replacement system and is
waiting for approval of a Department of Education grant for construction. The design of a conventional hydronic heating system for the Kaltag School heating has been completed to the
design development level by WH Pacific. The engineer effort to date will be coordinated with wood heat engineering. Kathy Christy, an experienced project manager, will serve as the
District?s project manager responsible for coordinating the work of the consultants and the compilation of the reports and recommendations.
The project will be located in Mountain Village. The tribe with cooperation from the city will be the main entities involved in the project. We request to purchase and utilize small
wind turbines for the municipal and tribal government buildings, in all approximately seven buildings.
The Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal system was extensively studied in the late 1970s and early
1980s with a variety of geological, geochemical, and geophysical studies. Unfortunately the
execution of these surveys and interpretation of the data from these earlier studies did not result
in a thorough understanding of the area. By example, 6 very closely spaced holes were drilled
ranging from depths of 150 ft to 1001ft, passing through a very shallow plume of thermal water
that may be flowing in a southerly direction. Chemical analyses from this earlier work are
incomplete. It is proposed that the existing Pilgrim wellheads will be reconditioned so that static
and flowing temperature logs can be rerun in the existing wells and new water samples
collected. Additionally, a Controlled Source Audio Magnetotellurics (CSMAT) survey will be
combined with new shallow (+ 200?) temperature-gradient holes drilled away from the cluster of
existing wells to try to identify the location of the hotter upflow zone supplying thermal fluid to
the shallow aquifer. The goal of this project will ultimately be to drill a deeper hole into the
upflow zone to determine its temperature and water chemistry. The deeper hole, and perhaps
some of the other holes will also be flowed to obtain water samples for chemical analysis and
possibly collect some pressure interference data between the wells. These data, combined with
an airborne thermal imaging survey to determine total heat flow to the surface should be
adequate to determine total potential output of the system for sustainable long term
development. The proposed project is a joint effort between the following partners:
? Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP)
? US Department of the Interior (USGS/BLM)
? The Alaska Energy Authority
? The Catholic Bishop of Northern Alaska, (owner of Pilgrim Hot Springs)
The project will be led by ACEP. In addition to the project partners, letters of support have been
provided by:
? Mary?s Igloo Native Council (owners of property adjacent to Pilgrim)
? Nome Joint Utilities
The project has the potential to affect communities throughout the Seward Peninsula, including
Nome, Teller, Brevig Mission, and, if the resource is substantial, Kotzebue. This project, in
conjunction with a sister investigation of the greater Seward Peninsula led by the Alaska Village
Electric Cooperative (AVEC), is intended as a first leg of a broader geothermal drilling and
exploration program. For this reason, this project will include recommendations for next steps in
terms of this larger reconnaissance study.
The Mount Spurr area represents one of the best opportunities in Alaska for to develop a utility-scale
geothermal power plant. Phase 1 exploration efforts must be performed before moving forward to project
development. The target site is located 70 miles west of Anchorage on state land. Field work was
performed at the site in 1985. It is likely that the project would serve communities along the Railbelt and
the power purchased by one of the Railbelt electric utilities.
The grant request is for initial resource studies and assessment. The plan assumes a timeline of three
years with the bulk of the field work done in the summer months. The plan calls for an initial geological
scouting, mapping and sampling work, with progression to aerial and ground geophysics work,
culminating in a gradient and slim holes drilling program. Field surveys and surface studies during the
Summer of 2009, which Ormat would finance 100% from its own funds. The grant would cover
additional field surveys and geophysical studies and shallow temperature gradient wells during the
summer of 2010. A slim hole drilling program would occur during the Summer of 2011, if justified.
There are about 13 miles between the nearest road and the southeast flank of Crater Peak to our leases.
The objective of this field survey aspect of the potential geothermal area should be an early focus as to
cost for infrastructure and project development, including access roads and transmission. The primary
obstacle for this phase is the short time window (May through September) for exploration to avoid
extreme weather.
This project will assess the practicality of using heat pumps in different regions of Alaska.
Several technologies and unique configurations will be examined, including ground-source heat
pumps, air-source heat pumps, solar thermal storage, and diurnal thermal storage. In the case of
ground-source heat pumps, the ground temperature resource will be assessed by region.
Additionally, low-temperature heat applications will be explored. This project will be a joint
effort between UAF\'s Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) and the Cold Climate
Housing Research Center (CCHRC). The project will culminate with a final published report of
the findings.
The geothermal plant at Chena Hot Springs has been in continual operation since 2006 and is
the only operating geothermal plant in the State of Alaska. Since startup, there has been a
decline in geothermal fluid temperature and pressure. This may be due to either engineering or
reservoir issues. In order to operate the plant in a sustainable manner and develop other similar
and possibly more marginal projects sustainably, it is critical that we understand the underlying
mechanisms driving this production decline. Following this analysis, a suitable production
scheme and monitoring schedule should be developed. The proposed project is a cooperative
program between the University of Alaska and Chena Hot Springs Resort. A numerical
reservoir model of the Chena geothermal system will be created and its performance matched
to the historical production data. This model can then be used to assist in the making of
development strategy decisions.
Prior to production startup, geologic, geochemical, geophysical and well test information were
used to develop a conceptual model of the Chena Hot Springs system. However, to truly
understand the reservoir dynamics and adopt an appropriate production scenario, a numerical
model of the system is needed. Data from both the shallow geothermal system (less than 1000
ft depth) and the deeper source system (1000-4000 ft) are needed to characterize this model.
The shallow system properties have been well characterized in previous studies. To effectively
predict future performance, temperature, pressure and flow data relating to the deeper system is
also required. Chena Hot Springs has received a U.S. Department of Energy grant to drill a
deep well to explore for a higher temperature geothermal resource beneath the facility. The
information that will be obtained from drilling this well will prove invaluable for the understanding
of geothermal potential in Interior Alaska as well as providing crucial input data for the Chena
Hot Springs reservoir model. A resource assessment achieved through the testing of multiple
production scenarios will be integrated with a conceptual design of the power plant production
system. A generic feasibility analysis will generate recommendations for the final design of the
Chena Hot Springs geothermal project. The outcomes of the modeling effort may be transferred
to other geothermal systems such as Circle, Manley and Pilgrim Hot Springs and to other sites
within the Central Alaska Hot Springs Belt.
The proposed Victor Creek hydro project could produce up to 5-MW and would be located near
Lawing, Alaska just south of Moose Pass, Alaska (see the map below produced by HDR Alaska,
Inc.). Kenai Hydro seeks to develop the project in compliance with current low impact hydro
guidelines and practices. The scope of this project will look at the Victor Creek project as a
stand-alone hydroelectric facility. Power from the project would be available to customers of
Homer Electric Association and other areas served by the existing Railbelt transmission grid.
Kenai Hydro, LLC (KHL) is a partnership among Homer Electric Association, Inc. (HEA), enXco
and Cook Inlet Region, Inc. (CIRI) that was formed for the purpose of evaluating and developing
low impact hydroelectric facilities.
Along with many communities in Alaska, Chena Power is not located directly in one of Alaska?s
larger cities making it heavily reliant on diesel and other fossil fuels. In order to offset the rising
cost of fuel, Chena Power has undertaken well known steps to greatly reduce the amount of fuel
that it requires by means of renewable energy sources. By taking these steps, Chena Power is
providing cost effective solutions for many Alaskan communities (large and small) to become
less reliant on non renewable sources of energy. Chena Power is proposing to use excess
electricity that is produced by its geothermal power plant towards the production of hydrogen gas
at Chena Hot Springs Resort. Chena Power plans to install a 60 kg/day hydrogen generation
module, a 6667 psi compression module, a 76.5 kg hydrogen storage module, and a hydrogen
dispenser module all of which will be purchased from Hydrogenics. Also in this proposal is a
plan to convert three 12 passenger vans to run off of hydrogen. This will allow Chena Power to
produce hydrogen to reduce the use of diesel in transportation and to reduce the propane in the
operation of appliances on site.
The Manley Village Council is applying for a Planning, Feasibility, and Coordination grant to develop the geothermal resources available in and around Manley Hot Springs for the purposes
of providing economical, stable, reliable, and environmentally friendly power generation and home heating options to its tribal members and other comunity members. Pending partners
include the Bean Ridge Corporation, Doyon, Ltd., the Alaska Energy authority, UAF\'s Alaska Center for Energy and Power, Chena Hot Springs, and private landowners in the Manley area.
AEB proposes a resource assessment/feasibility analysis/conceptual design project of geothermal sites in the targeted service area.
Goal: The AGDAP goal is to ascertain the feasibility of geothermal power generation for regional communities and develop conceptual design documents/reports for geothermal generation
on the eastern Alaska Peninsula and associated Aleutian Islands. The AGDAP strategic objectives are as follows:
SO 1: Identify potential geothermal sites in the Aleutian Island Service Area.
SO 2: Undertake a geological, geochemistry, and geophysical assessment of targeted sites for geothermal power generation potential.
SO3: Undertake a geothermal drilling program to promote regional geothermal interests.
SO4: Develop conceptual design and business plan for follow-on phases of the projects.
SO5: Conduct an optimization phase in the conceptual design to determine how to supply power either from one centrally located geothermal plant or from many smaller geothermal plants,
so the communities involved can be evaluated. Included will be evaluating the use of transmission lines for power versus supplying hot water via a pipeline to one or several geothermal
power plant(s).
The communities represented by AEB are Akutan, Cold Bay, False Pass, King Cove, Nelson Lagoon and Sand Point. The Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association (APIA) will work with AEB to assist
in the with the community outreach and project coordination. The Aleutian Islands communities represented by APIA are Akutan, Atka, False Pass, King Cove, Nelson Lagoon, Nikolski, Sand
Point and Unalaska. Other communities that are a part of the Aleutian Chain, but not a part of AEB or APIA are: Adak, Amchitka, and Attu. Some of these Aleutian Islands Region communities
have been abandoned (Belkofski, Pauloff Harbor and Unga), and the Tribes have been relocated in other communities (e.g. Sand Point). Accordingly, we are proposing to focus on the geothermal
resources in and near Adak, Atka, Cold Bay, False Pass, King Cove, Nelson Lagoon, Nikolski, Sand Point and Unalaska.
The proposed effort will involve the Tribal and City Councils of the above communities, Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Utilities, village corporations, and industrial interests
in the area.
The AEB/APIA team is aware of other geothermal proposals that have a complementary scope of work and synergies that have or will be submitted to the Alaska Energy Authority. If jointly
funded there are opportunities for cost sharing and co-mobilization that would not be achieved with independent proposals. The AEB/APIA team is willing to cooperate with these other
projects to promote cost sharing, co-mobilization, procurement, and cooperation.
Once the most promising sites have been determined, the technical team will conduct further ground-based geophysical assessments in coordination with the geologic surveys to be conducted
by Hattenburg, Dilley, & Linnell. The study will also include a drilling program that would collaborate with the USGS/BLM drill rig and associated state drilling program if available
or a private sector sub-contractor. Finally, AEB is proposing conceptual designs and transmission routing studies for the proposed sites.
As a whole, this study will serve as an essential decision support tool for making policy decisions, planning strategies for further exploration and development.
The proposed effort will involve the Tribal and City Councils of the above communities, village corporations, and industrial interests in the area. Key partners in the project will include
regional non-profits and for profit corporations, NANA Pacific, the UAF/Alaska Center for Energy and Power, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell (HDL), and additional engineering/scientific
consultants.
This project is for a reconnaissance study to investigate using hydrokinetic power to supply approximately 1.0 MW of renewable electricity to the City of Galena. Hydrokinetic power
extracts power from the velocity of water using turbines lowered into a river, and is benign compared to hydropower since no dams are required. Aerial photos suggest that the Yukon
River is narrow and straight at Galena, suggesting an ideal location for hydrokinetic power. However, to understand the most advantageous location (where the highest velocity exists)
for deploying hydrokinetic turbines to produce power, a thorough scientific study of the site needs to be completed. The project will perform a quality investigation of river bathymetry,
ice thickness and current vector (velocity and direction) survey.
This grant request identifies the repairs and upgrades required to bring the system back on line and to improve its long term efficiency and output. Since the Akutan hydroelectric generation
system has been in place for nearly 15 years, many requirements such as site assessment, reconnaissance, conceptual design and site control do not apply. Therefore, this grant application
is requesting funds for:
?
Phase III Final Design and Permitting
?
Phase IV Construction, Commissioning, Operation
and Reporting
The tasks for this project are defined in Sections 2.5 and 2.6 of the grant application instructions.
AEA renewable energy grant guidelines require a multi-phase approach to project development. A feasibility assessment of the Loud Creek resource was previously completed at the direction
of AEA. The assessment found Loud Creek to be ?an obvious choice? for development. Therefore, the City of Akutan is requesting funds for:
?
Phase II Feasibility Analysis, Conceptual Design
The tasks for this project are defined in Section 2.4 of the grant application instructions.
The City of Akutan intends to evaluate the feasibility of developing the Hot Springs Bay Valley into an active geothermal resource for power generation and related applications. The
purposes and anticipated results of this effort are those set forth in Section 2.3 Phase I ? Reconnaissance Requirements of the renewable energy grant application instructions. The
project will involve four primary tasks:
1.
Prospecting: Analysis of existing data and previous scientific studies. Geological, geophysical and geochemical field work sufficient to support exploratory drilling.
2.
Exploratory Drilling and Well Testing: Includes mobilization, drilling of test wells, flow testing and demobilization based on the results of prospecting.
3.
Preliminary Feasibility Study: A comprehensive assessment of the proposed geothermal development project, including technical alternatives, land issues, environmental screening, financial
and operational viability.
4.
Economic Assessment: Examines Akutan?s growing infrastructure, including airport construction, port expansion and growth of Trident Seafoods. Assesses potential for cooperative development
among the City, Akutan Corporation, Aleut Corporation, Trident Seafoods and other stakeholders. Identifies public and private financing alternatives. Defines the key elements of the
business plan for development and operation of the resulting power system.
Completion of the Phase I Reconnaissance project will allow all potential stakeholders, including the State of Alaska, to determine the potential technical and economic viability of
the proposed geothermal development before proceeding with feasibility and conceptual design tasks (Phase II).
The NSB recently commissioned a preliminary feasibility study entitled "Energy Options for the City of Atqasuk"(Attachment A, disk copy). The recently completed study assessed the alternative
energy options that could reduce or replace Atqasuk\'s dependence on diesel fuel for its power and heating needs. Natural gas from the Barrow gas fields proved to be the most viable
energy source.
An economic analysis was performed on:
a) shipping natural gas frm the Walapka gas field to Atqasuk via pipeline,
b) shipping compressed natural (CNG) from Walapka to Atqasuk,
c) transmitting electric power from a gas fired power plant in Barrow to Atqasuk via a new overhead transmission line to supply electric power and continue the use of fuel oil for heating,
and
d) transmitting electric power from a gas fired power plant in Barrow to Atqasuk via a new overhead transmission line to provide both power and heating.
Alternative "d" proved to be the most attractive.
This application requests funds to:
*Evaluate and select the power transmission option (HVDC vs. 3 phase AC) via comparative lifecycle cost analysis, technical viability and system reliability.
* Evaluate the use of composite poles in the Arctic. The poles are 1/3 the weight and 4 to 5 times the strength of wood poles. They can also be shipped in 25 foot sections.
*Evaluate the capacity of the Barrow Utilities & Electric Cooperative Inc. power plant for the additional demand.
*Determine business structure, rates and O&M responsibilities
*Evaluate and select the optimum 70 mile long route from Barrow to Atqasuk.
*Evaluate the impace of the added demand on the Barrow natural gas reserves.
*Evaluate land ownership issues.
*Evaluate environmental issues.
*Identify permit requirements
*Determine design parameters for wind and ice loads in arctic conditions.
*Develop the design and cost estimate of a power transmission system that will serve Atqasuk, Walakpa Gas Field and also facilitate a future expansion to Wainwright.
The North Slope Borough will be the primary participant and will utilize internal expertise and retain external consultants and contractors that have special expertise in designing power
transmission systems, building remove facilities in the high arctic, performing environmental assessments in the NSB, permitting this kind of facility in Alaska, and evaluating natural
gas production impace and reservoir potential.
The NSB recently commission ed an update of the Project Analysis Report (feasibility study) entitled "Village Heat Recovery" dated February 2006. The prior study assessed the previously
constructed waste lines and costs associated with waste heat utilization in Arctic and/or permafrost conditions in six NSB villages. The study verified that use of waste heat could
reduce or replace dependence on diesel fuel for its heating needs in NSB area wide villages. With rising fuel costs, it is now feasible to install waste heat lines in Point Lay.
This application requests funds to cover the following expenses:
* Design and construction administration services
* Construction cost estimates
* Construction costs
* NSB employeed training in operating and maintaining waste heat systems.
The North Slope Borough will be the primary participant and will utilize internal expertise and retain external consultants and contractors that have special expertise in designing waste
heat pipe lines, connecting building heating plants to the pipe lines, and recommending operations and maintenance schedules.
The NSB recently commissioned an update of the Project Analysis Report (feasibility study) entitled ?Village Heat Recovery? and dated February 2006. The prior study assessed the previously
constructed waste lines and costs associated with waste heat utilization in Arctic and/or permafrost conditions in six NSB villages. The study verified that use of waste heat could
reduce or replace dependence on diesel fuel for its heating needs in NSB area wide villages. With rising fuel costs, it is now feasible to install waste heat lines in Wainwright.
This application requests funds to:
? Provide schematic design services
? Identify and mitigate environmental issues
? Provide construction cost estimates
? Finalize land, routing and site control issues
? Complete design and bid documents
? Provide construction costs
? Provide for construction administration services
? Provide NSB employee training in operating and maintaining waste heat systems
The North Slope Borough will be the primary participant and will utilize internal expertise and retain external consultants and contractors that have special expertise in designing waste
heat pipe lines, connecting building heating plants to the pipe lines, and recommending operations and maintenance schedules.
Phase III of the Wainwright Coal Bed Methane is in the vicinity of Wainwright, Alaska. The parties that will be involved in this will be the North Slope Borough, United States Geological
Survey and Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. This phase will consist of drilling delineation wells at the landfill and the Wainwright Lagoon.
The Alaska Gasline Port Authority (AGPA) will prepare a feasibility analysis for a new natural
gas distribution system to provide service to the 3300 potential customers ofNorth Pole, Moose
Creek, and Salcha, areas. Residents currently heat with home heating oil, coal, and/or wood.
Natural gas service from Fairbanks Natural Gas is not available outside ofthe city ofFairbanks.
The feasibility analysis would include but not be limited to preparing a conceptual design ofthe
high pressure and distribution system, preparing a base computer model ofthe proposed system,
preparing various design scenarios using the base model as a foundation, developing and
reviewing various design scenarios including location ofgate stations, district regulators, and
high pressure main routing, preparing conceptual rate schedule, preparing conceptual
construction costs estimates, preparing a cost/revenue comparisons between the various
scenarios, recommending a mostfeasible/practical conceptual design, and recommending
construction phasing.
Project will be located in the fishing ports of coastal Alaska. From Ketchikan to Dutch Harbor
we will be surveying the 20 larger communities involved in the fishing industry to catalog their
waste oil production, and where resources are presently used. That information will be shared
with state and local authorities to show potential as recyclable fuel and waste disposal. This oil
could be utilized as fuel in school buses, generators, garbage trucks, or as any #2 fuel.
2.3
EarthRun Energy will provide a sustainable source of high grade wood chips for biomass
heating in the city of Anchorage, Alaska while strengthening and beautifying the urban forests.
In Anchorage, urban forests are currently overgrown presenting fire and disease problems. It is
the right time to make a sick forest a productive and healthy forest. EarthRun has worked hard to
come up with the cleanest, quietest and least interruptive way of harvesting the dead and
unhealthy trees from our urban forests, chipping them, and heating one municipal building, the
Russian Jack greenhouse. EarthRun Energy will work closely with the municipality to return the
forests to a healthy state.
This funding request is for a three phased high penetration wind/diesel power and heating system that will eventually be capable of providing over half of Pilot Point\'s heating and
energy needs without a battery storage system. The project will serve Pilot Point and be located at the designated City owned wind park site which now has two small 10kWh wind turbines
and towers with one producing power for over five years and the second ready for installation in November. The site is located away from the coast, residential areas, and avian flight
and feeding routes. The project will produce excess power during cold, predominately north wind winter periods and provide heating for residential homes through electric thermal impact
stoves as well as a boiler grid interface system to heat centrally located public buildings. Our steadiest winds are from the north tend to occur in the winter, are very cold and are
strongest at the time when heating relief is the most needed. The project is also needed to stabilize kWh rates and allow for economic development. Pilot Point is rich in natural
renewable resources that cannot be developed without sustainable energy. This Intelligent Energy Systems will manage the engineering and field operations with Frederick Reynolds the
on site construction manager. Valerie Jefferies, a highly qualified and experienced City Manager will be the point of contact and execution for the grant representing the City and
Utilities interests with Steve Kramer the plant operator/electrician and mayor. Gregory Kingsley who has ten years of grant writing and management in Pilot Point will act as project
manager. All of the aforementioned have had years of experience in managing and working on similar projects in Alaska.
Pellet stoves utilized in homes will alleviate the high costs of heating homes. A self contained pellet plant can process pellets from willows found in all the myriad rivers of the
Yukon Delta. The use of biomass pellets will reduce consumption of fossil fuels and create needed jobs for residents. Kotlik has an estimated population of 670 and 130 households.
The success of a project as this can be expanded to other villatges in rural Alaska.
This project is located on the outskirts of Chitina, Alaska, to serve the City of Chitina, the
Chitina Airport, and the Chitina community. Generating low cost, sustainable renewable energy
and extending the existing power distribution utility to the hydro-electric facility are the two
main goals of this project. The existing 25 year old diesel generator plant provides expensive
environmentally dirty power of limited reliability.
The options for hydro-electric generation facilities have been previously studied for several
waterways in the area. (reference appendix) Development of the most affordable, permittable,
and sustainable option, Fivemile Creek near the Chitina Airport, with a line extension
connection to the existing utility distribution system would provide reliable, low cost, local
renewable energy source for a community dependent on high operation cost fossil fuel-powered
diesel generators.
The proposed four mile line extension from the City of Chitina to the hydro electric facility and
the pending new DC funded diesel powerhouse is a combination of overhead, underground, and
submerged electrical distribution facilities. (reference appendix) It will also provide renewable
interconnected power to the local clinic, Alaska DOT facilities and the Airport. Design for the
four mile extension of the distribution facilities has been developed, but funding is lacking to
complete the construction. The pending new diesel powerhouse funded by DC will have modern
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 16 9/3/2008
switch gear that will seamlessly integrate into the proposed new hydro project The design and
operation will be similar to other small hydro projects Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) is
currently working on. (Ouzinkie, Larsen Bay, Pelican, King Cove)
CEI seeks this grant in anticipation of project management support from Alaska Energy
Authority. Discussions regarding the management and construction of the proposed hydro
project have been held with Bruce Tiedeman, Kris Noonan and Alan Fetters with AEA.
In order to effectively reduce the amount of diesel consumption in KEA?s power
plant, thermal energy must be utilized to the fullest. In order to do so, heat from
both the jacket water system and the exhaust heat should be captured. KEA
currently utilizes roughly one third of the available thermal energy which
originates from the jacket water system. The exhaust will be captured via HRSR
stack heat exchangers, manufactured by Cain Industries. Waste heat absorbed
into the existing 50/50 glycol loop can generate net 162 kW electricity from an
Ammonia Power Cycle, designed by Energy Concepts. The recovered heat will
also be utilized in an updated ammonia absorption ice maker and an extended
district heating system.
5 MW Biomass Combined Heat & Power Project ("CHP" or "Cogeneration") as the first phase of the repowering of KAPP to provide the thermal energy needs of the ARRC, ADF&G and other commercial
customers within economic reach of the Project and provide power to help ML&P and Chugach meet new generation needs.
Kuskokwim kinetic energy can be measured in the billions. At present the indication is to use the technology born from recent success in tidal and wave kinetic projects in our state.
These were born from the successes of low revolving generators used in wind generating systems. Together they paint a pretty picture wind, oceans producing cheap renewable energy. Unfortunately
this isn?t the reality, they are any thing but cheap, the wind farms are plagued by rising maintenance cost, imagine what ours will be out here, with the damn thing under water and
ice. The price of a watt to install is staggering, close to 25 dollars a watt. The Prototype under our consideration will reduce the install cost to 1.50 to 3.00 dollars per watt, a
85% reduction. We are able to accomplish this by eliminating the generator from the kinetic hydro turbine and placing it on shore and transferring captured river kinetic energy in
the form of slowly revolving torque through a drive line configuration encased in line pipe or drilling casing. By eliminating the marriage of the generator to the turbine allows us
to develop torque farms by tying several turbines output to one line, thus eliminating the expensive slow RPM generator and replacing it with a more durable and inexpensive unit. At
present none of the Hydro-kinetic being consider are suitable for our shallow river, 20? deep channels exist but are rare. It is part of our efforts will be to design low profile turbines
to accommodate the rivers profile without dredging.
It Isn?t Easy To Be Green; But it is Entirely Possible.
Feasibility Study
This study examines the opportunity, analyzes the possibility, and determines the feasibility of providing a stand-alone fish waste-processing facility that produces and uses clean energy
from renewable resources. It serves the commercial fishery and processing plants (7 land-based processing facilities, 3 floating processing facilities and several smaller independent
seller/operators) and the community of Naknek, King Salmon, and South Naknek, Alaska. It is a model plant that, when proven successful, will be recreated throughout the fisheries of
the State and the nation, and the world.
This facility serves the ecology and the economy as it provides supplemental clean energy from renewable sources to the locally owned cooperative energy association. This energy counteracts
the drain on the power grid during the fish processing season ? which is what creates the drain. In short, this model plant and its subsequent generations are usage neutral.
A wonderful and significant side-benefit of this proposed facility is that it utilizes the approximately 30-40% waste of fish products currently being dumped into the environment as
waste. While this waste is generally bio-degradable and may not always be environmentally unfriendly, it represents a huge waste of resources; resources that required energy to obtain;
resources that could be (and, now, will be) transformed into fuel (and other useful and healthy value added products) instead of simply being dumped back into the environment as garbage.
This type of facility need not be a ?highly profitable? business in the traditional sense in order to be highly beneficial to the local economy and, eventually, the world economy. While
providing supplemental clean energy fuel, it reduces unnecessary waste with its inherent potential harm to the environment. Even though it may be argued that such potential harm is
negligible, such waste and potential harm, no matter how slight offends the sensibilities, especially when it is unnecessary waste of environmental products (fish) which, in this case,
also happen to be living creatures ? and particularly when the alternative is transforming such waste into useful by products including clean, supplemental energy.
Bristol Bay Borough and Naknek Electric Association have joined in this responsible and cooperative scientific effort in the largest sockeye salmon fishery in the world to perform this
study and assess the initial, as well as its ultimate, practicality and profitability of such a facility.
The creation of this facility carries with it an opportunity for the local population, including the indigenous native population, to operate a model business that produces clean energy
and healthy, useful products as it achieves an ideal of Native American traditionalists and Green Planet idealists: Self sustaining, environmentally friendly production ? with no waste.
1) Market Issues ? This study will prove that there is a huge future need as well as adequate demand currently for the energy (and the value added products) produced and conserved by
this facility. This facility will serve as a model of a clean renewable energy production and conservation and the reduction of waste of environmental products (fish) which, as stated
are also living creatures.
2) Organizational Issues ? This project combines the skills and talents ? and idealistic objectives ? of technical and scientific communities with the local workforce and values. This
facility can and will be staffed and managed to a significant extent by qualified locals. The feasibility study will demonstrate how that will be done effectively and profitably.
3) Technical issues ? The equipment and technology needed ? where it can be obtained ? cost of technology and equipment ? when it can be operational ? etc. will be determined by the
feasibility study. There will be extensive study into best practices to deal with the amount of possible waste to be processed and disposed of according to regulatory, practical, and
ideal (e.g. ecological) requirements.
4) Financial issues ? Start up costs ? operating costs ? revenue and energy projections ? sources of financing ? profitability analysis ? etc. are impossible to determine until the feasibility
study is complete. The feasibility study is what will determine and propose the processes, resources and equipment necessary to create the final products and services to be produced.
The ideal objective of our facility is to produce clean energy from fish waste to reduce to zero the waste produced in processing fish ? and operate from its own clean energy produced
from such waste (which will then no longer be considered ?waste?). We collect undesired fish processing waste from cooperating commercial processors and render it into value added products
and resources. In so doing, we use as much as possible only renewable sources of energy particularly those created or released in commercial fish processing.
That ideal objective achieves the high standard of Native American traditionalists and Green Planet idealists: No waste ? and no harm to the environment.
In reaching that ideal objective, we produce and utilize only clean energy from renewable sources such as fish oil biofuel rendered from fish processing and energy obtained by harnessing
wind and solar power in a cogeneration situation.
1-100% of the fish processing waste is cost-effectively or profitably converted to fish oil and fish pellets and other value added products and
2-100% of the fuel is cost effectively produced from renewable energy sources (specifically fish oil, biofuel, wind and solar)
Our practical objective is to approach the ideal objective ever closer until the ideal is achieved ? however long that takes.
The practical objective in its first phase ? that justifies the initial human effort and financial cost of creating and operating the facility is considered successfully accomplished
as?
1-[?]% of the fish processing waste is cost-effectively or profitably converted to alternative or supplemental fuels and value-added products. and
2-[?]% of the fuel used is from renewable energy sources (specifically fish oil, bio-fuel, wind and solar).
What are the percentages [?]. That will be determined by the feasibility study.
The study will also determine where this facility should be located and how.
This facility is created and developed with the end in mind of organizing techniques and technologies and proceeding with processes that smaller fish processing plants can share and
larger plants can share or build.
Further, the physical, financial and human resources management systems that are created and established can and will be duplicated and promoted through written and spoken mediums, convention
and association presentations, study publishing, consulting, etc.
This is a first-cut look at these issues. We have examined carefully the relevant facts and related experiments, both successful and unsuccessful, already available to us. We have discovered
that nearly every significant technology and resource has been discovered and utilized to some extent. This is an effort to bring all such techniques and technologies together into
an operating facility. The Bristol Bay fishery is renown throughout the world and would be the best location for a leading trend to be set as a model.
It is clear that this feasibility study is an excellent investment and is likely to achieve a profitable, earth friendly, payoff within the first year of operation ? and will move ever
closer to its ideal goal until it is at least 99% achieved ? likely within the decade, perhaps sooner.
The project, when it is completed, will include a hydroelectric power plant, and associated infrastructure
for access and connection, to serve the community of Elfin Cove. The power plant will be located at the
mouth of Crooked Creek, a tributary of Port Althorp in Cross Sound. Upon completion, the hydroelectric
facility will include: a diversion structure on Crooked Creek; a 1,000-foot long diversion conduit from
Crooked Creek to Jim\'s Lake; a 1,300-foot long penstock from Jim\'s Lake to tidewater; a hydro power
house with Turgo type turbine and programmable automatic paralleling switchgear at tidewater; an onground
transmission line to the newly renovated diesel power plant; fiber optic communication cable
between the hydroelectric powerhouse and the town site diesel power plant control room; and access trails
to the power house and diversion structure. This project will be carried out by local project
administrators, with technical and engineering support subcontracted to a consulting engineering firm. At
the end of Phase 3 (proposed here) we should be prepared to begin final construction on the hydroelectric
power project.
The ultimate goal of this project is to produce electricity and employment both sustainably and locally. Thus the name ?Keep It Sustainable, and Keep It Local (KISKIL) Energy project.?
The project will be located thirty miles east of Delta Junction. The KISKIL Energy project will serve much of the Interior by providing electricity for Golden Valley Electric Association
(GVEA) via the grid. Additionally the project will serve Delta Junction, Healy Lake, Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tok and the surrounding areas by hiring regionally, and purchasing wood for
fuel locally. The model will be applicable to all small communities and/or mines or other industrial type operations with significant biomass resources nearby. KISKIL Energy is a
subsidiary of Delta Mine Training Center (DMTC) organized specifically for this project. DMTC is a 501 (c) 3 nonprofit corporation. DMTC has policies and procedures in place to comply
with ISO 9000 standards. KISKIL will be managed by DMTC. With assistance from the Alaska Energy Authority and the resources and capabilities of DMTC, this project will be a success.
The AVTEC Renewable Energy Fund Wind Project involves the installation of one (1) 100 kW
wind turbine on the AVTEC campus located in Seward, Alaska. The completed project will be
owned and operated by AVTEC and connected into the electrical distribution system at the
school?s industrial electricity facility located on the northern edge of town. The project will offer
benefits to AVTEC/State of Alaska through a reduction of operating costs at the state owned
facility (electricity) and will be used primarily to support the creation of a world class winddiesel
training program that will provide opportunities for rural power plant operators to gain
hands on operational experience with wind energy technology. Essentially, the completed
project will support the alternative energy investments the state of Alaska is making through its
HB 152 legislation by providing a training center and program for wind-diesel system operators.
AVTEC has assembled a project team, headed by STG Incorporated, that is prepared to
immediately begin work on an accelerated schedule. The project team includes members from
Duane Miller Associates LLC, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell LLC and BBFM Engineers. All
aspects of the Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, detailed in the following pages
of this application can be completed by fall of 2009.
The City and Borough of Wrangell (City) has a need for an economical alternative power source during the annual maintenance shutdown of the Tyee Lake Hydroelectric facility and as an
alternative power source in the event of a catastrophic failure similar to the one experienced in Juneau in the summer of 2008. An additional need is another source of water for the
City reservoir, which periodically runs very low on water and has an eminent risk of running out of water for the City?s use. Since there is a pertinent need for the additional water
source that Sunrise Lake can provide, it is economical and feasible that the two projects be constructed simultaneously. Hence, by utilizing the outflow from the hydroelectric project
turbines, the City will have an additional water source. These two projects are mutually exclusive to each other. In 1997, The Bentley Company performed a reconnaissance study to determine
the feasibility of developing hydroelectric power at Sunrise Lake. Sunrise Lake is a 70 acre, 100 foot deep, perched lake on Woronkofski Island, an uninhabited island approximately
five miles from the City of Wrangell. The Sunrise Lake Project can be interfaced easily into the Tyee Transmission Line, thus allowing the potential of supplying power to the City of
Wrangell. This power can be used as a back?up in the case of catastrophic failure and during the annual shut?down of the Tyee Hydroelectric facility for maintenance. This power can
be used to offset power from the Tyee Lake Hydroelectric facility and from diesel generators, thus improving the reliability of the power system. The community served by this project
is Wrangell, Alaska. Directly involved in this project is the City and Borough of Wrangell and Wrangell Municipal Light and Power (WMLP).
The AK?BC Intertie would provide a further opportunity to secure the energy future for Southeast Alaska. The AK?BC Intertie is a 26.5 mile transmission line from the existing Tyee Lake
Project to the AK?BC border. A feasibility study was conducted by Hatch Energy in 2005. This phase of the project would continue the project from the feasibility stage into the permitting
engineering phase. The purpose of this project is to export surplus power for sale in British Columbia/Pacific Northwest which would encourage development of new projects and provide
additional reliability benefits. The ability to export power would encourage early development of new hydro generation, as well as provide revenue from exports, which will help ensure
future maintenance of the current overall status of a clean hydro?powered region, offer operating flexibility for the southeast Alaska power system, and provide future benefits to the
region under the proposed marketing oversight proposal. Power sales agreement for power generated projects encouraged by the AK?BC Intertie could be structured to return payment to
the state. Power sales agreements could be structured to include a call?back provision when load in southeast Alaska grows and power is needed to serve the native load. The proposed
AK?BC Intertie would extend from Tyee Lake along the Bradfield river to the AK?BC border and along the Craig River to a proposed substation at Forrest Kerr in British Columbia.
The export of energy through the AK?BC Intertie will enable the completion of interties throughout Southeast Alaska including completion of the Swan?Tyee connection. Energy export could
lead to the development of a number of hydro?electric projects in many locations in Southeast Alaska meeting domestic power needs and providing a surplus for export. The goal is to
provide the energy needed for economic development in Southeast Alaska resulting in jobs for Alaskans and providing reliable, less costly alternatives to diesel generated energy for
Alaskan communities.
AP&T proposes to construct the 300 kW Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project), which will be
located approximately 8 miles north of Slana on the Glenn Highway (Tok Cutoff). The Project would offset
diesel generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Slana and Chistochina. The
Project will consist of two small diversion structures, approximately 13,200 feet of penstock, a
powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and a very short length of
transmission line. For about half the year, the Project operation will be run-of-river, but during the
colder months the Project will draw water from Carlson Lake. The potential annual generation is
estimated to be approximately 1,200 MWh/yr, which is greater than the current annual requirements of
the two communities. Therefore, the Project has the potential to offset 100% of the current diesel
generation. The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost
to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation.
The proposed Triangle Lake hydroelectric project will be located on the west side of Annette
Island near the route of the proposed Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie. The project as presently
envisioned will be comprised of a small embankment dam at the outlet of Triangle Lake, a 1.3
mile long penstock and a powerhouse containing a single horizontal Francis turbine generating
unit with a capacity of 4.0 MW. The Triangle Lake project will provide additional hydroelectric
power to Metlakatla and, with construction of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie, to the
interconnected electric systems of Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg. MIC will develop and
own the Triangle Lake project.
In July 2008, Haines Assisted Living, Inc.(HAL) began construction on a senior assisted living/ residential complex comprising a total of 26,000 SF. The building site is on lots fronting
Third St. from Dalton to Union. Residents of Haines and Southeast Alaska will utilize the senior assisted living and senior affordable housing complex being built in 2008?2010. The
project is a collaboration seven years in development and funded by the Denali Commission, the Community Development Block Grant Program, the Rasmuson Foundation and the community of
Haines. The first phase of the project will be completed in the fall of 2009 at a cost of over $4 million. Key to the long term sustainability of the facility is the installation of
a Ground Source Heat Pump to extract geothermal energy from the earth and circulate it through a radiant in-floor heating system. The initial feasibility and design has been completed
as the follow-up to an extensive energy life-cycle cost analysis performed in 2007and updated in October 2008.The designed system estimate of 210% efficiency will eliminate fossil fuel
consumption in favor of renewable geo-thermal heat source and local hydro-electric power and result in significant operational savings for the life of the facility. Haines Assisted
Living, Inc., Dan Austin, Project Manager and Jim Rehfeldt, Alaska Energy Engineering LLC are the principals involved in this grant project. Resumes attached.
ATTACHMENT A. Resumes, Dan Austin, Jim Rehfeldt.
AP&T proposes to construct a small run-of-river hydroelectric project at Neck Lake, a 1,000
acre lake located 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island.
The Project would supply power to the community of Whale Pass, and would offset diesel
generation, which is currently the sole source of electricity. The relatively high and modulated
flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end of the outlet stream provide a
good opportunity for a small run-of-river hydroelectric development. Facilities would include
an access road, intake structure, 400 feet of penstock, a containerized power plant, a tailrace
channel, and upgrade of 4 miles of transmission line. The hydroelectric facilities will be
designed to avoid interference with the existing salmon rearing and collection facilities operated
at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA). AP&T
conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2008, and determined that there is sufficient
potential to almost always provide enough generation for Whale Pass loads (see Section 7-
Appendices for a copy of the reconnaissance report). The Project will provide clean, renewable
electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for AP&T?s Whale Pass customers.
The Kenai Winds project is a 9MW wind energy generation facility located in the Nikiski
Industrial Area, in Nikiski, on the Kenai peninsula. The project will consist of 5-6 wind turbines
disbursed throughout the site.
The project will be located in the City of Kake, and will serve the entire Kake community. The City of Kake, the Organized Village of Kake and Kake Tribal Corporation have committed
to a joint effort, sponsored by the City Council of Tlingit and Haida, the Applicant for this Grant, to implement this project. The project involves the installation of commercially
viable, modular technology consisting of a biomass gasifier combustor system (in use for 10+ years) integrated with hot water electrical generating equipment (in use for 20+ years)
to provide lower cost electric power generation to remote villages in Alaska that presently rely on high cost diesel fuel to meet their energy needs, for both heating and power. This
system is easily replicated in any village or for a particular business operation, the equipment is available within 16 weeks of order, can be installed in less than 12 months and the
system can be immediately operational once installed.
The project will be co-located with a planned parking garage on University land, adjacent to and west of
Providence Hospital. The project will contain two gas turbine generators each with a heat recovery
boiler and a thermal distribution system that will connect Providence Hospital and UAA buildings to the
plant. It will serve the UMED district with thermal energy and the exclusive service territory of ML&P with
electricity. ML&P, UAA and Providence are involved in the grant project. Other institutions may become
involved as thermal customers to the project based upon their own schedule and requirements.
2.2
$ 8,588,000 in construction funding is being requested by the Kipnuk Light and Power Utility
Board to build a wind-diesel- heat and power system. This system will reduce diesel fuel
consumption used for both power generation and heating for 180-residences by 40%.
The wind system will generate 4,000,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity. The wind energy
will displace (save) 200,000 gallons of diesel fuel, 75,000 gallons of which is now being used to
generate power, and 125,000 gallons of which will be captured and stored for use as heat. The
system as proposed will consist of:
1. Two (2) 750 kWe (kilowatt electrical) Wind turbines mounted on 40-meter-tall tubular
towers
2. Control integration equipment for power regulation and system stability
3. Energy recovery boilers at the school and central water station
4. Smart electrical metering system
5. Installation of 180 residential thermal energy storage units
The construction and maintenance will be overseen by the Kipnuk Light and Power Utility
Board and the Chaninik Wind Group Board of Directors. Project Management will be
provided by Dennis Meiners of Intelligent Energy Systems (IES), with Construction and
Project Management Assistance provided by STG, Inc.
Astronomical heating costs are inspiring new creativity in planning for sustainable and affordable energy sources for our community in Cordova, Alaska. Affordable fuel sources have
been identified: waste cardboard that is currently taken to the landfill and wood waste generated at the community burn pile. Historically, the community has squandered these potential
energy sources. The burn pile will better serve the community when transitioned from a community dump into local-source heating fuel. The community will also save valuable landfill
space by diverting waste cardboard into a fuel source. The purpose of this project is to 1) quantify 2) design and 3) deploy a system that will re-use these valuable resources currently
being wasted. The wood and cardboard waste will become fuel for a biomass boiler to heat our community through a district heating network. Potential buildings include the city hall,
pool, hospital and schools. We need financial assistance to fully develop this project, which can then become self-sustaining. The feasibility study will quantify the avaliable BTUs
that can be generated by our waste stream, and the potential methods of fuel treatment and system equipment. The data will help determine which buildings we can start with and create
parameters for the system design. The design will determine required purchases - the boiler, wood chipper and other components, and identify required integration work. The deployment
phase will manage the construction and commissioning of the system and equipment to integrate it with the existing system. The City of Cordova owns and operates the burn pile and has
endorsed this project. The Cordova School District is also very supportive of the project. See letters of support on pages 49 and 50.
The project is located at Camp Hill near Wireless Point, approximately seven miles south of Cordova, Alaska. Because of high electricity costs ($.50/kWh winter and $.22/kWh summer after
PCE credits), Cordova needs to develop other local energy sources to offset running diesel generators - especially in the winter months when hydro power disappears. The wind energy
program will 1) complete the Camp Hill wind farm project design and permits, 2) improve wind data maps through a mobile 10-meter anemometer tower project, 3) initiate a wind farm pilot
project and a marine-based pilot project, 4) drive community involvement and education, 5) adopt best-known methods from other successful wind projects, 6) determine whether the wind
farm will be built and operated by Native Village of Eyak or Cordova Electric Co-Op and 7) set the stage for construction and implementation. The project will provide low-cost electricity
for all members of the Cordova Electric Co-Operative power grid.
The Little Port Walter (LPW) Marine Station is a research unit of Akune Bay Laboratories located 110 miles south of Juneau near the sourhern tip of Baranof island. LPW is the oldest
year-round biological research station in Alaska and has been the host of a wide variety of fisheries research projects since 1934. Electric power is currently provided for the site
by a diesel engine generator. Oil is used for building heating. An existing dam on the outlet of Lake Osprey on the north shore of Port Walter inlet could be utilized to provide electric
power for LPW through a small hydro turbine generator. Electrical service would require a transmission lind under the Port Walter Inlet and across a peninsula to the research center.
Ameresco would conduct the project evaluation proposed in this grant application to determine the viability of this hydroelectric project. Current electric consumption for LPW is
about 35 kW. The proposed hydroelectric project would include converstion of LPW to all electric energy systems to increase the average electrical consumption rate to 70 kW.
Terror Lake is KEA\'s primary generation source, and is located approximately 25 miles southwest of the City of Kodiak within the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge. This hydroelectric
facility is the cornerstone to KEA\'s Vision Statement: Endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost effective renewable power solutions by the year 2020, by providing base load
capacity to backup other forms of renewable energy. The power output of Terror Lake can be increased or decreased by dispatch to control the amount of total power on the grid. This
attribute of hydropower allows KEA to integrate the more variable sources of renewable energy, such as wind and tidal energy, onto its isolated grid. In addition to this stabilizing
capability, the Terror Lake reservoir itself acts like a battery for KEA\'s other renewable energy projects. This synergistic integration of wind and hydro power is an excellent renewable
energy solution for other communities in Alaska. The current capaity of Terror Lake has been surpassed by Kodiak\'s growing load demand. Without the additional hydropower capacity,
the synergistic relationship of more renewable variable energy sources and water cannot be fully realized. Expanding the capacity at Terror Lake will significantly enhance the stability
of KEA\'s isolated grid system, and reduce KEA\'s dependence on diesel fuel by providing ample backup capacity to cover peak loads, and outage backup for the other two hdyro turbine
generator units. The first step to bringing these benefits to the Kodiak community is to initiate a feasibility analysis and conceptual design for expanding Terror Lake\'s generating
capacity with the installation of a third turbine generator unit in the powerhouse. The results of this feasibility analysis and conceptual design will assist other Alaskan communities
in their efforts to optimize the renewable power of wind and water.
Baranof Island Housing Authority (BIHA) proposes to select up to three models of marketed air-source heat pumps and install them in up to 12 BIHA owned residential homes in Sitka, Alaska
that are presently heated with fuel oil boiler systems in order to evaluate their effectiveness in reducing household heating water costs. Additionally, heat pump domestic hot water
systems will be evaluated for cost effectiveness against conventional electric hot water tanks for determining most cost efective replacement of current fuel oil boiler domestic hot
water systems.
The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwells power system. Currently they obtain power from the line between MEA
and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). To accomplish this they propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River, a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this
plant will be in exccess of 1 MW. It will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
The Business Operating Plan provides a guideline fo the Akiachak Native Community Electric Company ("the Utility") Proposing a combinations for all three project descriptions, Reconnaissance;
Resource Assessment/ Feasibilty Analysis/Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; and/or Construction for the wind turbine for Akiachak Native Community Electric Company. The
ANCEC will be responsible to operate and sustain the newly installed Wind Turbine and associated electric power to save fuel and reduce fuel costs for the generators. The newly Akiachak
Electric Wind Turbine project will be located in Akiachak Alaska about 18 air mles east of Bethel, and Alaska Energy Authority will be involved in the grand project. Akiachak Native
Community Electric Company needs an alternative energy to determine its best and most sustainable energy here in village of Akiachak, and through this energy development project plan
the community feasibility of installing long term energy facility in order to reduce fuel costs and reduce over all cost of energy.
This project involves placing supplemental cord wood fired boilers at the school site. The supplemental heating system would be located at the Thorne Bay School in the City of Thorne
Bay on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska. The project would also serve the residents of the City of Thorne Bay. The entities involved in this project would be Southeast Island
School District, an engineering firm, local contractors, and the Alaska Energy Authority; We would rely on Alaska Energy Authority for guidance with the project.
This application addresses a first phase in implementing the AVCP Calista Regional Biennial Energy Plan 2008 - 2010 involving a feasibility level analysis to be conducted by the AVCP
Regional Housing Authority for Renewable Energy Deployment for the Kuskokwim Region involving Hydroelectric Power, Wind and Solar Energy, Biomass Heating, including Regional Utility
Consolidation Plan and Development for Bethel and villages along the Kuskokwim River. As a first effort, engineering, including geophysical and geotechnical analysis is proposed to
be undertaken to determine the feasibility and deployment requirements, including environmental permitting required to facilitate development of a Kiseralik River hydroelectric project
for the communities in the Kuskokwim River Region. The study will also review the technical merits of the Chikuminuk hydropower project in view of technological advances that may have
transpired in the transmission of electricity. This effort also includes the determination of power generation and distribution systems required to interconnect communities of the
Kuskokwim region with transmission interties from a regional hydroelectric utility. This project also proposes to outline the planning, organizational and development requirements
for consolidating the local utilities into a regional wholesale non-profit utility for the operation and management of a regional hydroelectric generation and transmission system.
This project proposes to bring together in a planning and development process the regional non-profit organizations, tribal governments and local utilities proposed to be affected by
a regional hydroelectric development project.
This proposed Biomass project will focus on conducting a feasibility analysis and the developing a conceptual design of two wood burners for the community of Kasaan. The project will
be located in the village of Kasaan on the Southeast side of Prince of Wales Island in southern Southeast Alaska. The Organized Village of Kasaan (OVK), a federally recognized Tribe
is the applicant organization. OVK will work closely with the City of Kasaan in the successful completion of this project.
One wood burner will be designed to heat all of the community buildings in Kasaan (school, city offices, medical clinic, Tribal offices, community library, and community hall). The
second wood burner will be constructed on a separate site in Kasaan to heat a cultural- and eco-tourism lodge that is in the design phase and will be owned and operated by the Tribe
as the primary economic development focal point for the community.
The wood fired supplemental heating system would be located at the Howard Valentine School
Site in the City of Coffman Cove on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska. The project
would also serve the residents of the City of Coffman Cove. The entities involved in this project
would be Southeast Island School District, a design engineering firm, local contractors, and the
Alaska Energy Authority. We would rely on Alaska Energy Authority for guidance with the
project. The use of wood biomass (cordwood) to heat the school will replace 85% of the fuel oil consumption. The project involves placing one thermal storage type wood-fired hydronic
heating unit adjacent to the school site and running underground insulated pipes from the woodfired heater to interface with the school?s heating system. Heat energy from biomass will
significantly decrease heating costs for the school. Wood is available from waste from local saw mills, USFS small sales, from wood left behind in landings, and from small local firewood
cutters.
The project, located in Valdez, Alaska, will take waste heat generated by the Petro Star Refinery. Waste heat will be collected by a shell and tube glycol medium recovery system. The
medium will drive two technologies operated in series.
Amonia absorption technology will create cooling for a 45 million pound -20 degree F cold storage. An Organic Rankine Cycle Generator will use the medium once it has exited the smmonia
absorption system to create 600 Kw\'s of power which will be used to operate the cold storage facility.
The final benefit will be to use the sold cycle on the generator to create a salmon rearing facility.
The proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 11841 (Project) is located near
the southeast end of Revillagigedo Island, approximately four miles east of the City of
Ketchikan, Alaska. KPU proposes to install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at
KPU?s existing Whitman Lake Dam to provide an additional source of clean renewable energy to
KPU?s customers, in the city of Ketchikan and the Ketchikan Gateway Borough area including
Saxman Village, while also enhancing the conversion of oil heat to electric heat and displacing
expensive and non-renewable diesel generation. The Project will be interconnected to KPU?s
existing distribution system and the grant project will involve KPU.
Use of Power
Power generated by the proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project would provide the city of
Ketchikan and the Ketchikan Gateway Borough area with increased system reliability; replace
current dependency on diesel generation; enable regional utilities to meet the increasing
demand for electricity as customers convert from oil to electric heat and new construction is
designed for electric heat; and reduce regional greenhouse gas emissions.
? Attachment E to this Grant Application includes two tables presenting estimated
greenhouse gas emissions in the region between 2007 and 2031 with and without
conversion of oil-fired heating furnaces.
The installation of this wind power project will provide a maximum output of 1,170 kW to the Nome Joint Utility electric grid in Nome, Alaska over a 20 year extendable project timeframe.
The owners of the project are committed to sell the energy at a price below the avoided cost calculations, even without any grant funding. Grant funding will allow further reduction
in the price of approximately $0.03 per kWH for every one million in grant funds. Selling the energy at a rate below avoided costs will provide savings to the utility to help to lower
the energy costs in the Nome area and provide some energy produced locally that is not dependent on imported oil. Furthermore, this project helps enable future village installations
in the region by helping with a base of operations, spare parts location, local training facility and regional hub. Providing for renewable energy projects in villages should help
reduce the dependency on oil in those locations where oil must be flown or barged in and ultimately help reduce energy rates in those locations as well. Through implementing a power
sales agreement, this project is unique in that it takes advantage of federal tax credit incentives for wind energy projects which help offset the actual cost of energy. Overall, this
project provides a cash and tax credit based revenue stream, provides jobs and keeps money working in the community while increasing overall power generation reliability by producing
it locally. Banner Wind LLC (jointly owned by Bering Straits Native Corporation and Sitnasuak Native Corporation) owns the wind farm while the construction and initial operations are
managed by Western Community Energy LLC. The profits from the project which are ultimately distributed to the shareholders of BSNC and SNC will help provide income to an area where
many have very limited incomes. This is an excellent demonstration of a commercial opportunity that needs to be eagerly developed.
The Grant Lake site facility would be constructed with a dam at the upper falls and diversion tunnel to maximize the power potential at approximately 3.12 MW (397 feet-net head). However,
to minimize the impact on salmon resources in Grant River below the dam site the construction as proposed would consist of a canal from behind the dam to an intake structure located
in an adjacent dry channel.
The dam constructed at the upper falls will be a concrete dam with an uncontrolled spillway. With a maximum height at El 504 and a 225 foot wide spillway at El 500 the spillway
flows will be diverted away from the toe of the dam via a concrete apron onto bedrock nearby.
The @1 mile diversion canal, 20 foot deep (1/1 side slopes), with an invert 468 El will have a minimum drawdown of 23 feet to El 477. A dike in the canal will direct the
water flow into the low pressure 60 inch 6,600 foot long pipeline leading to the surge tank and penstock. The 3,100 foot 48 inch penstock will link the surge tank to the power house.
The powerhouse will contain two 1,350 kW generators driven by two 2,000 hp turbines under a rated net head of 233 feet (average 215 ) with 92cfs.
This project will necessitate the construction of approximately 45-65 miles (depending on routing) of new underground three phase transmission tie line from the project
site to a new power substation constructed near the village of Aleknagik.
The Nushagak Area Hydropower Project will initially serve the communities of Aleknagik, Dillingham, and Kanakanak in the Nushagak and Wood River areas. This third phase with inter-tie
(phase four) is estimated to cost $38 million together and replace 700,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually, for a yearly savings of $2,947,000 at today?s fuel prices. Currently all
power in the area is generated with diesel by Nushagak Cooperative (NETC), with a current residential rate at $0.463 cents per kilowatt hour. Nushagak Cooperative would develop, maintain,
and operate the Lake Elva facility and associated infrastructure.
The proposed project would be located in an unincorporated area, northeast of the City of
Petersburg, Alaska. Development of hydroelectric power at the site would include construction
of a lake tap, arch dam, unlined tunnel, power penstock, power plant, tailrace, and transmission
line segments.
Attachment F to this Grant Application provides:
? Exhibit F.1 ? Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project ? Location Map
? Exhibit F.2 ? Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project ? Southern SE Alaska Transmission
System
? Exhibit F-3 ? Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project ? Photo depicting location of proposed
dam
Proposed Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project Features:
? Reservoir. Ruth Lake is fed primarily by rainfall and snowmelt, with some smaller firn or
hanging glaciers that contribute melt water during the summer months. The Project
would include a dam to provide a potential usable stored capacity of 17,000 acre-feet.
(See photo of proposed dam site at Attachment F ? Exhibit F.3
? Lake Tap / Power Conduit. The inlet works would consist of an arch dam and lake tap.
As presently planned water would initially flow through a 10-foot diameter tunnel for
approximately 3,500 feet. The remaining 7,800 feet of the conduit system would consist
of a 6-foot diameter buried or surface steel penstock.
? Powerhouse. The powerhouse would be located within 2,000 ft. of the confluence of
Delta Creek and would house three impulse turbines, each with a total rated head of
1,300 ft. The rated installed capacity of the powerhouse would be 20 MW and the energy
output would be roughly 70 GWh.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 26
City of Petersburg d/b/a Petersburg Municipal Power & Light
Ruth Lake Hydroelectric Project
Phase II ? Application for License and FERC Licensing Proceeding
November 3, 2008
? Site Access. The Project is separated from the nearest town of Petersburg by Frederick
Sound. The only access for either construction or long-term operation and maintenance
of the Project would be via boat or aircraft.
A dock would be located on Thomas Bay for loading and unloading people and supplies
from a boat. A road would be constructed between the powerhouse and dock.
Construction access would also be provided by helicopter in association with a limited
local temporary access road system to transfer equipment within the construction area.
During operation, the Project would be fully automated and access would be provided
via boat or aircraft.
? Transmission Lines. Power generated by the Project would be transmitted by a new
overhead / submarine, 138 kilovolt (KV) transmission segment roughly 20-miles long
running generally southwest from the powerhouse to Petersburg. (See Map at
Attachment F) The transmission segment would integrate the project to the Southern
Southeast Intertie System which currently connects Petersburg and Wrangell to the
Tyee Lake Hydroelectric Project on Bradfield Canal. Completion of construction of the
Swan Tyee Intertie will interconnect the Swan Lake and Tyee Lake hydroelectric
projects; proposed new transmission intertie segments would add Kake and Metlakatla.
(See Map at Attachment F ? Exhibit F.2)
? Other Structures. An intake structure housing controls would be constructed at Ruth
Lake. Housing would be provided for power plant operators, staging areas for
construction and substation facilities
Use of Power
Power generated by the proposed Ruth Lake Project would provide the interconnected
Southern Southeast Alaska regional utilities with increased system reliability; replace current
dependency on diesel generation; enable regional utilities to meet the increasing demand for
electricity as customers convert from oil to electric heat and new construction is designed for
electric heat; and reduce regional greenhouse gas emissions.
? Attachment G to this Grant Application includes excerpts from the ?AK-BC Intertie
Feasibility Study ? Southeast Alaska Final Report?, September 2007, prepared by Hatch
Acres for AEA, describing the loads and resources of the Southern Southeast Alaska
regional utilities that will be interconnected following completion of the Swan-Tyee
Intertie under construction; and the future proposed new transmission intertie segments
that would add Kake and Metlakatla.
? Attachment H to this Grant Application includes two tables presenting estimated
greenhouse gas emissions in the region between 2007 and 2031 with & without
conversion of oil-fired heating furnaces.
Bethel Wind Power Project Times 4 calls for the purchase and installation of four 100kW wind turbines, tubular towers, foundations, and related appurtenances on land owned by the city
of Bethel. The City of Bethel will own, operate, and maintain all four wind turbines and act as an independent power producer by selling 100% of the electricity generated to the privately
owned utility in Bethel. The regulated electric utility is Bethel Utilities Corporation.
The community of Bethel, with a population of 5,650, will be the community and boundary area served. The City of Bethel, the City\'s volunteer Alternative Energy Committee, the city\'s
public Works Committee, the City\'s Planning Commission, and Bethel Utilities Corporation will be involved with the project.
Project consists of a combination of Solar and Wind power to offset the high cost of electricity to run City Hall, the washeteria and the Water Plant. The equipment providing this power
would be adjacent and/or attached to the City Hall. The project manager and other needed project employees would be hired from the community. This project would serve the community
of Ambler by way of a more efficiently run City Government.
To lower the cost of running our City government and Water-sewer-plant is the most important work we have in front of us.
Without this to offset the cost, the plant may have to be closed down.
Current cost for water and sewer in Ambler is $ 120.00/houshold and actual cost to balance the budget would be about 400.00/houshold.
Wind Energy! Wind turbine system at vacinity community location Napaskiak, AK about 7 miles below Bethel, Alaska which service over 100 customers to commercial to residence. Wasteheat
from generators to heat nearby facility-church, garage.
The Delta/Greely School District proposes a Wood Chip Boiler Heating System to heat 77,000 sq. ft. of educational space in the sub-arctic. The legal description of the Delta High School
complex is 64 degrees 02\' 35.66" N 145 degrees 42\' 57.10"W. The building would be located 50 feet away from the Delta High School new mechanical room. This Wood Chip Boiler Heating
System constructs and installs the following: Cement building to house wood chip boiler, chip storage room, 4 chip storage trailers, and a chip feeding and chip drying process. The
direct impact of this Wood Chip Boiler Heating System will be the Delta High School complex staff and students as well as the community groups that use this facility on a weekly basis.
The following communities are served by this facility: Delta Junction, Fort Greely Garrison and its contractors, Gerstle River, and the greater Deltana area. The businesses, non-profit
agencies, Farm Forum, Relay for Life, Fish and Game, Department of Motor Vehicles, Delta Chamber of Commerce, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts to name a few groups. All use the Delta High
School complex during the year. Finally, the following groups will be involved in this project: Delta/Greely School District (DGSD), the Delta/Greely School Board, DGSD Facilities
Committee, Alaska Department of Natural Resources Forestry, CTA, CE2 Engineers, T.R. Miles Technical Consultants, Delta Logging and Milling Associates, and USKH (an architecture, engineering,
land surveying and planning company).
The proposed hybrid ground source heat pump system at the new Dimond Park Aquatic Center is
to be located in Juneau?s Mendenhall Valley, adjacent the new Thunder Mountain High School
and Riverbend Elementary on the Dimond Park site. The facility will primarily serve Juneau
residents, but will also serve visitors from nearby southeast Alaska communities and other
visitors to Juneau. The City & Borough of Juneau Engineering and Parks and Recreation
Departments are directly involved with the design and construction of the facility, as is the
Juneau School District. A professional design team led by local architectural firm Jensen Yorba
Lott, Inc. is responsible for the project design and construction administration. The City &
Borough of Juneau Engineering Department is responsible for design and construction
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 18 9/3/2008
management and progress reports to grant agencies as required. The City & Borough of Juneau
Finance Department is responsible for project funding and financial reporting to grant agencies
as required. A ?Pool Advisory Task Force? consisting of twelve community representatives is
also participating in the oversight of the project design. The project?s construction contractor
will be selected by competitive bid per the City & Borough of Juneau ordinances and is not
known at this time. The use of a hybrid ground source heat pump system in lieu of conventional
oil or electric heat systems at the Dimond Park Aquatic Center is supported by the Pool Advisory
Task Force, the City & Borough of Juneau Engineering and Parks Departments, the Juneau
School District, and the City & Borough of Juneau Assembly and Administration.
The work plan constitutes of the installation, control and integration of five major components:
1. Five Wind Matic 17-S Wind turbines on 80 foot lattice towers.
2. Diesel Station upgrade
3. Dnergy recovery boiler at the washeteria for frequency control
4. Smart metering system
5. 20 Thermal Stoves in residents of village elders
The wind turbines will be installed 300 foot apart on pile foundations, and connected via individual three phase transformers to the existing power lines with buried armored cable.
Connections between the turbines will be via above ground armored cable. A fiber optic cable will be buried along side the power cable to provide a communications link with the powerplant.
The US FWS has expressed an interest in keeping overhead transmission to a minimum, to reduce any potential hazards to passing migrating birds.
The energy from the turbines will be integrated into the diesel power systems. Three methods will be used:
1. power electronics connected with a heat recovery boiler for frequency control
2. adaptations to diesel generators to enable low load operation
3. an integrated control system that operates both the wind turbine and diesel generators in a coordinated manner with ceramic thermal storage located in the residents of village elders.
Two existing gensets will be modified to operate at low loads and low fuel consumption for extended periods of time. The mail features of the conversion will consist of the addition
of a boiler and boiler grid interface to provide reverse power protection to absorb wind gusts when operating at near zero kW, and to increase operating temperatures to eliminate cylinder
glazing and wet stacking.
The Smart Grid consists of a network of advanced meters, which receive information about the availability of green, or excess wind energy and make this energy available to the community
at reduced rates ,and enable devices to capture this energy. The meters communicate wirelessly, provide a user interface for customers, and account for energy sold at different rates.
The devices that are located in the homes of 20 village elders, and these stoves capture and store excess wind energy for later use. The Smart Metering and the stoves create a system
that allows wind energy to be sold as heat for 1/2 the cost of diesel heating.
GVEA has been monitoring the wind resource at the Eva Creek Site since 2003 or for five years and has found a resource with approximately a 33% to 36% capacity factor. The Eva Creek
Wind Project?s proximity to the Northern Intertie is key to its value, making the interconnection viable. The site is located on the east side of the Nenana River near Ferry, Alaska,
in the GVEA service territory in the Interior. The area could support up to 150 MW of wind generation but GVEA would like to start by installing a 24 MW wind project.
The proposed site is on a dirt road system that was developed to provide access to numerous mining claims in the area which would need some improvements,. The dirt road system
is not connected to the highway system. Currently, access is gained by walking across a Railroad bridge. Some infrastructure improvements will need to be made including road improvements
for access to the site, a substation, and a way to get equipment across the Nenana River.
Eva Creek is located near Ferry, Alaska, near Healy off the Parks Highway. The entire GVEA service area will be served by this renewable energy project and the entire Railbelt
potentially could be served by future expansion. GVEA has had an alternative energy team in place for the past decade. Wind has been a focal point of interest and investment. In 2002
GVEA contracted with Sterling Management Services to begin a series of studies evaluating the potential capacity of several sites within the service area after which it became clear
Eva Creek had the best potential for success.
Communities to be served: GVEA service 3,893 square miles extending 130 miles south including communities from Cantwell on the Parks Highway north through Healy, Anderson, Nenana,
Ester, Fairbanks and 100 miles south on the Richardson through North Pole and Salcha to Delta Junction. More than 100,000 residents are in the area with 33,000 members and 43,000 meters.
The members of the team who will be involved in the grant project will combine the talents and experience of existing GVEA staff and wind expert consultants and at the appropriate
time the contractor for construction. GVEA personnel and contracted consultants will be working on this project. The GVEA team includes:
? Kathryn K. Lamal, Vice President of Power Supply, GVEA
? Mike Wright, PE, Vice President of Transmission and Distribution, GVEA
? Tim DeVries, PE, Manager of Engineering Services, GVEA
? Paul Morgan, Wind Specialist and Alternative Energy Team member, GVEA
? Daniel R. Bishop, PE, Senior Engineer, GVEA
? Henri Dale, PE, GVEA Power System Manager
? Paul Parks, PE, Power Supply Engineer, GVEA
Sterling Energy Management, LLC of California is the contractor wind consulting firm, naming senior consultants Ron Fawcett, Jake Drews and Jon Lantz to this project.
Golden Valley Electric Association proposes the construction of a solar water heating system to be used by the Denali Education Center (DEC). This proposed solar water heating system
would be used to displace fossil fuel energy (specifically, electricity) that is currently used to heat water and space for these end-users. DEC is located just south of the 64th northern
latitude, about eight miles south of the Denali NAtional Park entrance at mile post 231.1 on the east side of the Parks Highway bridge that crosses over the Nenana River. It is a non-profit
research, education and communication organization with cooperative interaction to Denali National Park and all its summer-time visitors. The DEC\'s campus serves people who visit
and stay there during the summer tourist season. There are 13 cabins on the campus, a campus center and other outbuildings. Currently, the peak number who lodge and work at the Center
during the summer in about 75 people, with an anticipated near-future growth up to 100 people. GVEA also plans to work ABS Alaskan and Jim Norman, principal and owner.
The work plan consists of the installation, control and intergration of five major components:
1. Five Wind Matic 17-S Wind turbines on 80 foot lattice towers
2. Diesel Station upgrade
3. Energy recovery boiler at the washerteria for frequency control
4. Smart metering system
5. 20 Thermal Stoves in residents of village elders
The wind turbines will be installed 300 foot apart on pile foundations, and connected via individual three phase transformers to the existing power lines with 15kV metal clad buried
armored cable. Connections between the turbines will be via above ground armored cable. A fiber optic cable will be buried along side the power cable to provide a communications
link with the powerplant. The US FWS has expressed an interest in keeping overhead transmission to a minimum, to reduce any petential hazards to passing migrating birds.
The energy from the turbines will be intregrated into the diesel power systems. Three methods will be used:
1. power electronics connected with a heat recovery boiler for frequency control.
2. adaptations to diesel generators to enable low load operation
3. an integrated control system that operates both the wind turbine and diesel generators in a coordinated manner with ceramic thermal storage located in the residents of village elders.
Two existing gensets will be modified to operate at low loads and low fuel consumption for extended periods of time. The main features of the conversion will consist of the addition
of a boiler and boiler grid interface to provide reverse power protection to absorb wind gusts when operating aat neat zero kW, and to increase operating temperatures to eliminate cylinder
glazing and wet stacking.
The Smart Grid consists of a network of advanced meters, which receive information about the availability of green, or excess wind energy and make this energy available to the community
at reduced rates, and enable devices to capture this energy. The meters communicate wirelessly, provide a user interface for customers and account for energy sold at different rates.
The meters can be programmed for prepayment. The Smart Grid enables 20 thermal storage devices that are located in the homes of 20 village elders and these stoves capture and store
excess wind energy for later use. The Smart Metering and the stoves create a system that allows wind energy to be sold as heat for 1/2 the cost of diesel heating.
The installation of this wind power project will provide a maximum output of 1,170 kW to the Nome Joint Utility electric grid in Nome, Alaska over a 20 year extendable project timeframe.
The owners of the project are committed to sell the energy at a price below the avoided cost calculations, even without any grant funding. Grant funding will allow further reduction
in the price of approximately $0.03 per kWH for every one million in grant funds. Selling the energy at a rate below avoided costs will provide savings to the utility to help to lower
the energy costs in the Nome area and provide some energy produced locally that is not dependent on imported oil. Furthermore, this project helps enable future village installations
in the region by helping with a base of operations, spare parts location, local training facility and regional hub. Providing for renewable energy projects in villages should help
reduce the dependency on oil in those locations where oil must be flown or barged in and ultimately help reduce energy rates in those locations as well. Through implementing a power
sales agreement, this project is unique in that it takes advantage of federal tax credit incentives for wind energy projects which help offset the actual cost of energy. Overall, this
project provides a cash and tax credit based revenue stream, provides jobs and keeps money working in the community while increasing overall power generation reliability by producing
it locally. Banner Wind LLC (jointly owned by Bering Straits Native Corporation and Sitnasuak Native Corporation) owns the wind farm while the construction and initial operations are
managed by Western Community Energy LLC. The profits from the project which are ultimately distributed to the shareholders of BSNC and SNC will help provide income to an area where
many have very limited incomes. This is an excellent demonstration of a commercial opportunity that needs to be eagerly developed.
The NPEP Waste Heat Recovery Project consists of installing 520\' of underground supply and return piping, a glycol distribution piping system inside NPPP, installing 12 glycol unit
heaters with VFDs, and HVAC controls. GVEA will manage and administrate the project, perform the electrical/control installation, commissioning, and startup of the system. The mechanical
portion of the work will be performed by a mechanical contractor. Electric power conservation/fuel savings will benefit all of GVEA\'s 33,000 members from Cantwell to Delta Junction.
The Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (?Reynolds Creek? or the ?Project?) is a 5.0 MW
hydroelectric resource to be constructed on Prince of Wales Island approximately ten miles east
of Hydaburg. The Project will interconnect with the existing transmission grid on the island and
will be used by the residents and businesses of Craig, Klawock, Hollis, Hydaburg, Thorne Bay,
and Kasaan. In addition, once the interconnected grid is expanded to Coffman Cove and
Naukati, those two communities will also directly benefit from Reynolds Creek. The Project will
be constructed and owned by the Haida Power, Inc., a joint venture between the Haida
Corporation and Alaska Power & Telephone.
The Pillar Mountain Wind project is KEA\'s next step to achieve its Vision Statement "Endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost effective renewable power solutions by the year
2020. This renewable energy project will consist of three 1.5 MW General Electric (GE) SLE wind turbines. it is estimated that ths project will produce 15.6 million kWh\'s annually
and thereby eliminate over 1.2 million gallons of diesel each year. The wind project will utilize the 20MW Terror Lake Hydroelectric facility as an energy storage system to mitigate
the fluctuations of wind power. Wind and water will work in concert together to produce an estimated 91% of our current power generation needs. This renewable energy project will benefit
the Cityof Kodiak; United States Coast Guard Intergrated Support Command Kodiak, Bells Flats and Russian Creek areas, as well as the villages of Chiniak, Pasagshak and Port Lions.
There are numerous people involved in making this project a reality. These groups of individuals are mainly Alaskans, primary from Kodiak. KEA is proud to be helping our community
lower is dependence on diesel and very thankful for the overwhelming community support for this project.
Pillar Mountain is located directly southwest fo the City of Kodiak. Attached is a survey map depiciting the land ownership of the area and the portion of land where the wind turbines
will be located. The topographical map illustrating the six (6) turbine sites is also attached. This phase of the wind project KEA will be developing three of the six sites depicted
on the map. These maps are found in the Appendix-Exhibit G.
The many different contractors involved in this project have been listed in Section 3.4.
This project will consist of twenty (20) wind turbines to make a collective 2MW "wind farm" in Delta Junction and will be the first project of its kind to integrate into the Railbelt
Grid using an "experimental" program by Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA), by using "proven" cold-weather technology (Northwind 100 turbines with direct-drive motors) which
have already been successfully used in Alaska\'s cold weather, as well as a proven "test" turbine (the first of twenty 100kW turbines) at the same location just erected and successfully
tested by GVEA. This will serve all the communities that are on the Railbelt Grid and can produce enough electricity to power 600 homes each year without any emissions or environmental
harm of any kind. Mike Craft, Managing Partner for Alaska Environmental Power, LLC (AEP) will be spearheading this project as its P.M. (Project Manager), in conjunction with Golden
Valley Electric Association (GVEA), and a team of well qualified individuals and businesses necessary for the construction and erection of the wind turbines for final connection to
GVEA\'s power source connecting it to the Railbelt Grid and all those consumers who receive power from the Grid. We are ready to install at 2009 break-up. We have secured a contract
with the manufacturer-Northern Power Systems (Exhibit C), the crane company-Precision Crane (Exhibit D), the bold manufacturer-Williams Form Engineering (Exhibit E), the PVC supplier-Crescent
Electric (Exhibit F), embedment rings and concrete forms-Greer Tank and Welding (Exhibit T), concrete and pump truck-University Redi-Mix (Exhibit U) and a twenty-year experimental power
purchase agreement (PPA) with Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) (Exhibit G), at a 5.59 meters per second wind regime as determined by our meteorological data.
The proposed project is to convert bio-mass (forest products residuals) to liquid fuels, specifically heating fuels and diesel, and electricity through gasification of the bio-mass and
converting the resulting synthesis gas (SynGas) to #1 heating fuel and diesel for transportation applications. Electricity is a by-product of the proposed process and will be produced
to meet facility electrical needs with any excess electricity made available to the local utilities. The technologies used in the process are, for the most part, well known and proven
technologies in use since the mid-1930?s. The gasses produced will be converted to liquids fuel using a catalytic conversion process called Fischer-Tropsch, and the electricity will
be produced and generated by capturing the waste heat and making steam through heat exchangers and standard turbines and generators. The preferred site for this facility is Ketchikan,
AK, specifically at the industrial park located adjacent to the airport and co-located with one of the mills in the area. Ketchikan has a large volume of woody bio-mass available from
both the National Forest and the local wood products industries. Long term supply appears to be available and transportation of the raw material and the finished product is limited
to very short distances. It is envisioned that the majority of the finished product will be consumed in the local area, off-setting high transportation costs for heating oil and diesel
and providing a nominal amount of electricity to the industrial park, local area and community as needed.
The Kenai Winds project is a 15-18MW wind energy generation facility located in the Nikiski
Industrial Area, in Nikiski, on the Kenai peninsula. The project will consist of 10 wind turbines
disbursed throughout the site, electrically interconnected to the Tesoro Alaska Refinery. A
discussion of the refinery and its direct benefits to the community is included in Appendix O. At
times when the Kenai Winds generation exceeds the needs of the refinery, power will be sold to
others. Electric energy will be delivered and sold to the oil refinery, providing low-cost power,
and helping ensure the economic viability of the refinery.
The proposed project will take place on the Tanana River adjacent to the community of Nenana.
Nenana was chosen due to a combination of strong local support for the project, available
technical assistance and infrastructure, and location on the road system within close proximity to
the University of Alaska Fairbanks. These factors increase the likelihood of project success
while minimizing costs. This project will be administered by the Alaska Center for Energy and
Power (ACEP) at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, with significant contributions from the
University of Maine, Yukon River Intertribal Watershed Council, the Tribal and City Councils of
Nenana, and Ocean Renewable Power Corporation (ORPC). The primary purpose of the project
is to successfully address the numerous challenges associated with installing hydrokinetic
devices in Alaska?s riverine environments. This will be accomplished through a comprehensive
resource assessment (biological and physical), followed by the installation of a ?dummy? open
architecture turbine to assess operations in challenging environments (including interactions with
ice and debris) without damaging expensive real turbine equipment. Finally, this project will
involve the design, construction, deployment and initial testing of a first commercial
hydrokinetic device at the site. It is hoped that beyond the scope of this project, the University of
Alaska will continue to operate the Nenana site as a test center to assess other devices and work
with manufacturers to improve designs. It is also hoped that ORPC, as the holder of the FERC
permit for the site, will continue to manage their operation in conjunction with the testing center
and supply electric power to the local grid.
The community of Crooked Creek, Ak along the Kuskokwim River, have long been interested in renewable power and have already researched a variety of possibilities, this year?s project
initially will be to develop a finale list of potentially feasible methods, to explore feasibility studies and cost evaluation. We\'ll collect the necessary data by testing the feasibility
of these considerations; by building prototypes that will supply us with the solid data to base our decisions on, to aid us in reduce our dependency on Fossil Fuels. This may require
the combination of available technologies, some we\'re considering are Thermopile technology, Hydro power (four sources available here), Solar power, Wind, Residential producers, Wood
gas and heat power production, We\'ll be verifying permitting requirements, Land right of ways and environmental, permitting obstacles identified. A Full study of Village Creek flow,
explore methods to increase and extend its annual usage. As much as this is a fact finding mission, it is also a call to arms by the population of Crooked Creek. Our IGAP program will,
with this grant, will ready us for all consideration.
Geothermal energy remains an underdeveloped renewable and sustainable energy resource
within the State of Alaska. Aside from Chena Hot Springs, which currently has an installed
capacity of 400 kW of power from a low temperature (about 73?C) geothermal source, there are
presently no other geothermal-electric energy producers in the State. The Makushin project?s
primary goal is to produce a minimum of 40 MW of power from the geothermal resource and
supply that power to the City of Unalaska, independent power producers and other energy users
in the vicinity. The current generating capacity within Unalaska consists of UniSea (Fairbanks-
Morris (12? MW)), Westward Seafood (9? MW Wartsila), Alyeska Seafood (5.5? MW), and the
City of Unalaska (currently 7.5 MW; in addition the City has purchased, but not installed, 10 MW
capacity Wartsila diesel gensets (and perhaps an additional 10 MW of diesel generation) for the
potential of 44+ MW, in the future which is contemplated to be utilized as emergency back-up
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 29 10/8/2008
generation. The base load of all Unalaska to be supplied by the Geothermal-electric Project is
estimated near 10 mW/hr. The combined base and peak loads are estimated to be near
32 mW/hr. The project could supply more than 50 percent of the electrical load for the City and
other power producers in Unalaska. Any unutilized electric energy available above any total
load requirements, and the Project?s installed electric capacity will be utilized in four ways:
1. For electric resistive heating within Unalaska to displace expensive fuel oil now used for
domestic space heat and man-camp heat systems or to augment or replace thermal
energy heat exchanged from some present diesel generation jacket heating loops.
2. To supply electric fuel/energy for Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) to displace
higher and unstable priced gasoline and diesel, as an imported fuel. The PHEV
technology has the additional ability to feed electricity back in the grid for emergencies
from the PHEV batteries. This project will retrofit two local F-150 pickup fleet trucks to
PHEV to increase the fuel economy of these vehicles from 16 mpg to 41 mpg on roads
within the City of Unalaska. This will be an important step to demonstrate how
sustainable green transportation at reduced and stable costs for ?fuel? will work in
Unalaska.
3. Electric energy conversion into other ?manufactured and transportable? fuels, like
ammonia, methane, and hydrogen which could augment or displace costly diesel fuel
now used by the local fishing fleet. This utilization or transporting ?stranded renewable
energy? could create new local business opportunities for diversification of local business
infrastructure.
4. Lower temperature ?waste heat? from the geothermal-electric facility could be used for
heating greenhouses and other industries requiring stable energy values.
KSLC is the fee simple, surface and subsurface land owner of 7,200? acres known as the
Makushin geothermal resource area, and as such will be the lead grant recipient. KSLC anticipates working closely with the City of Unalaska, the Ounalashka Village Corporation, the Native
Village Tribe and the group of noted civil and electrical engineers, geologists and other scientists identified in this proposal to complete 16 tasks that include further assessing
the
resource, developing facility siting plans, evaluating the electrical integration of the geothermal
power with the local power, evaluating the transmission lines required (including new and
reconducting), and developing 35 percent level cost estimates for each of three alternatives for
facility locations. The team members include Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell (HDL), RSA
Engineering (RSA), TDX Power, University of Manitoba, University of California Santa Cruz, Alaska Volcano Observatory, and specialty contractors to assist in select areas of the project.
As part of the assessment of the resource we will develop a searchable database for the substantial existing literature and data gathered since 1978, and conduct geochemical studies
and spectral imaging in order to refine the existing model of the geothermal resource system. Seismic data gathered from previous studies will be inputted into the refined model. In
order to develop 35 percent project cost estimates, a number of factors will have to be evaluated including: conceptual design of facilities including a dock and other needed infrastructure,
power plant size and type, power transmission and electrical integration with existing electrical system, and evaluation of permitting issues.
Wind Energy Alaska (WEA), plans to construct a 6 megawatt (MW) wind generation facility on
CIRI-owned land near the village of Nikolaevsk, located on the southern Kenai Peninsula
(Figure 1 of Section 7). The electricity generated by the project will be interconnected to the
Anchor Point Substation, which is owned and operated by the Homer Electric Association
(HEA). The project includes the construction of the wind generation plant, with four 1.5 MW GE
wind turbines, a new 1.9 mile access road, and a distribution line approximately 10 miles in
length from the plant to the Anchor Point Substation in Nikolaevsk. See Appendix J
photographs representative of the GE wind turbines and the distribution line proposed for the
project. HEA is one of the six prime electric cooperatives, or utilities, that serves the Alaska
Railbelt transmission grid. This grid includes Anchorage, Fairbanks, Matanuska?Susitna, and
the Kenai Peninsula and serves about 75 percent of Alaska?s population. This portion of the
population consumes more than 85 percent of the State?s electrical power. HEA is a memberowned
electric cooperative that serves most of Alaska?s Kenai Peninsula. HEA serves
approximately 20,153 members at 28,547 metered locations, 2,200 miles of energized line,
within a service area of 3,166 square miles. WEA, CIRI, and enXco are project proponents.
WEA is investigating other prospective wind sites on the Kenai Peninsula in the Caribou Hills
area. HEA and Chugach Electric Association, Inc. (Chugach) are potential power customers.
WEA has contracted URS/Tryck, Nyman and Hayes to provide design engineering, permitting,
and construction management of the project.
Wind Energy Alaska (WEA) wishes to construct a 3.2 megawatt (MW) Landfill Gas (LFG) to
Energy Generation Facility at the Anchorage Regional Landfill, located east of the Glenn
Highway near Eagle River, Alaska. The Anchorage Regional Landfill is owned and operated by
the Municipality of Anchorage (MOA), Solid Waste Service (SWS). With an in-service date of
April, 2010, this project is designed for incremental growth beginning with 3.2 MW and up to 6.4
MW within the next 15 years with additional capacity as needed. Landfill gas flow records and
projected fill rates at the landfill over the next 20 years support the potential for this level of
electric power production. MOA would receive royalty payments to compensate for use of land
and LFG for the project. This revenue could be used to offset tipping fees at the landfill to
benefit the public. In addition to power generation, the proposed project will include a heat
recovery system that will recover waste heat from the LFG engines to be used in nearby office
and storage building presently heated with a natural gas. The natural gas fuel cost savings will
reduce landfill operating costs. The landfill is located near the existing power lines that feed into
the electric system and the Railbelt grid. The U.S. Army Fort Richardson, Elmendorf Air Force
Base, ML&P, Chugach Electric Association (CEA), Matanuska Electric Association (MEA),
MOA?s Anchorage Regional Landfill and SWS are potential power customers. WEA has
contracted HDR Alaska, Inc. to provide design engineering, permitting, and construction
management of the project. HDR has LFG design experience and has assisted in the
development of cost estimates for this project.
The Applicant owns and operates Motherload Lodge located near the Little Susitna River. The 4.9 acre plot of land is privately owned but segments of the proposed project will be locataed
on land owned by the State of Alaska Park Service. The Motherload Lodge currently utilizes 3 diesel fuel generators to power the facility and accounts for a significant percentage
of annual operating expenses. The company plans to construct a 50kW run of river project on Delia Creek. The proposed project, The Delia Creek Alternative Energy Project (DCAEP),
will utilize water flow from the Delia Creek to power electricity to the Motherload Lodge. The project will include an intake site, underground penstock and powerhouse. The hydroelectric
system will be intergrated with the current fuel generator system. Out of the 3 gensets, 2 gensets will be removed immediately and the third genset, replaced with a smaller genset.
DCAEP will be headed by Project Manager, Jill Reese, Owner and sole member of HPML LLC.
The Native Village of Napaimute, governed by its Traditional Council, is deliberately focused on the goal of its elders: to resettle the village. Using a combination of local resources,
local labor, unwavering vision and hard work coupled with a think-outside-the-box approach the tribe has successfully leveraged in-kind, State or Federal funding to create its Community
Plan; construct a village offices and a community building using local material; log and mill local wood to construct rental cabins and kits for sale; site, clear, survey and construct
a pioneer airstrip; and to build a landfill. Since Napaimute received its land base through unusual means, it was through Administration for Native American funding that survey of
its community lands was completed. This enabled the tribe to open a Home Site Program; people are resettling, the village growing. Napaimute Enterprises sells fuel; operates a small
package store; rents cabins and the community center; operates a sawmill; has a coin-op washer and dryer; and offer showers. Commerce and our economic base are slowly growing, in accordance
to our Community Plan. The cost of providing linked energy to rural Alaskan villages is staggering; individual energy systems must smartly utilize energy by reducing use of petroleum
products. Our village, located on the Kuskokwim River, about 30 miles from Aniak works to be a model village where refuse is contained, development is planned and residents demonstrate
their care and respect for the environment by minimizing their dependence on diesel; this is also a demonstration of the harsh economic environment. Our proposal will serve current
and future members of the community (25 or so residential homes) along with a couple of families that live across the river and the countless river commuters who come to wash clothes
and take a shower. NVN?s Director Development & Operations Mark Leary and Environmental Coordinator Mitchell Dammeyer will be directly involved in the management of this project.
Both men are highly respected in the Kuskokwim and Mr. Leary has overseen most of Napaimute\'s development, literally from the brush up.
The City of St. George operates a traditional diesel power plant which currently uses
multiple diesel fueled engine generators to supply all required electric power to the
community of St. George Island. With fuel and fuel handling cost now at historically high
levels, the community, through their partner APICDA, seeks technology alternatives to
provide long term fuel-savings impact. As wind/diesel technology has been proven viable
in a variety of remote applications in Alaska and internationally, APICDA has allocated
resources to determine if a wind retrofit at St. George can provide a meaningful, cost
effective benefit. The City of St. George, APICDA and TDX Power are all involved in
delivering a high penetration wind diesel hybrid project for the community.
This medium penetration wind-diesel and jacket heat recovery project is located on
Umnak Island, approximately 100 miles west of Unalaska/Dutch Harbor. The community
of Nikolski will be directly served by this project. In addition, the community of pilots
and passengers who make international flights over this area will benefit greatly. A
communications gap, long a problem for international flights, was recently remedied by
the installation of communications equipment in Nikolski by the FAA.
The Nikolski IRA Council, Chaluka Corporation, the management of Umnak Power, TDX
Power and the Aleutian Pribilof Island Community Development Association/APICDA will
be involved in ensuring this project succeeds.
We propose a 2 year project to estimate in-line (hydrokinetic) renewable energy potential for rural Alaska. We will begin creating a list of about 24 sites/communities which appear to
have the greatest potential. We plan to study 8 sites in year 1 and 16 sites in year 2. At this point, Alaska?s larger rivers (i.e., the Yukon, Koyukuk, Kuskokwim and Susitna Rivers)
are obvious places to look for in-stream energy. We will examine available data, and work with project partners (including Re vision, AEA and ANSEP) to come up with a list of river
stretches and community partners. The UAA-SOE Alaska Native Science and Engineering Program (ANSEP) has well established relationships with many communities throughout Alaska and has
agreed to assist the faculty in establishing working relationships with the communities. Following site selection, we will select student research assistants (3 in year 1 and 5 in year
2) who will be trained in hydrographic surveying and velocity measurement. Then, working in cooperation with the communities, we will survey the selected river stretches during the
summer of 2009 and 2010 to obtain bathymetric and current distribution data. Next, using data from United States Geological Survey (USGS) gauging stations, we will estimate the long
term hydrologic (i.e, velocity/depth) conditions at the selected rural sites. The USGS provides discharge rates at nearly 400 sites around the state, covering most river systems. The
long-term velocity/depth distribution data obtained will be used to determine the hydrokinetic energy available for power generation.
The Fishhook Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in Hatcher
Pass, Alaska. The project will be located on a combination of mostly state land and some
borough land off Hatcher Pass Road. Energy from the project would be provided into the
Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid.
Fishhook Renewable Energy, LLC (FRE) is the project proponent, and would contribute
funding, own, and operate the project. FRE has already completed reconnaissance, feasibility,
and conceptual design efforts, and is currently in the permitting and contract negotiation
processes for the project. With timely completion of permitting, contract negotiations, and
financing, construction will occur in 2009. Final design would be completed by members of
FRE. Construction would be completed by qualified contractors and subcontractors selected
through a competitive bidding process.
The Fourth of July Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located near
Seward, Alaska. The project would be located east of the Spring Creek Correctional Facility,
across Resurrection Bay from the city of Seward. Energy from the project would be provided
into the Seward Electric System grid.
Independence Power, LLC (IP) is the project developer, and would contribute funding and own
and operate the project. IP would manage the pre-construction study process, completing some
efforts internally, and contracting out other activities to qualified consultants as appropriate.
Construction would be completed by qualified contractors selected through a competitive
bidding process.
Rural residents in NW Alaska are facing some of the highest costs anywhere in the nation. In
order to proactively address the region?s energy crisis, KEA is working to implement long term
energy options. While there are a variety of alternative energy options available to the
Kotzebue region, such as wind, solar, and geothermal; wind energy has a proven track
record of success in this community.
The goals of the proposed project are:
? To increase the wind capacity of KEA from 1.14 MW to 4.39 MW using 5 Fuhrlander
650kWs.
? To integrate the increased wind capacity with a 600 kW / 1800 kWh Vanadium Red-
Ox Flow Battery.
? To utilize the excess electricity in a distributed heating system.
This is a two year project. Year one involves performing all pre-construction and foundation
construction tasks. Year two involves the wind turbine erection and commissioning.
We are proposing to enhance and expand the first in-stream hydrokinetic energy conversion
device successfully deployed in the United States in Ruby, Alaska. In the summer of 2008, the
Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council (YRITWC), along with the Tribe and City of Ruby,
the local electric utility (owned and operated by the City of Ruby), and ABS Alaskan, deployed,
tested, and removed a 5 kW Encurrent vertical axis hydrokinetic turbine in the Yukon River at
Ruby, Alaska, before winter ice formation. This proposal is for a two-year project that will begin
in 2009 with a revised resource assessment, re-design certain aspects of the turbine deployment
such as anchoring and debris diversion, finalize permit acquisition, and re-deploy the 5 kW
device. Based on the performance of the 5 kW turbine, and modeling feasibility for a larger
system with a turbine re-designed to optimally perform at a lower current speed, in 2010 we will
install a 25 kW version of the hydrokinetic turbine. All project partners will remain in place,
along with Terrasond and re vision LLC, who will assist with resource assessment and feasibility
analysis.
Kotzebue Electric Association?s Cost of Energy Reduction Program will achieve a 25%
reduction is diesel based power by installing, in part, a Vanadium Red-Ox Flow Battery
Energy Storage System (VRFB) which will be able to provide 600 kW of power for three
hours. This battery bank will increase voltage stability, increase the efficiencies of
operating diesel generators, and capture excess wind energy during off-peak hours.
While this installation will serve Kotzebue, the demonstrated technology could offer
significant benefits to other villages as more wind energy is harnessed.
The VRFB will benefit the KEA existing system in three specific ways. Diesel turbines run
most efficiently when operating to the fullest capacity. Charging the battery, when the
generator would otherwise operate below ideal conditions, will increase overall system
efficiency. Secondly, KEA runs one EMD year round and supplements this with a second
CAT generator when the load demands it. Instead of starting the second generator, the
VRFB will supply the electricity. Normally, the CAT gen set is run approximately 3,200 hrs
per year. This will be reduced less than 350 hrs per year with the VRFB online. This results
to a direct reduction in diesel consumption. Thirdly, in order to realize the benefits of
increasing the level of wind penetration in Kotzebue, energy storage MUST be utilized.
The simple payback for the VRFB is under three years.
High-efficiency solid state ammonia synthesis (SSAS) will be advanced from laboratory to proof of-concept and pre-commercialization pilot-plant stage. An SSAS module will be built, capable
of synthesizing anhydrous ammonia (NH3) at ~10 kWe input from renewable-source electric
energy, fresh water, and atmospheric nitrogen. The NH3 will be stored in a pressurized steel
tank, and will fuel an internal-combustion-engine (ICE) generating set delivering to the utility
electricity grid or isolated load. A complete system will be located in Juneau at the Alaska
Electric Light & Power (AEL&P) site. Hydroelectric energy will be converted, at ~ 10 kW scale,
to NH3, stored as a liquid at 250 psi in steel tanks, and regenerated to electric energy in an
ammonia-fueled internal combustion energy (ICE) generating set and returned to the electricity
grid or isolated load. This system will model a village-scale system that could store enough
surplus renewable-source energy, as liquid NH3 in surface tanks, to supply the village?s total
year-round energy needs as firm energy, assuming enough local renewable energy production
capacity is in place to generate this total energy. The goal is village and other ?energy island?
energy independence via renewable-source energy and annual-scale firming storage, replacing
all diesel electricity generation and oil heating. Deploying the project initially at AEL&P allows
hydro energy input and lower project technical risk via Juneau?s benign climate and favorable
transportation access; the project may later be relocated to a smaller community for further
evaluation and test.
The project will be located at a site yet to be determined within the Alaska state boundaries. Once the exact site location is determined, then an evaluation of the communities to be
served can be provided. Also involved in this project will be contractors and subcontractors to be hired for various engineering, design, construction and supply aspects related to
the project activities. Specifically, Ormat will be working with Precision Power LLC who will be the construction contractor for this project to perform the construction of the project
on site.
AGE?s management and engineering team in collaboration with the UAA School of Engineering is
proposing this PROJECT that when proven will provide rural communities with CBM resources an
inexpensive energy source that will provide sustainable heat and power 24/7 365 days a year. This
PROJECT will develop an Arctic Ready Combined Heat and Power Unit powered by CBM gas that will
have direct application to rural communities with viable CBM resources. The PROJECT has three
parallel components with appropriate milestones.
? Component 1 will construct and complete Fowler Oil and Gas?s (FOG) Kircher CBM Well located
at the corner of Trunk and Bogard Roads, Palmer, Alaska (see Exhibit A). . This well is located
near the Colony Middle/High School Complex (Colony Schools). FOG?s Kircher Well is permitted,
bonded and construction can be initiated as soon as grant funding is available.
? Component 2 will pipe CBM gas from the Kircher well to a prototype skid mounted Arctic Ready
Combined Heat and Power Unit at the Colony Schools. AGE will be the IPP that will own and
operate this CHP system.
? Component 3 will assess the CBM resources at 7 communities located through out rural Alaska.
The seven communities will be selected from the 38 villages identified by the State of Alaska as
having potential CBM resources (see Exhibit B). AGE has completed the initial reconnaissance
assessment of these communities with the results summarized in Exhibit C These 38
communities are within the boundaries of 7 of the 13 Regional Native Corporations. AGE
recommends selecting one community from within each Native Corporation boundary to ensure
that the test projects will cover a broad geographic area. The final selection of the seven
communities will be a public process with input from a proposed Project Assessment Team made
up of AGE and our sub-consultants, USGS, BLM, DNR-DGGS, local power producers such as
AVEC and Regional Corporations.
All PROJECT Components are related but can stand alone if required. For example, if the Kircher Well
does not produce CBM, then the Colony Schools Prototype CHP can be operated using available natural
gas. Confirming FOG?s CBM technology will address the critical environmental and social concerns
associated with CBM well spacing and produced water management that have plagued Lower 48 CBM
developments. FOG?s process uses directional/horizontal drilling that allows well spacing on one well per
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 18 2008-Oct-08
Z:\\AEA Grant 2008\\Artic Ready CHP CBM\\AR AEA Grant Application-final.doc
640 acres compared to one vertical well per 10 acres used in standard CBM development. FOG?s
technology uses in-ground dewatering compared to above ground management and disposal of
produced water. FOG?s technology will revolutionize CBM development within the state and nationally.
Most importantly, FOG?s process will result in a sustainable technology that can be easily managed and
operated in rural Alaska communities with minimum social and environmental impacts.
This project is located in Girdwood (See Exhibit A). AGE proposes to install a natural gas
powered CHP plant with its efficiency enhanced by the TEG unit that will provide heat and
power to Girdwood Elementary and the Girdwood public by feeding power into the local
electrical grid. Thermal energy will be provided to Girdwood Elementary for space heating, snow
melt, and heated pedestrian walkways as well as the research center itself.
Two micro-hydro projects located at California and Virgin Creeks will provide hydro power
generation to supplement the CHP/TPG plant during periods of sufficient flow estimated at 8
months per year. Again, many rural communities have micro-hydro potential.
Small scale solar and wind energy will be developed at the proposed CHP/TPG site adjacent to
Girdwood Elementary near California Creek again to demonstrate how alternative sources can
supplement an efficient power plant in rural settings.
This Construction Project is based on the following reconnaissance level findings:
? CHP and TEG power generation systems are proven technologies that,
together, are more than twice as efficient as current power generation systems
in Girdwood and will reduce the schools carbon footprint by more than half.
? Several steep, rapid-flow streams are located in Girdwood.
? Solar and wind levels are adequate for demonstration and research purposes.
? Available Geo-thermal and tidal energy will provide future research and
educational opportunities for UAA staff and students.
Finally, other public and private grant funds will be sought to construct a Renewable Energy
Research and Discovery Center for UAA. The center is proposed to be constructed on donated
Municipality of Anchorage land adjacent to the Girdwood Elementary School. This center will
house and showcase the CHP/TEG, and have a small wind generator and solar panels. The
micro-hydro projects will be tied into the CHP/TEG. In the same building will be classroom and
research space for UAA researchers and students. The public Renewable Energy Discovery
Center will be in the front of this building and will be staffed by UAA students. This center will
facilitate the study of other renewable sources of energy such as tidal and fuel cells.
Shungnak is a village that can benefit from solar energy. it is proposed that a grid tied,batteryless 50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power
plant and tank farm. it consists of 225ea 224-watt solar panels on an adjustable 6300 ft2 rack that is supported on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation. Multiple 7000 watt inverters
provide 277 VAC power.
Noatak is a village that can benefit from solar energy. It is proposed that a grid tied, batteryless
50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power plant and
tank farm in Noatak . It consists of 225ea 224-watt panels on adjustable 6,300 ft2 racking
mounted on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation. Each adjustable array utilizes one 7000 watt
inverter providing 277 VAC power.
Ambler is a village that can benefit from solar energy. It is proposed that a grid tied, batteryless
50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power plant and
tank farm in Ambler . It consists of 225 ea 224-watt panels on adjustable 6300 ft2 racking
mounted directly on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation system. Each adjustable array utilizes one
7000 watt inverter providing 277 VAC power.
AVEC proposes a resource assessment/feasibility analysis/conceptual design project of hydropower sites
in the Upper Kobuk region. We will evaluate at least twelve sites regarding their hydroelectric potential
and will create conceptual designs for the most promising sites. The project will potentially serve the
communities Kobuk, Ambler, Shungnak, and Kiana, as well as possible future industrial developments,
which for the purposes of this application will be referred to collectively as the Upper Kobuk region. Key
partners in the project will include NANA Pacific/NANA Regional Corporation, NovaGold/Mantra
Mining and additional engineering consultants. NANA Pacific/NANA Regional Corporation will be
responsible for coordination of all activities, developing and managing sub-contracts with appropriate
sub-contractors and consultants, providing technical assistance, and completing the final report.
The Project is a 300 kW run of the river hydroelectric plant with a diversion structure, pipeline,
powerhouse, and electric line. The project involves collecting up to 7 cfs of water year round
from a tributary (Mountain Creek) of Barling Bay Creek and transporting it across a basin
boundary to Big Creek. The Project will be developed by Alaska Village Electric Cooperative,
Inc. (AVEC) and it will provide for most of the electrical needs of Old Harbor. AVEC will employ
consultants and contractors as needed to complete the Project. AVEC may utilize local or other
personnel for project maintenance.
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and
commissioning of two wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and
distribution system for the community of Mekoryuk. Participants in the project include AVEC,
STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management and electrical system
engineering for the project. STG will be the general contractor, responsible for the design and
installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary
electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100 wind turbines and startup &
commissioning services. Site control has already been completed. The foundation design is
completed. Permitting is underway, having already relocated the turbines in response to input
from Fish & Wildlife.
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and
commissioning of one additional wind turbine to supplement the existing power generation and
distribution system for the community of Toksook Bay. Participants in the project include AVEC,
STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management and electrical system
engineering for the project. STG will be the general contractor, responsible for the design and
installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbine, and installation of all ancillary electrical
systems. Northern Power will provide the Northwind 100 wind turbine and startup &
commissioning services. The site is already under control and already contains three Northwind
100 wind turbines. Existing permits are in place and can be extended to cover the additional
wind turbine.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative is proposing to complete design, permitting and installation of three Northern 100B Wind Turbines, and new control modules, to provide wind power
to the community of Quinhagak, which is located on the coast of the Bering Sea, west of Bethel in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta area.
According to the "Quinhagak, ALaska Wind Resource Update Report" by V3 Energy LLC, Quinhagak has good wind power development potential. It classifies Quinhagak as a Class 4 wind resource
with a projected 400 Watts per square meter wind power density at 50 meters.
Project management is a collaborative approach. AVEC will provide overall project management, and electrical system engineering for the project. AVEC is in the process of hiring a construction
management firm, who will be responsible for the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems. The
supplier of the Northwind 100B wind turbines will also provide start-up training and commissioning services. Site control has been secured and permitting for installation of the wind
turbines to the US Fish and Wildlife resulted in a no adverse impact determination.
The Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) Solid Waste Services Department (SWS) intends to develop an
electric power generating plant to be located at the Anchorage Regional Landfill (ARL). The plant
will use landfill gas (LFG), a byproduct of anaerobic waste decomposition, as its primary fuel.
Electricity generated by the project will be sold and delivered to the Matanuska Electric Association
(MEA) distribution system to provide power to Eagle River and Southcentral Alaska. SWS will
negotiate a power sales agreement with the end power user, likely MEA, and select of a development
partner to design, build and operate the plant.
The Bethel Wind Project is designed to contribute clean, renewable wind power to the Bethel energy grid. The project area is about 1.5 miles northwest of the Bethel Airport on hilltop
land owned by Bethel Native Corporation. Our power will be sold wholesale to BUC for distribution to its customers as normal. The size of our project is dependent on our ability to
sell power, not on the wind resource, but we expect that a two MW project will be viable. The communities served could include Napakiak and Bethel.
The grant participants will be Village Wind Power LLC (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Alaska Wind Power LLC). Alaska Wind Power LLC is owned by Alaska Power & Telephone Company, a certificated
Alaska public utility, and LAPP Resources, Inc., a private Alaskan natural resource developer. We have invited both Bethel Native Corporation (BNC), whose land we are proposing to use
for the wind farm site, and BUC who will distribute the electricity, to join us in this project as partners. Nether has made a decision on this yet. BNC entered into an exclusive use
agreement with us for our evaluation of their site several months ago. We recently supplied a draft land lease to them and are currently negotiating its terns. We expect that the land
lease will be in place by the end of the year, and equipment orders can be placed for delivery and construction in 2009.
The Delta Wind Project is designed to contribute clean, renewable wind power to the railbelt energy grid. The project area is about 25 miles south of Delta Junction on Coal Mine Road.
We are currently funding an Interconnection Study with Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) to identify costs associated with putting wind power on their transmission system near
Delta Junction. The results of the interconnection study will be used to formulate a power tariff for sale of our power to GVEA. The size of our project is dependent on our ability
to sell power, not on the wind resource, but we expect that a 40 to 50 MW project could be achievable. The communities served will include all communities within the GVEA?s service
area that purchase power from GVEA, including Delta Junction, North Pole, Fairbanks, Fox, College, Nenana, and Healy, as well as two major gold mines, Fort Knox and Pogo.
The grant participants will include Alaska Wind Power LLC (the project owner) and an environmental contactor, yet to be selected, to conduct the field work and report the results. The
federal Bureau of Land Management has not identified any threatened or endangered species of wildlife in the project area. However, the area does include ?potential? habitat for at
least four species of birds currently listed on BLM-Alaska?s Sensitive Status Species List. Pre-development surveys should be conducted within the project area to locate any sensitive
species of concern. The avian surveys that are the subject of this grant application are described below.
Task 1?Raptor Survey
To locate eagle nests in the vicinity of the wind farm, we would conduct a fixed-wing aerial survey to search for active Bald or Golden eagle nests within 10 miles of all proposed wind
farm facilities. A raptor biologist will accompany a pilot (Piper Supercub) for 1 day of surveys.
Task 2?Spring Migration Surveys (Diurnal)
Spring migration occurs in the area from about early April to mid May, with peak periods for species varying during that time span, thus prolonged sampling would be cost-prohibitive.
Instead, we suggest a targeted approach to sample periods when the most birds and species would be moving through the area. A biological technician will collect daily observations during
two 10-day windows (20 days total) to help characterize the species, relative abundance, and distributional use (geographic and altitudinal) of birds using the proposed wind farm.
Task 3?Summer Bird Use at the Wind farm Site
Summer bird use of the wind farm area is primarily associated with the local breeding populations, and the objective of this task is to characterize use of the area by breeding birds.
A biological technician will collect bird observations during six 1-day visits to the wind farm site in summer. Two visits will occur in each month during June, July, and August.
Task 4?Fall Migration Surveys (Diurnal)
Fall migration in the area is more prolonged than spring migration, but most larger migratory birds (waterfowl and cranes) move through the area in late August to early October. To characterize
fall migration, a biological technician will collect daily observations during three 9-day periods and record species, relative abundance, and distribution (geographic and altitudinal)
of birds using the proposed wind farm site.
Task 5?Fall Migration Surveys (Nocturnal)
Because many species groups (e.g., waterfowl, passerines) migrate during the night, nocturnal techniques (such as radar) are required to assess migration. We propose to measure nocturnal
migration rates and characteristics (e.g., altitude and direction) with a mobile radar lab, concurrent with diurnal investigations for three 9-day periods. We are recommending radar
monitoring only for fall migration because 1) the nocturnal period then is longer than during spring, 2) more birds, including young-of-the-year (i.e., less experienced flyers) travel
through the Tanana Valley in fall, and 3) we believe some nocturnal studies will occur in spring 2009 close to Delta Junction .
Replace diesel generation of electricity for the community of Tenakee Springs with renewable hydroelectric power. The City of Tenakee Springs proposes to construct a hydroelectric project
on Indian River. This will be a low head, run-of-river plant displacing the use of at least
33,000 gallons of diesel fuel. Design, engineering, and construction will involve the City of Tenakee Springs, multiple state and federal agencies, private contractors, and the Alaska
Energy Authority.
This project is a regional Resource Assessment/Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual design of Wind Power opportunities around the Lake & Peninsula Borough. It is designed to build upon existing
wind resource assessment efforts, including wind met tower data in some communities, as well as data from existing micro-scale (10kW) wind turbines that are in operation.
The communities included in this package are:
Pedro Bay
Port Alsworth
Egegik
Iliamna-Newhalen-Nondalton
Port Heiden
Pilot Point
In addition to the Borough Management and staff working closely with the local utilities, the Borough intends to hire HDR as their lead engineering consulting firm for these assessments.
The intended outcome of this work is a set of bid documents for a regional Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) contract.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough seeks funding for design and permitting to install High Efficiency Low Emissions (HELE) wood boilers in five communities in the Lake and Peninsula Borough
providing heat to the local school and adjacent teacher housing. The communities to be considered are Pedro Bay, Newhalen/Iliamna, Nondalton, Kokhanok and Port Alsworth. The schools
in these communities served 225 children in the 07-08 school year.
All of these communities are in heavily wooded areas and with the exception of Port Alsworth they are have few or no land use issue that need to be resolved. The wood resource near Port
Alsworth resides in Federal Park land and ANCSA land, the Borough will utilize area experts to resolve any impediments to sustainable wood harvest.
An initial feasibility indicates that these communities could displace tens of thousands of gallons of diesel currently used to heat the facilities. Actual fuel consumption for school
year 07/08 was used in the analysis. A simple payback analysis offered periods of 1.6 to 2.9 years.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough will work with the school district and a HELE unit vendor to complete the project. Contract employee, Bob Loeffler will work with local authorities to
ensure that any land issues related to a sustainable wood fuel harvest are resolved.
The proposed project is a wind/hydro hybrid intertie feasibility study for Chignik Bay, Chignik Lagoon and Chignik Lake (hereafter ?Chigniks?.) The Chigniks have a combined population
of 277 people - the largest community is Chignik Lake with 128 people. The cost of fuel to create electricity is becoming beyond reach in the area, the purpose of the proposed project
is to provide affordable and stable-price energy to create sustainable communities.
Wind: There is existing wind data confirming class 5 wind in the area, strong enough to be a good energy source. However, at the sites where data was collected the wind was ?too turbulent?
to be utilized for wind energy generation. Part of the feasibility study will involve determining the most advantageous site for wind turbines by collecting supplemental met data.
Hydro: The Chignik Alaska Draft Small Hydropower Feasibility Report and EIS, by the Army Corps of Engineers, July 1984, evaluated hydro resources at Packers Creek, Mud Bay Lake and Indian
Creek. The study found that Indian Creek had the best potential for economical development with a potential head of 409 ft and modest flows on the order of 22cfs. See Hydro Screening
Attachment G for details
The Lake and Peninsula Borough will provide management for the project, overseeing the work of HDR Alaska who will act as the owner representative in developing the feasibility study
for a wind/hydro intertie project.
McGrath Light and Po er is located in McGrath, Alaska. McGrath has a population of 315, and is located 221 miles northwest of Anchorage and 269 miles southwest of Fairbanks in Interior
Alaska. It borders the Kuskokwim River directly south of its confluence with the Takotna River. The remote location of McGrath and frequently difficult river conditions lead to some
of the highest barge-delivered fuel costs in the state. Direct beneficiaries of this project include the Iditarod Area School District (IASD) McGrath complex, and three commercial facilities
adjacent to the ML&P power plant. Indirect beneficiaries include all ML&P electric customers, as the project will provide increased revenues from the sale of recovered heat, as well
as improved electric generating efficiency and reduced operations and maintenance costs. ML&P will be the Grantee under the Renewable Energy Fund. ML&P has teamed up with the engineering
firm of Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E). AE&E has a long history of successful energy related projects throughout Alaska, and has worked with both ML&P and IASD on numerous
projects dating back to 1995.
Yakutat Power is located in Yakutat, Alaska. The City and Borough of Yakutat has a population of 631, and is located at the mouth of Yakutat Bay along the Gulf of Alaska, 225 miles northwest
of Juneau and 220 miles southeast of Cordova. Yakutat receives monthly barge service during the winter and more frequent service during summer. Yakutat is equipped with two jet-certified
runways and receives jet service daily. The U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service have offices in Yakutat. This project will convert readily available biomass to a producer
gas (wood gasification) that will be used to reduce diesel fuel consumption at the Yakutat Power plant. The Biomax 75 is based on proven technology with recent additional improvements
for use in cold weather climates. Direct beneficiaries of this project include all Yakutat Power electric service customers. Participants in the project include Yakutat Power, the City
and Borough of Yakutat, the U.S. Forestry Service, National Park Service, and Community Power Corp - the Biomax 75 developer,
Yakutat Power ill be the Grantee under the Renewable Energy Fund grant. Yakutat Power has teamed up with the engineering firm of Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E) to provide
design, permitting, and system integration and construction management. AE&E has a long history of successful energy-related projects throughout Alaska, and has worked with Yakutat
Power on several energy-related projects dating back to 1991.
This project will be located in the upper Kobuk River Valley and will serve the villages of Kobuk, Shungnak, and Ambler. The applicant is Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority; other cooperating
organizations include NANA Regional Corporation, Maniilaq Association, NANAPacific, WHPacific Inc., and Kobuk, Shungnak and Ambler Village Councils. An initial woody biomass site assessment
was sponsored by NANAPacific in August, 2008 under a Department of Energy Tribal Energy Grant. Bill Wall, PhD conducted an initial reconnaissance study to determine the viability of
a wood energy project. Dr. Wall also held presentations in each of the three villages to acquaint them with the scope and components of a wood energy program. The study determined
that a wood energy program is viable and that all three of the villages are very interested in proceeding. In conjunction with the site visit a report completed in 1981 was reviewed
which determined that woody biomass use was sustainable for region (citation attached). The proposed project will develop following analysis and fully complete each of the outline
of tasks for a reconnaissance and feasibility study:
1. Resource Assessment will determine the sustainable level of biomass harvest in the Upper Kobuk; utilize Geographic Information Systems for future harvest planning;
2. Harvest System Assessment will assess a harvest cost delivery model based on two different scales: small individual village scale or a regional harvest scale to service all three
villages;
3. Wood yard conceptual design that links production of wood products chips or cord wood with appropriate boiler configuration and a wood processing cost model;
4. Boiler feasibility and conceptual design to determine the most cost effective and best fit for chip or round wood boilers and the amount of annual wood usage, determination with a
level one feasibility cost summary, the type of boiler locations and potential for district heating major buildings or houses.
5. Preliminary Business Models to determine the initial appropriate organization and ownership of harvest systems, wood yards, and wood energy utilities and basic costs and cash flows
for each village. Many sources will be utilized including the Cold Climate Research Center in Fairbanks, Alaska.
6. Communication process to fully involve the communities in supporting, empowering, and making the decisions on appropriate structure for sustainable wood utilization in the region.
7. Final Presentation to inform project partners and especially villages of the wood energy feasibility, business model, and key pros and cons of moving forward with program construction
and implementation.
A small, 271-kW, cross-flow turbine, generation system with a darn and power house (approximately latitude 52? 11\' 28" N and longitude 174? 11\' 37" W) which utilizes hydro-electric
stored kinetic energy in a reservoir dam on Chuniisax Creek approximately 3/4-mile southwest of the old Atka village site (approximately T92S, R176W, Seward Meridian) and replacement
electrical distribution system. The project will displace use of high cost fossil fuels with a renewable energy resource using proven technology. Energy costs to all users in Atka will
be significantly reduced while providing the current and future energy requirements. The village has secured additional funding from EDA to complete the most of the remaining 55%. (45%
was previously completed using RUS, AEA, and city funding.) This grant plus our cash and in-kind contribution will complete the balance.
The South Fork hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in Eagle River,
Alaska. The project will be located on a private homestead off Hiland Road in Eagle River.
Energy from the project would be provided into the Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid.
South Fork Hydro, LLC (SFH) is the project proponent, and would contribute funding, own, and
operate the project. SFH has already completed reconnaissance, feasibility, and permitting
efforts. Final design is currently in progress, and construction is planned for 2009. Final design
would be completed by members of South Fork Hydro, LLC. Construction would be completed
by South Fork Construction, Inc., with some construction tasks subcontracted as appropriate.
Subcontractors for significant budget items would be selected through a competitive bidding
process.
Rural Alaskans in the Northwest Arctic Borough, NWAB, are facing some of the highest costs
anywhere in the nation. In order to proactively address the region?s Energy Crisis, declared
by the NWAB in September 2008, the NWAB is working to implement long term energy
options. While there are a variety of alternative energy options available in NW Alaska, such
as wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass; wind energy has a proven track record of success
in our communities. Installing and integrating wind turbines in three villages is a big step
toward securing the future of rural Alaska.
The goals of the proposed project are:
? To develop the wind energy potential in the communities of Buckland, Deering, and
Noorvik,
? To develop appropriate wind generation engineering plans and designs, and
? To construct the necessary wind generation facilities (fully integrated with diesel
power systems).
This is a two year project. Year one involves performing both pre-construction and
construction tasks in Deering and Noorvik as well as pre-construction tasks in Buckland. Year
two involves construction tasks in Buckland.
This project focuses on the development of 1 megawatt of wind power located in an area AEA suspects to be have a Class 7 resource. The location is approximately 14 miles Northwest of
the City of Dillingham, less than 5 miles Northeast of Manakotak, and approximately 8 miles South of Alegnagik near Snake Mountain. Due to the specific need of the development of this
resource for the Healthcare organization, this project will benefit all the communities that rely on the Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation to remain ?the only? critical access medical
facility in the Bristol Bay Region. Although the project is being proposed by a Tribal Organization, it has the support of the local electrical cooperative [Nushagak] as well as many
of the residents of Dillingham. Our project development team has tapped into the resources of TDX, Power Corp., MAP Consulting, STG Inc, and Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation.
IRHA proposes to install a biomass heat source for the Yukon-Koyukuk Assisted Living Center, a NAHSDA, Denali Commission, ICDBG, FHLB, and AHFC funded project that will provide a 9 unit
housing complex for the elderly of the Yukon Koyukuk Region. The design includes a multi-purpose area, office space, and dormitory-type housing for transient village health care workers.
Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) is designated by the owner, Louden Tribal Council, to be the Construction/Contractor of the Galena Assisted Living Facility. In addition Interior
Regional Housing Authority functions as the Construction Manager for the project, and is directed to act with full authority of the Owner, in all matters of coordination of design work
performance of the A&E Consultant, Construction Scheduling and Implementation, Management of funding dollars, in accordance with the Payment Schedule, and Management of any and all
Subcontractor entities required to produce satisfactory work completion.
On behalf of the Louden Tribal Council and the Y-K Senior Living Center Consortium, Interior Regional Housing Authority is proposing to install an energy efficient biomass and solar
system to the project.
The project site is bordered by the Yukon River and Campion Road within seciton 4, T9S, T10E, Kateel River Meridian, Nulato Recording District, and contains 3.42 acres. The Biomass
Center would be located within 100 feet of the Center building site, a 8,000 SF building under construction.
Selecting the System
The biomass Center wood system costs include the initial capital costs of purchasing and installing the equipment, non capital costs (engineering, permitting, etc.) the costs of the
fuel storage building and boiler building, the fuel costs, and the other costs associated for operating with operating and maintaining the heating system, including labor.
Comparative Costs of Fuels
The selection of fuel system for the Galena Assisted Living Facility has been based in part on the success of the Energy Center recently built in Tanana, Alaska. Comparative Costs of
Fuels for the Tanana Energy Center were derived from the Preliminary Feasibility Assessment for High Efficiency, Low Emission Wood HEating in Tanana, Alaska, May 8, 2007 by Daniel Parrent,
Juneau Economic Development Council. According to the study, at high efficiency, heat from white spruce cordwood (MC30) at $353.30 per cord is equal t the cost of oil at $3.50 per
gallon, before considering the costs of equipment and operation, and maintenance and repair. It is interesting to note since this study was completed, the cost of oil per gallon has
increased and is currently $7.00 per gallon and expected to rise. Current estimates from suppliers in Galena place a cord of wood at $250.00 per cord.
Initial Investment Cost Estimates
The Biomass System would provide a sustainable resource energy source for heat to the facility. The oil system designed for the building will remain in place as a back-up system to the
Biomass System. If the Biomass System can be installed during the construction phase, installation costs for the Biomass System will be reduced because the plumbing and piping system,
the most significant costs besides the boiler, can be installed during the installation of the oil system. The payback period for the Biomass Heating Units and the fuel storage building
are expected to be recovered within a year three year span.
The Solar Panel System is an additional source of renewable heat, hot water, and electricity for the Center.
This project is designed to demonstrate power generation using combusted biomass as a heat
source to drive an Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) power plant module designed and developed
by United Technologies Corporation. The module is based on the award-winning geothermal
power plant installed at Chena Hot Springs Resort; however the biomass version will operate at
significantly higher efficiency. These efficiency improvements are necessary because unlike the
geothermal fluid, biomass material is not a ?free? fuel. In addition to being designed for
maximum thermal efficiency, the power plant includes load following capability, and
independent, simple, remotely monitored operation at low pressures that do not require special
training to operate. This is important because while the project will be located in North Pole,
Alaska, the power plant is specifically designed for rural Alaskan applications. The project will
be constructed and managed by Chena Power, LLC and will be located at the K&K Recycling
Facility located at Mile 9 on the Richardson Highway. Design work and assembly of the power
plant will be completed by United Technologies Corporation through their Research Center
(UTRC).
The NJUS Renewable Energy Fund Wind Project involves the installation of five 600 kW wind
turbines on Newton Peak located approximately one mile north of Nome. The completed
project, with a total size of three MW, will be owned and operated by NJUS. The wind turbines
will be connected into NJUS?s electrical distribution system through a constructed transmission
line. The project will offer benefits to the community of Nome and its electric customers
through a system-wide reduction and stabilization of energy prices. NJUS has assembled a
project team, headed by STG Incorporated, that is prepared to immediately begin work on an
accelerated schedule. The project team includes members from Intelligent Energy Systems LLC,
DNV Global Energy Concepts Inc, Electrical Power Systems, Duane Miller Associates LLC,
Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell LLC, BBFM Engineers and Aurora Consulting. All aspects of the
Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, detailed in the following pages of this
application, can be completed by fall 2010.
Mt. Alice Harbor Development project is in and around Seward at mile 2 Nash Rd. the service road to the NE side of Ressurection bay 1.5 miles across from the municipal boat harbor on
the NW side, serving the needs of the local population as a community and destination resort, boating access and public access to the Fishing resources of the area. Also serving the
needs of the international community supporting Seward,s role as a burgeoning Summertime international tourism hub and promoting the sustainability of year round tourism. Local Engineers,
Surveyors, Municipal department heads etc. have expressed positive input and eagerness to work on the project. The Architects, Project managers are ready to proceed.
The Unalakleet Renewable Energy Fund Wind Project involves the installation of two 600 kW wind
turbines on a project site located approximately one and a half miles northeast of Unalakleet. The
completed project, with a total size of 1.2 MW, will be owned and operated by UVEC. The wind
turbines will be connected into UVEC?s electrical distribution system through a constructed
transmission line. The project will offer benefits to the village of Unalakleet and its electric
customers through a system-wide reduction and stabilization of energy prices. UVEC has
assembled a project team, headed by STG Incorporated, that is prepared to immediately begin work
on an accelerated schedule. The project team includes members from Intelligent Energy Systems
LLC, DNV Global Energy Concepts Inc., Electrical Power Systems, Duane Miller Associates LLC,
Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell LLC, BBFM Engineers and Aurora Consulting. All aspects of the
Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, which are detailed in the following pages of this
application, can be completed by fall 2010.
The proposed biomass heating system will take place at Tok School, in Tok, Alaska, and will serve to initiate the beginnings of a systemic regional conversion from fossil heating fuel
to clean, renewable biomass heating systems. An outbuilding to house the boilers will be constructed behind the school, in a central location where access to the outbuildings can also
be had. The building will have 3 bays for fiber wagons that will to feed into the a feeder bin inside the boiler room. The boiler will be able to be fed from the inside or the outside
of the building, to accommodate for downtime on the biomass feed systems. The biomass boiler will fed into the current boiler infrastructure, which will serve as a back up system,
and will heat the outbuildings. The project has the advantage of being designed by firms having extensive experience with biomass systems, and is heavily supported by the community.
It was written in partnership with the Tok Area Forestry, CTA Engineering, and by Alaska Gateway School District staff.
The City of Whittier proposes conducting a renewable energy project consisting of a reconnaissance level effort to examine the viability of hydropower on Whittier Creek in Whittier,
Alaska. The work will include engineering analysis, an economic study, and two years of stream guage data gathering. The final product will include an estimated generation capacity,
a preliminary cost estimate for a hydropower facility, and a preliminary analysis of the potential benefits (i.e. power cost savings over time). This effort will be performed by the
Alaska District Corps of Engineers with assistance from the Corps of Engineers Hydroelectric Design Center based out of Portland, Oregon, with stream guaging to be performed by the
USGS. The City of Whittier proposes conducting a renewable energy project consisting of a reconnaissance level effort to examine the viability of hydropower on Whittier Creek in Whittier,
Alaska. Although Chugach Electric currently provides electricity to Whittier, frequent and prolonged outages, particularly during the winter months, necessitates the need to develop
alternate energy sources for a local generation system that could also supply the Railbelt when not needed as a primary provider to the community. The project would assess the potential
for the development of Whittier into a sustainable community that utilizes renewable energy systems.
Located in Nome, this project will install a 2-mile transmission line and a 8-mile fiber control
cable to connect a 1MW wind farm to be operated by Banner Wind LLC, an independent power
producer, to the City of Nome/Nome Joint Utility System (NJUS) power distribution grid. The
project will place an underground 25kv distribution line adjacent to a new road, and include a
fiber control cable run from the wind generators to the utility power plant. Banner Wind LLC is
an IPP formed in partnership between Bering Straits Native Corporation & Sitnasuak Native
Corporation. NJUS will be primarily responsible for the project construction activities, as well
as the reporting and financial control of the intertie project.
The final design work will build upon the feasibility study and preliminary design work completed as of October, 2008. A bulk fuel wood boiler will be built at the Kenny Lake K-12 school
to displace 18,035 gallons of fuel oil. The current boilers will be used for backup and low load periods. This project will involve school district personnel, local contractors, design
engineers and Alaska Energy Authority. This project will employee local residents in project management, construction and chip material delivery.
EarthRun Energy will provide a sustainable source of high grade wood chips for biomass heating in the city of Anchorage, Alaska while strengthening and beautifying the urban forests.
In Anchorage, urban forests are currently overgrown presenting fire and disease problems. It is the right time to make a sick forest a productive and healthy forest. EarthRun has worked
hard to come up with the cleanest, quietest and least interruptive way of harvesting the dead and unhealthy trees from our urban forests, chipping them, and heating one municipal building,
the Russian Jack greenhouse. EarthRun Energy will work closely with the municipality to return the forests to a healthy state.
5 MW natural gas fired Combined Heat & Power Project (?CHP? or ?Cogeneration?), sited near the Begich Tower, to provide the energy needs of the Begich Tower and thermal energy needs
of City of Whittier, Public School and commercial customers within economic reach of the Project, and provide firm power to help Chugach meet new generation needs and improve service
reliability to Whittier.
5 MW natural gas fired Combined Heat & Power Project (?CHP? or ?Cogeneration?), sited at the Alaska State Fair in Palmer (the ?Fair) as the centerpiece of an Alaska Energy Center, to
showcase renewable and alternative energy technologies, provide the energy needs of the Fair and operations sited at the Fair, provide the thermal energy needs of commercial, institutional
and agricultural customers within economic reach of the Project, and provide firm power to help MEA meet new generation needs.
Burro Creek, formerly the Burro Creek Farms Hatchery, is an existing, operational hydro system located on 121 acres of private land approximately one and a half miles south of Skagway
on the west side of upper Lynn Canal. A grant is requested to obtain expert analysis of the feasibility of upgrading the existing hydro system in order to wholesale power to Alaska
Power and Telephone or the City of Skagway. Existing AP&T hydro projects supply electricity to Haines and Skagway but the communities must still rely on diesel during certain times
of the year. Also, existing hydro projects do not generate enough power to supply the cruise lines who have expressed an interest in connecting to shore power as a means of reducing
air quality emissions.
The Haines Borough proposes to explore the potential for use of low-emission nontoxic wood biomass as
the source for wood-fired boilers to provide heat (through an insulated pipe distribution system) initially
to four buildings located within the Borough: the K-12 School, the Voc-Ed Building, the Municipal
Administration Building, and the Public Library. The Borough would begin to reduce our dependence on
costly fossil fuels, while employing cleaner, renewable, and locally available resources, through the use of
locally available wood biomass. The Haines Borough will contract qualified consultants to perform
reconnaissance and feasibility studies, and guide us through the 35% concept design. Contracting will be
in accordance with the Borough?s standard procurement policies.
The City of Chignik will partner with Trident Seafoods (holder of FERC License 620) to study
the engineering, electronics, and economics of restoring the antiquated hydropower system on
Indian Creek in Chignik, Alaska. (See attached Project Area maps.) The ?Chignik Hydro?
project would benefit the residents of Chignik by offsetting the cost of fuel currently used to
generate electricity for homes and community buildings such as the Subsistence Building and the
school. Electricity generated by the new hydropower system will also benefit the new small boat
harbor, the Trident Seafoods fish processing plant, and the Harris Sub-Regional Clinic, which
will serve residents of Chignik Lagoon, Chignik Lake, Perryville, and Port Heiden. In addition,
by re-building the dam and conveyor pipeline, the project would also be reinforcing the
infrastructure that supports the city?s water system, as well as the fish plant water supply.
The Division of Forestry at Milepost 267.5 Richardson Highway, Delta Junction, Alaska is proposing a pilot project using barley/wood pellets for heating a governmental building. The
boiler system will combine two heating systems, a 3840 square foot (sf) main office building, proposed 3000 sf addition, and a 1792 sf warehouse. The boiler will be located in a separate
building which will house a heating system and barley/wood pellet storage.
The grant will involve local contractors for construction and maintenance. The agricultural industry will provide barley as a biomass fuel. Excess barley not currently used for animal
or human consumption is available from the local farming community. Two pellet facilities are being constructed in Delta Junction. End of the Alcan is in the final stages of completing
a commercial pellet manufacturing facility. Logging and Milling Associates (LMA) has purchased wood pellet manufacturing equipment and is in the process of installation of the equipment.
The proposed project would be located in an unincorporated area, northeast of the City of
Petersburg, Alaska. Development of hydroelectric power at the site will include construction of
a lake tap, arch dam, unlined tunnel, power penstock, power plant, tailrace, and transmission
line segments.
Project features would include:
? Reservoir. Ruth Lake is fed primarily by rainfall and snowmelt, with some smaller firn or
hanging glaciers that contribute melt water during the summer months. . The Project
would include a dam to provide a potential usable stored capacity of 17,000 acre-feet.
? Lake Tap / Power Conduit. The inlet works would consist of an arch dam and lake tap.
As presently planned water would initially flow through a 10-foot diameter tunnel for
approximately 3,500 feet. The remaining 7,800 feet of the conduit system would consist
of a 6-foot diameter buried or surface steel penstock.
? Powerhouse. The powerhouse would be located within 2,000 ft. of the confluence of
Delta Creek and would house three impulse turbines, each with a total rated head of
1,300 ft. The rated installed capacity of the powerhouse would be 20 MW and the energy
output would be roughly 70 GWh.
? Access Roads. The Project is separated from the nearest town of Petersburg by
Frederick Sound. The only access for either construction or long-term operation and
maintenance of the Project will be via boat or aircraft. A dock would be located on
Thomas Bay for loading and unloading people and supplies from a boat. A road would
be constructed between the powerhouse and dock. Construction access would also be
provided by helicopter in association with a limited local temporary access road system
to transfer equipment within the construction area. During operation, the Project would
be fully automated and access would be provided via boat or aircraft.
? Transmission Lines. Power generated by the Project would be transmitted by a new
overhead / submarine, 138 kilovolt (KV) transmission segment roughly 20-miles long
running generally southwest from the powerhouse to Petersburg. The transmission
segment would integrate the project to the Southeast Intertie which currently connects
Petersburg to Wrangell to the Tyee Lake Hydroelectric Project on Bradfield Canal.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 21 9/3/2008
? Other Structures. An intake structure housing controls would be constructed at Ruth
Lake. Housing would be provided for power plant operators, staging areas for
construction and substation facilities
Power generated by the Project would provide the interconnected Southern Southeast Alaska
regional utilities with increased system reliability; replace current dependency on diesel
generation; and enable regional utilities to meet the increasing demand for electricity as
customers convert from oil to electric heat and new construction is designed for electric heat.
interconnected southern southeast Alaska regional utilities.
The proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 11841 (Project) is located near
the southeast end of Revillagigedo Island, approximately four miles east of the City of
Ketchikan, Alaska. KPU proposes to install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at
KPU?s existing Whitman Lake Dam to provide an additional source of clean renewable energy to
KPU?s customers, in the city of Ketchikan and the Borough area including Saxman Village, while
also enhancing the conversion of oil heat to electric heat and displacing expensive and nonrenewable
diesel generation. The Project will be interconnected to KPU?s existing distribution
system and the grant project will involve KPU.
This proposal seeks to design and make commercially available a system that utilizes renewable energy as an option to the basic rural Alaska electrical power generating system. This
is multi part concept that utilizes advanced technology to improve the over-all efficiency of prime power diesel generating systems. The elements of the new system are divided into
three separate parts each bringing their own value contribution. They include waste heat recovery, conversion of waste heat using the Organic Rankine Cycle in combination with Controlled
Environment Agriculture, and biomass incineration. At this time Precision Power LLC is the singular participant in the project.
The project involves the installation of two wind turbines near the water treatment plant (WTP) in
Hooper Bay, Alaska (see attached Project Area Maps, and Figure 1 for WTP Site Map). The
two Northwind 100B 100kW wind turbines will provide a dedicated energy source for the WTP?s
water heating system, providing approximately 539,000 kWh per year dedicated to an electric
boiler inside the WTP. Wind-powered energy will offset the use of 15,995 gallons of fuel
currently used in the three fuel oil-burning boilers. Northern will provide the wind towers and
turbine technology, and STG will perform the installation of the towers and turbines. HDL will
provide the geotechnical survey expertise and conduct environmental permitting. BBFM will do
the structural design of the tower foundations. CE2 Engineers, the firm that designed and built
the WTP, will supervise the engineering and wiring of the new boiler system.
The proposed 5 to 7-MW Grant Lake/Falls Creek hydro project is located near Moose Pass,
Alaska (see map in HDR?s attached site assessment). Kenai Hydro seeks to develop the project
in compliance with current low impact hydro guidelines and practices. The scope of this project
will also involve looking at the feasibility of a design that includes diverting flows from Falls
Creek into Grant Lake. Kenai Hydro has secured a Preliminary Permit for this project, issued by
FERC on October 7, 2008. A copy of the Preliminary Permit is attached in the Section 7
appendices. Power from the project would be available to customers of Homer Electric
Association and other areas served by the existing Railbelt transmission grid. Kenai Hydro, LLC
is a partnership among Homer Electric Association (HEA), enXco and Cook Inlet Region, Inc.
(CIRI) that was formed for the purpose of evaluating and developing this site as a low impact
hydroelectric facility.
Additional information on this project may be found in the attached initial site assessment
reported by HDR Alaska, Inc.
Haines, within Southeast Alaska, will benefit from reasonably-priced housing. The Chilkoot
Indian Association is proposing to construct and operate four-plex housing (four buildings with
sixteen units) incorporating a cordwood-fired boiler system. The project is initiated by our
Housing Department, who will manage the subsidized, low-income housing project. A separate
boiler/fuel storage building will be built on one lot and recirculate hot water to be used in each
four-plex for building heat and domestic hot water. Architectural, civil, mechanical, and
electrical design is complete except for an engineering refit to accommodate the wood boiler
system. Our proposal will be for heating system redesign and construction.
The project addresses the availability, quality andfeasibility ofsustainable, economic use of
agricultural and forestry biomass in Alaska. This must be considered before the myriad of
biofuel projects proposed & envisioned can move forward, and before existing, commercially
available technologies that use biomass to produce energy for heat, fuel, & power can be most
effectively, and most successfully, deployed. The goal ofthe project is to 1) assimilate all
existing information on the total forest and crop biomass available in Alaska into one data base,
2) determine the gaps in the data base and the information needed to fill the gaps, and 3)
determine the biological, physical, and economic feasibility ofusing Alaskan biomass as
biofuels. The impetus for the Study is the biomasslcoal-to-liquids plant proposed for the
Fairbanks area ofinterior Alaska, and its needfor commercial/industrial-scale volumes of
biomass fuel stocks. However, the Study will have major statewide application as it will serve as
the basisfor all agricultural andforestry biomass-based energy projects; the greatest number of
which are being proposedfor rural and village communities. Work will take place in Fairbanks
and Palmer, Alaska. Project cooperators are the School ofNatural Resources and Agricultural
Sciences(SNRAS) and the Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station(AFES) at the University
ofAlaska Fairbanks(UAF) (project primary/agricultural energy crops andforest biomass),
Fairbanks Economic Development Corporation(FEDC) (logistics, data support, and information
dissemination), and the Alaska Division ofForestry (forest biomass, and harvest, transport, and
storage technologies),
Gwitchyaa Zhee Corporation Board is the authorizing Board for Gwitchyaa Zhee Utility the Applicant. This application supports a wood heating project in Fort Yukon, Alaska. Local partners
include the Council of Athabascan Tribal Governments (DOE recipient of biomass grant support $1.2 million), Gwitchyaa Zhee Native Corporation & Utility Company and Gwitchyaa Gwichin
Tribal Government, Yukon Flats School District and City of Fort Yukon. A wood energy supply analysis, and a feasibility and conceptual design analysis has been completed for a district
heating loop for downtown Fort Yukon to include the School, Gym, AC Store, School District Office, Water Plant, Post Office and two stand alone boilers; one at the new CATG Clinic and
the other heating the Voc Ed Complex. A side by side analysis of both chip boilers (K?b) and stick fired boilers (Garn) with estimated cost analysis and net simple payback for
individual buildings was conducted in the feasibility assessment. In each case the chip boilers made more economic sense in an integrated model with forest management and harvest operations.
The three chip fired boilers will require approximately 2000-2500 tons of chips depending on moisture content to displace up to 135,347 gallons of fuel or 90% of oil used in these commercial
buildings at a cost of approximately $20/MMBTU ($200/ton) for chips
compared to $46.93/MMBTU for fuel oil ($6.50/gal). This project is being conducted in concert but as a separate project with a project funded by Denali Commission, US DOE through an
Alaska Village Initiatives earmark, and GZ Corporation to develop a wood harvesting system, wood yard and a wood energy utility to supply and maintain the boilers. Both projects have
been developed through technical support from Alaska Village Initiatives, and CATG Resource
Department and e-Four Engineering. Principle personnel to date include Bill Wall, PhD, Peter Olsen, Bruce Thomas, and Greg Koontz, ME.
This application supports a wood heating project in McGrath, Alaska. Local partners include the
City of McGrath, Village Safe Water, MTNT Corporation, and McGrath Light & Power
(ML&P) (applicant). A wood energy supply analysis, and a Level 2 Feasibility (in writing
phase) and conceptual design analysis has been completed for a district heating loop for
downtown McGrath to include in addition to residences, larger consumers; , School District
Office Building (offices, Museum, Library), Captain Snow Center, (including Water Treatment
Plant, Southcentral Foundation offices and current Health Center, Alaska State Troopers,
Washeteria & Showers, District Court, city offices and meeting hall), Post Office, new Health
Center, (to be built), DNR Forestry & Wildfire Center, new Tribal Center (Village Council
offices and Community Hall), and KSKO Public Radio Station. This Level 2 study has not yet
been coordinated with an analysis for a heat recovery project being proposed by ML:&P and
AE&E. The biomass project will link and integrate with the heat recovery project in future
iterations of design and cost analysis in order to capture the synergies from both to create an
optimum design. A side by side analysis of both chip boilers (K?b) and stick fired boilers (Garn)
with estimated cost analysis and net simple payback for individual buildings was conducted in
the feasibility assessment (calculations attached). In most cases the chip boilers made more
economic sense in an integrated model with forest management and harvest operations. The chip
fired boilers will require approximately 2000 tons of chips annually modeled at 40% moisture
content to displace up to 125,000 gallons of fuel or 98% of oil used in these commercial
buildings at a cost of between $28.88 ? $36.10/MMBTUs or between $4-$5 on a per gallon
equivalent compared to $50.54/MMBTU for fuel oil ($7.00/gal). This project is planned to be
conducted in concert with the Village Safe Water project to replace the entire water main system
in McGrath in 2009-2011. The integration of these two projects has the potential to produce
significant cost savings for installation of piping, the most expensive portion of the project. Both
projects have been developed through technical support from Alaska Village Initiatives, and
McGrath Light & Power and e-Four Engineering. Principle personnel to date include Bill Wall,
PhD, Peter Olsen, Ernie Baumgartner, and Greg Koontz, ME, George Wilson, ME of Village
Safe Water. Linkages are planned with Steven J. Stassel, P.E., president AE&E.
The applicant, along with the State Department of Transportation (ADOT), proposes to build a road and 69-kV transmission line to connect the community of Kake with Petersburg. The road/intertie
will allow the delivery of surplus hydropower available from the Tyee project to Kake and eliminate its total reliance upon diesel generation. The community of Kake will continue to
be served by the Inside Passage Electric Cooperative (IPEC). The transmission line infrastructure will be owned and operated by the Kwaan Electric Intertie Cooperative, Inc. (KWETICO,
the applicant), who will charge IPEC for wheeling power to Kake. The road project will allow Kake citizens access to Petersburg\'s infrastructure including major air transportation,
medical facilities, more frequent ferry service, engine repair facilities, and various services and industries not available in Kake. The Intertie will also provide broadband telecommunications
to the community of Kake, and savings to the State\'s Power Cost Equalization Program. The project is part of the overall Southeast Intertie plan commissioned and supported by Southeast
Conference and regional leaders. The road/Intertie dual construction will save money for both ADOT and KWETICO, and will facilitate access to the transmission line for repairs and maintenance.
The project will begin at the Hawk Inlet submarine cable termination yard on Admiralty Island as a continuation of the 69-kV line from Juneau. The cable termination yard will be located
on the eastern shore approximately 2.75 miles up Hawk Inlet just inland from the shoreline and the submarine cable will be buried as it leaves the yard and proceeds offshore. The total
length of the submarine cable is approximately 25 miles. Kwaan Electric Intertie Cooperative, Inc. (KWETICO) will own and operate the transmission line however Inside Passage Electric
Cooperative (IPEC) will continue as the utility providing electrical service to the Hoonah area. IPEC will purchase power from Alaska Electric Light & Power (AEL&P) and KWETICO will
charge IPEC a wheeling rate for providing power to Hoonah who will be the primary community served along with the old Whitestone Logging Camp. The project is part of the overall Southeast
Intertie plan commissioned and supported by Southeast Conference and regional leaders.
The Southeast Alaska Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) 2008 Update lists the intertie as the number one priority for the City of Hoonah. Jodi Mitchell the CEO/General
Manager of IPEC will be the contact person on the project. Additional personnel from AEL&P that will be involved are Tim McLeod President and General Manager and, Eric Eriksen Vice
President Transmission and Distribution Engineer.
The Allison Lake Hydroelectric Project is located adjacent to the Prince William Sound, immediately south of Valdez, Alaska. CVEA is a member-owned electric cooperative providing central
station electrical service to a relatively large geographical area of Eastern Interior and Gulf Coast Alaska. CVEA is a stand-alone (not interconnected to another power system) electric
utility. The service territory is divided into two districts, the Valdez district and the Copper River Basin district. The Valdez district is comprised of the organized area of the
City of Valdez. The Copper Basin district incorporates many outstretched communities including: Glennallen, Gakona, Gulkana, Tazlina, Copper Center, Kluti-Kaah, Copperville, Kenny Lake,
Tolsona,
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 15 9/3/2008
Mendeltna, Nelchina, Eureka, and Sheep Mountain. CVEA?s corporate office is located in Glennallen while the engineering and power production functions are managed from the Valdez district
office. CVEA?s personnel are extensively involved with the Allison Lake Project. CVEA has hired Hatch Acres to assist in coordinating the work and field studies and license application.
The project is located in Cordova, Alaska. Because of astronomical home heating costs, we need to provide an affordable form of energy this winter. Affordable fuel wood is available
to the community, from donated lots at an old sort yard and from an airport clearing project. We need assistance with purchasing a processing mill, yarding the logs, and cutting the
logs into split firewood. The Eyak Corporation owns several log sort yards which they have generously donated to the village for firewood use. The State of Alaska has offered down
logs from the airport clearing project. To efficiently process this wood, we will purchase a firewood processing mill, set it up and train the operators. The mill will enable us to
process firewood in a timely manner to be able to distribute an abundant amount of firewood to the community. We will mill approximately 3,421 cords of firewood. The supply for this
will come from existing log decks and the airport clearing project. The firewood will be distributed to our elders at no cost and the rest of the community will be asked to contribute
$50 per cord to sustain the program. The money generated will help pay for labor costs of processing the firewood in future years. This project will provide 37.2 billion BTU\'s of
low cost energy for home heating and will offset 312.6 thousand gallons of fuel oil and save $1.58 million this winter in home heating costs for Cordova.
In July 2008, Haines Assisted Living, Inc.(HAL) began construction on a senior assisted living/ residential complex comprising a total of 26,000 SF. The building site is on lots fronting
Third St. from Dalton to Union. Residents of Haines and Southeast Alaska will utilize the senior assisted living and senior affordable housing being built in 2008?2010. The project
is a collaboration seven years in development and funded by the Denali Commission, the Community Development Block Grant Program, the Rasmuson Foundation and the community of Haines.
The first phase of the project will be completed in the fall of 2009 at a cost of over $4 million. Key to the long term sustainability of the facility is the installation of a Ground
Source Heat Pump to extract geothermal energy from the earth and circulate it through a radiant in-floor heating system. The initial feasibility and design has been completed as the
follow-up to an extensive energy life-cycle cost analysis performed in 2007and updated in October 2008.The designed system estimate of 210% efficiency will eliminate fossil fuel consumption
in favor of renewable geo-thermal heat source and local hydro-electric power and result in significant operational savings for the life of the facility. Haines Assisted Living, Inc.,
Dan Austin, Project Manager and Jim Rehfeldt, Alaska Energy Engineering LLC are the principals involved in this grant project. Resumes attached.
AP&T proposes to construct the 2.0 MW Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located
on Yerrick Creek, approximately 20 miles west of Tok. The Project would off-set diesel
generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Tetlin, Tanacross, Dot Lake,
and Tok. The Project will consist of a small diversion structure, approximately 15,000 feet of
penstock, powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and transmission
line. The Project operation will be run-of-river; annual generation is expected to be
approximately 4,900 MWh/yr (approximately 40% of the interconnected load). The Project will
provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost to maintain a hydro
project is also significantly lower than diesel generation.
This project is called the North Prince of Wales Island Intertie Project (Project). AP&T
proposes to construct a line extension to the communities of Coffman Cove and Naukati Bay,
placing these communities on the Prince of Wales Island (POW) electric grid which is supplied
with renewable energy from two hydroelectric projects. Both of these communities currently rely
on 100% diesel generation for electricity. The total line is to be 48 miles (Coffman Cove = 37
miles; Naukati Bay = 11 miles) of overhead 4/0 ACSR three-phase 34.5 kV line with a 1/0 ACSR
neutral conductor on single pole wood structures. This line extension will come off the existing
34.5 kV line from between Klawock and Thorne Bay, near Control Lake. The route is shown on
enclosed diagrams in Section 7 ? Appendices. Naukati Bay is 11 miles off the main road to
Coffman Cove.
Phase I: Reconnaissance
This phase is already completed with previous reconnaissance along the highway to determine
how many poles, etc. will be needed to complete project.
Phase II: Resource Assessment/Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual Design
A feasibility assessment based on the condition of the new highway and right-of-way (ROW) to
access the proposed pole locations, including anchoring and corner structure and transformers,
to develop the conceptual design of project components will need to occur. AP&T is presently in
discussion with SHPO as to whether an archaeological survey is necessary for this project. No
other environmental surveys are anticipated due to the project being in or adjacent to the
highway ROW which passes through some clear-cut\'s as well.
Phase III: Final Design & Permitting
In this phase permits will be acquired, acquiring legal access to lands, and final design for the
construction phase including a final survey of the route. Permits needed: COE permit, Forest
Service Special-Use Permit, Alaska Dept. of Transportation easement, and SHPO review.
Phase IV: Construction
Construction phase would include mobilization (acquiring materials, i.e. wood poles, conductor,
cross-arms, transformers, etc., contracting with local companies to provide materials and
equipment, and preparing ROW, i.e. brushing, etc. and installing the transmission line;
and interconnecting with AP&T\'s existing infrastructure in both Coffman Cove and Naukati Bay.
A monthly report can be made during construction to AEA of progress and expenditures (or
AEA Renewable Energy Fund
NORTH POW INTERTIE PROJECT Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 18 10/7/2008
quarterly on expenditures to reduce paperwork).
CEC proposes to serve as a model for rural Alaska utilities by installing an ORC heat recovery unit that will capture waste heat and increase diesel generator electrical production by
an additional four to six percent. The average electric production efficiency of CEC?s Orca Power Plant is 13.65 kWh/gallon of diesel. CEC has placed a deposit on a new, 3.6 MW rated,
EMD 710 series, 20 cylinder diesel generator. The efficiency of the new generator is expected to peak at 15 kWh/gallon. Cordova Electric Cooperative desires fit the EMD with an organic
Rankine Cycle (ORC) heat recovery system that will capture additional BTUs that would otherwise be wasted energy. Cordova Electric Cooperative is the sole provider of power to the City
of Cordova, Alaska. We are a member-owned cooperative with 17 full time employees. CEC?s CEO Clay Koplin, Manager of Power Production Danny Ackmann, Manager of Finance Valerie Covel
and the engineering firm of Marsh Creek make up the project team for implementing this renewable energy project.
After a decade of declining performance and three years of no operation (2005 ? 2008), due to unstable site geology and flooding, CEC has focused intense efforts on re?designing its
Humpback Creek hydro?electric facility. Humpback Creek, named for the pink salmon that spawn in its mouth, is located five miles north of Cordova and is accessible only by boat. Sub?marine
cable from the plant to Cordova City limits, and buried transmission lines to the CEC plant, connect the facility to Cordova. Because of its steep grade, fish are not able to migrate
upstream and thus no fish populations will be affected by this project. From the original in?take structure to tidewater, Humpback Creek flows about 0.7 miles and drops from an elevation
of 276 feet to where it enters saltwater Orca Inlet. Site visits by the project team to other small hydro?electric projects with a variety of in?take arrangements and a project workshop
held in December, 2007 culminated in a new design with an intake/diversion that includes a tunnel, conventional side intake with provisions for sluicing sediment and a diversion dam
with a sluice gate that will allow removal of stream bed material that may collect outside the intake. The new location facilitates much?improved access, a location with shallower bedrock
substrate, and a better hydrological analysis. This project has been CEC?s and the community of Cordova?s top priority for the past three years, ever since October, 2006?s 3,500?year
return period flood event destroyed the intake/diversion facility. Project partners include the City of Cordova, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the Eyak Corporation
(for access).
The proposed Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie is a 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect
the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan Public Utilities (KPU).
The Intertie will include 16 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line to be constructed on
Annette Island between Metlakatla and Race Point and an approximate one mile submarine cable
crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Race Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation.
The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for the integrated operation of the
interconnected systems? generating plants. The Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie will provide
benefits to both Ketchikan and Metlakatla, allowing for significantly improved utilization of
Metlakatla?s existing hydroelectric generating resources while reducing diesel generation in
Ketchikan.
The proposed project is a combination of selective reconnaissance, prototype testing, conflict assessment and comprehensive feasibility assessment to establish the feasibility of prospective
pilot tidal energy development projects at four sites where Preliminary Permits have been issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The four sites and respective communities
served are:
? Icy Passage Icy Straits, serving the community of Gustavus;
? Angoon, serving the local Kootznoowoo community;
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 8 of 59 9/3/2008
? Wrangell Narrows, potentially serving the community of Petersburg; and
? Central Cook Inlet near Nikiski, potentially supplying the communities in the service area of the
Homer Electric Association.
The map locations of the sites are provided in figures included in the Section 2 Overview above. The
proposed grant recipients are two prospective IPPs, AKTidal Energy Company (developer of the Icy
Passage, Wrangell Narrows and Central Cook sites) and Natural Currents Alaska, LLC. (developer of the
Angoon site), in partnership with the City of Gustavus and the Tlingit ? Haida Tribal Council as the
umbrella organization representing the local Kootznoowoo at Angoon.
The Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project is a long-term energy solution to rising and unpredictable costs of energy in rural and remote regions with geothermal energy
potential. The next phase of the project and the subject of this application is geothermal energy resource confirmation and qualification. Phase III includes design, engineering and
construction of a deep well preceded by funding and permit acquisition, road and well site improvements and drilling and drill management contracts. Subsequent to resource confirmation
and qualification, NEA proposes constructing a 25 MW geothermal plant and interconnection infrastructure that will supply 25+ communities in the Bristol Bay and Lake Region with low-cost
electricity that effectively decreases the cost of power 70% by displacing 5.4 million gallons of diesel fuel currently used to meet regional electrical and heating energy requirements.
The project will be the first utility grade geothermal development in Alaska establishing long-term firm, reliable and cost effective alternative energy that will enhance rural sustainability
and the development of renewable and strategic natural resources. Although the project focuses on the production of electricity the identification and development phases will bring
geothermal technology transfer and demonstration that is applicable to other geothermal sites in the region.
The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwells power system. Currently they obtain power from the line between MEA
and GVEA. To accomplish this they propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this plant will be in exccess
of 1 MW. It will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
We are proposing the first 10 MW Utility-Grade Geothermal Development in Alaska. This 10 MW project would be able to extract geothermal power from the base of either Redoubt or Spur
by 2105. The reference Project would begin with the Remote Construction...
The project will be located at the mile 33 of the Tok Cutoff Highway in Chistochina, Alaska and will be managed and owned by the Cheesh?na Tribal Council (CTC). The project provides
a (cordwood) biomass system to provide heat and hot water for all community facilities located in a ?campus? area. Existing facilities that will be served by the project are owned
and operated by CTC and include the CTC Tribal Office Building, Chistochina Community Hall and the Education/Library facility. Two new facilities that will be served by the project
are scheduled to be constructed in the coming year; Mt Sanford Tribal Consortium multiuse facility with health clinic and CTC?s Washateria.
The Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project is located on Packers Creek in Chignik
Lagoon. The 190 kW project can provide for most of the communities current power
needs, which peak at about 125 kW. The plant would eliminate about 85% of 50,000
gallons of diesel consumed by the generators annually. There will also be excess
energy that could be used for heating the school and other local structures. The project
would also enable the community to add a freezer/processing facility to further improve
the local economy.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a reconnaissance study prior to pursuing a Resource Assessment, Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design for the development
of a state of the art clean waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Ketchikan and the communities of the Southeast Conference. The proposed plant project location must
be determined but initial consideration is being given to a site at Ward Cove, site of the old Ketchikan Pulp Mill. The project will serve Ketchikan and those communities that the
proposed study shows can be reasonably served. This study will provide the information about present patterns for disposal of municipal solid waste and other types of waste in the
general area, logistics considerations, feedstock sources that can be identified and evaluated that would be available to support the proposed plant and such other information that
can lead to a feasibility analysis, how such a proposed plant would supplement, integrate into or supplant existing energy resources, potential markets for such a plant and its products,
possible site and cost analysis for future studies addressing the preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating
costs, by product markets and operating information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to meet future grant applications
for such a study and project.
The proposed plant project will convert the waste, landfill and the Ketchikan Pulp Mill superfund site into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management
Company, Robert Loescher, Richard Smith and Alaska Recycling Energy in conjunction with Ketchikan City and Borough staff and the Southeast Conference. If needed, additional consultants
will be retained.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a reconnaissance study prior to pursuing a Resource Assessment, Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design for the development
of a state of the art clean waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Juneau and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project location is at the Juneau Landfill
currently owned and operated by Waste Management. The project will principally serve Juneau and those communities that the proposed study shows can be reasonably served. This study
will provide the information about present patterns for disposal of municipal solid waste and other types of waste in the general area, logistics considerations, feedstock sources
that can be identified and evaluated that would be available to support the proposed plant and such other information that can lead to a feasibility analysis, how such a proposed plant
would supplement, integrate into or supplant existing energy resources, potential markets for such a plant and its products, possible site and cost analysis for future studies addressing
the preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product markets and operating information necessary
to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to meet future grant applications for such a study and project. The proposed plant project
will convert the Juneau waste, landfill and sanitary sludge into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Robert Loescher, and Alaska Recycling
Energy in conjunction with Juneau City and Borough staff and the Southeast Conference. If needed, additional consultants will be retained.
The Aleutians East Borough (AEB) stretches from the tip of the Alaska Peninsula to the easternmost Aleutian Islands. This isolated region is bordered on one side by the North Pacific
Ocean and the other by the Bering Sea. It has been home to generations of Aleut families since the Second Ice Age in Akutan, False Pass, King Cove, Nelson Lagoon, and Sand Point. Cold
Bay was developed during World War II. In this region, called ?the birthplace of the winds?, renewable energy resources abound -- not only wind power, but also hydro, geo-thermal,
current and tidal. Some waste heat recovery opportunities also exist. The larger AEB communities of Akutan, King Cove and Sand Point, which have personnel resources and comparatively
healthy city budgets, have alternative energy projects operating or on the drawing board. This project requests funding to conduct a renewable energy reconnaissance report for the
smaller (populations less than 100) communities of Cold Bay, False Pass and Nelson Lagoon which require assistance to decrease their energy costs and reduce their dependence on diesel
fuel. A reconnaissance report will summarize the assessment and findings. This project will be administered and managed by the AEB and will be conducted by a consultant chosen by
the AEB.
The Falls Creek Hydro Electric Project is an 800 kW run-of-river hydroelectric facility, located in Gustavus Alaska, which will provide electric power to the community of Gustavus.
The project is being built by Gustavus Electric Company to displace existing diesel generation. Construction of the project is approximately 90% complete and will provide 90% of the
communities electric needs..
The City and Borough of Wrangell (City), through Wrangell Municipal Light and
Power (WMLP), has established a fuel displacement rate of $.08/KWH for all heat and
hot water. There is a possibility of an interruptible rate of $.05/KWH from the Four
Dam Pool Power Agency. This special rate is due to Tyee Lake Hydroelectric facilities
spilling of excess water (water not used in power production). A feasibility study has
been conducted by Electric Power Systems, Inc. to determine what the savings would
be per year if the city buildings were converted from diesel fired boilers to electric
boilers, develop a rough order magnitude cost estimate (ROM), and provide estimated
engineering design fees for replacing the boilers. The study was conducted on 11 public
buildings in Wrangell and the study found significant savings to progress this project to
the design, permitting and construction phase. WMLP would like funding to convert
these 11 public facilities from diesel fired boilers to electric boilers. The community
served by this project is Wrangell, Alaska. Directly involved in this project is the City
and Borough of Wrangell and Wrangell Municipal Light and Power.
The reconnaissance study, followed by a more detailed feasibility study will analyze the
feasibility of supplying the town of Anchorage, Alaska with heat from geothermal energy
sources. IAE has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Municipality of
Anchorage to facilitate such a study. The Municipality of Anchorage has agreed to support the
feasibility study efforts by providing information about the potential for geothermal energy use
in Anchorage as well as right of way information. If the results of the feasibility study prove to
be positive for development, IAE will work towards developing the project.
Power to the People ? from fish!
It Isn?t Easy To Be Green; But It Is Entirely possible.
Feasibility Study
This study examines the opportunity, analyzes the possibility, and determines the feasibility of providing a stand-alone fish waste-processing facility that produces and uses clean energy
from renewable resources. It serves the commercial fishery and processing plants (7 land based processing facilities, 3 floating processing facilities and several smaller independent
seller/operators) and the community of Naknek, King Salmon, and South Naknek, Alaska. It is a model plant that, when proven successful, will be recreated throughout the fisheries of
the State and the nation, and the world.
This facility serves the ecology and the economy as it provides supplemental clean energy from renewable sources to the locally owned cooperative energy association. This energy counteracts
the drain on the power grid during the fish processing season ? which is what creates the drain. In short, this model plant and its subsequent generations are usage neutral.
A wonderful and significant side-benefit of this proposed facility is that it utilizes the approximately 30-40% waste of fish products currently being dumped into the environment as
waste. While this waste is generally bio-degradable and may not always be environmentally unfriendly, it represents a huge waste of resources; resources that required energy to obtain;
resources that could be (and, now, will be) transformed into fuel (and other useful and healthy value added products) instead of simply being dumped back into the environment as garbage.
This type of facility need not be a ?highly profitable? business in the traditional sense in order to be highly beneficial to the local economy and, eventually, the world economy,. While
providing supplemental clean energy fuel, it reduces unnecessary waste with its inherent potential harm to the environment. Even though it may be argued that such potential harm is
negligible, such waste and potential harm, no matter how slight offends the sensibilities, especially when it is unnecessary waste of environmental products (fish) which, in this case,
also happen to be living creatures ? and particularly when the alternative is transforming such waste into useful by products including clean, supplemental energy.
Bristol Bay Borough and Naknek Electric Association have joined in this responsible and cooperative scientific effort in the largest sockeye salmon fishery in the world to perform this
study and assess the initial, as well as its ultimate, practicality and profitability of such a facility.
The creation of this facility carries with it an opportunity for the local population, including the indigent native population, to operate a model business that produces clean energy
and healthy, useful products as it achieves an ideal of Native American traditionalists and Green Planet idealists: Self sustaining, environmentally friendly production ? with no waste.
1) Market Issues ? This study will prove that there is a huge future need as well as adequate demand currently for the energy (and the value added products) produced and conserved by
this facility. This facility will serve as a model of a clean renewable energy production and conservation and the reduction of waste of environmental products (fish) which, as stated
are also living creatures.
2) Organizational Issues ? This project combines the skills and talents ? and idealistic objectives ? of technical and scientific communities with the local workforce and values. This
facility can and will be staffed and managed to a significant extent by qualified locals. The feasibility study will demonstrate how that will be done effectively and profitably.
3) Technical issues ? The equipment and technology needed ? where it can be obtained ? cost of technology and equipment ? when it can be operational ? etc. will be determined by the
feasibility study. There will be extensive study into best practices to deal with the amount of possible waste to be processed and disposed of according to regulatory, practical, and
ideal (e.g. ecological) requirements.
4) Financial issues ? Start up costs ? operating costs ? revenue and energy projections ? sources of financing ? profitability analysis ? etc. are impossible to determine until the feasibility
study is complete. The feasibility study is what will determine and propose the processes, resources and equipment necessary to create the final products and services to be produced.
The ideal objective of our facility is to produce clean energy from fish waste to reduce to zero the waste produced in processing fish ? and operate from its own clean energy produced
from such waste (which will then no longer be considered ?waste?). We collect undesired fish processing waste from cooperating commercial processors and render it into value added products
and resources. In so doing, we use as much as possible only renewable sources of energy particularly those created or released in commercial fish processing.
That ideal objective achieves the high standard of Native American traditionalists and Green Planet idealists: No waste ? and no harm to the environment.
In reaching that ideal objective, we produce and utilize only clean energy from renewable sources such as fish oil biofuel rendered from fish processing and energy obtained by harnessing
wind and solar power in a cogeneration situation.
1-100% of the fish processing waste is cost-effectively or profitably converted to fish oil and fish pellets and other value added products and
2-100% of the fuel is cost effectively produced from renewable energy sources (specifically fish oil, biofuel, wind and solar)
Our practical objective is to approach the ideal objective ever closer until the ideal is achieved ? however long that takes.
The practical objective in its first phase ? that justifies the initial human effort and financial cost of creating and operating the facility is considered successfully accomplished
as?
1-[?]% of the fish processing waste is cost-effectively or profitably converted to alternative or supplemental fuels and value-added products. and
2-[?]% of the fuel used is from renewable energy sources (specifically fish oil, bio-fuel, wind and solar).
What are the percentages [?]. That will be determined by the feasibility study.
The study will also determine where this facility should be located and how.
This facility is created and developed with the end in mind of organizing techniques and technologies and proceeding with processes that smaller fish processing plants can share and
larger plants can share or build.
Further, the physical, financial and human resources management systems that are created and established can and will be duplicated and promoted through written and spoken mediums, convention
and association presentations, study publishing, consulting, etc.
This is a first-cut look at these issues. We have examined carefully the relevant facts and related experiments, both successful and unsuccessful, already available to us. We have discovered
that nearly every significant technology and resource has been discovered and utilized to some extent. This is an effort to bring all such techniques and technologies together into
an operating facility. The Bristol Bay fishery is reknown throughout the world and would be the best location for a leading trend to be set as a model.
It is clear that this feasibility study is an excellent investment and is likely to achieve a profitable, earth friendly, payoff within the first year of operation ? and will move ever
closer to its ideal goal until it is at least 99% achieved ? likely within the decade, perhaps sooner.
The Lake Elva facility will consist of a dam constructed 8,500 feet downstream from the existing outlet of the lake. A rock fill structure with a projected height of 120 feet above
the estimated base; the dam crest will be 625 feet long and 20 feet wide with a 2.5:1 upstream and a 2.1:1 downstream slope. This dam will increase the existing lake from its? initial
surface area of 300 acres at 325 El. The reservoir formed by the dam will provide 26,800 acre feet of active storage above the minimum operational pool at 320 El. The lake surface
area will be 820 acres at normal pool El 370. A 50 foot wide spillway with 10 feet of freeboard to the dam crest will discharge over natural terrain into the existing creek channel.
Cresting at El 370 the spillway is designed to discharge the probable maximum flood of 3,790 cfs. A buried concrete pipe will provide the power conduit from the power intake to the
power house. A 60 inch diameter vertical shaft power intake will be set at El 310, ten feet below minimum operation pool. The intake will be protected with a steel trash-rack. The
60 concrete encased steel water conduit will be used to divert flows during construction. Upon completion this conduit will transition to an electrically controlled 36 inch butterfly
valve downstream for inspection and emergency closure operations. The control valve will transition to a 48 inch steel pipe and then into concrete sections following the terrain where
it will be connected to a 24 inch steel bifurcation 100 feet above the power house. The powerhouse will contain two 750 kW turbines. Under a rated net head of 280 feet each unit will
drive a 900 kVa, 0.9 pf, 2.4 kV generator. This steel framed structure will be located approximately 1,800 feet upstream from the Elva Creek confluence with Lake Nerka. It is planned
to be on a 20 by 80 foot concrete foundation with a height of 20 feet above the generator floor. The average discharge head from the power house will be 60 cfs.
This project will necessitate the construction of approximately 33 miles of new three phase transmission tie line from the project site to close proximity of the village of Aleknagik.
The Nushagak Area Hydropower Project will initially serve the communities of Aleknagik, Dillingham, and Kanakanak in the Nushagak and Wood River areas (future interties to Manokotak
and Ekwok - New Stuyahok - Koliganek are under consideration). This first phase with inter-tie is estimated to cost $22 million and replace 500,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually,
for a yearly savings of $2,105,700 at today?s fuel prices. Currently all power in the area is generated with diesel by Nushagak Cooperative (NETC), with a current residential rate
at $0.463 cents per kilowatt hour. Nushagak Cooperative would develop, maintain, and operate the Lake Elva facility and associated infrastructure.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of the art clean
waste gasification plant that will generate energy for FNSB and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the FNSB Municipal Landfill in Fairbanks.
The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the FNSB Solid Waste Division. This study will provide the information required to develop the feedstock
sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product markets and operating
information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize a legal relationship with the Solid Waste Division for
FNSB. The proposed plant project will convert the FNSB waste and landfill into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Plasma Waste Recycling,
CH2MHill, Economic Research Associates, and Alaska Recycling Energy staff in conjunction with FNSB Solid Waste Services and Borough staff. If needed, additional consultants will be
retained.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of the art clean
waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Mat-Su and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the Mat-Su Municipal Landfill in Palmer.
The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the Mat-Su Solid Waste Division. This study will provide the information required to develop the feedstock
sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product markets and operating
information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize a legal relationship with the Solid Waste Division for
Mat-Su. The proposed plant project will convert the Mat-Su waste and landfill into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Plasma Waste
Recycling, CH2MHill, Economic Research Associates, and Alaska Recycling Energy staff in conjunction with Mat-Su Solid Waste Services and Borough staff. If needed, additional consultants
will be retained.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of the art clean
waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Anchorage and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the Anchorage Municipal Landfill adjacent
to Route 1 on the Glenn Highway just east of town. The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the Anchorage Solid Waste Services. This study will provide
the information required to develop the feedstock sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up
and operating costs, by product markets and operating information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize
a legal relationship with the Solid Waste Services Sector for the Municipality of Anchorage. The proposed plant project will convert the Anchorage waste and landfill into electricity
or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Plasma Waste Recycling, CH2MHill, Economic Research Associates, and Alaska Recycling Energy staff in conjunction
with Anchorage Solid Waste Services and City staff. If needed, additional consultants will be retained.
We will be integrating a wood fired hydronic heating system with existing boiler system in some of the buildings and retrofitting hot water heat to other buildings. The project will
require a greater initial investment and higher annual OM&R costs than for an equivalent oil or gas system alone; however, the savings in fuel costs (wood vs. fossil fuel) will pay
for the initial investment and cover the additional OM&R costs in a relatively short period of time. After the initial investment is paid off, the project will continues to save money
(avoided fuel cost) for the life of the heating system. Since inflation rates for fossil fuels are typically higher than inflation rates for wood fuel, increasing inflation rates result
in greater fuel savings and thus greater project viability.
The potential financial viability of this project depends not only on the relative costs and cost savings, but also on the financial objectives and expectations of the Gulkana Village,
which will be getting free firewood from another program.
The existing oil-fired furnaces, which would remain in place for back up purposes, and the installation of two Garn WHS 32000 wood fired hydronic heaters will supply heat to four
duplexes, teen center, community hall administration, fitness center, shop, new offices, clinic, and the new bus garage. It will also feed into the water system through the water
distribution made.
The initial investment would be $898,000 which would include the cost a combined heat building and wood storage, pex insulated pipe, adapting buildings to hot water heat that do not
already have it.
Takatz Lake Project ? Alaska, a hydroelectric project of about 27.7 MW in size capable of
producing an average of about 106,900 MWH per year to serve the City of Sitka and other
communities in Southeast Alaska as the communities become electrically interconnected. See
the attached application to FERC dated June, 2008 for a more detailed description.
Short Project Description
This project will raise the normal reservoir height 15' (5% head increase) at the existing Swan Lake hydro project, FERC No. P-2911, creating an additional 21,600 acre-ft of storage
resulting in an average annual energy generation of 7,500 MWh's at a total cost of $13 million.
Design of the FERC licensed (P-11393) project that will create 9.6 MW of new hydroelectric capacity on Mahoney Lake with a storage capacity of 4,000 acre-ft and 41,700 MWh of energy
at a cost of $45 million to serve Ketchikan and sourrounding communities.
Combined with application #517 / only this one (#523) scored
Combined with application #523 / this one not scored
This new department will be responsible for 1. energy assessment 2. seek and secure funds related to energy 3. assist tribal members with : a. weathrization application and b. heating
assistant applications (to help with the high cost of fuel we pay in Noatak) 4. long term goals will be to look into alternative energy for Noatak.
There are many types of wood-fired boiler systems available on the market but they are very costly and the freight to bring them to the villages would likely triple the cost of the boiler
system. We are proposing to build a wood stove from local scrap metal, e.g., old fuel tanks that are no longer used, but the water containers must be shipped to the village because
we do not have the capabilities or the resources to manufacture them. The project will be located in the village of Marshall and the Ohogamiut Traditional Council EPA Department will
oversee the project.
Wood biomass for the production of bulk commercial wood pellets and briquettes, bulk and/or bagged residential wood pellets, wood chips for commercial use and cordwood. Facility will
be located at milepost 112 Richardson Highway, 190 miles from Anchorage and 250 miles from Fairbanks. Communities served will include all villages and cities in Alaska. The grant project
will incorporate varying degrees of assistance from Ahtna, Incorporated and its subsidiaries, State agencies, Federal agencies, local borough, city and village government bodies and
various contractors and consulting firms.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough, the Lake and Peninsula School District and the Bristol Bay Native Corporation have indicated written or verbal support for this project (see attached
letters of support). The Lake and Peninsula School District supplies power to the school and Chignik Lake community with their diesel generators. They used over 65,000 gallons of diesel
in the 2007/2008 school year which must transported 5000 gallons at time in a tanker truck from Chignik via a small vessel that can navigate the Chignik River. Diesel cost $3.87 a gallon
delivered to Chignik plus a $1.10 per gallon surcharge to transport it from Chignik to Chignik Lake for a total of $323,050 for the 2007/2008 school year. The State of Alaska Department
of Natural Resources February 2000 report titled Coalbed Methane and Exploration Targets for Rural Alaska Communities identifies the Chignik Bay Basin within the Alaska Peninsula Province
as having potential CBM resources. The Chignik Basin is underlain by bituminous coal. This project will confirm this potential resource by drilling, coring and testing CBM resources
in the Chignik Lake area. A specific drilling plan will be prepared during the Reconnaissance Phase. Once the final location is determined, the drilling, coring and testing will take
place during the Resource Assessment/Feasibility phases.
AWE is requesting additional funds for Phase 1 to add two Vestas V39 turbines to the existing power generation system to dramatically decrease the total consumption of diesel fuel and
stove oil in Sand Point, Alaska. The harbor community of Sand Point is located several hundred miles southwest of Anchorage on the Shumagin Islands, just south of the Aleutian chain.
This commercial fishing village of nearly 1,000 residents serves as a regional hub for crab and salmon fisheries, as well as other fisheries, and has generally enjoyed a healthy economy
over the past ten years. TDX Sand Point Generating (TSPG), a wholly owned subsidiary of TDX Power, owns and operaqtes the Sand Point electric utility. AWE will design, construct,
operate, and maintain the entire project.
Tatitlek, located in northeastern Prince William Sound, is about 30 miles south of Valdez on the eastern side of the Tatitlek Narrows. The community of Tatitlek will be served by this
project. With the "upwardly mobile" price of diesel these days, we can afford to leave no stone unturned in our quest to exploit an alternative energy resource. We are aware that
a good hydro resouce exists nearby. But, is it too far from our community to be economically developed? Local anecdotal information, the Renewable Energy Atlask of Alaska, and AEA\'s
Draft Regional Wind Study suspect that Tatitlek has an excellent wind resource. But we also have a mountain directly behind the village. Will the winds be too turbulent? Site specific
monitoring and feasibility studies can answer these questions and provide direction for further design, permitting, and construction. TDX Power has a Teaming Agreement with Tatitlek
Corporation and the Tatitlek Village IRA ouncil to manage this project with active participation from the IRA Council, Corporation, and Tatitlek School.
Adak is a former military base now owned by the Aleut Corporation (TAC). It is located on Adak Island near the end of Alaska Aleutian Island Chain. Presently there are approximately
75 residents at a base where a population of 6,000 military personnel and their families were once housed. The site was turned over to TAC by the US Navy in 1999. TAC aspires to re-populate
the island with shareholders and employees of the fishing industry. The location is in good fishing grounds and has an established processing plant. The US Navy houses and Missile
Defense Agency house an enormous radar facility in the harbor there for part of the year. This expensive piece of equipment requires reliable shore-based power.
The RCA recently ruled that the City of Adak was not capable of managing nor operating the utility electric utility. TDX Power agreed to take over the utility while the people of Adak
were under emergency conditions. TDX Adak Generating, LLC will complete the project using personnel from its parent company, TDX Power.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource assessment and analysis at the community of McGrath, Alaska. The model would compile the
best available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and proposed
energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and where is it? ? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of McGrath, although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local
conditions. While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for McGrath, the model produced by this project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template,
or framework, for data processing and compilation.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource assessment and analysis at the community of Nenana, Alaska. The model would compile the best
available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and proposed
energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and where is it? ? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of Nenana, although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local conditions.
While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for Nenana, the model produced by this project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template, or framework,
for data processing and compilation.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource assessment and analysis at the community of Tanacross, Alaska. The model would compile the
best available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and proposed
energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and where is it? ? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of Tanacross, although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local
conditions. While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for Tanacross, the model produced by this project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template,
or framework, for data processing and compilation.
The proposed project will develop a process and a model for community-based biomass resource assessment and analysis at the community of Tanana, Alaska. The model would compile the best
available information for land cover, ownership, growth, management concerns and restrictions, and costs to produce a tool that could be used to evaluate biomass demands and proposed
energy projects for feasibility and sustainability. It is envisioned that the model produced by the project will be capable of answering basic questions that arise when considering
biomass energy projects, such as:
? How large a project could be supported with local biomass resources?
? How many acres would need to be harvested per year to support a project of a specific size?
? How many acres on the surrounding landscape would be required to be managed for biomass production on a sustainable basis in the long term?
? Who owns the available resource and land, and what is the amount and location of the resource by owner?
? How much of the resource is actually available for harvesting and management, and where is it?
? How much does the resource cost as it exists on the landscape (stumpage)
? How much does it cost to get the resource from any available area to a proposed biomass energy facility?
? What harvesting and transportation systems need to be analyzed or addressed?
It is proposed to conduct this assessment over all land ownerships in a 5-mile radius of Tanana, although the geographic extent could be expanded in the future to accommodate local conditions.
While producing a viable biomass assessment tool for Tanana, the model produced by this project can also be applied to other communities in Alaska by serving as a template, or framework,
for data processing and compilation.
ORPC has obtained a FERC Preliminary Permit for a tidal energy site in a portion of Cook Inlet and Knik Arm adjacent to the waterfront of Anchorage for the purpose of deploying a commercial
scale tidal energy project. The project will involve the deployment of ORPC\'s proprietary ocean current generation (OCGen?) modules consisting of four turbine-generator units (TGUs).
Each TGU consists of a proprietary underwater permanent magnet generator with four (2 per side) advanced design cross flow (ADCF) turbines attached to and rotating on a common shaft.
OCGen? technology is deployed well below the water surface and held in place with a deep sea mooring system so as to be operable beneath the winter ice and avoid any conflicts with
marine navigation. It will be licensed under the FERC hydrokinetic Pilot Project License program and initially installed at a capacity of 1MW (a single OCGen? module) for testing and
monitoring of its operation, including any potential environmental impacts. After the initial OCGen? module has been operated for a year, additional OCGen? modules will be installed
to bring the generating capacity of the project up to the limit of 5 MW allowed under the Pilot Project License. Full build out of the project will occur after a long term FERC Operating
License has been obtained, estimated to be in 2012 or 2013. The project will be interconnected to the railbelt power grid through either Chugach Electric or ML&P and the electricity
generated will be sold to the railbelt utilities.
Phase I of the project will involve assessment of the current diesel and fuel oil users within the ONC controlled assets in Bethel; to estimate the volume of CNG to be supplied, the
extent of modification required to accommodate the switchover7 to natural gas, and of course the willingness of the village residents to be involved. Phase II will build on the inventory
data from the first stage, and will entail development of conceptual design elements sufficient to support the economic analysis noted above, in 2.3. The second stage will also emphasize
a firm supply of pipeline quality natural gas or LNG, as well as identifying critical path schedule constraints such as environmental or transport permits.
This project will convert Biomass waste (municipal wastes, and sawmill/wood wastes) to renewable electric power. Possible site locations include Eielson Air Force base near Fairbanks
and landfill locations near Anchorage, Kodiak and Juneau. Our plant will provide electricity to local communities (local/military schools, residential, Air Force base and civilian airports).
The project will involve Solena Group and its partners (GE, MPR Associates, Ford Bacon & Davis and Deutsche Bank).
This project will construct buried piping, pumps, heat exchangers, and other system components required to recover waste heat from the existing AVEC power plant and confer this energy
to the new City water plant and washeteria in Ambler. This project will involve coordination between the City of Ambler, Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC), the Northwest
Arctic Borough, and the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC).
The proposed project will benefit every electric utility ratepayer in Sand Point and also the public radio station in Sand Point. As such, one hundred (100) percent of the electricity
generated by the wind turbine will benefit the public. KSDP Radio / Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting, Inc. is an AM public radio station licensed to Sand Point, Alaska. The station?s
listening audience consists of approximately 3,000 year-round residents and an additional 2,000 seasonal residents in Sand Point, Chignik, Perryville, Port Moller, Nelson Lagoon, King
Cove, Cold Bay and False Pass. Aleutian Peninsula Broadcasting, Inc.?s General Manager Kells Hetherington will oversee the project with his five member Board of Directors. Members of
the radio station?s Board are elected from within the station?s listening area. The wind turbine and associated equipment will be installed at the station?s transmitter site. The work
will be done by ABS Alaska, an alternative energy contractor with offices in Fairbanks, Anchorage and Washington State.
The Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project (Project) will be located in Southeast Alaska, approximately 14 miles northeast of the City of Haines and 10 miles southwest of the City of Skagway.
Connelly Lake (formerly known as Upper Chilkoot Lake) is an 85 acre alpine lake, and drains into the Chilkoot River. The project will be on state and private land, including the Haines
State Forest and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve. The project facilities will include a dam at the lake outlet, a penstock about 6,200 feet long, a 12.0 MW powerhouse with two generating
units, a 14-mile-long 34.5 kV transmission line and a 14-mile long access road. Final dimensions and capacities of these facilities will be determined by optimization studies to be
conducted during Phase II. The Project will be developed by AP&T to provide additional generation to its interconnected Haines and Skagway electrical systems.
AVEC proposes a resource assessment/feasibility analysis/conceptual design project of geothermal sites on the Seward Peninsula region, simultaneously involving the NANA/NW Arctic Borough
Regions and the Kawerak/Bering Straights Native Corporation Regions.
Goal: The SGAP goal is to ascertain the feasibility of geothermal power generation for regional communities and develop conceptual design documents/reports for geothermal generation
on the Seward Peninsula. The SGAP strategic objectives are as follows:
SO 1: Identify potential geothermal sites in the Seward Peninsula Region.
SO 2: Undertake a geological, geochemistry, and geophysical assessment of targeted sites for geothermal power generation potential.
SO3: Undertake a geothermal drilling program to promote regional geothermal interests
SO4: Develop conceptual design and business plan for follow?on phases of the projects.
SO5: Conduct an optimization phase in the conceptual design wherein how to supply power either from one centrally located geothermal plant or from many smaller geothermal plants, to
the communities involved can be evaluated. Included will be evaluating the use of transmission lines for power versus supplying hot water via a pipeline to one or several geothermal
power plant(s).
Our project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of two wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Shaktoolik. Participants in the project include AVEC, STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management and electrical system engineering
for the project. STG will be the general contractor, responsible for the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary
electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100 wind turbines and startup and commissioning services.
The project involves the final design, permitting, and construction of an electrical distribution tie line between the villages of Emmonak and Alakanuk and the final design, permitting,
construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of eight wind turbines to supplement a new power generation system for the communities of Emmonak and Alakanuk. Participants in the
project include AVEC, STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management and electrical system engineering for the project. STG will be the general contractor, responsible
for the design and installation of all civil works, installation of the electrical distribution lines, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary electrical systems.
Northern Power will provide Northwind 100 wind turbines and startup and commissioning services. Site control is under final review and is expected within a week of submission of this
application. Permitting was completed for the met tower currently at the site of the wind turbines; we expect no unusual permitting requirements for the site.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Stebbins. The work will involve obtaining
a letter of non?objection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location, studying the wind resource
for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome
of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
A meterological (met) tower installed in New Stuyahok between 2003 and 2005 found that winds were class 3 (fair to good); however, placement of the met tower was hindered by the active
runway at the time (location new airport has now been constructed out of town), and it is expected that the wind resource could be better. Before going forward with the final design
and construction of wind turbines, AVEC would like to better determine the wind potential in the community. The work would involve obtaining a letter of non?objection for placement
of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical
investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical
investigation. Wind generators placed at the old airport could reduce the annual fuel consumption of the diesel generators, thus reducing the cost of electricity within New Stuyahok,
as well as reducing the overall volume of fuel that is handled within the community and risks associated with handling fuel.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Scammon Bay. The work will involve
obtaining a letter of nonobjection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource
for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome
of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
A meteorological (met) tower installed near Pitka?s Point (Saint Mary?s and Pitka?s Point are connected by a road and an electrical intertie) in October 2007 has revealed an outstanding
Class 6 wind resource with highly directional winds. A second met tower was installed in August 2008 at lower elevation and closer to Saint Mary?s. This second site was chosen to evaluate
possible trade?offs of wind resource and rime icing risk. The Pitka?s Point met tower data has indicated that rime icing conditions appear to possibly be a significant issue at that
location. While rime icing is presumed to also occur at the lower elevation Saint Mary?s met tower site, the desire is to contrast and compare the two sites with respect to wind power
and predicted power loss due to rime icing. A third met tower is presently stored in Saint Mary?s and available for installation at a third site should early winter data collection
at the Saint Mary?s (the second site) indicate significant rime icing. AVEC proposes to continue the wind resource assessment for an additional one to two years to include evaluation
and comparison of the two existing met towers and possible installation of the third met tower at a site further from back from the Yukon River. The primary focus of continuation of
the wind study will be to further evaluate the icing problem at the met tower sites and to estimate as accurately as possible turbine downtime during icing conditions.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Teller. The work will involve obtaining
a letter of non-objection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for
1 year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of
the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
The Archangel Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in Hatcher Pass, Alaska. The project will be located on state land in the Archangel Valley. Energy
from the project would be provided into the Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid.
Archangel Green Power, LLC (AGP) is the project proponent, and would contribute funding, own, and operate the project. AGP has already completed reconnaissance studies of the Archangel
Creek resource, and finds that the project warrants further study. Construction would be completed by qualified contractors and subcontractors selected through a competitive bidding
process.
The Applicant owns and operates Motherlode Lodge located near Delia Creek. The 4.9 acre plot of land is privately owned but segments of the proposed project will be located on land owned
by the State of Alaska Park Service. The Motherlode Lodge currently utilizes 2 diesel fuel generators, 1 boiler and 2 wood stoves to power the facility and accounts for a significant
percentage of annual operating expenses. The company plans to construct a 50 kWh run of river project with a flow of 3.5 cfs through a 10? pipeline from Delia Creek to the Powerhouse.
Peak production is estimated to be 140 kWh with a minimum of 16 kWh. The proposed project, The Delia Creek Alternative Energy Project (DCAEP), will utilize water flow from the Delia
Creek to power electricity to the Motherlode Lodge. The project will include an intake site, underground penstock and powerhouse. The hydroelectric system will be integrated with the
new MEA power line extension. The existing energy system will be removed immediately and a 2.75 mile MEA power line extension developed to displace all fuel costs. The first phase of
development was estimated by MEA to cost $150,000. All three phases of development are estimated at $750,000 by MEA. DCAEP will be headed by Project Manager, Jill Reese, Owner and sole
member of HPML LLC and Polarconsult Engineering Firm. HPML LLC will match funds of $50,000 to the total cost of development. This does not include HPML?s initial investment in the lodge
(paid, free and clear) plus an additional $850,000 in upgrades, permits and licensing.
This application seeks funding to conduct a feasibility study on using high efficiency, low emissions (HELE) biomass heat and power systems for the Sitka Community Hospital and the proposed
adjacent Sitka Community Greenhouse. Specifically, we are following the example of the system being used in the city of Craig, which is a wood chip fired gasifier burner that transfers
heat via a low pressure hydronic system. This study will be accomplished by contracting with mechanical engineers who will determine the specific equipment necessary, the fuel requirements
and availability, and the costs and payback period of the project. If this project is selected by the AEA and approved by the Alaska Legislature, the award recipient will be the City
and Borough of Sitka. The City will contract with the engineers to do the study. Sitka Community Hospital will provide the engineers with all the data and access to their facilities
necessary for the study. Direct technical assistance regarding the community greenhouse requirements will be provided by the Sitka Community Greenhouse Committee and other members
of the Sitka Health Summit. The City will be responsible for reporting to the Authority and providing AEA with the final report.
The project is a wood energy district heating project located in Venetie for three buildings: the school, school housing and washeteria/water system. The applicant is the Venetie Village
Council. The project will be a two year project with completion of project development Phases 2-3 to occur in 2009 and construction Phase 4 to occur in 2010. A level one feasibility
boilers and a reconnaissance of forest wood resources has been performed in the summer of 2008 under a DOE Tribal energy grant for Yukon Flats. A table comparing round wood boiler and
chip fed boilers is attached to demonstrate initial analysis and initial potential designs. It is anticipated that round wood fired boilers will be used for simplicity of the harvest
system. This will require installation of 3 stick-fired boilers which will require firing up to 4 times per day on peak heat days and will require approximately 300-350 cords of wood
annually to displace 33,390 gallons of fuel oil for heat.
The project is a wood energy district heating project located in Chalkyitsik for two groups of buildings: District Heat 1: the school, school housing and water system; District Heat
2: the washeteria/water plant and Village/Tribal Office. The applicant is the Chalkyitsik Village Council. The project will be a two year project with completion of project development
Phases 2-3 to occur in 2009 and construction Phase 4 to occur in 2010. A level one feasibility boilers and a reconnaissance of forest wood resources has been performed in the summer
of 2008 under a DOE Tribal energy grant for Yukon Flats through CATG. A table comparing round wood boiler and chip fed boilers is attached to demonstrate initial analysis and initial
potential designs. It is anticipated that round wood fired boilers will be used for simplicity of the harvest system. This will require installation of 2 district heating systems one
at the school with 3 stickfired boilers and the second at the Chalkyitsik Village Council office which will require 2 boilers.
This application specifically develops the capacity to harvest and deliver 2000+ tons of wood annually to the Village of McGrath, Alaska and to process the wood into usable form and
store the wood for later use. The biomass project will link and integrate with the heat recovery project in future iterations of design and cost analysis in order to capture the synergies
from both to create an optimum design. A side by side analysis of both chip boilers (K?b) and stick fired boilers (Garn) with estimated cost analysis and net simple payback for individual
buildings was conducted in the feasibility assessment (calculations attached). This application supports a district wood heating project already in development in a previous application.
The funding will be used to purchase harvest and processing equipment and develop a wood processing, storage and delivery system and storage yard. Matching funding will be used for
development of a forest harvest plan, training and technical support.
The Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project is located on Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon. The 190 kW project can provide for most of the communities current power needs, which peak at
about 125 kW. The plant would eliminate about 85% of 50,000 gallons of diesel consumed by the generators annually. There will also be excess energy that could be used for heating the
school and other local structures. The project would also enable the community to add a freezer/processing facility to further improve the local economy.
The Glacier Fork Hydroelectric Project is an approximately 75 MW storage project proposed for the Glacier Fork of the Knik River near the mouth of Metal Creek, located approximately
20 miles east of the Eklutna Hydroelectric Project powerhouse and 25 miles southeast of Palmer, Alaska. Electricity from the project would be delivered into the railbelt transmission
grid via a new approximately 20-mile transmission line to existing transmission infrastructure in the vicinity of the Old Glenn Highway bridge over the Knik River. A map of the project
is included at the end of the application before Attachment A. Glacier Fork Hydropower, LLC (GFH) would be the project owner, and would contribute funding, develop, own, and operate
the project. GFH is currently owned by the five engineers of Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., an engineering consulting firm based in Anchorage, Alaska that specializes in hydroelectric project
development throughout Alaska. GFH is currently in discussions with Chugach Electric Association (CEA) regarding the project. GFH, jointly with CEA, intends to work with other Railbelt
utilities and the State to develop the project.
The project would be constructed at the City landfill in Ataqan Subdivision on Saint Paul Island, the existing utility power plant, and within existing utility easements. The new turbines
would be tied into the existing City electric utility grid and control cables installed to tie into the existing power plant switchgear. A new low fuel consumption diesel 4,160v generator
would be installed in the existing power plant to replace an older unused 480v generator. Wind generated electricity would benefit all existing electric customers through lower power
generation costs. The City would administer the project and contract out to qualified consultants for the final design, and contract with a qualified contractor to supply, install
and maintain the wind turbines for the first 5 years and train local wind turbine maintenance personnel.
The Tok Wind Project is located approximately 12 miles south of Tok near the 5,000 foot level of Seven Mile Ridge and will contribute 2 MW of clean, renewable wind power to the Alaska
Power Company Tok distribution system.
The communities served will include all communities within the Alaska Power Company (APC, an Alaska Power & Telephone Company public utility subsidiary) service area including Tok (2007
population 1,353), Tanacross (173), Tetlin (165), and Dot Lake (15). The total population of the served area is 1,706.
The project will include construction of a 12 mile long transmission line, and a five mile-long construction access road across state-owned land from the old Eagle Trail west to the
proposed wind power generation facility. The power generation facility will include approximately two MW of wind turbines, the size and type subject to final design. These turbines
will be founded in shallow bedrock prevalent on the ridge crest. Power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation. Overhead transmission
lines (distribution voltage) from the transformer substation will follow the access road and Eagle Trail approximately 12 miles to the existing APC distribution line on the Tok Cutoff.
The grant participants are Village Wind Power LLC who have three Alaska wind projects under development (Slana, Tok, and Bethel). There will be a number of contractors involved in completing
the project. In addition to our own in-house efforts, other experienced contractors will be chosen to carry out selected components of the project.
The Slana Wind Project is located approximately seven miles west of Slana near the 4,000 foot level at VABM Cobb, and will contribute up to 2 MW of clean, renewable wind power to the
Alaska Power Company Slana distribution system. The communities served will include all communities within the Alaska Power Company (APC, an Alaska Power & Telephone Company public
utility subsidiary) service area including Slana (2007 population 108), Chistochena (93) and when it is connected, Mentasta (1,404). The total population of the served area will be
1,605. The project will include construction of a 1.5 mile long transmission line and construction access road across Ahtna Corporation and state-owned land from the Tok Cutoff to the
proposed wind power generation facility on the ridgetop. The power generation facility will include approximately two MW of wind turbines, the size and type subject to final design.
These turbines will be founded in shallow bedrock prevalent on the ridge crest. Power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation.
Overhead transmission lines (distribution voltage) from the transformer substation will follow the access road 1.5 miles to the existing APC distribution line on the Tok Cutoff. The
grant participant is Village Wind Power LLC who have three Alaska wind projects under development (Tok, Slana, and Bethel). There will be a number of contractors involved in completing
the project. In addition to our own in-house efforts, other experienced contractors will be chosen to carry out selected components of the project.
The Delta Wind Project is located approximately 25 miles south of Delta Junction near the end of Coal Mine Road and is designed to contribute 50 MW of clean, renewable wind power to
the Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) railbelt energy grid. The communities served will include all communities within the GVEA?s service area including Delta Junction, North
Pole, Fairbanks, Fox, College, Nenana, and Healy. In addition to local communities, a number of large facilities are currently served by GVEA?s transmission system including. Alyeska
Trans Alaska Pipeline Pump Station 9, Fort Knox Gold Mine, and Pogo Gold Mine. More distant utilities could also benefit through the railbelt electric grid. An Interconnection Study
with GVEA is currently being conducted by Power Engineers, Inc. to identify costs associated with integrating Delta Project wind power and GVEA?s existing transmission system. The
results of the interconnection study will be used to help formulate a power purchase agreement between GVEA and the project sponsors.
The project will include construction of a 20 mile-long transmission line, and a ten mile-long construction access road across state-owned land from the Richardson Highway south to the
proposed wind power generation facility. The power generation facility will include thirty 1.65 MW AAER wind turbines or equivalent, mounted on 65 meter high towers (subject to final
design and site suitability) set on buried concrete foundations. Underground power collection cables and control wiring will lead from each turbine to the transformer substation. A
five-acre lay down yard with a control building/service facility/warehouse will be installed within the wind farm area. Overhead transmission lines from the transformer substation will
follow the access road and Richardson Highway approximately 20 miles to the existing GVEA power transmission grid near Alyeska Pump Station #9.
Using the existing seven (7) ton per day municipal solid waste stream, renewable resource biomass and digester gas, we will evaluate the Tactical Garbage-to-Energy (TGER) self-contained
bio-refinery technology and other viable low-volume alternatives. The waste-to energy project will be co-located with the existing baler source separation facility located on municipally-owned
land known as the Public Works Compound in Kotzebue. The City of Kotzebue will work with Decision Sciences and Maniilaq Services to perform the reconnaissance study to determine the
feasibility of deploying the TGER technology to produce fuel for heating and electricity at the Public Works Compound. The fuel from the TGER can produce enough energy to power 60 Kwh
for every ton of municipal solid waste. The heat and power savings, if reconnaissance proves feasible, is $2,900,000 over cost today for ten years not including the substantial landfill
costs found in the project benefit.
The project addresses the availability, quality and feasilbility of sustainable, economic use of agricultural and forestry biomass for bioenergy in Alaska. This must be considered before
the myriad of biofuel projects proposed & envisioned can move forward, and before existing, commercially available technologies that use biomass to produce energy for heat, fuel, &
power can be most effectively, and most successfully, deployed. The goal of the project is to 1) assimilate existing information on standing forest and agricultural biomass in ALaska,
2) conduct research and demonstration projects addressing agricultural bioenergy crop varities and crop management and addressing harvest methods in preperation for natural and managed
regenertation in mixed, single-aged forest stands, and, 3) determine the biological, physical, and economic feasibility of using Alaska agricultural energy crops and existing forest
stands for biomass as biofuels. The impetus for the study is the biomass/coal-to-liquids plant proposed for the Fairbanks area of interior Alaska, and its need for commercial/industrial-scale
volumes of biomass fuel stocks.. However, the study will have major statewide application as it will serve as the basis for all agricultural and forestry biomass-based energy projects;
the greatest number of which are being proposed for rural and village comminities. Work will take place in Fairbanks and Palmer, Alaska. Project cooperators are the School of Natural
Resources and Agricultural Sciences (SNRAS) and the Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station (AFES) at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) (project primary/agricultural energy
crops and forest biomass), Fairbanks Economic Development Corporation (FEDC) (logistics, data support, and information dissemination) and the Alaska Division of Forestry (forest biomass,
and harvest, transport, and storage technologies).
The City of Homer, with participation from Seldovia Village Tribe and the Port Graham Village Council, proposes to assess the tidal energy potential and development feasibility of four
sites within Kachemak Bay. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) will be the lead technology provider through the Center for Operational Oceanographic Products
and Services (CO- OPS) and the Kasitsna Bay Laboratory, which is the Coastal Marine Ecosystem Research Laboratory for NOAA in Kachemak Bay. NOAA will deploy both stationary and roving
Acoustic Doppler Current Profiling (ADCP) devices, conduct bathymetric mapping, and integrate other existing and new data to construct a comprehensive tidal, energetic, and circulation
flow model of the entire Kachemak Bay region. This model will be focused on providing the necessary outputs to determine power densities and to conduct detailed and site specific tidal
energy feasibility studies, but it will also have multiple public benefits beyond assessing tidal energy, such as improved spill response, mariculture siting, and impact assessment
of local development projects. Terrasond, an industry leading terrestrial and marine floor mapping consultancy firm, will provide additional technical assistance on data collection
and spatial data analysis to contribute to the circulation model and generate power density values.An assumed project start date of July 1, 2009 will result in project completion in
12 months, i.e., July 1, 2010. The total project budget is $1,154,341, of which $482,387 is requested via this proposal, and the remainder, $671,954, is provided as matching contributions,
for a 58% cost- share. Of the $482,287 requested from AEA, Phase 1 (reconnaissance) would require $79,910 of AEA funds and phase 2 (feasibility and conceptual design) would require
$403,387 of AEA funds.
The Tanana area is blessed with a multitude of possible alternative energy resources including:
1) Wind Energy at is T. 5 N., R. 21 W. Sec. 10 located approximately 10 miles from downtown Tanana proper.
2) Wind Energy at T. 4 N., R 20 W. This resource was eliminated as a possible because of transmission line costs from the site to Tanana. The transmission line would have to cross the
Yukon River.
3) Wind and Kinetic Hydro at T. 6 N., R 17 W. commonly referred to as ?The Rapids?. This has both wind and water energy available however transmission line costs from The Rapids to Tanana,
given the terrain, would be very costly.
4) Geothermal at Little Melozitna Hot Springs (65.459, 153.312). There has been cursory analysis done on this resource using chalcedony geo-thermometer methods by Kolker. These results
are encouraging. However, the magnitude of the resource needs to be defined better to determine if it would be economically prudent to develop.
5) Traditional Hydro at Jackson Creek located at T. 5 N., R. 21 W. and T. 6 N., R 21 W. The project has been studied before by the APA in the 1980s. Information regarding the study can
be found in ?Reconnaissance Study of Energy Requirements and Alternatives for Tanana? Report Summary.
6) Kinetic Hydro Energy production using the Yukon River at Tanana using drag turbines. Grant funds would be used to do engineering assessments of resources 4 and 5 with the contributed
funds and in kind resources of Tanana Power and the community of Tanana devoted to quantifying the resources 1 and 6.
The ultimate goal being to determine ?the best? resource to develop of the community to meet the community of Tanana?s long term energy needs most cost effectively.
The location of the project is Perryville, Alaska. Perryville is located on the south coast of the Alaska Peninsula, 275 miles southwest of Kodiak and 500 miles southwest of Anchorage.
It lies at approximately 55.912780? North Latitude and 159.145560? West Longitude. (Sec. 27, T049S, R064W, Seward Meridian.) Perryville is located in the Aleutian Islands Recording
District. The area encompasses 9.2 sq. miles of land and 0.1 sq. miles of water. As can be seen in this image, the village benefits from southern exposure to the sun and longer days
due to its southerly latitude.Community To Be Served The community was founded in 1912 as a refuge for Alutiiq people driven away from their villages by the eruption of Mt. Katmai.
Many villagers from Douglas and Katmai survived the eruption because they were out fishing at the time. Captain Perry of the ship "Manning" transported people from the Katmai area to
Ivanof Bay, and later, to the new village site. The village was originally called "Perry," but the "ville" was added to conform to the post office name, established in 1930. The population
is approximately 110. Project Team Project management is a collaborative approach. The Native Village of Perryville is the applicant will be responsible for the overall management of
AEA funds. George Sikat III of Mat-Su Energy will serve as the Project Manager. Mr. Anthony Caole will be the grants administrator and will be assisted by Ms. Charlene Yagie. Mr. Tom
Humphrey, P.E. will serve as the project\'s consulting electrical engineer and assist with data analysis and economic/feasibility calculations.
The Port Alsworth Improvement Corporation, the Tanalian Electric Cooperative, Tanalian Incorporated, Lake Clark National Park and Preserve, and the Lake and Peninsula Borough support
AGE?s proposal to conduct all pre-construction activities related to the construction of a hydroelectric facility on the Tanalian River. The project will reduce the community?s dependence
on expensive diesel fuel that must be flown into Port Alsworth to provide heat and power. The Reconnaissance Phase will be multi-faceted and will include initial engineering, environmental
and hydrological studies on the Tanalian River to confirm its hydroelectric potential. The reconnaissance phase will include scoping meetings with the community and agencies to identify
issues and study needs that will need to be addressed during the feasibility phase.
A selection process, that will include public and agency input, will be developed to recommend the most feasible alternative. A recommendation and analysis report will be developed that
will include a preferred alternative for the continuation for the project. This alternative will become the final design option. The Final Design and Permitting Phase will prepare the
detailed design and bid documents for the preferred alternative and secure all the remaining permits to allow construction. The final design will include the services of a landscape
architect to ensure that construction and visual impacts are minimized and mitigated. The Construction Phase will install the preferred alternative.
Rising energy prices and demand for renewable systems could create demand for solar for hot water heating throughout the nation- even in the Arctic. Solar is often dismissed as a non-starter
in the Arctic- it should not be. Some of the world?s most successful solar projects have been in places where the solar fraction is about 50%. By strategically targeting entities
and institutions with solar technology, this could be an effective demand-side management option.
This project focuses on the installation of solar hot water heaters on residential, commercial, and public buildings in the Northwest Arctic Borough. If the technology proves to be economically
feasible, the eventual goal would be to install many solar water heaters on buildings and residences throughout the region. Before solar water heaters are installed on many buildings
throughout the region, a solar hot water heating demonstration project would be installed as a test case. Presumably, this demonstration solar water heater would be installed on commercial
and housing interests where the NIHA has a strategic influence, in Kotzebue or the surrounding communities. Key partners in the project include NANA Pacific/NANA Regional Corporation,
the Northwest Arctic Borough School District and additional engineering and building maintenance consultants. It is the team?s desire to develop monitoring and evaluation parameters
that can prove/disprove the technology in an Arctic setting.
The strategic objectives of this project are as follows:
? SO1: Develop monitoring and evaluation criteria and test methodology to evaluate the effectiveness of solar thermal hot water heating in the Arctic;
? SO2: Identify up to 5 commercial entities and 25 residential entities that are viable candidates for a solar hot water heating program in the NW Arctic/NANA Region;
? SO3: Design, procure, and install an appropriate solar hot water heating system;
? SO4: Evaluate the effectiveness of solar thermal hot water heating in NW Alaska.
The proposed project is located in Angoon, Alaska which is a remote native community with a population of approximately 400 residents. Electricity is generated locally by diesel-electric
generation. Most homes and larger buildings, including the schools, use diesel as a heating fuel. The heat recovery project will provide heat to the local schools and reduce their
annual heating fuel requirement. IPEC is working closely with the engineering firm, Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. to make this project successful.
objectives that have been established by stakeholders of the IRP process. The resource portfolio is a set of supply-side and/or demand-side improvements that eliminate any identified
energy or capacity deficits. Supply side improvements would be new generation construction, or modifications to existing generation assets such that energy production or available capacity
is increased. Demand side improvements are system efficiency improvements or peak load modification measures. Stakeholders include concerned citizen groups, commercial and industrial
customers, utility or city government officials, and representatives of state agencies. The stakeholders and the IRP issuing body (The Four Dam Pool Power Agency, FDPPA) establish the
objectives that govern how the resource portfolio is established. Most IRP objectives are governed by the 3 major categories of cost, risk, and environmental impact. The IRP process
includes stakeholder input with final content decisions made by the issuing body (FDPPA).
The FDPPA is also undergoing a restructuring whereby two of the Agency?s four projects are being transferred or sold back to the member utilities. The FDPPA is a Joint Action Agency
organized under State Statute and will remain the same although the name will be changed to the Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA). This planned restructuring is scheduled to close
in January, 2009. SEAPA will remain the owner of the Swan Lake and Tyee Lake hydroelectric facilities as well as associated transmission lines providing Agency power to Ketchikan, Wrangell
and Petersburg including the Swan-Tyee Intertie.
Developing an IRP requires an analysis of the regions generation and transmission system, and an estimation of the regions load growth. Generation and load forecasts are modeled to determine
when and to what extent future energy and/or capacity deficits occur. Energy and capacity deficits are resolved by a combination of constructing new generation facilities, and through
load growth rate or peak hour value reduction via demand side management. The IRP then documents a short term and long term plan to address the energy and capacity deficits.
This project involves constructing a powerhouse, diversion structure with penstock, and substation for a new hydroelectric facility located on the Nenana River upstream of the Healy
Creek confluence. The new substation would connect the hydroelectric power generation facility to GVEA\'s existing high voltage transmission infrastructure in Healy. Electricity from
the new power generation source would be distributed to GVEA\'s 33,000 members from Cantwell to Delta Junction.
The Project is a Reconnaissance Project to investigate the possibilities of installing supplemental or replacement renewable energy for the lighting needs for the public docks and harbors
operated by NPRHA in Tatitlek and Chenega Bay, Alaska. It will include quantifying the renewable energy resource available by erecting a monitoring tower, completing other items of
the reconnaissance phase including consolidating our data into this process, completing environmental screening, reviewing system benefits, proposing a system design, other phase requirements
and lastly the analysis and recommendations.
This is a request for funding to construct a high-penetration wind-diesel system for the community of Tuntutuliak. The wind diesel system will displace 30% of the diesel fuel currently
being used to generate electricity and used to provide residential home heating. The work plan consists of the installation, control and integration of five major components:
1. Five (5) Windmatic 17-S Wind turbines on 80 feet-tall lattice towers
2. Diesel power system control and integration upgrades
3. Energy recovery boiler at the school
4. Smart metering system
5. 40 Residential electric thermal room heating units
The wind turbines will be installed 250 feet apart on pile foundations on the abandoned runway. Construction will take place during the Summer and Fall of 2009. Each turbine will be
connected to the electrical distribution system via a buried armored cable. A fiber optic cable will be buried alongside the power cable to provide a communications link with the powerplant.
Three hierarchical methods of integrating the wind into the diesel grid include:
1. Heat recovery with frequency control
2. Adaptations to diesel generators to enable low-load operation
3. An integrated control system that operates both the wind turbines and diesel generators in a coordinated manner with ceramic thermal storage.
This purpose of this work is to provide a conceptual design and construction cost estimate for to use wind power to displace diesel fuel for power generation and heating. The scope of
work will include conducting energy use baseline studies, energy resource monitoring and the development of conceptual designs and cost estimates for construction. This work would also
explore the management and financial feasibility of a wind project. This project would be in conjunction with other efforts such as those of the Chaninik Wind Group, which is working
in the Bethel region. The average consistent power in the wind across our region is some of the best to be found in Alaska, however, this general data must be supplemented with simultaneous
electric load data in each location to better integrate the available wind with the energy needs. Village energy system and wind monitoring stations will be purchased in Fall of 2009
and installed this winter, and monitored for one year. This work is needed in order to move forward with a renewable energy project and obtain future funding.
Waste Heat Recovery Project: This project will tap off of the excess heat from existing generators at the Dutch Harbor Powerhouse to run a new generator designed to convert the waste
heat to electrical energy. When the NEw Powerhouse is constructed, the waste heat recovery system will be expanded to include excess heat from increased power demands. The Dutch Harbor
Powerhouse serves the residents and various industrial processes in the City of Unalaska and the International Port of Dutch Harbor, which is the number one fishing port in the United
States.
This project will provide a 20-kilowatt solar photovoltaic array of the roof of the Student Recreation Center on the University of Alaska Fairbanks campus. This array will generate
electric power to the University of Alaska Fairbanks electric power grid. All power produced by this project will offset power that the University will not have to purchase or generate.
WCA proposes a hydrokinetic renewable energy project to be implemented on the nearby Tanana River, approximately 2000-3000 feet downriver from the Richardson Highway crossing near Big
Delta, Alaska. This proposed project encompasses Phases III and IV of a four-phase program. Reconnaissance and feasibility studies were performed by Electric Power Research Institute,
Inc. (EPRI) in 2007 and 2008. The purpose was to assess technical, economic, financial, and operational viability of a project and to narrow the focus of final design and construction.
The reconnaissance and feasibility studies have shown that this proposed project is warranted. Electronic copies of the reconnaissance and feasibility reports are available on EPRI?s
website at http://oceanenergy.epri.com/risec.html#reports.
Building on information gathered in Phases I and II, WCA shall establish the project configuration and specifications that will be used to guide construction, further refine project
cost estimates, finalize business plans, and obtain land use and resource authorizations required for construction. This proposed project encompasses the final design and permitting
and construction/operation phases for a pilot RISEC plant and subsequent expanded generating plant serving the Whitestone Community on the Tanana River. The electricity produced by
the pilot generating plant will be operated in two modes; first, exclusively connected to the remote Whitestone power distribution grid, and then, when deemed successful, connected
to the GVEA power transmission / distribution grid. This project will be managed by WCA, with technical support provided by EPRI; system integration and construction management support
from CE2 Engineers, Inc. (CE2); a RISEC technology developer to be selected; and other necessary Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 16 9/3/2008
support contractors to be identified and selected. This phased project will be progressively conducted with a gated decision process allowing for data evaluation prior to proceeding
with construction.
This project will provide a central chilled water system for the West Ridge area of the University of Alaska Fairbanks campus. This central chilled water system will meet the cooling
needs of the buildings on the West Ridge and the needs of the computer center. This project will replace the electrically-driven chillers that are in each building with a central absorption
chilling facility. This cooling system will utilize steam heat that is currently being wasted as its energy source.
Tlingit Haida Central Council (CCTHIA) will construct two containerized mobile biodiesel processing plants to be operated in tandem to take advantage of available feedstock, while also
servicing distinct geographical regions in Alaska. As the relative isolation of the Southeast and Southcentral regions of the state make prices of feedstock and finished biodiesel dependent
upon transportation, we expect to use lower-cost local production and local feedstocks, in addition to imported feedstocks, to bring down the overall costs of the final wholesale and
retail costs of Bioheat, a blended Home Heating Oil that can be used in virtually any existing fuel oil stove for residential and public space heating. The operations will be conducted
by AlaskaSmart Eco-fuels as per a memorandum of agreement.
Birch Creek Village Council is seeking funds to install a solar array in conjunction with a 35kw generator in the community of Birch Creek. The Tribal Council operates the electric
utility and like many others, is experiencing the negative affects of the high cost of diesel. With the solar panels, we anticipate we can generate enough electricity six months of
the year to utilize a 35kw gen set, thereby replacing the need to run the larger 65kw diesel powered generator for a significant portion of the year. The project and the utility serve
the village of Birch Creek. The tribal council and the village corporation (project management/personnel) will be involved in the project.
The Village of Igiugig is located at the outlet of Lake Iliamna, 240 air miles southwest of Anchorage, on the southern shore of the Kvichak River. Igiugig has a year-round population
of 56 (predominantly Yupik, Aleut, and Athabascan) rising in summer to about 75. Igiugig also provides goods and services to six area tourism lodges and their respective clients and
workforce of 90 additional persons per week. This lake outlet location provides an ideal site for the study, testing and implementation of river in-stream energy conversion that will
also benefit other Alaska communities considering this form of renewable energy. A RISEC plant will convert available river kinetic energy into electric power, and feed into the existing
Igiugig electric grid to reduce diesel fuel consumption at the Igiugig power plant. Direct beneficiaries include the Lake and Peninsula School District (LPSD) and Igiugig electric service
customers.
Yakutat Power is located in Yakutat, Alaska. The City and Borough of Yakutat has a population of 631, and is located at the mouth of Yakutat Bay along the Gulf of Alaska, 225 miles northwest
of Juneau and 220 miles southeast of Cordova. Yakutat receives monthly barge service during the winter and more frequent service during summer. Yakutat is equipped with two jet-certified
runways and receives jet service daily. The U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service have offices in Yakutat. This project will investigate the conversion of readily available
wave energy with the long term goal of integrating the resource into the Yakutat Power electric grid. Direct beneficiaries of this project include all Yakutat Power electric service
customers.
This proposal is to conduct a reconnaissance and feasibility study for alternative energy use for the school facilities in the communities of Whittier, Chenega Bay, and Tatitlek operated
by Chugach School District. Development of sustainable alternative energy is a School Board objective in Chugach School District where fuel costs consume an escalating proportion of
the annual budget, detracting from the primary mission of education. Chugach School District has been an education leader and model for other rural Alaska school districts for over
15 years and now wants to be one of the first to create a solution to a problem plaguing rural Alaska.
The Municipality of Skagway (Municipality) proposes to construct the West Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on West Creek, approximately 7 miles west of Skagway and adjacent
to the small community of Dyea. The primary purpose of the Project would be offsetting diesel generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway from May through September each year. Up
to five cruise ships per day dock in Skagway for 12-15 hours and continuously operate their diesel plants to provide for on-board electricity consumption. The continuous stack emissions
spread a blue haze at about the 1,500 foot elevation where vegetation has been noticeably affected. The Project will improve air quality and save vegetation in the area (there may be
other unknown environmental benefits). To emphasize how serious the air quality of the area is being taken, the National Park Service, Municipality of Skagway, and Alaska Power & Telephone
Company (AP&T) have a cooperative agreement to place and maintain equipment at AP&T?s Dewey Lakes Hydro project site to monitor this pollution.
This project is to conduct an assessment of potential sources of alternative energy for the schools and communities served by the Yukon Koyukuk School District. These communities are
Alakaket, Hughes, Huslia, Kaltag, Koyukuk, Manley Hot Springs, Minto, Nulato and Ruby. Potential alternative energy sources in the District include hydrokinetic, geothermal, biomass
(wood ), waste heat and wind. There is a high degree of interest in developing alternative energy in the Interior. The District plans to coordinate with other agencies working in this
area. The Gwitchyaa Zhee Corporation in Fort Yukon is developing a much larger wood fuel project than would be required by YKSD communities but they provide a model to follow. The
District will contract with the consultants assisting in the development of that project, Dr. William Wall, Ph.D. and Peter Olsen. The biomass potential community of Kaltag will be
address in a separate grant application. The Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council (YRITWC) has an experimental hydrokinetic project in Ruby that might have application to our
other river based communities. Dr. Brian Hirsch of the Council will assist in the evaluation of harnessing river power. River conditions in the Region will be reviewed and the two
most promising site will be selected for evaluation. Gwen Holdmann of the Alaska Center for Energy and Power at the University of Alaska Fairbanks will complete a basic reconnaissance
of the geothermal potential in the District for direct use and power generation applications. The District will review waste heat options with local utilities. Manley may have good
waste heat potential.From initial review it appears wind generation opportunities are limited. This will be confirmed with AEA. Kathy Christy will serve as the District?s project manager
responsible for coordinating the work of the consultants and the compilation of the Phase I report and recommendations.
This project is to develop a wood energy project for the Kaltag school and community. The school is the largest consumer of power in the community so that it is appropriate for the District
to take the lead role in the development of this project, but for biomass utilization to be sustainable in the community and to possibly expand to other nearby communities a cooperative
effort is required. This project will be developed in phases. The first phase will be to identify the energy requirements and to confirm the availability of the resource. A preliminary
cost benefit analysis will be conducted to verify that the project and fuel supply has the potential to be sustainable and that the projected cost will justify the development costs.
Environmental issues will be identified and community meetings held to confirm support for the project. Potential business partners will be identified. If the first phase of development
yields favorable results the project will proceed to Phase II and a more detailed business plan and project concept design will be developed. The District plans to contract with William
Wall, PhD. who is developing the Ft. Yukon Bio mass project, to perform the reconnaissance, feasibility studies and harvest management plan. To proceed to final design, Phase III
the commitment of a wood supplier is required. The existing heating system at the Kaltag School is in very poor condition and the District has designed a replacement system and is
waiting for approval of a Department of Education grant for construction. The design of a conventional hydronic heating system for the Kaltag School heating has been completed to the
design development level by WH Pacific. The engineer effort to date will be coordinated with wood heat engineering. Kathy Christy, an experienced project manager, will serve as the
District?s project manager responsible for coordinating the work of the consultants and the compilation of the reports and recommendations.
The project will be located in Mountain Village. The tribe with cooperation from the city will be the main entities involved in the project. We request to purchase and utilize small
wind turbines for the municipal and tribal government buildings, in all approximately seven buildings.
The Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal system was extensively studied in the late 1970s and early 1980s with a variety of geological, geochemical, and geophysical studies. Unfortunately
the execution of these surveys and interpretation of the data from these earlier studies did not result in a thorough understanding of the area. By example, 6 very closely spaced holes
were drilled ranging from depths of 150 ft to 1001ft, passing through a very shallow plume of thermal water that may be flowing in a southerly direction. Chemical analyses from this
earlier work are incomplete. It is proposed that the existing Pilgrim wellheads will be reconditioned so that static and flowing temperature logs can be rerun in the existing wells
and new water samples collected. Additionally, a Controlled Source Audio Magnetotellurics (CSMAT) survey will be combined with new shallow (+ 200?) temperature-gradient holes drilled
away from the cluster of existing wells to try to identify the location of the hotter upflow zone supplying thermal fluid to the shallow aquifer.
The goal of this project will ultimately be to drill a deeper hole into the upflow zone to determine its temperature and water chemistry. The deeper hole, and perhaps some of the other
holes will also be flowed to obtain water samples for chemical analysis and possibly collect some pressure interference data between the wells. These data, combined with an airborne
thermal imaging survey to determine total heat flow to the surface should be adequate to determine total potential output of the system for sustainable long term development.
The Mount Spurr area represents one of the best opportunities in Alaska for to develop a utility-scale geothermal power plant. Phase 1 exploration efforts must be performed before moving
forward to project development. The target site is located 70 miles west of Anchorage on state land. Field work was performed at the site in 1985. It is likely that the project would
serve communities along the Railbelt and the power purchased by one of the Railbelt electric utilities.
The grant request is for initial resource studies and assessment. The plan assumes a timeline of three years with the bulk of the field work done in the summer months. The plan calls
for an initial geological scouting, mapping and sampling work, with progression to aerial and ground geophysics work, culminating in a gradient and slim holes drilling program. Field
surveys and surface studies during the Summer of 2009, which Ormat would finance 100% from its own funds. The grant would cover additional field surveys and geophysical studies and
shallow temperature gradient wells during the summer of 2010. A slim hole drilling program would occur during the Summer of 2011, if justified.
There are about 13 miles between the nearest road and the southeast flank of Crater Peak to our leases. The objective of this field survey aspect of the potential geothermal area should
be an early focus as to cost for infrastructure and project development, including access roads and transmission. The primary obstacle for this phase is the short time window (May through
September) for exploration to avoid extreme weather.
This project will assess the practicality of using heat pumps in different regions of Alaska. Several technologies and unique configurations will be examined, including ground-source
heat pumps, air-source heat pumps, solar thermal storage, and diurnal thermal storage. In the case of ground-source heat pumps, the ground temperature resource will be assessed by region.
Additionally, low-temperature heat applications will be explored. This project will be a joint effort between UAF\'s Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) and the Cold Climate Housing
Research Center (CCHRC). The project will culminate with a final published report of the findings.
The geothermal plant at Chena Hot Springs has been in continual operation since 2006 and is the only operating geothermal plant in the State of Alaska. Since startup, there has been
a decline in geothermal fluid temperature and pressure. This may be due to either engineering or reservoir issues. In order to operate the plant in a sustainable manner and develop
other similar and possibly more marginal projects sustainably, it is critical that we understand the underlying mechanisms driving this production decline. Following this analysis,
a suitable production scheme and monitoring schedule should be developed. The proposed project is a cooperative program between the University of Alaska and Chena Hot Springs Resort.
A numerical reservoir model of the Chena geothermal system will be created and its performance matched to the historical production data. This model can then be used to assist in the
making of development strategy decisions.
The information that will be obtained from drilling this well will prove invaluable for the understanding of geothermal potential in Interior Alaska as well as providing crucial input
data for the Chena Hot Springs reservoir model. A resource assessment achieved through the testing of multiple production scenarios will be integrated with a conceptual design of the
power plant production system. A generic feasibility analysis will generate recommendations for the final design of the Chena Hot Springs geothermal project. The outcomes of the modeling
effort may be transferred to other geothermal systems such as Circle, Manley and Pilgrim Hot Springs and to other sites within the Central Alaska Hot Springs Belt.
The proposed Victor Creek hydro project could produce up to 5-MW and would be located near Lawing, Alaska just south of Moose Pass, Alaska (see the map below produced by HDR Alaska,
Inc.). Kenai Hydro seeks to develop the project in compliance with current low impact hydro guidelines and practices. The scope of this project will look at the Victor Creek project
as a stand-alone hydroelectric facility. Power from the project would be available to customers of Homer Electric Association and other areas served by the existing Railbelt transmission
grid. Kenai Hydro, LLC (KHL) is a partnership among Homer Electric Association, Inc. (HEA), enXco and Cook Inlet Region, Inc. (CIRI) that was formed for the purpose of evaluating and
developing low impact hydroelectric facilities.
Along with many communities in Alaska, Chena Power is not located directly in one of Alaska?s larger cities making it heavily reliant on diesel and other fossil fuels. In order to offset
the rising cost of fuel, Chena Power has undertaken well known steps to greatly reduce the amount of fuel that it requires by means of renewable energy sources. By taking these steps,
Chena Power is providing cost effective solutions for many Alaskan communities (large and small) to become less reliant on non renewable sources of energy. Chena Power is proposing
to use excess electricity that is produced by its geothermal power plant towards the production of hydrogen gas at Chena Hot Springs Resort. Chena Power plans to install a 60 kg/day
hydrogen generation module, a 6667 psi compression module, a 76.5 kg hydrogen storage module, and a hydrogen dispenser module all of which will be purchased from Hydrogenics. Also in
this proposal is a plan to convert three 12 passenger vans to run off of hydrogen. This will allow Chena Power to produce hydrogen to reduce the use of diesel in transportation and
to reduce the propane in the operation of appliances on site.
The Manley Village Council is applying for a Planning, Feasibility, and Coordination grant to develop the geothermal resources available in and around Manley Hot Springs for the purposes
of providing economical, stable, reliable, and environmentally friendly power generation and home heating options to its tribal members and other comunity members. Pending partners
include the Bean Ridge Corporation, Doyon, Ltd., the Alaska Energy authority, UAF\'s Alaska Center for Energy and Power, Chena Hot Springs, and private landowners in the Manley area.
AEB proposes a resource assessment/feasibility analysis/conceptual design project of geothermal sites in the targeted service area.
Goal: The AGDAP goal is to ascertain the feasibility of geothermal power generation for regional communities and develop conceptual design documents/reports for geothermal generation
on the eastern Alaska Peninsula and associated Aleutian Islands. The AGDAP strategic objectives are as follows:
SO1: Identify potential geothermal sites in the Aleutian Island Service Area.
SO2: Undertake a geological, geochemistry, and geophysical assessment of targeted sites for geothermal power generation potential.
SO3: Undertake a geothermal drilling program to promote regional geothermal interests.
SO4: Develop conceptual design and business plan for follow-on phases of the projects.
SO5: Conduct an optimization phase in the conceptual design to determine how to supply power either from one centrally located geothermal plant or from many smaller geothermal plants,
so the communities involved can be evaluated. Included will be evaluating the use of transmission lines for power versus supplying hot water via a pipeline to one or several geothermal
power plant(s).
This project is for a reconnaissance study to investigate using hydrokinetic power to supply approximately 1.0 MW of renewable electricity to the City of Galena. Hydrokinetic power
extracts power from the velocity of water using turbines lowered into a river, and is benign compared to hydropower since no dams are required. Aerial photos suggest that the Yukon
River is narrow and straight at Galena, suggesting an ideal location for hydrokinetic power. However, to understand the most advantageous location (where the highest velocity exists)
for deploying hydrokinetic turbines to produce power, a thorough scientific study of the site needs to be completed. The project will perform a quality investigation of river bathymetry,
ice thickness and current vector (velocity and direction) survey.
This grant request identifies the repairs and upgrades required to bring the system back on line and to improve its long term efficiency and output. Since the Akutan hydroelectric generation
system has been in place for nearly 15 years, many requirements such as site assessment, reconnaissance, conceptual design and site control do not apply. Therefore, this grant application
is requesting funds for:
? Phase III Final Design and Permitting
? Phase IV Construction, Commissioning, Operation and Reporting
The tasks for this project are defined in Sections 2.5 and 2.6 of the grant application instructions.
AEA renewable energy grant guidelines require a multi-phase approach to project development. A feasibility assessment of the Loud Creek resource was previously completed at the direction
of AEA. The assessment found Loud Creek to be ?an obvious choice? for development. Therefore, the City of Akutan is requesting funds for:
? Phase II Feasibility Analysis, Conceptual Design
The tasks for this project are defined in Section 2.4 of the grant application instructions.
The City of Akutan intends to evaluate the feasibility of developing the Hot Springs Bay Valley into an active geothermal resource for power generation and related applications. The
purposes and anticipated results of this effort are those set forth in Section 2.3 Phase I ? Reconnaissance Requirements of the renewable energy grant application instructions. The
project will involve four primary tasks:
1. Prospecting: Analysis of existing data and previous scientific studies. Geological, geophysical and geochemical field work sufficient to support exploratory drilling.
2. Exploratory Drilling and Well Testing: Includes mobilization, drilling of test wells, flow testing and demobilization based on the results of prospecting.
3. Preliminary Feasibility Study: A comprehensive assessment of the proposed geothermal development project, including technical alternatives, land issues, environmental screening, financial
and operational viability.
4. Economic Assessment: Examines Akutan?s growing infrastructure, including airport construction, port expansion and growth of Trident Seafoods. Assesses potential for cooperative development
among the City, Akutan Corporation, Aleut Corporation, Trident Seafoods and other stakeholders. Identifies public and private financing alternatives. Defines the key elements of the
business plan for development and operation of the resulting power system.
Completion of the Phase I Reconnaissance project will allow all potential stakeholders, including the State of Alaska, to determine the potential technical and economic viability of
the proposed geothermal development before proceeding with feasibility and conceptual design tasks (Phase II).
The NSB recently commissioned a preliminary feasibility study entitled "Energy Options for the City of Atqasuk"(Attachment A, disk copy). The recently completed study assessed the alternative
energy options that could reduce or replace Atqasuk\'s dependence on diesel fuel for its power and heating needs. Natural gas from the Barrow gas fields proved to be the most viable
energy source.
This application requests funds to:
*Evaluate and select the power transmission option (HVDC vs. 3 phase AC) via comparative lifecycle cost analysis, technical viability and system reliability.
* Evaluate the use of composite poles in the Arctic. The poles are 1/3 the weight and 4 to 5 times the strength of wood poles. They can also be shipped in 25 foot sections.
*Evaluate the capacity of the Barrow Utilities & Electric Cooperative Inc. power plant for the additional demand.
*Determine business structure, rates and O&M responsibilities
*Evaluate and select the optimum 70 mile long route from Barrow to Atqasuk.
*Evaluate the impace of the added demand on the Barrow natural gas reserves.
*Evaluate land ownership issues.
*Evaluate environmental issues.
*Identify permit requirements
*Determine design parameters for wind and ice loads in arctic conditions.
*Develop the design and cost estimate of a power transmission system that will serve Atqasuk, Walakpa Gas Field and also facilitate a future expansion to Wainwright.
The NSB recently commission ed an update of the Project Analysis Report (feasibility study) entitled "Village Heat Recovery" dated February 2006. The prior study assessed the previously
constructed waste lines and costs associated with waste heat utilization in Arctic and/or permafrost conditions in six NSB villages. The study verified that use of waste heat could
reduce or replace dependence on diesel fuel for its heating needs in NSB area wide villages. With rising fuel costs, it is now feasible to install waste heat lines in Point Lay.
This application requests funds to cover the following expenses:
* Design and construction administration services
* Construction cost estimates
* Construction costs
* NSB employeed training in operating and maintaining waste heat systems.
The North Slope Borough will be the primary participant and will utilize internal expertise and retain external consultants and contractors that have special expertise in designing waste
heat pipe lines, connecting building heating plants to the pipe lines, and recommending operations and maintenance schedules.
The NSB recently commissioned an update of the Project Analysis Report (feasibility study) entitled ?Village Heat Recovery? and dated February 2006. The prior study assessed the previously
constructed waste lines and costs associated with waste heat utilization in Arctic and/or permafrost conditions in six NSB villages. The study verified that use of waste heat could
reduce or replace dependence on diesel fuel for its heating needs in NSB area wide villages. With rising fuel costs, it is now feasible to install waste heat lines in Wainwright.
This application requests funds to:
? Provide schematic design services
? Identify and mitigate environmental issues
? Provide construction cost estimates
? Finalize land, routing and site control issues
? Complete design and bid documents
? Provide construction costs
? Provide for construction administration services
? Provide NSB employee training in operating and maintaining waste heat systems
The North Slope Borough will be the primary participant and will utilize internal expertise and retain external consultants and contractors that have special expertise in designing waste
heat pipe lines, connecting building heating plants to the pipe lines, and recommending operations and maintenance schedules.
Phase III of the Wainwright Coal Bed Methane is in the vicinity of Wainwright, Alaska. The parties that will be involved in this will be the North Slope Borough, United States Geological
Survey and Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. This phase will consist of drilling delineation wells at the landfill and the Wainwright Lagoon.
The Alaska Gasline Port Authority (AGPA) will prepare a feasibility analysis for a new natural gas distribution system to provide service to the 3300 potential customers ofNorth Pole,
Moose Creek, and Salcha, areas. Residents currently heat with home heating oil, coal, and/or wood. Natural gas service from Fairbanks Natural Gas is not available outside ofthe city
ofFairbanks. The feasibility analysis would include but not be limited to preparing a conceptual design ofthe high pressure and distribution system, preparing a base computer model
ofthe proposed system, preparing various design scenarios using the base model as a foundation, developing and reviewing various design scenarios including location ofgate stations,
district regulators, and high pressure main routing, preparing conceptual rate schedule, preparing conceptual construction costs estimates, preparing a cost/revenue comparisons between
the various scenarios, recommending a mostfeasible/practical conceptual design, and recommending construction phasing.
Project will be located in the fishing ports of coastal Alaska. From Ketchikan to Dutch Harbor we will be surveying the 20 larger communities involved in the fishing industry to catalog
their waste oil production, and where resources are presently used. That information will be shared with state and local authorities to show potential as recyclable fuel and waste disposal.
This oil could be utilized as fuel in school buses, generators, garbage trucks, or as any #2 fuel.
EarthRun Energy will provide a sustainable source of high grade wood chips for biomass heating in the city of Anchorage, Alaska while strengthening and beautifying the urban forests.
In Anchorage, urban forests are currently overgrown presenting fire and disease problems. It is the right time to make a sick forest a productive and healthy forest. EarthRun has worked
hard to come up with the cleanest, quietest and least interruptive way of harvesting the dead and unhealthy trees from our urban forests, chipping them, and heating one municipal building,
the Russian Jack greenhouse. EarthRun Energy will work closely with the municipality to return the forests to a healthy state.
This funding request is for a three phased high penetration wind/diesel power and heating system that will eventually be capable of providing over half of Pilot Point\'s heating and
energy needs without a battery storage system. The project will serve Pilot Point and be located at the designated City owned wind park site which now has two small 10kWh wind turbines
and towers with one producing power for over five years and the second ready for installation in November. The site is located away from the coast, residential areas, and avian flight
and feeding routes. The project will produce excess power during cold, predominately north wind winter periods and provide heating for residential homes through electric thermal impact
stoves as well as a boiler grid interface system to heat centrally located public buildings. Our steadiest winds are from the north tend to occur in the winter, are very cold and are
strongest at the time when heating relief is the most needed. The project is also needed to stabilize kWh rates and allow for economic development. Pilot Point is rich in natural
renewable resources that cannot be developed without sustainable energy.
Pellet stoves utilized in homes will alleviate the high costs of heating homes. A self contained pellet plant can process pellets from willows found in all the myriad rivers of the
Yukon Delta. The use of biomass pellets will reduce consumption of fossil fuels and create needed jobs for residents. Kotlik has an estimated population of 670 and 130 households.
The success of a project as this can be expanded to other villatges in rural Alaska.
This project is located on the outskirts of Chitina, Alaska, to serve the City of Chitina, the Chitina Airport, and the Chitina community. Generating low cost, sustainable renewable
energy and extending the existing power distribution utility to the hydro-electric facility are the two main goals of this project. The existing 25 year old diesel generator plant provides
expensive environmentally dirty power of limited reliability. The options for hydro-electric generation facilities have been previously studied for several waterways in the area. (reference
appendix) Development of the most affordable, permittable, and sustainable option, Fivemile Creek near the Chitina Airport, with a line extension connection to the existing utility
distribution system would provide reliable, low cost, local renewable energy source for a community dependent on high operation cost fossil fuel-powered diesel generators.
In order to effectively reduce the amount of diesel consumption in KEA?s power plant, thermal energy must be utilized to the fullest. In order to do so, heat from both the jacket water
system and the exhaust heat should be captured. KEA currently utilizes roughly one third of the available thermal energy which originates from the jacket water system. The exhaust will
be captured via HRSR stack heat exchangers, manufactured by Cain Industries. Waste heat absorbed into the existing 50/50 glycol loop can generate net 162 kW electricity from an Ammonia
Power Cycle, designed by Energy Concepts. The recovered heat will also be utilized in an updated ammonia absorption ice maker and an extended district heating system.
5 MW Biomass Combined Heat & Power Project ("CHP" or "Cogeneration") as the first phase of the repowering of KAPP to provide the thermal energy needs of the ARRC, ADF&G and other commercial
customers within economic reach of the Project and provide power to help ML&P and Chugach meet new generation needs.
Kuskokwim kinetic energy can be measured in the billions. At present the indication is to use the technology born from recent success in tidal and wave kinetic projects in our state.
These were born from the successes of low revolving generators used in wind generating systems. Together they paint a pretty picture wind, oceans producing cheap renewable energy. Unfortunately
this isn?t the reality, they are any thing but cheap, the wind farms are plagued by rising maintenance cost, imagine what ours will be out here, with the damn thing under water and
ice. The price of a watt to install is staggering, close to 25 dollars a watt. The Prototype under our consideration will reduce the install cost to 1.50 to 3.00 dollars per watt, a
85% reduction. We are able to accomplish this by eliminating the generator from the kinetic hydro turbine and placing it on shore and transferring captured river kinetic energy in
the form of slowly revolving torque through a drive line configuration encased in line pipe or drilling casing. By eliminating the marriage of the generator to the turbine allows us
to develop torque farms by tying several turbines output to one line, thus eliminating the expensive slow RPM generator and replacing it with a more durable and inexpensive unit. At
present none of the Hydro-kinetic being consider are suitable for our shallow river, 20? deep channels exist but are rare. It is part of our efforts will be to design low profile turbines
to accommodate the rivers profile without dredging.
This study examines the opportunity, analyzes the possibility, and determines the feasibility of providing a stand-alone fish waste-processing facility that produces and uses clean energy
from renewable resources. It serves the commercial fishery and processing plants (7 land-based processing facilities, 3 floating processing facilities and several smaller independent
seller/operators) and the community of Naknek, King Salmon, and South Naknek, Alaska. It is a model plant that, when proven successful, will be recreated throughout the fisheries of
the State and the nation, and the world.
This facility serves the ecology and the economy as it provides supplemental clean energy from renewable sources to the locally owned cooperative energy association. This energy counteracts
the drain on the power grid during the fish processing season ? which is what creates the drain. In short, this model plant and its subsequent generations are usage neutral.
The project, when it is completed, will include a hydroelectric power plant, and associated infrastructure for access and connection, to serve the community of Elfin Cove. The power
plant will be located at the mouth of Crooked Creek, a tributary of Port Althorp in Cross Sound. Upon completion, the hydroelectric facility will include: a diversion structure on Crooked
Creek; a 1,000-foot long diversion conduit from Crooked Creek to Jim\'s Lake; a 1,300-foot long penstock from Jim\'s Lake to tidewater; a hydro power house with Turgo type turbine and
programmable automatic paralleling switchgear at tidewater; an onground transmission line to the newly renovated diesel power plant; fiber optic communication cable between the hydroelectric
powerhouse and the town site diesel power plant control room; and access trails to the power house and diversion structure. This project will be carried out by local project administrators,
with technical and engineering support subcontracted to a consulting engineering firm. At the end of Phase 3 (proposed here) we should be prepared to begin final construction on the
hydroelectric power project.
The ultimate goal of this project is to produce electricity and employment both sustainably and locally. Thus the name ?Keep It Sustainable, and Keep It Local (KISKIL) Energy project.?
The project will be located thirty miles east of Delta Junction. The KISKIL Energy project will serve much of the Interior by providing electricity for Golden Valley Electric Association
(GVEA) via the grid. Additionally the project will serve Delta Junction, Healy Lake, Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tok and the surrounding areas by hiring regionally, and purchasing wood for
fuel locally. The model will be applicable to all small communities and/or mines or other industrial type operations with significant biomass resources nearby. KISKIL Energy is a
subsidiary of Delta Mine Training Center (DMTC) organized specifically for this project. DMTC is a 501 (c) 3 nonprofit corporation. DMTC has policies and procedures in place to comply
with ISO 9000 standards. KISKIL will be managed by DMTC. With assistance from the Alaska Energy Authority and the resources and capabilities of DMTC, this project will be a success.
The AVTEC Renewable Energy Fund Wind Project involves the installation of one (1) 100 kW wind turbine on the AVTEC campus located in Seward, Alaska. The completed project will be owned
and operated by AVTEC and connected into the electrical distribution system at the school?s industrial electricity facility located on the northern edge of town. The project will offer
benefits to AVTEC/State of Alaska through a reduction of operating costs at the state owned facility (electricity) and will be used primarily to support the creation of a world class
winddiesel training program that will provide opportunities for rural power plant operators to gain hands on operational experience with wind energy technology. Essentially, the completed
project will support the alternative energy investments the state of Alaska is making through its HB 152 legislation by providing a training center and program for wind-diesel system
operators. AVTEC has assembled a project team, headed by STG Incorporated, that is prepared to immediately begin work on an accelerated schedule. The project team includes members from
Duane Miller Associates LLC, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell LLC and BBFM Engineers. All aspects of the Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, detailed in the following pages
of this application can be completed by fall of 2009.
The City and Borough of Wrangell (City) has a need for an economical alternative power source during the annual maintenance shutdown of the Tyee Lake Hydroelectric facility and as an
alternative power source in the event of a catastrophic failure similar to the one experienced in Juneau in the summer of 2008. An additional need is another source of water for the
City reservoir, which periodically runs very low on water and has an eminent risk of running out of water for the City?s use. Since there is a pertinent need for the additional water
source that Sunrise Lake can provide, it is economical and feasible that the two projects be constructed simultaneously. Hence, by utilizing the outflow from the hydroelectric project
turbines, the City will have an additional water source. These two projects are mutually exclusive to each other. In 1997, The Bentley Company performed a reconnaissance study to determine
the feasibility of developing hydroelectric power at Sunrise Lake. Sunrise Lake is a 70 acre, 100 foot deep, perched lake on Woronkofski Island, an uninhabited island approximately
five miles from the City of Wrangell.
The AK?BC Intertie would provide a further opportunity to secure the energy future for Southeast Alaska. The AK?BC Intertie is a 26.5 mile transmission line from the existing Tyee Lake
Project to the AK?BC border. A feasibility study was conducted by Hatch Energy in 2005. This phase of the project would continue the project from the feasibility stage into the permitting
engineering phase. The purpose of this project is to export surplus power for sale in British Columbia/Pacific Northwest which would encourage development of new projects and provide
additional reliability benefits. The ability to export power would encourage early development of new hydro generation, as well as provide revenue from exports, which will help ensure
future maintenance of the current overall status of a clean hydro?powered region, offer operating flexibility for the southeast Alaska power system, and provide future benefits to the
region under the proposed marketing oversight proposal.
AP&T proposes to construct the 300 kW Carlson Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project), which will be located approximately 8 miles north of Slana on the Glenn Highway (Tok Cutoff). The
Project would offset diesel generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Slana and Chistochina. The Project will consist of two small diversion structures, approximately
13,200 feet of penstock, a powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and a very short length of transmission line. For about half the year, the Project operation
will be run-of-river, but during the colder months the Project will draw water from Carlson Lake. The potential annual generation is estimated to be approximately 1,200 MWh/yr, which
is greater than the current annual requirements of the two communities. Therefore, the Project has the potential to offset 100% of the current diesel generation. The Project will provide
clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation.
The proposed Triangle Lake hydroelectric project will be located on the west side of Annette Island near the route of the proposed Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie. The project as presently
envisioned will be comprised of a small embankment dam at the outlet of Triangle Lake, a 1.3 mile long penstock and a powerhouse containing a single horizontal Francis turbine generating
unit with a capacity of 4.0 MW. The Triangle Lake project will provide additional hydroelectric power to Metlakatla and, with construction of the Metlakatla ? Ketchikan Intertie, to
the interconnected electric systems of Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg. MIC will develop and own the Triangle Lake project.
In July 2008, Haines Assisted Living, Inc.(HAL) began construction on a senior assisted living/ residential complex comprising a total of 26,000 SF. The building site is on lots fronting
Third St. from Dalton to Union. Residents of Haines and Southeast Alaska will utilize the senior assisted living and senior affordable housing complex being built in 2008?2010. The
project is a collaboration seven years in development and funded by the Denali Commission, the Community Development Block Grant Program, the Rasmuson Foundation and the community of
Haines. The first phase of the project will be completed in the fall of 2009 at a cost of over $4 million. Key to the long term sustainability of the facility is the installation of
a Ground Source Heat Pump to extract geothermal energy from the earth and circulate it through a radiant in-floor heating system. The initial feasibility and design has been completed
as the follow-up to an extensive energy life-cycle cost analysis performed in 2007and updated in October 2008.
AP&T proposes to construct a small run-of-river hydroelectric project at Neck Lake, a 1,000 acre lake located 1.5 miles southwest of the community of Whale Pass on Prince of Wales Island.
The Project would supply power to the community of Whale Pass, and would offset diesel generation, which is currently the sole source of electricity. The relatively high and modulated
flows from the lake combined with the steep drop at the lower end of the outlet stream provide a good opportunity for a small run-of-river hydroelectric development. Facilities would
include an access road, intake structure, 400 feet of penstock, a containerized power plant, a tailrace channel, and upgrade of 4 miles of transmission line. The hydroelectric facilities
will be designed to avoid interference with the existing salmon rearing and collection facilities operated at Neck Lake by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA).
AP&T conducted a reconnaissance study of the site in 2008, and determined that there is sufficient potential to almost always provide enough generation for Whale Pass loads (see Section
7- Appendices for a copy of the reconnaissance report). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization and lower rates for AP&T?s Whale Pass customers.
The Kenai Winds project is a 9MW wind energy generation facility located in the Nikiski Industrial Area, in Nikiski, on the Kenai peninsula. The project will consist of 5-6 wind turbines
disbursed throughout the site.
The project will be located in the City of Kake, and will serve the entire Kake community. The City of Kake, the Organized Village of Kake and Kake Tribal Corporation have committed
to a joint effort, sponsored by the City Council of Tlingit and Haida, the Applicant for this Grant, to implement this project. The project involves the installation of commercially
viable, modular technology consisting of a biomass gasifier combustor system (in use for 10+ years) integrated with hot water electrical generating equipment (in use for 20+ years)
to provide lower cost electric power generation to remote villages in Alaska that presently rely on high cost diesel fuel to meet their energy needs, for both heating and power. This
system is easily replicated in any village or for a particular business operation, the equipment is available within 16 weeks of order, can be installed in less than 12 months and the
system can be immediately operational once installed.
The project will be co-located with a planned parking garage on University land, adjacent to and west of Providence Hospital. The project will contain two gas turbine generators each
with a heat recovery boiler and a thermal distribution system that will connect Providence Hospital and UAA buildings to the plant. It will serve the UMED district with thermal energy
and the exclusive service territory of ML&P with electricity. ML&P, UAA and Providence are involved in the grant project. Other institutions may become involved as thermal customers
to the project based upon their own schedule and requirements.
$8,588,000 in construction funding is being requested by the Kipnuk Light and Power Utility Board to build a wind-diesel- heat and power system. This system will reduce diesel fuel consumption
used for both power generation and heating for 180-residences by 40%. The wind system will generate 4,000,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity. The wind energy will displace (save)
200,000 gallons of diesel fuel, 75,000 gallons of which is now being used to generate power, and 125,000 gallons of which will be captured and stored for use as heat.
Astronomical heating costs are inspiring new creativity in planning for sustainable and affordable energy sources for our community in Cordova, Alaska. Affordable fuel sources have
been identified: waste cardboard that is currently taken to the landfill and wood waste generated at the community burn pile. Historically, the community has squandered these potential
energy sources. The burn pile will better serve the community when transitioned from a community dump into local-source heating fuel. The community will also save valuable landfill
space by diverting waste cardboard into a fuel source. The purpose of this project is to 1) quantify 2) design and 3) deploy a system that will re-use these valuable resources currently
being wasted. The wood and cardboard waste will become fuel for a biomass boiler to heat our community through a district heating network. Potential buildings include the city hall,
pool, hospital and schools. We need financial assistance to fully develop this project, which can then become self-sustaining. The feasibility study will quantify the avaliable BTUs
that can be generated by our waste stream, and the potential methods of fuel treatment and system equipment.
The project is located at Camp Hill near Wireless Point, approximately seven miles south of Cordova, Alaska. Because of high electricity costs ($.50/kWh winter and $.22/kWh summer after
PCE credits), Cordova needs to develop other local energy sources to offset running diesel generators - especially in the winter months when hydro power disappears. The wind energy
program will 1) complete the Camp Hill wind farm project design and permits, 2) improve wind data maps through a mobile 10-meter anemometer tower project, 3) initiate a wind farm pilot
project and a marine-based pilot project, 4) drive community involvement and education, 5) adopt best-known methods from other successful wind projects, 6) determine whether the wind
farm will be built and operated by Native Village of Eyak or Cordova Electric Co-Op and 7) set the stage for construction and implementation. The project will provide low-cost electricity
for all members of the Cordova Electric Co-Operative power grid.
The Little Port Walter (LPW) Marine Station is a research unit of Akune Bay Laboratories located 110 miles south of Juneau near the sourhern tip of Baranof island. LPW is the oldest
year-round biological research station in Alaska and has been the host of a wide variety of fisheries research projects since 1934. Electric power is currently provided for the site
by a diesel engine generator. Oil is used for building heating. An existing dam on the outlet of Lake Osprey on the north shore of Port Walter inlet could be utilized to provide electric
power for LPW through a small hydro turbine generator. Electrical service would require a transmission lind under the Port Walter Inlet and across a peninsula to the research center.
Ameresco would conduct the project evaluation proposed in this grant application to determine the viability of this hydroelectric project. Current electric consumption for LPW is
about 35 kW. The proposed hydroelectric project would include converstion of LPW to all electric energy systems to increase the average electrical consumption rate to 70 kW.
Terror Lake is KEA\'s primary generation source, and is located approximately 25 miles southwest of the City of Kodiak within the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge. This hydroelectric
facility is the cornerstone to KEA\'s Vision Statement: Endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost effective renewable power solutions by the year 2020, by providing base load
capacity to backup other forms of renewable energy. The power output of Terror Lake can be increased or decreased by dispatch to control the amount of total power on the grid. This
attribute of hydropower allows KEA to integrate the more variable sources of renewable energy, such as wind and tidal energy, onto its isolated grid. In addition to this stabilizing
capability, the Terror Lake reservoir itself acts like a battery for KEA\'s other renewable energy projects. This synergistic integration of wind and hydro power is an excellent renewable
energy solution for other communities in Alaska. The current capaity of Terror Lake has been surpassed by Kodiak\'s growing load demand. Without the additional hydropower capacity,
the synergistic relationship of more renewable variable energy sources and water cannot be fully realized.
Baranof Island Housing Authority (BIHA) proposes to select up to three models of marketed air-source heat pumps and install them in up to 12 BIHA owned residential homes in Sitka, Alaska
that are presently heated with fuel oil boiler systems in order to evaluate their effectiveness in reducing household heating water costs. Additionally, heat pump domestic hot water
systems will be evaluated for cost effectiveness against conventional electric hot water tanks for determining most cost efective replacement of current fuel oil boiler domestic hot
water systems.
The Native Village of Cantwell wishes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwells power system. Currently they obtain power from the line between MEA
and GVEA (Alaska Intertie System). To accomplish this they propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River, a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this
plant will be in exccess of 1 MW. It will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
The Business Operating Plan provides a guideline fo the Akiachak Native Community Electric Company ("the Utility") Proposing a combinations for all three project descriptions, Reconnaissance;
Resource Assessment/ Feasibilty Analysis/Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; and/or Construction for the wind turbine for Akiachak Native Community Electric Company. The
ANCEC will be responsible to operate and sustain the newly installed Wind Turbine and associated electric power to save fuel and reduce fuel costs for the generators. The newly Akiachak
Electric Wind Turbine project will be located in Akiachak Alaska about 18 air mles east of Bethel, and Alaska Energy Authority will be involved in the grand project. Akiachak Native
Community Electric Company needs an alternative energy to determine its best and most sustainable energy here in village of Akiachak, and through this energy development project plan
the community feasibility of installing long term energy facility in order to reduce fuel costs and reduce over all cost of energy.
This project involves placing supplemental cord wood fired boilers at the school site. The supplemental heating system would be located at the Thorne Bay School in the City of Thorne
Bay on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska. The project would also serve the residents of the City of Thorne Bay. The entities involved in this project would be Southeast Island
School District, an engineering firm, local contractors, and the Alaska Energy Authority; We would rely on Alaska Energy Authority for guidance with the project.
This application addresses a first phase in implementing the AVCP Calista Regional Biennial Energy Plan 2008 - 2010 involving a feasibility level analysis to be conducted by the AVCP
Regional Housing Authority for Renewable Energy Deployment for the Kuskokwim Region involving Hydroelectric Power, Wind and Solar Energy, Biomass Heating, including Regional Utility
Consolidation Plan and Development for Bethel and villages along the Kuskokwim River. As a first effort, engineering, including geophysical and geotechnical analysis is proposed to
be undertaken to determine the feasibility and deployment requirements, including environmental permitting required to facilitate development of a Kiseralik River hydroelectric project
for the communities in the Kuskokwim River Region. The study will also review the technical merits of the Chikuminuk hydropower project in view of technological advances that may have
transpired in the transmission of electricity. This effort also includes the determination of power generation and distribution systems required to interconnect communities of the
Kuskokwim region with transmission interties from a regional hydroelectric utility. This project also proposes to outline the planning, organizational and development requirements
for consolidating the local utilities into a regional wholesale non-profit utility for the operation and management of a regional hydroelectric generation and transmission system.
This project proposes to bring together in a planning and development process the regional non-profit organizations, tribal governments and local utilities proposed to be affected by
a regional hydroelectric development project.
This proposed Biomass project will focus on conducting a feasibility analysis and the developing a conceptual design of two wood burners for the community of Kasaan. The project will
be located in the village of Kasaan on the Southeast side of Prince of Wales Island in southern Southeast Alaska. The Organized Village of Kasaan (OVK), a federally recognized Tribe
is the applicant organization. OVK will work closely with the City of Kasaan in the successful completion of this project.
One wood burner will be designed to heat all of the community buildings in Kasaan (school, city offices, medical clinic, Tribal offices, community library, and community hall). The
second wood burner will be constructed on a separate site in Kasaan to heat a cultural- and eco-tourism lodge that is in the design phase and will be owned and operated by the Tribe
as the primary economic development focal point for the community.
The wood fired supplemental heating system would be located at the Howard Valentine School Site in the City of Coffman Cove on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska. The project
would also serve the residents of the City of Coffman Cove. The entities involved in this project would be Southeast Island School District, a design engineering firm, local contractors,
and the Alaska Energy Authority. We would rely on Alaska Energy Authority for guidance with the project. The use of wood biomass (cordwood) to heat the school will replace 85% of the
fuel oil consumption. The project involves placing one thermal storage type wood-fired hydronic heating unit adjacent to the school site and running underground insulated pipes from
the woodfired heater to interface with the school?s heating system. Heat energy from biomass will significantly decrease heating costs for the school. Wood is available from waste from
local saw mills, USFS small sales, from wood left behind in landings, and from small local firewood cutters.
The project, located in Valdez, Alaska, will take waste heat generated by the Petro Star Refinery. Waste heat will be collected by a shell and tube glycol medium recovery system. The
medium will drive two technologies operated in series.
Amonia absorption technology will create cooling for a 45 million pound -20 degree F cold storage. An Organic Rankine Cycle Generator will use the medium once it has exited the smmonia
absorption system to create 600 Kw\'s of power which will be used to operate the cold storage facility. The final benefit will be to use the sold cycle on the generator to create a
salmon rearing facility.
The proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 11841 (Project) is located near the southeast end of Revillagigedo Island, approximately four miles east of the City of Ketchikan,
Alaska. KPU proposes to install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at KPU?s existing Whitman Lake Dam to provide an additional source of clean renewable energy to KPU?s customers,
in the city of Ketchikan and the Ketchikan Gateway Borough area including Saxman Village, while also enhancing the conversion of oil heat to electric heat and displacing expensive and
non-renewable diesel generation. The Project will be interconnected to KPU?s existing distribution system and the grant project will involve KPU.
The installation of this wind power project will provide a maximum output of 1,170 kW to the Nome Joint Utility electric grid in Nome, Alaska over a 20 year extendable project timeframe.
The owners of the project are committed to sell the energy at a price below the avoided cost calculations, even without any grant funding. Grant funding will allow further reduction
in the price of approximately $0.03 per kWH for every one million in grant funds. Selling the energy at a rate below avoided costs will provide savings to the utility to help to lower
the energy costs in the Nome area and provide some energy produced locally that is not dependent on imported oil. Furthermore, this project helps enable future village installations
in the region by helping with a base of operations, spare parts location, local training facility and regional hub. Providing for renewable energy projects in villages should help
reduce the dependency on oil in those locations where oil must be flown or barged in and ultimately help reduce energy rates in those locations as well.
The Grant Lake site facility would be constructed with a dam at the upper falls and diversion tunnel to maximize the power potential at approximately 3.12 MW (397 feet-net head). However,
to minimize the impact on salmon resources in Grant River below the dam site the construction as proposed would consist of a canal from behind the dam to an intake structure located
in an adjacent dry channel.
The Nushagak Area Hydropower Project will initially serve the communities of Aleknagik, Dillingham, and Kanakanak in the Nushagak and Wood River areas. This third phase with inter-tie
(phase four) is estimated to cost $38 million together and replace 700,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually, for a yearly savings of $2,947,000 at today?s fuel prices. Currently all
power in the area is generated with diesel by Nushagak Cooperative (NETC), with a current residential rate at $0.463 cents per kilowatt hour. Nushagak Cooperative would develop, maintain,
and operate the Lake Elva facility and associated infrastructure.
The proposed project would be located in an unincorporated area, northeast of the City of Petersburg, Alaska. Development of hydroelectric power at the site would include construction
of a lake tap, arch dam, unlined tunnel, power penstock, power plant, tailrace, and transmission line segments.
Bethel Wind Power Project Times 4 calls for the purchase and installation of four 100kW wind turbines, tubular towers, foundations, and related appurtenances on land owned by the city
of Bethel. The City of Bethel will own, operate, and maintain all four wind turbines and act as an independent power producer by selling 100% of the electricity generated to the privately
owned utility in Bethel. The regulated electric utility is Bethel Utilities Corporation.
Project consists of a combination of Solar and Wind power to offset the high cost of electricity to run City Hall, the washeteria and the Water Plant. The equipment providing this power
would be adjacent and/or attached to the City Hall. The project manager and other needed project employees would be hired from the community. This project would serve the community
of Ambler by way of a more efficiently run City Government. To lower the cost of running our City government and Water-sewer-plant is the most important work we have in front of us.
Without this to offset the cost, the plant may have to be closed down. Current cost for water and sewer in Ambler is $ 120.00/household and actual cost to balance the budget would
be about 400.00/household.
Wind Energy! Wind turbine system at vacinity community location Napaskiak, AK about 7 miles below Bethel, Alaska which service over 100 customers to commercial to residence. Wasteheat
from generators to heat nearby facility-church, garage.
The Delta/Greely School District proposes a Wood Chip Boiler Heating System to heat 77,000 sq. ft. of educational space in the sub-arctic. The building would be located 50 feet away
from the Delta High School new mechanical room. This Wood Chip Boiler Heating System constructs and installs the following: Cement building to house wood chip boiler, chip storage
room, 4 chip storage trailers, and a chip feeding and chip drying process. The direct impact of this Wood Chip Boiler Heating System will be the Delta High School complex staff and
students as well as the community groups that use this facility on a weekly basis. The following communities are served by this facility: Delta Junction, Fort Greely Garrison and
its contractors, Gerstle River, and the greater Deltana area. The businesses, non-profit agencies, Farm Forum, Relay for Life, Fish and Game, Department of Motor Vehicles, Delta Chamber
of Commerce, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts to name a few groups. All use the Delta High School complex during the year. Finally, the following groups will be involved in this project:
Delta/Greely School District (DGSD), the Delta/Greely School Board, DGSD Facilities Committee, Alaska Department of Natural Resources Forestry, CTA, CE2 Engineers, T.R. Miles Technical
Consultants, Delta Logging and Milling Associates, and USKH (an architecture, engineering, land surveying and planning company).
The proposed hybrid ground source heat pump system at the new Dimond Park Aquatic Center is to be located in Juneau?s Mendenhall Valley, adjacent the new Thunder Mountain High School
and Riverbend Elementary on the Dimond Park site. The facility will primarily serve Juneau residents, but will also serve visitors from nearby southeast Alaska communities and other
visitors to Juneau. The City & Borough of Juneau Engineering and Parks and Recreation Departments are directly involved with the design and construction of the facility, as is the Juneau
School District. A professional design team led by local architectural firm Jensen Yorba Lott, Inc. is responsible for the project design and construction administration. The City &
Borough of Juneau Engineering Department is responsible for design and construction management and progress reports to grant agencies as required. The City & Borough of Juneau Finance
Department is responsible for project funding and financial reporting to grant agencies as required.
The Smart Grid consists of a network of advanced meters, which receive information about the availability of green, or excess wind energy and make this energy available to the community
at reduced rates ,and enable devices to capture this energy. The meters communicate wirelessly, provide a user interface for customers, and account for energy sold at different rates.
The devices that are located in the homes of 20 village elders, and these stoves capture and store excess wind energy for later use. The Smart Metering and the stoves create a system
that allows wind energy to be sold as heat for 1/2 the cost of diesel heating.
GVEA has been monitoring the wind resource at the Eva Creek Site since 2003 or five years and has found a resource with approximately a 33% to 36% capacity factor. The Eva Creek Wind
Project?s proximity to the Northern Intertie is key to its value, making the interconnection viable. The site is located on the east side of the Nenana River near Ferry, Alaska, in
the GVEA service territory in the Interior. The area could support up to 150 MW of wind generation but GVEA would like to start by installing a 24 MW wind project.
Golden Valley Electric Association proposes the construction of a solar water heating system to be used by the Denali Education Center (DEC). This proposed solar water heating system
would be used to displace fossil fuel energy (specifically, electricity) that is currently used to heat water and space for these end-users. DEC is a non-profit research, education
and communication organization with cooperative interaction to Denali National Park and all its summer-time visitors. The DEC\'s campus serves people who visit and stay there during
the summer tourist season. There are 13 cabins on the campus, a campus center and other outbuildings. Currently, the peak number who lodge and work at the Center during the summer
in about 75 people, with an anticipated near-future growth up to 100 people. GVEA also plans to work ABS Alaskan and Jim Norman, principal and owner.
The Smart Grid consists of a network of advanced meters, which receive information about the availability of green, or excess wind energy and make this energy available to the community
at reduced rates, and enable devices to capture this energy. The meters communicate wirelessly, provide a user interface for customers and account for energy sold at different rates.
The meters can be programmed for prepayment. The Smart Grid enables 20 thermal storage devices that are located in the homes of 20 village elders and these stoves capture and store
excess wind energy for later use. The Smart Metering and the stoves create a system that allows wind energy to be sold as heat for 1/2 the cost of diesel heating.
The installation of this wind power project will provide a maximum output of 1,170 kW to the Nome Joint Utility electric grid in Nome, Alaska over a 20 year extendable project timeframe.
The owners of the project are committed to sell the energy at a price below the avoided cost calculations, even without any grant funding. Grant funding will allow further reduction
in the price of approximately $0.03 per kWH for every one million in grant funds. Selling the energy at a rate below avoided costs will provide savings to the utility to help to lower
the energy costs in the Nome area and provide some energy produced locally that is not dependent on imported oil. Furthermore, this project helps enable future village installations
in the region by helping with a base of operations, spare parts location, local training facility and regional hub. Overall, this project provides a cash and tax credit based revenue
stream, provides jobs and keeps money working in the community while increasing overall power generation reliability by producing it locally. Banner Wind LLC (jointly owned by Bering
Straits Native Corporation and Sitnasuak Native Corporation) owns the wind farm while the construction and initial operations are managed by Western Community Energy LLC. The profits
from the project which are ultimately distributed to the shareholders of BSNC and SNC will help provide income to an area where many have very limited incomes.
The NPEP Waste Heat Recovery Project consists of installing 520\' of underground supply and return piping, a glycol distribution piping system inside NPPP, installing 12 glycol unit
heaters with VFDs, and VAC controls. GVEA will manage and administrate the project, perform the electrical/control installation, commissioning, and startup of the system. The mechanical
portion of the work will be performed by a mechanical contractor. Electric power conservation/fuel savings will benefit all of GVEA\'s 33,000 members from Cantwell to Delta Junction.
The Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (?Reynolds Creek? or the ?Project?) is a 5.0 MW hydroelectric resource to be constructed on Prince of Wales Island approximately ten miles east
of Hydaburg. The Project will interconnect with the existing transmission grid on the island and will be used by the residents and businesses of Craig, Klawock, Hollis, Hydaburg, Thorne
Bay, and Kasaan. In addition, once the interconnected grid is expanded to Coffman Cove and Naukati, those two communities will also directly benefit from Reynolds Creek. The Project
will be constructed and owned by the Haida Power, Inc., a joint venture between the Haida Corporation and Alaska Power & Telephone.
The Pillar Mountain Wind project is KEA\'s next step to achieve its Vision Statement "Endeavor to produce 95% of energy sales with cost effective renewable power solutions by the year
2020. This renewable energy project will consist of three 1.5 MW General Electric (GE) SLE wind turbines. It is estimated that this project will produce 15.6 million kWh\'s annually
and thereby eliminate over 1.2 million gallons of diesel each year. The wind project will utilize the 20MW Terror Lake Hydroelectric facility as an energy storage system to mitigate
the fluctuations of wind power. Wind and water will work in concert together to produce an estimated 91% of our current power generation needs. This renewable energy project will benefit
the City of Kodiak; United States Coast Guard Integrated Support Command Kodiak, Bells Flats and Russian Creek areas, as well as the villages of Chiniak, Pasagshak and Port Lions.
This project will consist of twenty (20) wind turbines to make a collective 2MW "wind farm" in Delta Junction and will be the first project of its kind to integrate into the Railbelt
Grid using an "experimental" program by Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA), by using "proven" cold-weather technology (Northwind 100 turbines with direct-drive motors) which
have already been successfully used in Alaska\'s cold weather, as well as a proven "test" turbine (the first of twenty 100kW turbines) at the same location just erected and successfully
tested by GVEA. This will serve all the communities that are on the Railbelt Grid and can produce enough electricity to power 600 homes each year without any emissions or environmental
harm of any kind. Mike Craft, Managing Partner for Alaska Environmental Power, LLC (AEP) will be spearheading this project as its P.M. (Project Manager), in conjunction with Golden
Valley Electric Association (GVEA), and a team of well qualified individuals and businesses necessary for the construction and erection of the wind turbines for final connection to
GVEA\'s power source connecting it to the Railbelt Grid and all those consumers who receive power from the Grid.
The proposed project is to convert biomass (forest products residuals) to liquid fuels, specifically heating fuels and diesel, and electricity through gasification of the biomass and
converting the resulting synthesis gas (SynGas) to #1 heating fuel and diesel for transportation applications. Electricity is a by-product of the proposed process and will be produced
to meet facility electrical needs with any excess electricity made available to the local utilities. The gasses produced will be converted to liquids fuel using a catalytic conversion
process called Fischer-Tropsch, and the electricity will be produced and generated by capturing the waste heat and making steam through heat exchangers and standard turbines and generators.
The Kenai Winds project is a 15-18MW wind energy generation facility located in the Nikiski Industrial Area, in Nikiski, on the Kenai Peninsula. The project will consist of 10 wind turbines
disbursed throughout the site, electrically interconnected to the Tesoro Alaska Refinery. At times when the Kenai Winds generation exceeds the needs of the refinery, power will be
sold to others. Electric energy will be delivered and sold to the oil refinery, providing low-cost power, and helping ensure the economic viability of the refinery.
The proposed project will take place on the Tanana River adjacent to the community of Nenana. Nenana was chosen due to a combination of strong local support for the project, available
technical assistance and infrastructure, and location on the road system within close proximity to the University of Alaska Fairbanks. This project will be administered by the Alaska
Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, with significant contributions from the University of Maine, Yukon River Intertribal Watershed Council, the
Tribal and City Councils of Nenana, and Ocean Renewable Power Corporation (ORPC). The primary purpose of the project is to successfully address the numerous challenges associated with
installing hydrokinetic devices in Alaska?s riverine environments. This will be accomplished through a comprehensive resource assessment (biological and physical), followed by the installation
of a ?dummy? open architecture turbine to assess operations in challenging environments (including interactions with ice and debris) without damaging expensive real turbine equipment.
Finally, this project will involve the design, construction, deployment and initial testing of a first commercial hydrokinetic device at the site.
The community of Crooked Creek along the Kuskokwim River, have long been interested in renewable power and have already researched a variety of possibilities, this year?s project initially
will be to develop a finale list of potentially feasible methods, to explore feasibility studies and cost evaluation. We\'ll collect the necessary data by testing the feasibility of
these considerations; by building prototypes that will supply us with the solid data to base our decisions on, to aid us in reduce our dependency on Fossil Fuels. This may require the
combination of available technologies, some we\'re considering are Thermopile technology, Hydro power (four sources available here), Solar power, Wind, Residential producers, Wood
gas and heat power production, We\'ll be verifying permitting requirements, Land right of ways and environmental, permitting obstacles identified. A Full study of Village Creek flow,
explore methods to increase and extend its annual usage. As much as this is a fact finding mission, it is also a call to arms by the population of Crooked Creek. Our IGAP program will,
with this grant, will ready us for all consideration.
The Makushin project?s primary goal is to produce a minimum of 40 MW of power from the geothermal resource and supply that power to the City of Unalaska, independent power producers
and other energy users in the vicinity. The current generating capacity within Unalaska consists of UniSea (Fairbanks- Morris (12? MW)), Westward Seafood (9? MW Wartsila), Alyeska Seafood
(5.5? MW), and the City of Unalaska (currently 7.5 MW; in addition the City has purchased, but not installed, 10 MW capacity Wartsila diesel gensets (and perhaps an additional 10 MW
of diesel generation) for the potential of 44+ MW, in the future which is contemplated to be utilized as emergency back-up generation. The base load of all Unalaska to be supplied by
the Geothermal-electric Project is estimated near 10 mW/hr. The combined base and peak loads are estimated to be near 32 mW/hr. The project could supply more than 50 percent of the
electrical load for the City and other power producers in Unalaska.
Wind Energy Alaska (WEA), plans to construct a 6 megawatt (MW) wind generation facility on CIRI-owned land near the village of Nikolaevsk, located on the southern Kenai Peninsula. The
electricity generated by the project will be interconnected to the Anchor Point Substation, which is owned and operated by the Homer Electric Association (HEA). The project includes
the construction of the wind generation plant, with four 1.5 MW GE wind turbines, a new 1.9 mile access road, and a distribution line approximately 10 miles in length from the plant
to the Anchor Point Substation in Nikolaevsk. HEA is one of the six prime electric cooperatives, or utilities, that serves the Alaska Railbelt transmission grid. HEA is a member owned
electric cooperative that serves most of Alaska?s Kenai Peninsula. HEA serves approximately 20,153 members at 28,547 metered locations, 2,200 miles of energized line, within a service
area of 3,166 square miles. WEA, CIRI, and enXco are project proponents.
Wind Energy Alaska (WEA) wishes to construct a 3.2 megawatt (MW) Landfill Gas (LFG) to Energy Generation Facility at the Anchorage Regional Landfill, located east of the Glenn Highway
near Eagle River, Alaska. The Anchorage Regional Landfill is owned and operated by the Municipality of Anchorage (MOA), Solid Waste Service (SWS). With an in-service date of April,
2010, this project is designed for incremental growth beginning with 3.2 MW and up to 6.4 MW within the next 15 years with additional capacity as needed. Landfill gas flow records and
projected fill rates at the landfill over the next 20 years support the potential for this level of electric power production. MOA would receive royalty payments to compensate for use
of land and LFG for the project. This revenue could be used to offset tipping fees at the landfill to benefit the public. In addition to power generation, the proposed project will
include a heat recovery system that will recover waste heat from the LFG engines to be used in nearby office and storage building presently heated with a natural gas. The natural gas
fuel cost savings will reduce landfill operating costs. The landfill is located near the existing power lines that feed into the electric system and the Railbelt grid. The U.S. Army
Fort Richardson, Elmendorf Air Force Base, ML&P, Chugach Electric Association (CEA), Matanuska Electric Association (MEA), MOA?s Anchorage Regional Landfill and SWS are potential power
customers. WEA has contracted HDR Alaska, Inc. to provide design engineering, permitting, and construction management of the project. HDR has LFG design experience and has assisted
in the development of cost estimates for this project.
The Applicant owns and operates Motherload Lodge located near the Little Susitna River. The 4.9 acre plot of land is privately owned but segments of the proposed project will be located
on land owned by the State of Alaska Park Service. The Motherload Lodge currently utilizes 3 diesel fuel generators to power the facility and accounts for a significant percentage
of annual operating expenses. The company plans to construct a 50kW run of river project on Delia Creek. The proposed project, The Delia Creek Alternative Energy Project (DCAEP),
will utilize water flow from the Delia Creek to power electricity to the Motherload Lodge. The project will include an intake site, underground penstock and powerhouse. The hydroelectric
system will be integrated with the current fuel generator system. Out of the 3 gensets, 2 gensets will be removed immediately and the third genset, replaced with a smaller genset.
DCAEP will be headed by Project Manager, Jill Reese, Owner and sole member of HPML LLC.
Since Napaimute received its land base through unusual means, it was through Administration for Native American funding that survey of its community lands was completed. This enabled
the tribe to open a Home Site Program; people are resettling, the village growing. Napaimute Enterprises sells fuel; operates a small package store; rents cabins and the community
center; operates a sawmill; has a coin-op washer and dryer; and offer showers. Commerce and our economic base are slowly growing, in accordance to our Community Plan. The cost of
providing linked energy to rural Alaskan villages is staggering; individual energy systems must smartly utilize energy by reducing use of petroleum products. Our village, located on
the Kuskokwim River, about 30 miles from Aniak works to be a model village where refuse is contained, development is planned and residents demonstrate their care and respect for the
environment by minimizing their dependence on diesel; this is also a demonstration of the harsh economic environment. Our proposal will serve current and future members of the community
(25 or so residential homes) along with a couple of families that live across the river and the countless river commuters who come to wash clothes and take a shower. NVN?s Director
Development & Operations Mark Leary and Environmental Coordinator Mitchell Dammeyer will be directly involved in the management of this project. Both men are highly respected in the
Kuskokwim and Mr. Leary has overseen most of Napaimute\'s development, literally from the brush up.
The City of St. George operates a traditional diesel power plant which currently uses multiple diesel fueled engine generators to supply all required electric power to the community
of St. George Island. With fuel and fuel handling cost now at historically high levels, the community, through their partner APICDA, seeks technology alternatives to provide long term
fuel-savings impact. As wind/diesel technology has been proven viable in a variety of remote applications in Alaska and internationally, APICDA has allocated resources to determine
if a wind retrofit at St. George can provide a meaningful, cost effective benefit. The City of St. George, APICDA and TDX Power are all involved in delivering a high penetration wind
diesel hybrid project for the community.
This medium penetration wind-diesel and jacket heat recovery project is located on Umnak Island, approximately 100 miles west of Unalaska/Dutch Harbor. The community of Nikolski will
be directly served by this project. In addition, the community of pilots and passengers who make international flights over this area will benefit greatly. A communications gap, long
a problem for international flights, was recently remedied by the installation of communications equipment in Nikolski by the FAA. The Nikolski IRA Council, Chaluka Corporation, the
management of Umnak Power, TDX Power and the Aleutian Pribilof Island Community Development Association/APICDA will be involved in ensuring this project succeeds.
We propose a 2 year project to estimate in-line (hydrokinetic) renewable energy potential for rural Alaska. We will begin creating a list of about 24 sites/communities which appear to
have the greatest potential. We plan to study 8 sites in year 1 and 16 sites in year 2. At this point, Alaska?s larger rivers (i.e., the Yukon, Koyukuk, Kuskokwim and Susitna Rivers)
are obvious places to look for in-stream energy. We will examine available data, and work with project partners (including Re vision, AEA and ANSEP) to come up with a list of river
stretches and community partners. The UAA-SOE Alaska Native Science and Engineering Program (ANSEP) has well established relationships with many communities throughout Alaska and has
agreed to assist the faculty in establishing working relationships with the communities. Following site selection, we will select student research assistants (3 in year 1 and 5 in year
2) who will be trained in hydrographic surveying and velocity measurement. Then, working in cooperation with the communities, we will survey the selected river stretches during the
summer of 2009 and 2010 to obtain bathymetric and current distribution data. Next, using data from United States Geological Survey (USGS) gauging stations, we will estimate the long
term hydrologic (i.e, elocity/depth) conditions at the selected rural sites. The USGS provides discharge rates at nearly 400 sites around the state, covering most river systems. The
long-term velocity/depth distribution data obtained will be used to determine the hydrokinetic energy available for power generation.
The Fishhook Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in Hatcher Pass, Alaska. The project will be located on a combination of mostly state land and some
borough land off Hatcher Pass Road. Energy from the project would be provided into the Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid. Fishhook Renewable Energy, LLC (FRE) is the project
proponent, and would contribute funding, own, and operate the project. FRE has already completed reconnaissance, feasibility, and conceptual design efforts, and is currently in the
permitting and contract negotiation processes for the project. With timely completion of permitting, contract negotiations, and financing, construction will occur in 2009. Final design
would be completed by members of FRE. Construction would be completed by qualified contractors and subcontractors selected through a competitive bidding process.
The Fourth of July Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located near Seward, Alaska. The project would be located east of the Spring Creek Correctional Facility,
across Resurrection Bay from the city of Seward. Energy from the project would be provided into the Seward Electric System grid. Independence Power, LLC (IP) is the project developer,
and would contribute funding and own and operate the project. IP would manage the pre-construction study process, completing some efforts internally, and contracting out other activities
to qualified consultants as appropriate. Construction would be completed by qualified contractors selected through a competitive bidding process.
Rural residents in NW Alaska are facing some of the highest costs anywhere in the nation. In order to proactively address the region?s energy crisis, Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA)
is working to implement long term energy options. While there are a variety of alternative energy options available to the Kotzebue region, such as wind, solar, and geothermal; wind
energy has a proven track record of success in this community. The goals of the proposed project are: To increase the wind capacity of KEA from 1.14 MW to 4.39 MW using 5 Fuhrlander
650kWs; To integrate the increased wind capacity with a 600 kW / 1800 kWh Vanadium Red- Ox Flow Battery; To utilize the excess electricity in a distributed heating system. This is
a two year project. Year one involves performing all pre-construction and foundation construction tasks. Year two involves the wind turbine erection and commissioning.
This proposal is to enhance and expand the first in-stream hydrokinetic energy conversion device successfully deployed in the United States in Ruby, Alaska. In the summer of 2008, the
Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council (YRITWC), along with the Tribe and City of Ruby, the local electric utility (owned and operated by the City of Ruby), and ABS Alaskan, deployed,
tested, and removed a 5 kW Encurrent vertical axis hydrokinetic turbine in the Yukon River at Ruby, Alaska, before winter ice formation. Based on the performance of the 5 kW turbine,
and modeling feasibility for a larger system with a turbine re-designed to optimally perform at a lower current speed, in 2010 we will install a 25 kW version of the hydrokinetic turbine.
All project partners will remain in place, along with Terrasond and re vision LLC, who will assist with resource assessment and feasibility analysis.
Kotzebue Electric Association?s Cost of Energy Reduction Program will achieve a 25% reduction is diesel based power by installing, in part, a Vanadium Red-Ox Flow Battery Energy Storage
System (VRFB) which will be able to provide 600 kW of power for three hours. This battery bank will increase voltage stability, increase the efficiencies of operating diesel generators,
and capture excess wind energy during off-peak hours. While this installation will serve Kotzebue, the demonstrated technology could offer significant benefits to other villages as
more wind energy is harnessed. The VRFB will benefit the KEA existing system in three specific ways. Diesel turbines run most efficiently when operating to the fullest capacity. Charging
the battery, when the generator would otherwise operate below ideal conditions, will increase overall system efficiency. Secondly, KEA runs one EMD year round and supplements this with
a second CAT generator when the load demands it. Instead of starting the second generator, the VRFB will supply the electricity. Normally, the CAT gen set is run approximately 3,200
hrs per year. This will be reduced less than 350 hrs per year with the VRFB online. This results to a direct reduction in diesel consumption. Thirdly, in order to realize the benefits
of increasing the level of wind penetration in Kotzebue, energy storage MUST be utilized. The simple payback for the VRFB is under three years.
High-efficiency solid state ammonia synthesis (SSAS) will be advanced from laboratory to proof of- concept and pre-commercialization pilot-plant stage. An SSAS module will be built,
capable of synthesizing anhydrous ammonia (NH3) at ~10 kWe input from renewable-source electric energy, fresh water, and atmospheric nitrogen. The NH3 will be stored in a pressurized
steel tank, and will fuel an internal-combustion-engine (ICE) generating set delivering to the utility electricity grid or isolated load. A complete system will be located in Juneau
at the Alaska Electric Light & Power (AEL&P) site. The proposed system will model a village-scale system that could store enough surplus renewable-source energy, as liquid NH3 in surface
tanks, to supply the village?s total year-round energy needs as firm energy, assuming enough local renewable energy production capacity is in place to generate this total energy. The
goal is village and other ?energy island? energy independence via renewable-source energy and annual-scale firming storage, replacing all diesel electricity generation and oil heating.
Deploying the project initially at AEL&P allows hydro energy input and lower project technical risk via Juneau?s benign climate and favorable transportation access; the project may
later be relocated to a smaller community for further evaluation and test.
The project will be located at a site yet to be determined within the Alaska state boundaries. Once the exact site location is determined, then an evaluation of the communities to be
served can be provided. Also involved in this project will be contractors and subcontractors to be hired for various engineering, design, construction and supply aspects related to
the project activities. Specifically, Ormat will be working with Precision Power LLC who will be the construction contractor for this project to perform the construction of the project
on site.
AGE?s management and engineering team in collaboration with the UAA School of Engineering is proposing this PROJECT that when proven will provide rural communities with Coal Bed Methane
(CBM) resources an inexpensive energy source that will provide sustainable heat and power 24/7 365 days a year. This PROJECT will develop an Arctic Ready Combined Heat and Power Unit
powered by CBM gas that will have direct application to rural communities with viable CBM resources. The PROJECT has three parallel components with appropriate milestones.
This project is located in Girdwood. AGE proposes to install a natural gas powered CHP plant with its efficiency enhanced by the TEG unit that will provide heat and power to Girdwood
Elementary and the Girdwood public by feeding power into the local electrical grid. Thermal energy will be provided to Girdwood Elementary for space heating, snow melt, and heated pedestrian
walkways as well as the research center itself. Two micro-hydro projects located at California and Virgin Creeks will provide hydro power generation to supplement the CHP/TPG plant
during periods of sufficient flow estimated at 8 months per year. This Construction Project is based on reconnaissance level findings.
Noatak is a village that can benefit from solar energy. It is proposed that a grid tied, battery-less
50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power plant and tank farm in Noatak . It consists of 225ea 224-watt panels on adjustable 6,300 ft2 racking mounted
on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation. Each adjustable array utilizes one 7000 watt inverter providing 277 VAC power.
Shungnak is a village that can benefit from solar energy. It is proposed that a grid tied, battery-less 50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power
plant and tank farm. It consists of 225ea 224-watt solar panels on an adjustable 6300 ft2 rack that is supported on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation. Multiple 7000 watt inverters
provide 277 VAC power.
Noatak is a village that can benefit from solar energy. It is proposed that a grid tied, battery-less
50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power plant and tank farm in Noatak . It consists of 225ea 224-watt panels on adjustable 6,300 ft2 racking mounted
on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation. Each adjustable array utilizes one 7000 watt inverter providing 277 VAC power.
Ambler is a village that can benefit from solar energy. It is proposed that a grid tied, battery-less
50.4 kW photovoltaic system be installed on property adjacent to the AVEC power plant and tank farm in Ambler. It consists of 225 ea 224-watt panels on adjustable 6300 ft2 racking mounted
directly on a Triodetic Multipoint foundation system. Each adjustable array utilizes one 7000 watt inverter providing 277 VAC power.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) proposes a resource assessment/feasibility analysis/conceptual design project of hydropower sites in the Upper Kobuk region. We will evaluate
at least twelve sites regarding their hydroelectric potential and will create conceptual designs for the most promising sites. The project will potentially serve the communities Kobuk,
Ambler, Shungnak, and Kiana, as well as possible future industrial developments, which for the purposes of this application, will be referred to collectively as the Upper Kobuk region.
Key partners in the project will include NANA Pacific/NANA Regional Corporation, NovaGold/Mantra Mining and additional engineering consultants.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) proposes a 300 kW run of the river hydroelectric plant with a diversion structure, pipeline, powerhouse, and electric line in Old Harbor.
The project involves collecting up to 7 cfs of water year round from a tributary (Mountain Creek) of Barling Bay Creek and transporting it across a basin boundary to Big Creek. This
project will provide for most of the electrical needs of Old Harbor. AVEC will employ consultants and contractors as needed to complete the Project. AVEC may utilize local or other
personnel for project maintenance.
This project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of two wind turbines to supplement the existing power generation and distribution
system for the community of Mekoryuk. Participants in the project include AVEC, STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management and electrical system engineering
for the project. STG will be the general contractor, responsible for the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbines, and installation of all ancillary
electrical systems. Northern Power will provide Northwind 100 wind turbines and startup and commissioning services. Site control has already been completed. The foundation design is
completed. Permitting is underway, having already relocated the turbines in response to input from Fish & Wildlife.
This project involves the final design, permitting, construction, erection, startup, and commissioning of one additional wind turbine to supplement the existing power generation and
distribution system for the community of Toksook Bay. Participants in the project include AVEC, STG, and Northern Power. AVEC will provide overall project management and electrical
system engineering for the project. STG will be the general contractor, responsible for the design and installation of all civil works, erection of the wind turbine, and installation
of all ancillary electrical systems. Northern Power will provide the Northwind 100 wind turbine and startup & commissioning services. The site is already under control and already contains
three Northwind 100 wind turbines. Existing permits are in place and can be extended to cover the additional turbines.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative is proposing to complete design, permitting and installation of three Northern 100B Wind Turbines, and new control modules, to provide wind power
to the community of Quinhagak, which is located on the coast of the Bering Sea, west of Bethel in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta area.
The Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) Solid Waste Services Department (SWS) intends to develop an electric power generating plant to be located at the Anchorage Regional Landfill (ARL).
The plant will use landfill gas (LFG), a byproduct of anaerobic waste decomposition, as its primary fuel. Electricity generated by the project will be sold and delivered to the Matanuska
Electric Association (MEA) distribution system to provide power to Eagle River and Southcentral Alaska. SWS will negotiate a power sales agreement with the end power user, likely MEA,
and select of a development partner to design, build and operate the plant.
The Bethel Wind Project is designed to contribute clean, renewable wind power to the Bethel energy grid. The project area is about 1.5 miles northwest of the Bethel Airport on hilltop
land owned by Bethel Native Corporation. Our power will be sold wholesale to BUC for distribution to its customers as normal. The size of our project is dependent on our ability to
sell power, not on the wind resource, but we expect that a two MW project will be viable. The communities served could include Napakiak and Bethel.
The Delta Wind Project is designed to contribute clean, renewable wind power to the railbelt energy grid. The project area is about 25 miles south of Delta Junction on Coal Mine Road.
We are currently funding an Interconnection Study with Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) to identify costs associated with putting wind power on their transmission system near
Delta Junction. The results of the interconnection study will be used to formulate a power tariff for sale of our power to GVEA. The size of our project is dependent on our ability
to sell power, not on the wind resource, but we expect that a 40 to 50 MW project could be achievable. The communities served will include all communities within the GVEA?s service
area that purchase power from GVEA, including Delta Junction, North Pole, Fairbanks, Fox, College, Nenana, and Healy, as well as two major gold mines, Fort Knox and Pogo.
Replace diesel generation of electricity for the community of Tenakee Springs with renewable hydroelectric power. The City of Tenakee Springs proposes to construct a hydroelectric project
on Indian River. This will be a low head, run-of-river plant displacing the use of at least 33,000 gallons of diesel fuel. Design, engineering, and construction will involve the City
of Tenakee Springs, multiple state and federal agencies, private contractors, and the Alaska Energy Authority.
This project is a regional Resource Assessment/Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual design of Wind Power opportunities around the Lake & Peninsula Borough. It is designed to build upon existing
wind resource assessment efforts, including wind met tower data in some communities, as well as data from existing micro-scale (10kW) wind turbines that are in operation.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough seeks funding for design and permitting to install High Efficiency Low Emissions (HELE) wood boilers in five communities in the Lake and Peninsula Borough
providing heat to the local school and adjacent teacher housing. The communities to be considered are Pedro Bay, Newhalen/Iliamna, Nondalton, Kokhanok and Port Alsworth. The schools
in these communities served 225 children in the 07-08 school year.
The proposed project is a wind/hydro hybrid intertie feasibility study for Chignik Bay, Chignik Lagoon and Chignik Lake (hereafter ?Chigniks?.) There is existing wind data confirming
class 5 wind in the area, strong enough to be a good energy source. Part of the feasibility study will involve determining the most advantageous site for wind turbines by collecting
supplemental met data. The Chignik Alaska Draft Small Hydropower Feasibility Report and EIS, by the Army Corps of Engineers, July 1984, evaluated hydro resources at Packers Creek,
Mud Bay Lake and Indian Creek. The study found that Indian Creek had the best potential for economical development. The Lake and Peninsula Borough will provide management for the
project, overseeing the work of HDR Alaska who will act as the owner representative in developing the feasibility study for a wind/hydro intertie project.
McGrath Light and Power (ML &P) is proposing a heat recovery project. Direct beneficiaries of this project include the Iditarod Area School District (IASD) McGrath complex, and three
commercial facilities adjacent to the ML&P power plant. Indirect beneficiaries include all ML&P electric customers, as the project will provide increased revenues from the sale of recovered
heat, as well as improved electric generating efficiency and reduced operations and maintenance costs. ML&P will be the Grantee under the Renewable Energy Fund. ML&P has teamed up with
the engineering firm of Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E). AE&E has a long history of successful energy related projects throughout Alaska, and has worked with both ML&P and
IASD on numerous projects dating back to 1995.
This project will convert readily available biomass to a producer gas (wood gasification) that will be used to reduce diesel fuel consumption at the Yakutat Power plant. The Biomax 75
is based on proven technology with recent additional improvements for use in cold weather climates. Direct beneficiaries of this project include all Yakutat Power electric service customers.
Participants in the project include Yakutat Power, the City and Borough of Yakutat, the U.S. Forestry Service, National Park Service, and Community Power Corp - the Biomax 75 developer.
This project will be located in the upper Kobuk River Valley and will serve the villages of Kobuk, Shungnak, and Ambler. The applicant is Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority; other cooperating
organizations include NANA Regional Corporation, Maniilaq Association, NANAPacific, WHPacific Inc., and Kobuk, Shungnak and Ambler Village Councils. An initial woody biomass site assessment
was sponsored by NANAPacific in August, 2008 under a Department of Energy Tribal Energy Grant. Bill Wall, PhD conducted an initial reconnaissance study to determine the viability of
a wood energy project. The study determined that a wood energy program is viable and that all three of the villages are very interested in proceeding. The proposed project will develop
following analysis and fully complete a reconnaissance and feasibility study.
The project proposed is a small, 271-kW, cross-flow turbine, generation system with a darn and power which utilizes hydro-electric stored kinetic energy in a reservoir dam on Chuniisax
Creek approximately 3/4-mile southwest of the old Atka village site and replacement electrical distribution system. The project will displace use of high cost fossil fuels with a renewable
energy resource using proven technology. Energy costs to all users in Atka will be significantly reduced while providing the current and future energy requirements. The village has
secured additional funding from EDA to complete the most of the remaining 55%. (45% was previously completed using RUS, AEA, and city funding.) This grant plus our cash and in-kind
contribution will complete the balance.
The South Fork hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in Eagle River,
Alaska. The project will be located on a private homestead off Hiland Road in Eagle River. Energy from the project would be provided into the Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid.
South Fork Hydro, LLC (SFH) is the project proponent, and would contribute funding, own, and operate the project. SFH has already completed reconnaissance, feasibility, and permitting
efforts. Final design is currently in progress, and construction is planned for 2009. Final design would be completed by members of South Fork Hydro, LLC. Construction would be completed
by South Fork Construction, Inc., with some construction tasks subcontracted as appropriate.
Rural Alaskans in the Northwest Arctic Borough (NWAB) are facing some of the highest costs anywhere in the nation. This project proposes to: develop the wind energy potential in the
communities of Buckland, Deering, and Noorvik; develop appropriate wind generation engineering plans and designs, and; construct the necessary wind generation facilities (fully integrated
with diesel power systems). This is a two year project. Year one involves performing both pre-construction and construction tasks in Deering and Noorvik as well as pre-construction
tasks in Buckland. Year two involves construction tasks in Buckland.
This project focuses on the development of 1 megawatt of wind power located in an area AEA suspects to be have a Class 7 resource. The location is approximately 14 miles Northwest of
the City of Dillingham, less than 5 miles Northeast of Manakotak, and approximately 8 miles South of Alegnagik near Snake Mountain. Due to the specific need of the development of this
resource for the Healthcare organization, this project will benefit all the communities that rely on the Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation to remain ?the only? critical access medical
facility in the Bristol Bay Region. Although the project is being proposed by a Tribal Organization, it has the support of the local electrical cooperative [Nushagak] as well as many
of the residents of Dillingham. Our project development team has tapped into the resources of TDX, Power Corp., MAP Consulting, STG Inc, and Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation.
Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) proposes to install a biomass heat source for the Yukon-Koyukuk Assisted Living Center, a NAHSDA, Denali Commission, ICDBG, FHLB, and AHFC
funded project that will provide a 9 unit housing complex for the elderly of the Yukon Koyukuk Region. The design includes a multi-purpose area, office space, and dormitory-type housing
for transient village health care workers.
This project is designed to demonstrate power generation using combusted biomass as a heat source to drive an Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) power plant module designed and developed by
United Technologies Corporation. The module is based on the award-winning geothermal power plant installed at Chena Hot Springs Resort; however the biomass version will operate at significantly
higher efficiency. These efficiency improvements are necessary because unlike the geothermal fluid, biomass material is not a ?free? fuel. In addition to being designed for maximum
thermal efficiency, the power plant includes load following capability, and independent, simple, remotely monitored operation at low pressures that do not require special training to
operate. This is important because while the project will be located in North Pole, Alaska, the power plant is specifically designed for rural Alaskan applications. The project will
be constructed and managed by Chena Power, LLC and will be located at the K&K Recycling Facility located at Mile 9 on the Richardson Highway. Design work and assembly of the power plant
will be completed by United Technologies Corporation through their Research Center (UTRC).
The Nome Joint Utilities System (NJUS) Renewable Energy Fund Wind Project involves the installation of five 600 kW wind turbines on Newton Peak located approximately one mile north of
Nome. The completed project, with a total size of three MW, will be owned and operated by NJUS. The wind turbines will be connected into NJUS?s electrical distribution system through
a constructed transmission line. The project will offer benefits to the community of Nome and its electric customers through a system-wide reduction and stabilization of energy prices.
NJUS has assembled a project team, headed by STG Incorporated which is prepared to immediately begin work on an accelerated schedule. The project team includes members from Intelligent
Energy Systems LLC, DNV Global Energy Concepts Inc, Electrical Power Systems, Duane Miller Associates LLC, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell LLC, BBFM Engineers and Aurora Consulting. All
aspects of the Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, detailed in the following pages of this application, can be completed by fall 2010.
Mt. Alice Harbor Development project is in and around Seward at mile 2 Nash Rd. the service road to the NE side of Ressurection bay 1.5 miles across from the municipal boat harbor on
the NW side, serving the needs of the local population as a community and destination resort, boating access and public access to the Fishing resources of the area. Local Engineers,
Surveyors, Municipal department heads etc. have expressed positive input and eagerness to work on the project. The Architects, Project managers are ready to proceed.
The Unalakleet Renewable Energy Fund Wind Project involves the installation of two 600 kW wind turbines on a project site located approximately one and a half miles northeast of Unalakleet.
The completed project, with a total size of 1.2 MW, will be owned and operated by Unalakleet Valley Electric Cooperative (UVEC). The wind turbines will be connected into UVEC?s electrical
distribution system through a constructed transmission line. The project will offer benefits to the village of Unalakleet and its electric customers through a system-wide reduction
and stabilization of energy prices. UVEC has assembled a project team, headed by STG Incorporated which is prepared to immediately begin work on an accelerated schedule. The project
team includes members from Intelligent Energy Systems LLC, DNV Global Energy Concepts Inc., Electrical Power Systems, Duane Miller Associates LLC, Hattenburg Dilley & Linnell LLC, BBFM
Engineers and Aurora Consulting. All aspects of the Final Design/Permitting and Construction project, can be completed by fall 2010.
The proposed biomass heating system will take place at Tok School, in Tok, Alaska, and will serve to initiate the beginnings of a systemic regional conversion from fossil heating fuel
to clean, renewable biomass heating systems. An outbuilding to house the boilers will be constructed behind the school, in a central location where access to the outbuildings can also
be had. The building will have 3 bays for fiber wagons that will to feed into the feeder bin inside the boiler room. The boiler will be able to be fed from the inside or the outside
of the building, to accommodate for downtime on the biomass feed systems. The biomass boiler will fed into the current boiler infrastructure, which will serve as a back-up system,
and will heat the outbuildings. The project has the advantage of being designed by firms having extensive experience with biomass systems, and is heavily supported by the community.
It was written in partnership with the Tok Area Forestry, CTA Engineering, and by Alaska Gateway School District staff.
The City of Whittier proposes conducting a renewable energy project consisting of a reconnaissance level effort to examine the viability of hydropower on Whittier Creek in Whittier,
Alaska. The work will include engineering analysis, an economic study, and two years of stream gauge data gathering. The final product will include an estimated generation capacity,
a preliminary cost estimate for a hydropower facility, and a preliminary analysis of the potential benefits (i.e. power cost savings over time). This effort will be performed by the
Alaska District Corps of Engineers with assistance from the Corps of Engineers Hydroelectric Design Center based out of Portland, Oregon, with stream gauging to be performed by the
USGS.
Located in Nome, this project will install a 2-mile transmission line and a 8-mile fiber control cable to connect a 1MW wind farm to be operated by Banner Wind LLC, an independent power
producer, to the City of Nome/Nome Joint Utility System (NJUS) power distribution grid. The project will place an underground 25kv distribution line adjacent to a new road, and include
a fiber control cable run from the wind generators to the utility power plant. Banner Wind LLC is an IPP formed in partnership between Bering Straits Native Corporation & Sitnasuak
Native Corporation. NJUS will be primarily responsible for the project construction activities, as well as the reporting and financial control of the intertie project.
The final design work will build upon the feasibility study and preliminary design work completed as of October, 2008. A bulk fuel wood boiler will be built at the Kenny Lake K-12 school
to displace 18,035 gallons of fuel oil. The current boilers will be used for backup and low load periods. This project will involve school district personnel, local contractors, design
engineers and Alaska Energy Authority. This project will employee local residents in project management, construction and chip material delivery.
EarthRun Energy will provide a sustainable source of high grade wood chips for biomass heating in the city of Anchorage while strengthening and beautifying the urban forests. In Anchorage,
urban forests are currently overgrown presenting fire and disease problems. It is the right time to make a sick forest a productive and healthy forest. EarthRun has worked hard to come
up with the cleanest, quietest and least interruptive way of harvesting the dead and unhealthy trees from our urban forests, chipping them, and heating one municipal building, the Russian
Jack greenhouse. EarthRun Energy will work closely with the municipality to return the forests to a healthy state.
The proposal is for a 5 MW natural gas fired Combined Heat & Power Project (?CHP? or ?Cogeneration?), sited near the Begich Tower, to provide the energy needs of the Begich Tower and
thermal energy needs of City of Whittier, Public School and commercial customers within economic reach of the Project, and provide firm power to help Chugach meet new generation needs
and improve service reliability to Whittier.
The proposal is for a 5 MW natural gas fired Combined Heat & Power Project (?CHP? or ?Cogeneration?), sited at the Alaska State Fair in Palmer (the ?Fair) as the centerpiece of an Alaska
Energy Center, to showcase renewable and alternative energy technologies, provide the energy needs of the Fair and operations sited at the Fair, provide the thermal energy needs of
commercial, institutional and agricultural customers within economic reach of the Project, and provide firm power to help Matanuska Electric Association meet new generation needs.
Burro Creek, formerly the Burro Creek Farms Hatchery, is an existing, operational hydro system located on 121 acres of private land approximately one and a half miles south of Skagway
on the west side of upper Lynn Canal. A grant is requested to obtain expert analysis of the feasibility of upgrading the existing hydro system in order to wholesale power to Alaska
Power and Telephone or the City of Skagway. Existing AP&T hydro projects supply electricity to Haines and Skagway but the communities must still rely on diesel during certain times
of the year. Also, existing hydro projects do not generate enough power to supply the cruise lines who have expressed an interest in connecting to shore power as a means of reducing
air quality emissions.
The Haines Borough proposes to explore the potential for use of low-emission nontoxic wood biomass as the source for wood-fired boilers to provide heat (through an insulated pipe distribution
system) initially to four buildings located within the Borough: the K-12 School, the Voc-Ed Building, the Municipal Administration Building, and the Public Library. The Borough would
begin to reduce our dependence on costly fossil fuels, while employing cleaner, renewable, and locally available resources, through the use of locally available wood biomass. The Haines
Borough will contract qualified consultants to perform reconnaissance and feasibility studies, and guide us through the 35% concept design.
The City of Chignik will partner with Trident Seafoods (holder of FERC License 620) to study the engineering, electronics, and economics of restoring the antiquated hydropower system
on Indian Creek in Chignik, Alaska. (See attached Project Area maps.) The ?Chignik Hydro? project would benefit the residents of Chignik by offsetting the cost of fuel currently used
to generate electricity for homes and community buildings such as the Subsistence Building and the school. Electricity generated by the new hydropower system will also benefit the new
small boat harbor, the Trident Seafoods fish processing plant, and the Harris Sub-Regional Clinic, which will serve residents of Chignik Lagoon, Chignik Lake, Perryville, and Port Heiden.
In addition, by re-building the dam and conveyor pipeline, the project would also be reinforcing the infrastructure that supports the city?s water system, as well as the fish plant
water supply.
The Division of Forestry at Milepost 267.5 Richardson Highway, Delta Junction is proposing a pilot project using barley/wood pellets for heating a governmental building. The boiler system
will combine two heating systems, a 3840 square foot (sf) main office building, proposed 3000 sf addition, and a 1792 sf warehouse. The boiler will be located in a separate building
which will house a heating system and barley/wood pellet storage.
The proposed project would be located in an unincorporated area, northeast of the City of Petersburg, Alaska. Development of hydroelectric power at the site will include construction
of a lake tap, arch dam, unlined tunnel, power penstock, power plant, tailrace, and transmission line segments. The powerhouse would be located within 2,000 ft. of the confluence of
Delta Creek and would house three impulse turbines. The rated installed capacity of the powerhouse would be 20 MW and the energy output would be roughly 70 GWh. Power generated by
the Project would be transmitted by a new overhead / submarine, 138 kilovolt (KV) transmission segment roughly 20-miles long running generally southwest from the powerhouse to Petersburg.
The transmission segment would integrate the project to the Southeast Intertie which currently connects Petersburg to Wrangell to the Tyee Lake Hydroelectric Project on Bradfield Canal.
Project would provide the interconnected Southern Southeast Alaska regional utilities with increased system reliability; replace current dependency on diesel generation; and enable
regional utilities to meet the increasing demand for electricity as customers convert from oil to electric heat and new construction is designed for electric heat.
The proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 11841 (Project) is located near the southeast end of Revillagigedo Island, approximately four miles east of the City of Ketchikan,
Alaska. KPU proposes to install 4.6 MW of hydropower generating capacity at KPU?s existing Whitman Lake Dam to provide an additional source of clean renewable energy to KPU?s customers,
in the city of Ketchikan and the Borough area including Saxman Village, while also enhancing the conversion of oil heat to electric heat and displacing expensive and nonrenewable diesel
generation. The Project will be interconnected to KPU?s existing distribution system and the grant project will involve KPU.
This proposal seeks to design and make commercially available a system that utilizes renewable energy as an option to the basic rural Alaska electrical power generating system. This
is multi part concept that utilizes advanced technology to improve the over-all efficiency of prime power diesel generating systems. The elements of the new system are divided into
three separate parts each bringing their own value contribution. They include waste heat recovery, conversion of waste heat using the Organic Rankine Cycle in combination with Controlled
Environment Agriculture, and biomass incineration.
The project involves the installation of two wind turbines near the water treatment plant (WTP) in Hooper Bay, Alaska. The two Northwind 100B; 100kW wind turbines will provide a dedicated
energy source for the WTP?s water heating system, providing approximately 539,000 kWh per year dedicated to an electric boiler inside the WTP. Wind-powered energy will offset the use
of 15,995 gallons of fuel currently used in the three fuel oil-burning boilers. Northern will provide the wind towers and turbine technology, and STG will perform the installation of
the towers and turbines. CE2 Engineers, the firm that designed and built the WTP, will supervise the engineering and wiring of the new boiler system.
The proposed 5 to 7-MW Grant Lake/Falls Creek hydro project is located near Moose Pass, Alaska. Kenai Hydro seeks to develop the project in compliance with current low impact hydro guidelines
and practices. The scope of this project will also involve looking at the feasibility of a design that includes diverting flows from Falls Creek into Grant Lake. Kenai Hydro has secured
a Preliminary Permit for this project, issued by FERC on October 7, 2008. Power from the project would be available to customers of Homer Electric Association and other areas served
by the existing Railbelt transmission grid. Kenai Hydro, LLC is a partnership among Homer Electric Association (HEA), enXco, and Cook Inlet Region, Inc. (CIRI) that was formed for the
purpose of evaluating and developing this site as a low impact hydroelectric facility.
The Chilkoot Indian Association is proposing to construct and operate four-plex housing (four buildings with sixteen units) incorporating a cordwood-fired boiler system. The project
is initiated by our Housing Department, who will manage the subsidized, low-income housing project. A separate boiler/fuel storage building will be built on one lot and recirculate
hot water to be used in each four-plex for building heat and domestic hot water. Architectural, civil, mechanical, and electrical design is complete except for an engineering refit
to accommodate the wood boiler system. Our proposal will be for heating system redesign and construction.
The project addresses the availability, quality and feasibility of sustainable, economic use of
agricultural and forestry biomass in Alaska. The goal of the project is to 1) assimilate all existing information on the total forest and crop biomass available in Alaska into one
data base, 2) determine the gaps in the data base and the information needed to fill the gaps, and 3) determine the biological, physical, and economic feasibility of using Alaskan biomass
as biofuels. The impetus for the Study is the biomass/coal-to-liquids plant proposed for the Fairbanks area and its need for commercial/industrial-scale volumes of biomass fuel stocks.
Work will take place in Fairbanks and Palmer, Alaska.
This application supports a wood heating project in Fort Yukon, Alaska. A wood energy supply analysis, and a feasibility and conceptual design analysis has been completed for a district
heating loop for downtown Fort Yukon to include the School, Gym, AC Store, School District Office, Water Plant, Post Office and two stand alone boilers; one at the new CATG Clinic and
the other heating the Voc Ed Complex. The three chip fired boilers will require approximately 2000-2500 tons of chips depending on moisture content to displace up to 135,347 gallons
of fuel or 90% of oil used in these commercial buildings at a cost of approximately $20/MMBTU ($200/ton) for chips compared to $46.93/MMBTU for fuel oil ($6.50/gal). This project is
being conducted in concert but as a separate project with a project funded by Denali Commission, US DOE through an Alaska Village Initiatives earmark, and GZ Corporation to develop
a wood harvesting system, wood yard and a wood energy utility to supply and maintain the boilers
This application supports a wood heating project in McGrath, Alaska. A wood energy supply analysis, and a Level 2 Feasibility (in writing phase) and conceptual design analysis has
been completed for a district heating loop for downtown McGrath to include in addition to residences, larger consumers; School District Office Building (offices, Museum, Library),
Captain Snow Center, (including Water Treatment Plant, Southcentral Foundation offices and current Health Center, Alaska State Troopers, Washeteria & Showers, District Court, city offices
and meeting hall), Post Office, new Health Center, (to be built), DNR Forestry & Wildfire Center, new Tribal Center (Village Council offices and Community Hall), and KSKO Public Radio
Station. This Level 2 study has not yet been coordinated with an analysis for a heat recovery project being proposed by ML&P and Alaska Energy and Engineering (AE&E). The biomass project
will link and integrate with the heat recovery project in future iterations of design and cost analysis in order to capture the synergies from both to create an optimum design. A side
by side analysis of both chip boilers (K?b) and stick fired boilers (Garn) with estimated cost analysis and net simple payback for individual buildings was conducted in the feasibility
assessment (calculations attached). The chip fired boilers will require approximately 2000 tons of chips annually modeled at 40% moisture content to displace up to 125,000 gallons of
fuel or 98% of oil used in these commercial buildings at a cost of between $28.88 ? $36.10/MMBTUs or between $4-$5 on a per gallon equivalent compared to $50.54/MMBTU for fuel oil ($7.00/gal).
This project is planned to be conducted in concert with the Village Safe Water project to replace the entire water main system in McGrath in 2009-2011. The integration of these two
projects has the potential to produce significant cost savings for installation of piping, the most expensive portion of the project. Both projects have been developed through technical
support from Alaska Village Initiatives, and McGrath Light & Power and e-Four Engineering. Principle personnel to date include Bill Wall, PhD, Peter Olsen, Ernie Baumgartner, and Greg
Koontz, ME, George Wilson, ME of Village Safe Water. Linkages are planned with Steven J. Stassel, P.E., President AE&E.
The applicant, along with the State Department of Transportation (ADOT), proposes to build a road and 69-kV transmission line to connect the community of Kake with Petersburg. The road/intertie
will allow the delivery of surplus hydropower available from the Tyee project to Kake and eliminate its total reliance upon diesel generation. The community of Kake will continue to
be served by the Inside Passage Electric Cooperative (IPEC). The transmission line infrastructure will be owned and operated by the Kwaan Electric Intertie Cooperative, Inc. (KWETICO,
the applicant), who will charge IPEC for wheeling power to Kake. The road project will allow Kake citizens access to Petersburg\'s infrastructure including major air transportation,
medical facilities, more frequent ferry service, engine repair facilities, and various services and industries not available in Kake. The Intertie will also provide broadband telecommunications
to the community of Kake, and savings to the State\'s Power Cost Equalization Program. The project is part of the overall Southeast Intertie plan commissioned and supported by Southeast
Conference and regional leaders. The road/Intertie dual construction will save money for both ADOT and KWETICO, and will facilitate access to the transmission line for repairs and maintenance.
Hoonah-Hawk Intertie will begin at the Hawk Inlet submarine cable termination yard on Admiralty Island as a continuation of the 69-kV line from Juneau. The cable termination yard will
be located on the eastern shore approximately 2.75 miles up Hawk Inlet just inland from the shoreline and the submarine cable will be buried as it leaves the yard and proceeds offshore.
The total length of the submarine cable is approximately 25 miles. Kwaan Electric Intertie Cooperative, Inc. (KWETICO) will own and operate the transmission line however Inside Passage
Electric Cooperative (IPEC) will continue as the utility providing electrical service to the Hoonah area. IPEC will purchase power from Alaska Electric Light & Power (AEL&P), KWETICO
will charge IPEC a wheeling rate for providing power to Hoonah who will be the primary community served along with the old Whitestone Logging Camp. This project is part of the overall
Southeast Intertie plan commissioned and supported by Southeast Conference and regional leaders.
The Allison Lake Hydroelectric Project is located adjacent to the Prince William Sound, immediately south of Valdez, Alaska. Copper Valley Electric Association (CVEA) is a member-owned
electric cooperative providing central station electrical service to a relatively large geographical area of Eastern Interior and Gulf Coast Alaska. CVEA is a stand-alone (not interconnected
to another power system) electric utility. The service territory is divided into two districts, the Valdez district and the Copper River Basin district. The Valdez district is comprised
of the organized area of the City of Valdez. The Copper Basin district incorporates many outstretched communities including: Glennallen, Gakona, Gulkana, Tazlina, Copper Center, Kluti-Kaah,
Copperville, Kenny Lake, Tolsona, Mendeltna, Nelchina, Eureka, and Sheep Mountain. CVEA?s personnel are extensively involved with the Allison Lake Project. CVEA has hired Hatch Acres
to assist in coordinating the work and field studies and license application.
The project is located in Cordova, Alaska. Affordable fuel wood is available to the community, from donated lots at an old sort yard and from an airport clearing project. We are asking
for assistance with purchasing a processing mill, yarding the logs, and cutting the logs into split firewood. The Eyak Corporation owns several log sort yards which they have generously
donated to the village for firewood use. The State of Alaska has offered down logs from the airport clearing project. To efficiently process this wood, we will purchase a firewood
processing mill, set it up and train the operators. The mill will enable us to process firewood in a timely manner to be able to distribute an abundant amount of firewood to the community.
We will mill approximately 3,421 cords of firewood. The supply for this will come from existing log decks and the airport clearing project. The firewood will be distributed to our
elders at no cost and the rest of the community will be asked to contribute $50 per cord to sustain the program. The money generated will help pay for labor costs of processing the
firewood in future years. This project will provide 37.2 billion BTU\'s of low cost energy for home heating and will offset 312.6 thousand gallons of fuel oil and save $1.58 million
this winter in home heating costs for Cordova.
In July 2008, Haines Assisted Living, Inc. (HAL) began construction on a senior assisted living/ residential complex comprising a total of 26,000 SF. Residents of Haines and Southeast
Alaska will utilize the senior assisted living and senior affordable housing being built in 2008?2010. The first phase of the project will be completed in the fall of 2009 at a cost
of over $4 million. Key to the long term sustainability of the facility is the installation of a Ground Source Heat Pump to extract geothermal energy from the earth and circulate it
through a radiant in-floor heating system. The initial feasibility and design has been completed as the follow-up to an extensive energy life-cycle cost analysis performed in 2007and
updated in October 2008.The designed system estimate of 210% efficiency will eliminate fossil fuel consumption in favor of renewable geo-thermal heat source and local hydro-electric
power and result in significant operational savings for the life of the facility. Haines Assisted Living, Inc., Dan Austin, Project Manager and Jim Rehfeldt, Alaska Energy Engineering
LLC are the principals involved in this grant project.
Alaska Power and Telephone (AP&T) proposes to construct the 2.0 MW Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on Yerrick Creek, approximately 20 miles west of Tok. The Project
would off-set diesel generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Tetlin, Tanacross, Dot Lake, and Tok. The Project will consist of a small diversion structure, approximately
15,000 feet of penstock, powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and transmission line. The Project operation will be run-of-river; annual generation is
expected to be approximately 4,900 MWh/yr (approximately 40% of the interconnected load). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost
to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation.
This proposal is for the North Prince of Wales Island Intertie Project (Project). Alaska Power and Telephone (AP&T) proposes to construct a line extension to the communities of Coffman
Cove and Naukati Bay, placing these communities on the Prince of Wales Island (POW) electric grid which is supplied with renewable energy from two hydroelectric projects. Both of these
communities currently rely on 100% diesel generation for electricity. The total line is to be 48 miles (Coffman Cove = 37 miles; Naukati Bay = 11 miles) of overhead 4/0 ACSR three-phase
34.5 kV line with a 1/0 ACSR neutral conductor on single pole wood structures. This line extension will come off the existing 34.5 kV line from between Klawock and Thorne Bay, near
Control Lake. Naukati Bay is 11 miles off the main road to Coffman Cove.
Cordova Electric Cooperative (CEC) proposes to serve as a model for rural Alaska utilities by installing an ORC heat recovery unit that will capture waste heat and increase diesel generator
electrical production by an additional four to six percent. The average electric production efficiency of CEC?s Orca Power Plant is 13.65 kWh/gallon of diesel. CEC has placed a deposit
on a new, 3.6 MW rated, EMD 710 series, 20 cylinder diesel generator. The efficiency of the new generator is expected to peak at 15 kWh/gallon. Cordova Electric Cooperative desires
fit the EMD with an organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) heat recovery system that will capture additional BTUs that would otherwise be wasted energy. CEC is the sole provider of power to the
City of Cordova, Alaska.
After a decade of declining performance and three years of no operation (2005 ? 2008), due to unstable site geology and flooding, Cordova Electric Cooperative (CEC) has focused intense
efforts on re?designing its Humpback Creek hydro?electric facility. Humpback Creek, named for the pink salmon that spawn in its mouth, is located five miles north of Cordova and is
accessible only by boat. Sub?marine cable from the plant to Cordova City limits, and buried transmission lines to the CEC plant, connect the facility to Cordova. Because of its steep
grade, fish are not able to migrate upstream and thus no fish populations will be affected by this project. From the original in?take structure to tidewater, Humpback Creek flows about
0.7 miles and drops from an elevation of 276 feet to where it enters saltwater Orca Inlet. Site visits by the project team to other small hydro?electric projects with a variety of in?take
arrangements and a project workshop held in December, 2007 culminated in a new design with an intake/diversion that includes a tunnel, conventional side intake with provisions for sluicing
sediment and a diversion dam with a sluice gate that will allow removal of stream bed material that may collect outside the intake. The new location facilitates much?improved access,
a location with shallower bedrock substrate, and a better hydrological analysis. This project has been CEC?s and the community of Cordova?s top priority for the past three years, ever
since October, 2006?s 3,500?year return period flood event destroyed the intake/diversion facility. Project partners include the City of Cordova, the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), and the Eyak Corporation (for access).
This application proposes a Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie with 34.5-kV transmission line that will interconnect the electric systems of Metlakatla Power & Light (MP&L) and Ketchikan
Public Utilities (KPU). The Intertie will include 16 miles of overhead wood pole transmission line to be constructed on Annette Island between Metlakatla and Race Point and an approximate
one mile submarine cable crossing of Revillagigedo Channel between Race Point and KPU?s Mountain Point Substation. The project will also include control system upgrades to allow for
the integrated operation of the interconnected systems? generating plants. The Metlakatla-Ketchikan Intertie will provide benefits to both Ketchikan and Metlakatla, allowing for significantly
improved utilization of Metlakatla?s existing hydroelectric generating resources while reducing diesel generation in Ketchikan.
This project is a combination of selective reconnaissance, prototype testing, conflict assessment and comprehensive feasibility assessment to establish the feasibility of prospective
pilot tidal energy development projects at four sites where Preliminary Permits have been issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The four sites and respective communities
served are: Icy Passage Icy Straits, serving the community of Gustavus; Angoon, serving the local Kootznoowoo community; Wrangell Narrows, potentially serving the community of Petersburg;
and Central Cook Inlet near Nikiski, potentially supplying the communities in the service area of the Homer Electric Association.
The Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project is a long-term energy solution to rising and unpredictable costs of energy in rural and remote regions with geothermal energy
potential. The next phase of the project and the subject of this application is geothermal energy resource confirmation and qualification. Phase III includes design, engineering and
construction of a deep well preceded by funding and permit acquisition, road and well site improvements and drilling and drill management contracts. Subsequent to resource confirmation
and qualification, NEA proposes constructing a 25 MW geothermal plant and interconnection infrastructure that will supply 25+ communities in the Bristol Bay and Lake Region with low-cost
electricity that effectively decreases the cost of power 70% by displacing 5.4 million gallons of diesel fuel currently used to meet regional electrical and heating energy requirements.
The project will be the first utility grade geothermal development in Alaska establishing long-term firm, reliable and cost effective alternative energy that will enhance rural sustainability
and the development of renewable and strategic natural resources.
The Native Village of Cantwell proposes to improve the reliability and lower the cost of the community of Cantwell?s power system. Currently Cantwell obtains power from the line between
MEA and GVEA. To accomplish improved reliability, we propose to build a hydroelectric project on the Jack River a short distance from Cantwell. The installed capacity of this plant
will be in excess of 1 MW. This project will be comprised of a dam and a short tunnel. A feasibility design and scoping are required to provide the parameters of the project.
This project proposes the first 10 MW Utility-Grade Geothermal Development in Alaska. This 10 MW project would be able to extract geothermal power from the base of either Mt. Redoubt
or Spurr by 2105.
The project will be located at the mile 33 of the Tok Cutoff Highway in Chistochina, Alaska and will be managed and owned by the Cheesh?na Tribal Council (CTC). The project provides
a (cordwood) biomass system to provide heat and hot water for all community facilities located in a ?campus? area. Existing facilities that will be served by the project are owned
and operated by CTC and include the CTC Tribal Office Building, Chistochina Community Hall and the Education/Library facility. Two new facilities that will be served by the project
are scheduled to be constructed in the coming year; Mt Sanford Tribal Consortium multiuse facility with health clinic and CTC?s Washateria.
The Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Project is located on Packers Creek in Chignik Lagoon. The 190 kW project can provide for most of the communities current power needs, which peak at
about 125 kW. The plant would eliminate about 85% of 50,000 gallons of diesel consumed by the generators annually. There will also be excess energy that could be used for heating the
school and other local structures. The project would also enable the community to add a freezer/processing facility to further improve the local economy.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a reconnaissance study prior to pursuing a Resource Assessment, Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design for the development
of a state of the art clean waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Ketchikan and the communities of the Southeast Conference. The proposed plant project location must
be determined but initial consideration is being given to a site at Ward Cove, site of the old Ketchikan Pulp Mill. The project will serve Ketchikan and those communities that the
proposed study shows can be reasonably served. This study will provide the information about present patterns for disposal of municipal solid waste and other types of waste in the
general area, logistics considerations, feedstock sources that can be identified and evaluated that would be available to support the proposed plant and such other information that
can lead to a feasibility analysis, how such a proposed plant would supplement, integrate into or supplant existing energy resources, potential markets for such a plant and its products,
possible site and cost analysis for future studies addressing the preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating
costs, by product markets and operating information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to meet future grant applications
for such a study and project.
The proposed plant project will convert the waste, landfill and the Ketchikan Pulp Mill superfund site into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management
Company, Robert Loescher, Richard Smith and Alaska Recycling Energy in conjunction with Ketchikan City and Borough staff and the Southeast Conference. If needed, additional consultants
will be retained.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a reconnaissance study prior to pursuing a Resource Assessment, Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design for the development
of a state of the art clean waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Juneau and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project location is at the Juneau Landfill
currently owned and operated by Waste Management. The project will principally serve Juneau and those communities that the proposed study shows can be reasonably served. This study
will provide the information about present patterns for disposal of municipal solid waste and other types of waste in the general area, logistics considerations, feedstock sources
that can be identified and evaluated that would be available to support the proposed plant and such other information that can lead to a feasibility analysis, how such a proposed plant
would supplement, integrate into or supplant existing energy resources, potential markets for such a plant and its products, possible site and cost analysis for future studies addressing
the preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product markets and operating information necessary
to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to meet future grant applications for such a study and project. The proposed plant project
will convert the Juneau waste, landfill and sanitary sludge into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Robert Loescher, and Alaska Recycling
Energy in conjunction with Juneau City and Borough staff and the Southeast Conference. If needed, additional consultants will be retained.
This project requests funding to conduct a renewable energy reconnaissance report for the smaller (populations less than 100) communities of Cold Bay, False Pass and Nelson Lagoon which
require assistance to decrease their energy costs and reduce their dependence on diesel fuel. This region, called ?the birthplace of the winds?, renewable energy resources abound --
not only wind power, but also hydro, geo-thermal, current and tidal. Some waste heat recovery opportunities also exist. A reconnaissance report will summarize the assessment and findings.
This project will be administered and managed by the Aleutians East Borough (AEB) and will be conducted by a consultant chosen by the AEB.
The Falls Creek Hydro Electric Project is an 800 kW run-of-river hydroelectric facility, located in Gustavus Alaska, which will provide electric power to the community of Gustavus. The
project is being built by Gustavus Electric Company to displace existing diesel generation. Construction of the project is approximately 90% complete and will provide 90% of the community
electric needs.
The City and Borough of Wrangell (City), through Wrangell Municipal Light and Power (WMLP), has established a fuel displacement rate of $.08/KWH for all heat and hot water. There is
a possibility of an interruptible rate of $.05/KWH from the Four Dam Pool Power Agency. This special rate is due to Tyee Lake Hydroelectric facilities spilling of excess water (water
not used in power production). A feasibility study has been conducted by Electric Power Systems, Inc. to determine what the savings would be per year if the city buildings were converted
from diesel fired boilers to electric boilers, develop a rough order magnitude cost estimate (ROM), and provide estimated engineering design fees for replacing the boilers. The study
was conducted on 11 public buildings in Wrangell and the study found significant savings to progress this project to the design, permitting and construction phase. WMLP would like funding
to convert these 11 public facilities from diesel fired boilers to electric boilers. Directly involved in this project is the City and Borough of Wrangell and Wrangell Municipal Light
and Power.
This is a request for reconnaissance study, followed by a more detailed feasibility study that will analyze the feasibility of supplying Anchorage with heat from geothermal energy sources.
IAE has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Municipality of Anchorage to facilitate such a study. The Municipality of Anchorage has agreed to support the feasibility
study efforts by providing information about the potential for geothermal energy use in Anchorage as well as right of way information. If the results of the feasibility study prove
to be positive for development, IAE will work towards developing the project. Specific focus on the market available, what type of organization will be needed for the project, technical,
and financial issues.
This proposal will examine the opportunity, analyzes the possibility, and determines the feasibility of providing a stand-alone fish waste-processing facility that produces and uses
clean energy from renewable resources. It will serve the commercial fishery and processing plants (7 land based processing facilities, 3 floating processing facilities and several
smaller independent seller/operators) and the community of Naknek, King Salmon, and South Naknek, Alaska. The study produced will look at a model plant that, when proven successful,
will be recreated throughout the fisheries of the State and the nation, and the world.
Bristol Bay Borough and Naknek Electric Association have joined in this responsible and cooperative scientific effort in the largest sockeye salmon fishery in the world to perform this
study and assess the initial, as well as its ultimate, practicality and profitability of such a facility.
This project proposes a facility at Lake Elva that will consist of a dam constructed 8,500 feet downstream from the existing outlet of the lake. The powerhouse will contain two 750
kW turbines. The steel framed structure will be located approximately 1,800 feet upstream from the Elva Creek confluence with Lake Nerka. It is planned to be on a 20 by 80 foot concrete
foundation with a height of 20 feet above the generator floor. This proposed project will necessitate the construction of approximately 33 miles of new three phase transmission tie
line from the project site to close proximity of the village of Aleknagik.
The Nushagak Area Hydropower Project will initially serve the communities of Aleknagik, Dillingham, and Kanakanak in the Nushagak and Wood River areas (future interties to Manokotak
and Ekwok - New Stuyahok - Koliganek are under consideration). This first phase with inter-tie is estimated to cost $22 million and replace 500,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually,
for a yearly savings of $2,105,700 at today?s fuel prices. Currently all power in the area is generated with diesel by Nushagak Cooperative (NETC), with a current residential rate
at $0.463 cents per kilowatt hour. Nushagak Cooperative would develop, maintain, and operate the Lake Elva facility and associated infrastructure.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of the art clean
waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the FNSB Municipal
Landfill in Fairbanks. The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the FNSB Solid Waste Division. This study will provide the information required to
develop the feedstock sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product
markets and operating information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize a legal relationship with the Solid
Waste Division for FNSB. The proposed plant project will convert the FNSB waste and landfill into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company,
Plasma Waste Recycling, CH2MHill, Economic Research Associates, and Alaska Recycling Energy staff in conjunction with FNSB Solid Waste Services and Borough staff. If needed, additional
consultants will be retained.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of the art clean
waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Mat-Su and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the Mat-Su Municipal Landfill in Palmer.
The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the Mat-Su Solid Waste Division. This study will provide the information required to develop the feedstock
sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product markets and operating
information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize a legal relationship with the Solid Waste Division for
Mat-Su. The proposed plant project will convert the Mat-Su waste and landfill into electricity or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Plasma Waste
Recycling, CH2MHill, Economic Research Associates, and Alaska Recycling Energy staff in conjunction with Mat-Su Solid Waste Services and Borough staff. If needed, additional consultants
will be retained.aska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of
the art clean waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Mat-Su and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the Mat-Su Municipal Landfill
in Palmer. The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the Mat-Su Solid Waste Division. This study will provide the information required to develop the
feedstock sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up and operating costs, by product markets
and operating information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize a legal relationship with the Solid Waste
Division for Mat-Su. The proposed plant project will convert the Mat-Su waste and landfill into electricity or fuel.
Alaska Recycling Energy, LLC ("ARE") seeks funding to prepare a resource assessment, feasibility analysis and conceptual design study for the development of a state of the art clean
waste gasification plant that will generate energy for Anchorage and its surrounding communities. The proposed plant project will be located at the Anchorage Municipal Landfill adjacent
to Route 1 on the Glenn Highway just east of town. The project will principally serve those communities presently served by the Anchorage Solid Waste Services. This study will provide
the information required to develop the feedstock sources and analysis, preliminary site layout and design, plant sizing and configuration, development plan, construction, start-up
and operating costs, by product markets and operating information necessary to prepare and analyze the financial information required to finance the proposed plant and to formalize
a legal relationship with the Solid Waste Services Sector for the Municipality of Anchorage. The proposed plant project will convert the Anchorage waste and landfill into electricity
or fuel. Preparation of the study will involve WFT Management Company, Plasma Waste Recycling, CH2MHill, Economic Research Associates, and Alaska Recycling Energy staff in conjunction
with Anchorage Solid Waste Services and City staff. If needed, additional consultants will be retained.
This project looks at the integration of a wood fired hydronic heating system with existing boiler system in some of the buildings and retrofit hot water heat to other buildings. The
project will require a greater initial investment and higher annual OM&R costs than for an equivalent oil or gas system alone; however, the savings in fuel costs (wood vs. fossil fuel)
will pay for the initial investment and cover the additional OM&R costs in a relatively short period of time. After the initial investment is paid off, the project will continue to
save money (avoided fuel cost) for the life of the heating system. Inflation rates for fossil fuels are typically higher than inflation rates for wood fuel, increasing inflation rates
result in greater fuel savings and thus greater project viability.
Takatz Lake Project ? Alaska, a hydroelectric project approximetily 27.7 MW in size capable of producing an average of about 106,900 MWH per year to serve the City of Sitka and other
communities in Southeast Alaska as the communities become electrically interconnected. See the attached application to FERC dated June, 2008 for a more detailed description.
Application BC Ratio
0.22
1.3
1.45
2.18
3.36
8.24
3.13
1.41
3.17
1.32
10.87
1.19
3.05
1.57
1.36
1.38
3.21
1.05
1.57
2.58
0.49
0.12
2.04
1.23
1.12
0.92
4.52
2.43
1.43
2.66
0.99
0.63
1.1
0.72
1.18
1.43
1.48
4.27
1.38
1.42
2.09
1.75
1.86
0.47
5.57
1.34
1.45
1.47
0.49
3.22
8.49
1.67
1.22
0.99
1.32
1.64
0.68
0.9
0.83
2.37
0.94
1.66
1.39
2.8
1.27
0.63
1.26
1.77
2.09
0.63
1.46
1.54
2.19
2.7
1.07
1.15
3.22
1.04
0.8
1.96
0.8
0.69
0.35
0.11
0.67
1.17
1.16
1.13
1.01
2.3
0.97
5
1.19
2.2
1.16
1.07
1.92
1.62
2.12
1.36
1.22
1.44
4.87
7.81
1.84
1.92
1.75
6.44
1.16
1.18
2.32
3.49
1.87
0.89
1.34
0.61
1.6
0.79
9.84
3.14
3.46
0.96
2.55
1.4
1.73
1.01
1.47
5
1.23
1.6
1.79
1.02
0.4
0.22
4.02
0.74
1.05
1.22
0.27
4.41
2.31
2.33
1.45
1.28
3.55
1.37
3.96
2.02
2.45
2.21
1.35
2.44
2.01
1.16
0.24
3.85
1.24
1.28
0.52
1.37
0.94
1.02
1.21
1.88
6.9
0
4.07
1.79
3.93
1.37
1.6
2.32
2.45
3.68
1.84
1.87
1.06
3.58
1.54
1.11
0.98
0.74
6.44
2.32
1.83
6.91
0.16
0.83
1.53
0.6
2.08
0.92
1.06
1.48
1.7
4.59
2.14
1.55
0.88
0.39
1.24
0
1.49
0.56
0.3
1.58
9.77
2.17
1.86
3.13
0.66
0.01
1.8
1.3
1.05
0.86
0.69
0.63
0.65
1.76
0.89
0.99
1.33
0.85
0.63
1.15
4.04
2.15
1.57
2.25
4.61
4.28
1.06
2.48
0.92
1.49
2.21
1.05
1.47
2.79
4.1
2.11
1.04
4.71
1.05
1.49
6.01
3.22
1.61
0.65
0.01
1.94
1.53
2.02
3.93
1.52
0.11
0.58
1.26
1.21
8.67
13.07
34.74
0.6
0.86
2.43
0.48
0.99
9.09
0.76
0.35
2.22
0.86
1.31
1.86
0.79
0.98
0.69
0.86
2.88
2.5
1.31
1.3
0.9
3.58
2.68
1.22
1.92
0.31
2.6
1.95
2.23
0
0
0
0
0
1.42
1.32
0
1.79
1.25
0.9
3.66
0.77
4.03
0.38
1.78
6.2
2.59
1.1
1.9
0.89
0.89
2.37
0.48
0.9
1.05
2.2
3.46
0.39
1.88
0
1.42
1.42
1.12
1.14
2.62
0.27
2.01
2.25
1.47
1.09
2.05
0.38
3.5
4.82
3.94
1.71
0.96
0.19
1.18
0.8
1
0.96
0.6
1.03
1.94
0.29
1.4
3.14
1.65
0.83
4.23
1.49
4.5
1.15
0.43
4.3
-0.18
2
1.56
3.6
3.6
1.87
6.56
0.67
1.66
0.62
1.2
0.97
0.87
0.99
1.07
1.47
0.85
0.73
0.56
0.82
0.93
1.12
2.26
1.32
1.79
0.99
0.56
9.84
1.64
0.84
2.11
1.38
0.27
0.79
2.03
3.3
2.86
0.69
1.6
10.74
0.44
0.88
0.83
0.84
0.78
3.57
3.27
1.82
4.33
3.25
0.57
1.78
1.87
3.99
1.65
0.82
0.47
0.96
0.54
2.42
0.94
2.54
0.61
1.61
0.63
3.15
0.37
0.91
0.15
1.26
0.98
0.82
2.43
1.44
0.27
0.99
0.45
16.16
1
1.46
4.14
1.7
1.47
2.23
0.86
1.19
1.46
1.47
4
2.21
0
0.47
0.63
3.33
0.36
1.05
0
2.92
3.32
4.56
0.98
7.05
11.24
2.29
1.78
1.45
1.08
2.32
0.5
2.16
1.45
2.45
4.9
1.79
0.56
1.23
0.92
0.81
10.46
3.61
1.26
8.41
0.61
2.45
27.98
0.85
2.44
0.88
1.07
0.87
0
1.11
1.58
2.73
0.81
4.67
2.82
0.22
4.93
1.8
4.75
1.31
0.32
1.57
1.72
1.94
1.84
0.91
0.93
0.59
1.3
1.44
1.56
3.45
0.8
0.78
3.26
3.22
3.36
4.83
2.3
0.24
0.91
1.03
3
3.93
1.94
4.77
0.19
0.43
19.73
0.4
0.39
0.6
1.22
1.3
2.94
1.84
5.61
3.19
3.43
1.64
1.14
0.2
1.2
2.41
9.12
1.96
-0.15
0.74
0.99
6.03
0.58
1.1
0.98
0.46
7.52
1.54
6.53
3.75
5.37
1.23
9.15
1.88
0.64
1.78
0.88
0.77
4.93
1.46
1.87
0.7
1.35
1.88
4.19
3.29
4.59
1.17
2.5
1.25
0.26
8.07
1.13
3.35
1.93
2.81
4.13
3.29
1.57
1.84
1.78
1.52
0.57
0.69
0.49
0.01
1.59
0.71
0.65
0.71
3.54
4.25
2.82
3.99
1.45
0.65
1.07
1.84
2.81
1.39
5.89
5.41
0.85
2.9
2.45
1.28
1.13
0.82
1
2.17
0.67
2.4
0.59
4.4
0.097
3.97
8.26
0.5
2.95
4.23
0.92
0.06
0.84
1.15
4.81
19.92
2.76
3.08
2.33
4.54
6.19
15.8
0.44
3.13
22.06
1.91
1.83
0.63
1.09
AEA BC Ratio
0.2
0.44
1.22
0.94
0.91
1.86
1.66
1.75
2.23
1.15
1.97
0.37
0.73
1.06
2.19
0.47
1.25
1.44
0.98
2.02
0.79
0.43
0.42
0.29
0.54
1.71
1.1
1
0.93
2.16
1.38
0.72
1.87
0.93
1.38
1.04
0.72
1.01
1.06
1.08
1.13
0.36
0
1.33
1.23
0.13
1.21
0.74
1.07
4.24
1.24
1.03
0.82
0.36
2.94
1.52
1.67
0.96
0.99
1.25
0
0.4
0.69
0.59
0.77
1.06
1.66
1.71
2.33
1.28
0.97
0.42
1.26
1.97
0.46
1.46
0.71
0.62
2.19
1.02
1.8
0.18
1.14
0.58
1.95
0.5
0.71
0.34
0.09
0.67
1.12
0.75
0.95
0.7
1.21
0.69
3.63
1.17
1.36
1
1.09
1.79
1.3
2.3
1.06
1.98
0.94
3.21
1.28
1.23
1.79
1.41
3.03
0.87
1.62
1.54
2.45
1.37
7.11
1.31
0.67
1.05
0.74
4.23
1.48
1.3
1
1.7
0.86
1.53
1.08
1.19
3
1.7
0.98
1.11
1.14
0.01
0.22
2.56
0.55
0.71
1.24
1.14
0.47
1.13
1.45
2.2
0.97
0.96
3.3
1.03
4.31
1.52
1.47
1.68
1.61
1.01
1.83
1.51
1.12
2.15
1.66
0.44
1.77
0.5
1.02
1.12
0.51
0.79
1.9
2.55
3.18
4.28
1.05
4.07
1.84
1.72
0.09
1.48
1.02
1.47
1.91
3.96
1.19
0.91
0.73
1.69
1.12
0.66
0.97
0.86
1.39
1.54
0.76
1.79
0.16
0.68
0.98
0.6
1.76
0.53
1.45
1.48
1.57
0.94
2.04
1.48
0.74
0.28
0.58
0.68
0.81
0.93
0.64
1.58
5.68
1.77
1.09
0.49
0.99
-0.01
1.8
0.87
0.88
0.92
0.78
0.56
0.64
1.64
0.52
1.09
1.04
0.79
0.66
1.19
4.04
2.15
1.22
1.65
3.64
3.38
0.38
1.96
0.71
1.1
1.62
1.43
1.9
2.02
4.1
2.16
1.04
3.41
0.72
1.12
5.54
3.47
2.26
0.67
0.01
1.94
1.45
2.02
2.85
1.58
2.24
5.23
1.42
1.17
0.52
3.08
10.97
1.59
3.52
0.15
1.68
0.83
2.43
0.43
0.78
1.03
0.27
3.46
1
1.14
1.54
0.58
0.65
0.47
0.78
2.07
2.5
0.76
1.18
0.6
3.58
1.54
0.9
0.85
0.14
2.6
1.95
2.23
0
0
0.88
0
0
1.42
2.12
0
1.78
1.25
0.89
2.06
0.89
3.6
0.81
1.78
6.2
1.88
0.82
1.9
0.91
0.91
1.25
0.62
0.9
0.59
0.55
3.74
0.31
1.49
0.76
0.8
1.52
1.07
1.02
1.24
0.55
1.39
0.22
1.84
2.14
1.16
1.07
1.47
0.3
1.42
3.55
1.41
1.48
0.94
0.03
1.37
0.9
1.89
0.89
0.75
1.34
1.94
0.29
1
2.56
1.77
0.83
3.01
1.49
3.1
1.11
0.53
0.87
0.01
2.21
2.15
0.13
0.13
1.91
2.21
1.08
0.99
0.53
0.91
0.89
0.52
0.91
0.95
1.52
0.74
0.67
0.67
0.76
0.79
1.12
1.34
1.4
1.37
0.8
0.32
4.23
0.25
1.09
0.81
0.05
0.39
0.75
1.59
3.53
0.47
1.25
10.21
0.54
0.78
0.6
0.75
0.67
2.33
2.97
0.82
1.04
2.26
0.61
1.78
0.43
1.74
1.48
0.59
0.58
0.85
0.4
1.17
0.89
0.58
-0.05
0.92
0.45
3.41
0.23
0.47
0.12
0.97
0.46
0.57
0.37
2.25
1.4
-0.74
0.46
0.4
0.8
0.48
1
1.35
1.2
1.39
2.07
1
1.07
1.19
1.99
2.02
1.79
2.1
0.44
1.27
0.12
0.47
0.64
3.18
-0.07
0.83
0
3.34
2.21
3.5
0.98
6.07
1.54
1.09
1.07
1.02
0.32
1.13
1.3
2.64
2.58
1.18
0.73
1.9
0.15
0.14
0.14
0.47
0
0.47
1.18
27.98
1.35
1.25
0.75
0.97
0.78
0
1.11
1.32
2.5
0.92
3.92
2.63
0.2
2.83
0.82
4.55
1.16
0.18
1.34
1.66
1.88
1.51
0.99
0.93
0.59
1.3
1.44
1.56
2.92
1
0.92
2.7
3.49
3.11
-0.63
1.92
0.1
0.89
1.03
2.26
-0.58
1.56
4.62
0.19
0.43
-0.72
0.59
0.36
0.48
1.26
1.78
2.94
1.61
3.78
3.19
2.55
1.37
1.14
0.13
1.28
1.83
7.66
1.66
-0.16
1.43
1.04
5.49
0.58
1.36
1.09
2.11
2.07
1.89
7.31
3.18
2.51
1.41
7.9
1.63
0.6
1.83
0.13
1.36
0.77
5.12
1.13
2.68
0.44
1.63
1.63
3.44
3.29
3.89
0.92
0.79
1.43
0.06
8.02
1.34
3.38
1.73
1.19
4.13
3.29
1.25
0.33
0.69
1.47
0.26
0.37
0.22
0.01
1.59
0.66
1
0.83
3.54
3.86
3.58
0.98
1.71
0.65
1.58
2.13
1.94
0.57
4.09
5.41
0.95
2.62
1.64
2.38
2.06
0.94
1
1.86
0.67
2.4
0.59
4.4
0.084
3.97
8.26
0.45
2.51
3.5
1.14
0.01
0.56
1.1
4.81
20.31
2.76
3.08
2.33
4.54
2.26
0.45
3.13
22.06
1.91
1.83
0.61
1.09
Cost of Electricity
0.813
0.71
0.7537
0.7
0.3375
0.494
0.47
1.0308
0.5916
0.3375
0.180838
0.5922
0.5916
0.36
0.95
0.62
0.2649
0.6339
0.7077
0.6162
0.15
0.15
0.4271
0.175587846
0.174450818
0.5916
0.71
0.227392
0.6002
0.6589
0.4465
0.6068
0.3
0.42
0.741754312
0.2544
0.7616
0.6121
0.6549
0.7173
0.745062943
0.163
0.160756465
0.0958
0.0958
0.3698
0.42
0.6057
0.3698
0.2544
0.138
0.3911
0.1807
0.549
0.665
0.18069
0.4854
1.2
0.6824
0.74
0.796
0.3
0.17414
0.632528
0.6455
0.6272
0.4166
0.731
0.53
1.2
0.13293
0.6408
0.42
0.18069
0.18498
0.6824
0.6408
0.1158
0.6175
0.1158
0.9
0.3678
0.15
0.15
0.092
0.61
0.4007
0.6895
0.2597
0.5994
0.9
0.813
0.42
0.6012
0.6186
0.63
0.71
0.5998
0.6
0.4955
0.6792
0.5958
0.6293
0.629
0.585
0.2597
0.6824
0.4007
0.3887
0.1827
0.2597
0.5854
0.119933
0.119933
0.4955
0.119933
0.11155
0.1609
0.55
0.62041667
0.65
0.1511
0.280125
0.1549233
0.154923333
0.5131916
0.505
0.1511
0.4904166
0.6337289
0.2844
0.65
0.5584416
0.803
0.5975
0.5840916
0.4936416
0.558275
0.543991
0.504025
0.576225
0.435
0.594025
0.5131916
0.550975
0.5332666
0.7429777
0.7399833
0.8
0.81163
0.105
0.5030583
0.53
0.4904083
0.5045583
0.15
0.15
0.5633
0.682725
0.55513333
0.9
0.4936416
0.603575
0.4844083
0.5357666
0.4175666
0.10201
0.69175
0.6539083
0.0966584
0.09468
0.589375
0.1972607
0.19027
0.22416
0.22416
0.490416665
0.70166667
0.62041667
0.62185
0.102205207
0.1022052
0.22019167
0.47556667
0.4081916
0.2402333
0.2844
0.2844
0.09468
0.09468
0.09468
0.285503
0.22416
0.849475
0.12099
0.50455833
0.65
0.6
0.1022052
0.22416
0.4175666
0.743992
0.61737
0.671486
0.713907
0.50572
0.14231
0.689471
0.22416
0.91
0.14231
0.598121
0.58671
0.63
0.2844
0.575639
0.765748
0.51211
0.716304
0.9
0.217665
0.448904
0.55
0.704052
0.19726
0.22416
0.589547
0.581855
0.52
0.57
0.62
0.74
0.556574
0.545374
0.589165
0.642328
0.508924
0.8
0.5
0.62265
0.22416
0.65
0.617144
0.508924
0.556574
0.619203
0.540597
0.8537
0.7
0.490995
0.662
0.645
0.22416
0.2844
0.265123
0.414179
0.56
0.485761
0.485761
0.19223
0.19027
0.619203
0.508239
0.619899
0.10201
0.217665
0.09468
0.23642
0.590815
0.217665
0.14231
0.858268
0.7
0.8
0.10201
0.59457
0.10201
0.454433
0.10201
0.12099
0.417122
0.22416
0.6
0.17
0.17
0.52
0.55
0.8
0.82
0.6
0.18
0.26
0.58
0.5
0.2
0.13
0.62
0.37
0.67
0.54
0.52
0.51
0.53
0.55
0.47
0.6
0.51
0.55
0.59
0.58
0.17
0.8
0.39
0.54
0.53
0.55
0.47
0.58
0.44
0.6
0.53
0.21
0.72
0.57
0.51
0.51
0.59
0.92
0.55
0.51
0.58
0.5
0.7
0.57
0.55
0.87
0.36
0.14
0.4
0.39
0.17
0.13
0.55
0.22
0.38
0.1
0.55
0.11
0.55
0.15
0.55
0.58
0.52
0.63
0.13
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.1
0.17
0.28
0.1
0.1
0.28
0.39
0.56
0.28
0.13
0.18
0.1
0.2
0.22
0.092
0.092
0.092
0.5
0.531
0.5
0.169
0.653
0.63
0.55
1.08
0.151
0.295
0.126
0.523
0.157
0.169
0.201
0.434
0.422
0.57
0.6
0.5
0.151
0.53
0.725
0.644
0.74
0.52
0.63
0.169
0.198
0.151
0.774
0.111
0.422
0.422
0.63
0.799
0.464
0.198
0.531
0.52
0.198
0.198
0.151
0.151
0.198
0.563
0.126
0.092
0.092
0.368
0.153
0.151
0.416
0.65
0.198
0.609
0.655
0.621
0.594
0.624
0.625
0.631
0.63
0.598
0.702
0.643
0.693
0.594
0.176
0.198
0.463
0.384
0.531
0.212
0.321
0.435
0.212
0.522
0.212
0.132
0.169
0.331
0.323
0.096
0.197
0.331
0.531
0.168
0.151
0.696
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.563
1.17
0.168
0.197
0.537
0.092
0.713
0.198
0.537
0.422
0.365
0.169
0.422
0.767
0.464
0.422
0.611
0.63
0.621
0.734
0.725
0.609
0.522
0.168
0.151
0.713
0.76
0.151
0.204
0.46
0.151
0.422
0.198
0.6
0.531
0.198
0.422
0.126
0.169
0.169
0.151
0.459
0.201
0.55
0.5
0.422
0.55
0.653
0.151
0.531
0.198
0.389
0.153
0.151
0.664
0.169
0.5
0.151
0.169
0.151
0.323
0.323
0.447
0.168
0.368
0.98
0.537
0.347
0.422
0.126
0.464
0.198
0.168
0.168
0.435
0.416
0.126
0.198
0.169
0.092
0.092
0.46
0.295
0.523
0.536
0.491
0.422
0.212
0.435
0.197
0.389
0.212
0.638
0.463
0.198
0.201
0.169
0.176
0.422
0.168
0.351
0.563
0.772
0.096
0.65
0.168
0.168
0.168
0.132
0.132
0.132
0.132
0.132
0.168
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.151
0.197
0.111
0.331
0.331
0.464
0.092
0.563
0.168
0.168
0.153
0.168
0.7572
0.4818
0.1237
0.627
0.6091
0.76
0.77
0.6078
0.1729
0.4925
0.5693
0.0893
0.5972
0.1729
0.8259
0.6091
0.2302
0.0862
0.4709
0.4851
0.4995
0.5145
0.5392
0.482
0.5614
0.1271
0.1271
0.1047
0.75
0.95
0.6078
0.5159
0.1271
0.64
0.4925
0.7452
0.1729
0.3605
0.17
0.1387
0.5693
0.6
0.7022
0.49
0.6126
0.1172
0.1729
0.76
0.52
0.6
0.5433
0.1729
0.1729
0.1729
0.17
0.75
0.603
0.5318
0.435
0.2302
0.7805
0.5067
0.4666
0.3169
0.1271
0.17
0.1729
0.1387
0.1729
0.601
0.323
0.398
0.5214
0.5214
0.323
0.8237
0.572
0.47
0.47
0.1729
0.17
0.0893
0.5
0.5712
0.585
0.3605
0.1271
0.7749
0.2278
0.42
0.1729
0.1387
0.1052
0.1052
0.6552
0.1006
0.2302
0.6578
0.1387
0.6126
0.0893
0.32
0.3183
0.3183
0.1904
0.1047
0.1729
0.6
0.2581
0.5972
0.2581
0.6045
0.1237
0.1006
0.3169
0.2278
0.1172
0.5972
0.8259
0.6
0.2128
0.1083
0.55
0.2128
0.2128
0.5
0.3169
0.2128
0.2581
0.1904
0.2128
0.1006
0.1387
0.2128
0.7749
0.5433
0.1387
0.1025
0.7749
0.3675
0.6
0.4
0.1355
0.0905
0.3605
0.98
0.3605
0.1083
0.4
0.4
0.1239
0.7364
0.7572
0.8259
0.6177
0.4606
0.4821
0.3889
0.4989
0.1355
0.5972
0.2128
0.54
0.6819
0.6308
0.627
0.6078
0.5318
0.6431
0.552
0.1355
0.5195
0.2278
0.398
0.2128
0.3169
0.0905
0.3368
0.4925
0.1239
0.3169
0.1658
0.1132
0.1239
0.1355
0.2302
0.2302
0.627
0.2128
0.1231
0.1006
0.4
0.4761
0.1387
0.2302
0.4
0.4529
0.6078
0.6126
0.6126
0.1658
0.3183
0.2302
0.4925
0.602
0.3183
0.3183
0.1006
0.4098
0.3562
0.2128
0.1032
0.6856
0.5159
0.1006
0.1103
0.5724
0.7669
0.1105
0.1032
0.3562
0.2278
0.1729
0.1271
0.0893
0.1658
0.11
Price of Fuel
7.33
3.3
4.37
4.26
3.68
3.81
4.48
6.85
4.04657259
3.68
3.37
3.8
4.59
2.94
6.5
5.52
3.547483073
6.72
6.49
5.75
1.4
3
6.53
1.932041005
1.991759894
3.74
3.24
2.133544085
6.51
5.91
6.11
4.69
3.32
4.39
7.453711477
3.48
9.36
6.5
6.53
5
7.767629428
3.51
1.185588169
3.28
3.28
3.7
4.39
3.5
3.7
3.4
3.45
4.16
4.1809
4.462
7.0034
5.7424
4.9955
5.6074
4.2971
4.5978
5.0828
4.1613
4.365
5.609833
6.3632
6.3729
6.2565
6.03062
5.044
5.6074
4.12929
7.178
4.170515
4.180892
4.10892
5.0925
7.178
4.1031
7.6436
4.1031
6.5766
4.4814
1.358
1.455
4.656
5.8394
5.9655
6.2935
4.0643
6.9355
7.76
8.0801
4.0837
6.79
10.67
5.5775
3.9382
6.1983
6.7706
4.37955
8.9046
6.9937
5.2768
5.529
6.9549
4.1225
5.1992
5.9655
4.4814
3.8315
4.1031
4.0061
4.086933
4.086933
4.37955
4.086933
4.0837
4.4232
6.5766
5.85
6.8
3.71
6.345
6.8
6.21
5.95
5.77
7.15
5.05
4.38
3.79
6.02
5
8.5
4.6
3.89
4.3
5.29
6.07
3.59
3.59
5
5.19
7.65
4.09
6
3.8
3.8
4.2
4.17
3.59
3.59
3.59
3.8
4.06
6.82
4.12
3.5
6.8
Annual MWH Production
205
10
450
350
2000
988
1242
330
1293
11
476
596
10
756
3294
1473
99
2228
93
745
517
19500
927
532
1100
721
936
947
3832
451
3441
403
300
1704
32400
280
1000
2800
3441
2018
2000
450
Annual MMBtu Production
0
0
37.021
3566.33
14128.17
1440.25
2264
4947.46
1283
7094.67
1042
698
56238.33
13853.83
8737.52
5418.08
28464
0
7818.5
0
394
1737
7269.83
1136
504
376
41447.93
1524.33
11242
11242
32551.02
4418.55
0
0
685.83
356633.34
0
4389.33
548.67
4252.17
1508.83
28791.28
6446.83
3566.33
700921.68
651.54
1563.7
19203.33
832738.85
2537.58
4403.05
1783.17
Annual Diesel Displaced
34.539
76
0.27
26
103
10.5
20.02
36.069
11.971
51.723
9.726
6.518
410
101
63.7
39.5
207.514
96.33
57
43.2
3.52
16.2
53
8.474
4000
3.516
302.172
11.113
75
89.146
237.31
32.213
24
117.5
5
2592
22.4
32
4
31
11
209.9
108.72
47
26
3.5
4.75
11.4
140
6071
18.5
32.1
13
Generation Start Date
2018
2019
2020
2017
2020
2021
2020
2019
2018
2020
2017
2017
2018
2018
2017
2025
2020
2018
2018
2020
2019
2017
2019
2017
2017
2019
2019
2017
2020
2023
2019
2017
2021
2017
2019
2019
2018
2018
2018
2018
2018
2019
2017
2019
2021
2021
2019
9/1/2016
10/1/2017
10/1/2016
5/1/2017
9/1/2016
10/1/2016
10/1/2016
10/1/2016
10/1/2016
10/1/2016
10/1/2016
12/31/2016
Estimated Benefit
0
12530000
2170000
377800
1692000
715000
5726787
4360000
8600000
17556738
11676
15400
153418
1092480
157007
86126
14497040
0
82435
4474027
8496
3633684
6348805
171422
1440000
220000
203000
614685
3732080
44053
62532
20171
60765
1101123
1854871
34742
38676
27343
8378318
50270
915000
18200000
0
16656000
2274000
15600000
5360150
10290
21913
667996
527246
200000
2234466
15797235
2752000
324942365
6300000
51790
1049572336
3700000
0
431059
44880
5581052
225000
97305114
0
66399
7708
2000000
86750
6190000
0
688800
0
0
102000
350739
321084
326617
190273
455415
56600
0
4615664
75138
17000
44605623
27319
75000
167500000
51000
4753280
17624
78840
22625
22878
1440000
220000
6671039
10914652
33302
19550
72339
25280
54750
66267
0
184620
0
10539787
1229000
600000
12465
21463
22875
3436937
3210000
13270000
900000
25855
0
0
2752000
0
4156842
816000
5400000
0
83846
66320
2984999
620032
13295
48644
29282
2234466
167579
12958
1630000
10720000
44880
90000
6136221
2187846
5091.66
4993200
66000
5032
39500
5086000
18800000
4600000
5580000
8560000
16000000
3452900
360000
58999
58999
138477
129933
2700000
18994000
75000000
1087080
31000
3453876
114907
15063000
16050000
25000000
13052660
455000
82171
198874
111098
99554
24000
630000
119000
44365
85188
31035
240000
64085
9500
34325
102721
127810
4148571
350000
9000000
9842462
2827804
21560000
1717665
197625
3467771
43546
815000
268000000
2646000
50000
12000
398000000
16049776
6136221
12720
1020000
1630000
5132
13000000
90000
57600
9400000
42000000
2000
100050
715000
1720500
328489
325000
9896150
701360
30000
60600000
29800
74500
455000
137600
3125
73360
51618
72500
176000
231000
34785
28077
350000
-1087080
1700000
22625
8000
11279
84666
32168
39500
596829
60000
27952
26619
1704300
7766
44430000
2171256
5500000
146100
239579000
80000
1300000
41700000
165000
35580
41516
120000
136423100
771000
391712
1142857
1760000
184431
4000
10000
1000000
398000000
3450000
76381444
126000
268000000
23460
29044
5000
365570
187300
4045744
701360
113441
563000
190000
302863000
50380000
4023176
476700000
44430000
57646
225000
225000
1020000
65292
9510000
73368384
788000
125000
17400000
200000
300000
9907736
21560000
1638000
12600
359400000
1802829
4527320
198803
10000
1050000
3400000
76716446
5849474
10620
6627000
4000000
239579449
398000000
155000
4000000
97900000
642000000
0
7400000
1050000000
18300000
17500000
620986
673675
3000000
130000
2889867
39000000
10000000
207400
250000
230000
240000
220000
1800000
2340000
323559
0
2000000
0
50000000
0
23300000
181000
20700000
971510
482633
2578589
164716
164716
3795000
3500000
954000000
102832
570000
2625892
1317300
163127
113441
50380000
3786000000
11920000
4000000
113441
2900000
1752831605
113441
701360
359400000
126000
3964450
80980
50000000
2670000
47520000
9510000
7400000
2000000
19710
181000
3775000
32200000
36828
49785936
9907736
85210
2277600
6000000
145286
1759000
3400000
1600000
89110
262848
2828885
879755
150000
18300000
62300000
642000000
7400000
97900000
238000
150000000
23300000
25000
10000
40000
1752831605
30800
3000000
82000
24000
10000000
31113.17
120000
206530
272000
195000
37000
673675
744322
997425
63000000
551442
22275
9000000
720000
770000
172678
283824
56020
582241
172907000
100000000
160000
640000
255664
71076
108940
267120
329976
864850
3800000
310459934
228345
14120000
12100000
9670000
8500000
71613
230000
104000
150000
104937120
333850
4157757
385000
4000
500000
296000
30000
400350
231009000
29000000
89750
116000000
2000000
1800000
485476
306636
1000000
9000
100000
404000
3250000
950317
36000000
41000000
200000
2928640
7297
260000
40400000
4300000
1482000
15000000
25641495
4000000
2341500
1221862
248160
46877348
16800
915000
39450
23865
23300000
2880000
88410000
280000
496456
21600
2868000
3000000
11500000
193600
3000000
7000000
52000000
4190542.09
5000000
2505600
71194805
192000
500000000
4334600
25300000
54000
484309
94000
0
0
0
2210194
25673
907374
7500000
21500
4000000
160000
55000
216643
1400000
67000
930000
122151
400000
294000
584000
943480
251692
0
650166
1000000
71060
595383
1755238
2500000
770299
39000000
700000
27452
9000
30000000
30000000
60000
108717
192673
280000
2880000
74668
41000000
1103100
879755
864850
3053154
57786933
4830000
1578797
1482000
184300000
0
5260000
1199471
2000000
2500000
10000000
0
503500000
806007
3800000
3200000
0
63171000
1500000
1000000
1200000
1257766
50000000
Public Benefit
0
8440000
0
108000
9493534
48600
0
0
0
0
2091140
1
15000
0
380540
1652000
0
42400
0
0
0
8200000
0
0
0
812000
0
0
27837522
0
0
0
0
0
250000
771878
0
62000
7000
0
2752000
8000
1267419
0
45000
0
0
0
0
0
85000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
556672
0
17141
0
9000
0
8200000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10400
0
0
15000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
150000
0
0
55576
0
2596231
0
0
0
0
0
0
2752000
0
30000
9900
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
938608
0
27000
1260935
651499200
4194000
14805000
1440000
1125000
165000000
27000
25096
20000
25000
123000
8800000
14805000
1000000
2540000
838566
0
80000
28800000
847000
46000000
153896
3450000
85492575
165000000
500000
6360
29000000
1125000
4422385
4968796
7255696
103384500
128700
656
1000000
20000
51900000
0
0
3620000
8600000
0
0
100000
46000000
0
0
16000
14000
18000
15000
0
1000000
250000
0
0
0
19000000
0
14250000
66000
14400000
6954000
2578589
7341584
1395358
30301376.5
37950
1400000
2500000
2687000
66000
20000000
129760
29000000
1000000
4000000
133500
328000000
13410000
8600000
3620000
51900000
14250000
30301376.5
35160
6770
1312.2
255241
49000
100000
186000000
1336500
20046250
92000
2788774
1400000
788581
116835000
38000000
563499
6837061
375000
108940
4006500
4949640
12972750
2000000
198345
1050000
1050000
35740000
82900000
1330215
70000000
508148
314000
4000
500000
296000
119009000
2687000
5000000
29000000
2500000
1000000
735176
180000000
350000000
200000
97000
5200000
20200000
1350
7290000
15700000
26000
2341500
1221862
248160
71459366
16800
44500
23865
14500000
25000000
7200000
25000000
367969
135000
9400
7200000
7000000
52000000
4859211
5137439
29000000
1200000
96000000
484309
94000
960000
6837061
12677660
107326
2210194
1075656
1190571
1152593
2000000
5260000
27560000
25000
930000
122151
11423098
14152205
2.56
4106500
20000000
50000
94830
32280
3000000
30000000
30000000
0
4049524
0
20000000
25000000
1850000
13196325
12972750
3053154
32997044
0
1578797
105500000
516000
0
1000000
15000000
0
503500000
2000000
1634625
3200000
200000
0
0
0
2000000
1257766
19000000
Grant Fund Request
1490077
75000
88000
809000
1227000
1025175
265200
294102
3920000
95733
725000
140000
255000
397427
688386
649030
320000
305000
650047
427705
2017818
440000
384730
400000
140000
5282000
3400000
4000000
3196000
152000
2555489
1092500
675000
187000
296038
833556
135000
491610
308311
429892
341335
667000
100000
220000
1251000
4000000
440319
395200
386000
80000
750000
1100000
342600
1305000
1750000
341465
307120
85000
45000
977000
102300
1800000
4000000
230000
165000
296786
295775
247560
202696
85000
75000
305000
832635
4000000
50000
56000
756335
220000
198731
1288018
382400
2516385
2017818
440000
3445040
279562
2495189
699163
620977
390449
698904
2016509
428646
499000
379583
454277
7620000
729600
3000000
8000000
525000
645613
123500
1092500
4348540
102275
240592
384730
500000
270807
493100
391200
2797935
800000
413600
88742
627000
1250000
185000
208073
4308784
455642
35750
800000
3453920
150000
47050
306000
127065
6000000
456252
170000
250817
311456
80000
293737
1256403
4274575
342000
123500
353400
1092500
1400000
800000
428646
689251
497773
2922000
447800
375000
160000
225000
141000
286166
450000
625000
230000
2017818
440000
3096898
159000
322903
198474
735242
288745
558814
731372
1250000
2495189
1412889
2352653
3378500
9281615
373838
274750
318289
1900000
213750
54000
119000
114965
275000
700000
4000000
158771
1237403
213536
62272
1375000
940950
583900
5914491
267150
230200
849984
232620
492850
367965
225660
660000
1843379
455642
81000
4000000
1560558
76000
82000
181000
30700
460000
81700
45000
550000
2988000
66500
290000
127900
297600
527908
181000
695950
2567778
218195
185195
109765
185000
472000
213536
32464000
193000
140000
2000000
350000
117136
142500
142500
5581800
332500
207100
221350
332500
142500
142500
190000
332500
585000
5538592
486000
1629223
425811
985805
183200
1319088
3485000
668350
199863
350000
425701
168959
1314380
466890
6114000
2600000
356400
2787719
2753364
1990000
1367464
170974
6694000
3149387
640000
9570434
236000
4000000
20000
132600
1752000
3453920
80000
10000
205000
1000000
160000
41360
175000
244385
700000
75000
213750
81000
426833
100980
1521000
31350
2400000
7274277
314367
120000
331240
3900000
1900000
3325000
2686450
300000
4000000
400000
420000
359000
223250
2408646
90000
240260
240260
142500
142500
3795575
240260
264459
3998920
2000000
911400
625000
135825
3007750
415871
218900
40500
40000
45000
443030
301440
310841
46000
100000
27000
45000
30800
50000
40000
126682
399786
45000
96700
555000
298078
96700
150000
356424
6103500
127065
289710
1993496
467500
1436517
4000000
155294
4000000
132523
160000
8225000
74985
7000000
169960
265000
323696
398331
1215224
3453920
850000
687700
6114000
4885610
3244897
3300000
639050
66300
215130
72630
1200000
1452000
7636804
318000
1150000
8000000
186400
190000
236000
30000
20000
125000
708162
708162
2440000
1094695
3424041
142000
1395231
282395
2000000
203000
1375000
136500
347000
210000
84000
697475
1896836
475000
1700000
171275
105050
400000
3602000
369900
158625
158625
128625
350000
37000
500000
2000000
225000
3215680
4000000
4000000
110000
250000
85000
2000000
380000
145000
241623
955000
2000000
2000000
620811
472787
703800
9405200
500000
1330467
7000000
1999972
4000000
250000
565485
137750
85000
142500
4000000
237500
111150
142500
90000
142500
142500
1190876
154477
300000
1500000
2000000
3199400
2579200
4000000
160000
2000000
1844000
1040000
540000
317130
112500
750000
245065
2695000
2000000
158400
637500
754651
1463200
1700000
137209
400000
400000
400000
132000
210000
100000
69000
190000
350000
3961637.5
2000000
250050
1021287
3045000
8000000
650000
45000
4000000
297500
4000000
14954626
142500
142500
3501038
183350
142500
4000000
300000
400000
229500
903970
4000000
247360
1900000
1954000
2589200
547611
212942
144301
1495231
648284
140000
136500
420000
70000
1700000
267024
675185
3313920
1495231
1421240
1624240
1495231
3947236
4000000
67000
235523
4525605
187750
1993158
492642
84000
2350000
115000
70000
125000
2870000
1391000
293238
275142
1748343
219071
3744546
1200000
4000000
217170
260000
1600000
4000000
930750
3907500
252000
15000000
286580
125000
300000
500000
6332000
510941
203000
347200
2318255
252000
480000
400000
160000
1844000
2000000
4000000
988000
150000
20000000
1021287
508000
260000
200000
1610440
997500
578719
313280
551408
2000000
4000000
80000
95190
255000
5033414
313790
119263
1231113
90000
2000000
3506406
3506406
3506406
392520
350000
1000000
245065
4000000
549387
2000000
4000000
932250
194540
7500000
868000
50000
339452
8630000
1995000
639806
164358
800000
34740
29064.61
29643.58
30669
1787476
300000
435000
126750
988000
4301950
2465664
9670361
103256
117610
117610
110000
117610
100000
1550000
30000
88500
88500
822950
1750000
5000000
1600000
8100000
6940000
13000000
15000
454828
482387
303060
95581
4097000
986000
545934
252000
2200000
30500
1760000
200000
1300000
320000
3880660
10000000
1500000
89600
2302630
6900000
1380439
6864000
112000
288500
122100
2349751
4478345
80984
198168
88320
1241402
144107
4336950
223464
1795450
237772
2995000
400000
3995116
3300000
3300000
30000
116625
42000
910180
626400
4159500
915627
15000000
368000
75000
347200
2034216.9
634968
4367616
4433414
520000
500000
1432906
1952000
5850000
4750000
35000000
8588000
1850320
522633
50000
500000
121000
194540
4500000
178179
250000
30000
341056
6000000
12020000
4126000
20000000
2000000
2598320
150000
2868000
1450000
1700000
79340322
190000
1600000
4126000
840000
10500000
9650000
6269750
20500000
11700000
1854026
137543
3225500
4334600
2100000
50000
109471.29
1500000
409430
565439
2142961
7837500
12075535
446950
3144399
800000
495000
19401411
5231750
550000
550000
550000
1025000
225000
3155765
1037750
3882243
3700000
6960000
105000
2400000
184000
77000
375000
824815
3393600
249500
996000
1000000
10758928
10100000
382779
2000000
13951326
14673250
8774080
3245349
85000
801000
1200000
300000
7500000
7500000
48000
120500
207500
831203
160000
1300000
300000
2220141
816000
288222.3
286149
2945991
3052000
2990000
36709970
2288000
364225
1432906
11600000
3752181
1780000
5500000
7152000
1940000
5000000
194540
950000
827000
150000
105620
95000
25000
750000
3260000
4047230
80000
10000000
775000
650000
1100000
898000
2000000
Cash Match to be Provided
511038
0
5000
1100000
360000
50000
66300
49113
1545000
23680
85000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
168336
10554
64448
0
0
122500
100000
725528
3000000
8000
283943
57500
2925000
33000
164053
10000
0
0
0
0
0
113000
100000
0
0
15000000
0
98800
100000
10000
750000
240000
0
70000
0
0
61424
0
0
280
8900
1061000
10497695
0
0
0
0
61890
50673
17000
75000
0
40000
725528
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
201782
44000
0
0
30000
0
40000
49009
0
170000
0
0
0
0
0
0
50000
11000000
0
33980
6500
57500
537460
0
0
64448
250000
11000
10000
97800
6695934
0
100400
78386
113000
1250000
10000
0
50000
0
12000
1900000
13591226
100000
0
0
25802
11500000
0
14000
9000
9000
20000
9000
141000
474953
18000
6500
18600
57500
0
0
0
0
0
75000
0
0
0
0
20000
25000
0
4000
0
201782
44000
0
0
9687
5954
0
0
0
0
0
0
296936
905000
0
0
0
0
0
1900000
0
0
14000
20289
25000
0
8813869
8356
86448
10000
500
0
40000
4000
5914491
0
0
113000
1021393
165000
97000
4000000
5000
50000
50000
10000
150000
332000
3500
2500
44800
74400
1500000
5000
5000
5000
5000
45000
10000
540000
7000
50000
6696494
7500
7500
620200
17500
10900
11650
17500
7500
7500
10000
17500
65000
615399
62000
1629223
12774
29580
6000
21975
20050
5996
10500
11752
108313
19200
1300000
25000
82916
95575
60000
47770
15000
250000
50000
84000
4000000
5200
33150
438000
17343267
10000
1000
45000
100000
30000
10000
36000
5000
175000
11250
300
58995
19220
269000
1414756
5000
50080
2600000
1900000
500000
1000000
40000
25000000
170000
100000
11750
267627
10000
12645
12645
7500
7500
421731
12645
13919
444324
6696494
50000
4000
4000
106000
112037
78000
4500
8500
5000
43150
15865
16360
4000
12000
3000
5000
6200
14000
8500
6667
13833
5000
18300
32000
40500
18300
18000
45449
611500
34637.92
52190
523000
60000
39968
15725000
10840
10000
4500000
6988
2156402
16996
30800
80650
173771
17793920
0
687700
6114000
77355
0
20050000
11700
15570
8070
240000
363000
1909201
79500
110000
8000000
46600
10000
59000
9000
6000
40000
3200000
3200000
60000
250000
1200000
166137
20000
200000
26000
80000
61500
48000
40000
16000
148330
3624000
530000
448536
9550
7000
1960000
803000
123300
10000
10000
10000
7400
500000
21900000
25000
803920
978000
978000
15000
20000
9250
8000000
45000
16000
33000
99000
6050538
706424
16588
3320000
2000000
7459790
3882298
5624000
15000
7250
8500
7500
500000
12500
5850
7500
10000
7500
7500
60000
375000
500000
355488
0
8725000
40000
400000
596000
260000
60000
10000
12500
5500
3000
355000
14500000
39600
212500
560000
36329400
80000
12500
40000
40000
40000
13200
21000
49300
3000
10000
250000
699112.5
0
0
350000
750000
1679500
200000
2000000
52500
2755497
1661625
7500
7500
389004
9650
7500
100000
1960000
8030
30000
1700000
4547066
711324
166137
61500
80000
15000
80000
5449307
166137
150000
411060
166137
1400000
10000
33000
15474395
129440
2159647
95723
16000
150000
25000
15000
25000
250000
100000
407667
750000
400000
450000
15000
6000000
930750
3907500
38500
20506477
401000
46500
22283
1320000
104650
26000
48000
990000
60000
120000
100000
40000
488000
400000
8725000
247000
29500000
350000
150000
80000
40000
402610
278000
14500000
95000
21500
72000
45000
102602
42123
255744
2500000
350641
350641
350641
261680
250000
250000
3000
13031000
12500
231768
7187738
5460
8407950
2000000
17700
7130000
437900
8030
100000
9200
9200
9200
9200
640825
300000
65000
20000
247000
145000
262296
1062818
5435
6190
6190
5500
6190
60000
50000
2000
20000
20000
767142
160000
700000
5000
672125
90238.5
10000
72000
60000
550000
15000
1600000
619807
50000
85000
5000000
72050
22600
94200
44000
1716000
8500
17500
11155
20178927
15000
22080
1241402
43254
70000
55866
100000
262000
312000
312000
45280
50000
500000
300000
25000000
25000
48000
778003.8
73995
600000
130000
946101
488000
15150000
250000
20000000
1600000
27750
29440
10000
500000
21000
5460
600000
42000
150000
2000
14000
350000
3000000
1031000
18000000
520000
599666
0
500000
1500000
14001233
3600
1600000
1031000
210000
6645000
2000000
2094136
5125000
35100000
83046
58000
17588400
6157850
0
14023
1500000
41600
0
2412961
7837500
2800000
10555
786000
0
0
1422600
7000000
55000
55000
55000
50625
25000
350641
115306
431360
3700000
1750000
26250
100000
40000
18000
96000
167000
240000
248980
1344000
2087000
162500
2800000
4659760
2007900
1582983
222752
560000
115000
89000
7500000
7500000
12000
20000
0
0
45000
320000
60000
0
204000
28446.4
0
1200000
953000
2500000
750000
572000
264600
946101
2900000
2402838
3480000
6100000
500000
515000
5000000
5460
97200000
12000
15000
0
123000
4295580
20000
12000000
0
0
100000
0
Biomass Inventory Match
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20000
0
0
26000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10400
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20000
0
0
3000
0
0
0
0
0
0
EE Improvements Match
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
105000
0
17000
19338
0
0
103786
0
0
0
125000
0
25000
0
85000
0
22000
85000
0
0
314381
215000
8000
0
55278
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1993496
0
0
810000
250000
367319
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
41000
0
0
0
40000
0
0
8000
192891
0
0
0
0
0
Other In-Kind Match to be Provided
130625
10000
17000
15280
60680
10251
0
76931
0
38316
40000
210000
4014
6884
423275
25000
3050
6566
4277
33446
33446
0
2600000
210000
154500
2500000
150000
0
0
0
0
2600000
0
49140
15000
39000
4916
3083
54799
37200
0
0
0
0
0
62500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
79300
15356
0
10000
0
48000
0
0
0
1000
2968
29650
0
0
0
0
3050
41708
150000
0
4000
7563
0
1987
0
7500
25164
0
0
34450
5000
95000
7538
0
0
6989
126500
62500
4990
13796
4439
500000
7296
50000
0
27036
0
0
0
0
0
51592
0
100000
32000
176850
0
0
100000
3000
3456
0
0
5000
20000
0
13669
23750
0
0
5000
10000
0
0
11000
16000
0
0
10000
0
0
33000
0
0
0
0
0
120000
137820
20677
14933
75000
0
25000
0
25000
0
13890
153000
0
5000
0
0
47302
10000
9687
5954
22057
8663
16765
21941
0
95000
56286
138000
0
0
15000
28800
44516
0
11250
6000
15800
0
0
125000
0
3456
10000
0
3000
0
77825
40000
0
0
0
0
0
82550
25800
6770
0
13669
300
120000
1000
Total In-Kind Match
130625
10000
17000
15280
60680
10251
0
76931
0
38316
40000
210000
0
4014
6884
423275
25000
3050
6566
4277
33446
33446
0
2600000
210000
154500
2500000
150000
0
0
0
0
2600000
0
49140
15000
39000
4916
3083
54799
37200
0
0
0
0
0
62500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
79300
15356
0
30000
0
48000
0
0
0
1000
107968
29650
0
0
0
0
3050
84708
150000
19338
4000
7563
0
105773
0
7500
25164
0
0
34450
5000
220000
7538
0
25000
6989
126500
62500
89990
13796
26439
500000
92296
50000
0
27036
0
0
0
0
314381
266592
0
100000
43000
176850
0
0
100000
3000
3456
55278
0
5000
20000
0
13669
23750
0
0
5000
10000
0
0
11000
16000
0
0
10000
0
0
33000
0
0
0
0
0
120000
137820
20677
14933
75000
0
25000
0
25000
0
24290
153000
0
5000
0
0
47302
10000
9687
5954
22057
8663
16765
21941
0
95000
56286
2131496
0
0
825000
278800
411835
0
11250
6000
15800
0
0
125000
0
3456
51000
0
3000
0
137825
40000
0
11000
192891
0
0
82550
25800
6770
0
13669
300
120000
1000
Total Match
641663
10000
22000
1115280
420680
60251
66300
126044
1545000
61996
125000
210000
0
4014
6884
423275
25000
3050
6566
4277
201782
44000
64448
2600000
210000
277000
2600000
875528
3000000
8000
283943
57500
5525000
33000
213193
25000
39000
4916
3083
54799
37200
113000
100000
0
0
15000000
62500
98800
100000
10000
750000
240000
85000
70000
0
79300
76780
0
30000
280
56900
1061000
10497695
0
1000
107968
29650
61890
50673
17000
75000
3050
124708
875528
19338
4000
7563
0
105773
0
7500
25164
201782
44000
34450
5000
250000
7538
40000
74004
6989
296500
62500
89990
13796
26439
500000
92296
100000
11000000
27036
33980
6500
57500
537460
314381
266592
64448
350000
54000
186850
97800
6695934
100000
103400
81842
168278
1250000
15000
20000
50000
13669
35750
1900000
13591226
100000
5000
10000
25802
11500000
11000
30000
9000
9000
30000
9000
141000
507953
18000
6500
18600
57500
0
120000
137820
20677
14933
150000
0
25000
0
25000
20000
49290
153000
4000
5000
201782
44000
47302
10000
19374
11908
22057
8663
16765
21941
0
95000
353222
3036496
0
0
825000
278800
411835
1900000
11250
6000
29800
20289
25000
125000
8813869
11812
137448
10000
3500
0
177825
44000
5914491
11000
192891
113000
1021393
82550
25800
6770
165000
97000
13669
300
4000000
120000
1000
5000
50000
50000
10000
150000
332000
3500
2500
44800
74400
1500000
5000
5000
5000
5000
45000
10000
540000
7000
50000
6696494
7500
7500
620200
17500
10900
11650
17500
7500
7500
10000
17500
65000
615399
62000
1629223
12774
29580
6000
21975
20050
5996
10500
11752
108313
19200
1300000
25000
82916
95575
60000
47770
15000
250000
50000
84000
4000000
5200
33150
438000
17343267
10000
1000
45000
100000
30000
10000
36000
5000
175000
11250
300
58995
19220
269000
1414756
5000
50080
2600000
1900000
500000
1000000
40000
25000000
170000
100000
11750
267627
10000
12645
12645
7500
7500
421731
12645
13919
444324
6696494
50000
4000
4000
106000
112037
78000
4500
8500
5000
43150
15865
16360
4000
12000
3000
5000
6200
14000
8500
6667
13833
5000
18300
32000
40500
18300
18000
45449
611500
34637.92
52190
523000
60000
39968
15725000
10840
10000
4500000
6988
2156402
16996
30800
80650
173771
17793920
0
687700
6114000
77355
0
20050000
11700
15570
8070
240000
363000
1909201
79500
110000
8000000
46600
10000
59000
9000
6000
40000
3200000
3200000
60000
250000
1200000
166137
20000
200000
26000
80000
61500
48000
40000
16000
148330
3624000
530000
448536
9550
7000
1960000
803000
123300
10000
10000
10000
7400
500000
21900000
25000
803920
978000
978000
15000
20000
9250
8000000
45000
16000
33000
99000
6050538
706424
16588
3320000
2000000
7459790
3882298
5624000
15000
7250
8500
7500
500000
12500
5850
7500
10000
7500
7500
60000
375000
500000
355488
0
8725000
40000
400000
596000
260000
60000
10000
12500
5500
3000
355000
14500000
39600
212500
560000
36329400
80000
12500
40000
40000
40000
13200
21000
49300
3000
10000
250000
699112.5
0
0
350000
750000
1679500
200000
2000000
52500
2755497
1661625
7500
7500
389004
9650
7500
100000
1960000
8030
30000
1700000
4547066
711324
166137
61500
80000
15000
80000
5449307
166137
150000
411060
166137
1400000
10000
33000
15474395
129440
2159647
95723
16000
150000
25000
15000
25000
250000
100000
407667
750000
400000
450000
15000
6000000
930750
3907500
38500
20506477
401000
46500
22283
1320000
104650
26000
48000
990000
60000
120000
100000
40000
488000
400000
8725000
247000
29500000
350000
150000
80000
40000
402610
278000
14500000
95000
21500
72000
45000
102602
42123
255744
2500000
350641
350641
350641
261680
250000
250000
3000
13031000
12500
231768
7187738
5460
8407950
2000000
17700
7130000
437900
8030
100000
9200
9200
9200
9200
640825
300000
65000
20000
247000
145000
262296
1062818
5435
6190
6190
5500
6190
60000
50000
2000
20000
20000
767142
160000
700000
5000
672125
90238.5
10000
72000
60000
550000
15000
1600000
619807
50000
85000
5000000
72050
22600
94200
44000
1716000
8500
17500
11155
20178927
15000
22080
1241402
43254
70000
55866
100000
262000
312000
312000
45280
50000
500000
300000
25000000
25000
48000
778003.8
73995
600000
130000
946101
488000
15150000
250000
20000000
1600000
27750
29440
10000
500000
21000
5460
600000
42000
150000
2000
14000
350000
3000000
1031000
18000000
520000
599666
0
500000
1500000
14001233
3600
1600000
1031000
210000
6645000
2000000
2094136
5125000
35100000
83046
58000
17588400
6157850
0
14023
1500000
41600
0
2412961
7837500
2800000
10555
786000
0
0
1422600
7000000
55000
55000
55000
50625
25000
350641
115306
431360
3700000
1750000
26250
100000
40000
18000
96000
167000
240000
248980
1344000
2087000
162500
2800000
4659760
2007900
1582983
222752
560000
115000
89000
7500000
7500000
12000
20000
0
0
45000
320000
60000
0
204000
28446.4
0
1200000
953000
2500000
750000
572000
264600
946101
2900000
2402838
3480000
6100000
500000
515000
5000000
5460
97200000
12000
15000
0
123000
4295580
20000
12000000
0
0
100000
0
Other Grant Funds To Be Provided
1000000
1000000
801500
453071
1000000
Other Grant Funds Not Yet Approved
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1984500
0
0
0
0
0
0
2800000
0
0
0
0
1500000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
250000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Cost for Requested Phases
2131740
85000
110000
1924280
1647680
1085427
331500
420146
5465000
157729
850000
350000
255000
401441
695270
1072305
345000
308050
656613
431982
2219600
484000
449178
3000000
350000
5559000
6000000
4875528
6196000
160000
2839432
1150000
6200000
220000
509231
858556
174000
496526
311394
484691
378535
780000
200000
220000
1251000
19000000
502819
494000
486000
90000
1500000
1340000
0
1375000
1750000
420765
383900
85000
55000
4297280
506200
5461000
14497695
230000
164000
299754
325425
309450
253369
102000
150000
308050
932343
4875528
50000
60000
763898
220000
200718
1288018
389900
2541549
2219600
484000
3479490
284562
2620189
706701
660977
390449
705893
2313009
491146
503990
433379
454277
7620000
736896
3100000
19000000
552036
679592
130000
1150000
4886000
102275
292184
449178
1100000
313807
679950
489000
13391869
1100000
53000
170583
740000
2500000
200000
208073
4358784
455642
47750
2700000
17045146
250000
47050
306000
152867
17500000
456252
184000
259817
320456
100000
302737
1397403
4749528
360000
130000
372000
1150000
1400000
800000
428646
689251
497773
2997000
447800
375000
160000
225000
161000
311166
450000
629000
230000
2219600
484000
3096898
159000
332590
204428
735242
288745
558814
731372
1250000
2495189
1709825
3257653
3378500
9281615
373838
274750
318289
3800000
213750
54000
133000
135254
300000
700000
12813869
167127
1323851
223536
62772
1375000
980950
587900
11828982
267150
230200
962984
1254013
492850
367965
225660
825000
1940379
455642
81000
8000000
1560558
76000
82000
181000
35700
510000
131700
55000
700000
3320000
70000
292500
172700
372000
527908
181000
695950
4067778
223195
190195
114765
190000
517000
223536
33004000
200000
190000
8696494
350000
117136
150000
150000
6202000
350000
218000
233000
350000
150000
150000
200000
350000
650000
6153991
548000
3258446
438585
1015385
189200
1341063
3485000
688400
205859
360500
437453
168959
1422693
486090
6114000
3900000
381400
2870635
2848939
2050000
1415234
170974
6709000
3399387
690000
9570434
320000
8000000
25200
165750
2190000
20797187
90000
11000
250000
1100000
190000
51360
211000
249385
875000
75000
225000
81300
485828
120200
1790000
31350
2400000
8689033
314367
125000
381320
6500000
3800000
3825000
3686450
340000
29000000
400000
590000
459000
235000
2676273
100000
252905
252905
150000
150000
4217306
252905
278378
4443244
8696494
961400
629000
139825
3113750
527908
296900
45000
48500
50000
486180
317305
327201
50000
112000
30000
50000
37000
64000
48500
133349
413619
50000
115000
587000
338578
115000
168000
401873
6715000
161702.92
341900
2516496
527500
1476485
4000000
155294
19725000
143363
170000
12725000
81973
9156402
186956
295800
323696
478981
1388995
21247840
850000
1375400
12228000
4962965
3244897
23350000
639050
78000
230700
80700
1440000
1815000
9546005
397500
1260000
16000000
233000
200000
295000
39000
26000
165000
3908162
3908162
2500000
1344695
4624041
142000
1561368
302395
2200000
229000
1455000
198000
395000
250000
100000
845805
5520836
1005000
2148536
180825
112050
2360000
4405000
493200
168625
168625
138625
350000
44400
1000000
23900000
250000
4019600
4978000
4978000
125000
270000
94250
10000000
425000
161000
274623
1054000
2000000
8050538
1327235
472787
720388
12725200
500000
3330467
14459790
5882270
9624000
265000
565485
145000
93500
150000
4500000
250000
117000
150000
100000
150000
150000
1190876
154477
360000
1875000
2500000
3554888
2579200
12725000
200000
2400000
2440000
1300000
600000
327130
125000
755500
248065
3050000
16500000
198000
850000
1314651
37792600
1780000
149709
440000
440000
440000
145200
231000
149300
72000
200000
600000
4660750
2000000
250050
1371287
3795000
9679500
850000
45000
6000000
350000
6755497
16616251
150000
150000
3890042
193000
150000
4000000
400000
2360000
229500
912000
4000000
277360
3600000
6501066
2589200
1258935
212942
144301
1661368
648284
140000
198000
500000
85000
1780000
267024
675185
8763227
1661368
1571240
2035300
1661368
5347236
4000000
77000
268523
20000000
317190
4152805
588365
100000
2500000
140000
85000
150000
3120000
1491000
293238
275142
2156010
219071
4494546
1600000
4450000
232170
260000
1600000
10000000
1861500
7815000
290500
35506477
687580
171500
322283
500000
7652000
615591
229000
395200
3308255
312000
600000
500000
200000
2332000
2400000
12725000
1235000
150000
49500000
1371287
658000
340000
240000
2013050
1275500
578719
313280
551408
16500000
4095000
101500
167190
300000
5033414
416392
161386
1486857
90000
4500000
3857047
3857047
3857047
654200
600000
1250000
248065
17031000
561887
2231768
11187738
932250
200000
15907950
2868000
50000
357152
15760000
1995000
1077706
172388
900000
43940
38264.61
38843.58
39869
2428301
600000
500000
146750
1235000
4446950
2727960
10733179
108691
123800
123800
115500
123800
160000
1600000
32000
108500
108500
1590092
1750000
5000000
1760000
8100000
6940000
13700000
20000
454828
1154512
393298.5
95581
4097000
996000
617934
312000
2750000
45500
3360000
200000
1919807
370000
3965660
15000000
1572050
112200
2396830
6944000
1380439
8580000
120500
306000
133255
2349751
24657272
95984
198168
110400
2482804
187361
4406950
279330
1795450
237772
2995000
500000
4257116
3612000
3612000
30000
116625
42000
955460
676400
4659500
1215627
40000000
368000
100000
395200
2812220.7
708963
4367616
5033414
650000
500000
2379007
2440000
21000000
5000000
55000000
10188000
1878070
552073
60000
1000000
142000
200000
5100000
220179
400000
32000
355056
6350000
15020000
5157000
38000000
2520000
3197986
150000
2868000
1950000
3200000
93341555
193600
3200000
5157000
1050000
17145000
11650000
8363886
25625000
46800000
1937072
195543
3225500
21923000
8257850
50000
123494.29
3000000
451030
565439
4555922
15675000
14875535
457505
3930399
800000
495000
20824011
12231750
605000
605000
605000
1075625
250000
3506406
1153056
4313603
7400000
8710000
131250
2500000
224000
95000
471000
991815
3633600
498480
2340000
3087000
10921428
12900000
5042539
4007900
15534309
14673250
8996832
3805349
200000
890000
1200000
300000
15000000
15000000
60000
140500
207500
831203
205000
1620000
360000
2220141
1020000
316668.7
286149
4145991
4005000
5490000
37459970
2860000
628825
2379007
14500000
6155019
5260000
11600000
7652000
2455000
10000000
200000
98150000
839000
150000
105620
95000
40000
750000
3383000
8342810
100000
22000000
775000
650000
1200000
898000
2000000
Match percent
0.301004343869327
0.117647058823529
0.2
0.57958301286715
0.255316566323558
5.55090812270942E-02
0.2
0.300000476025001
0.282708142726441
0.393053908919729
0.147058823529412
0.6
0
9.99897867930779E-03
9.90118946596286E-03
0.394733774439175
0.072463768115942
9.9009900990099E-03
9.99980201427629E-03
9.90087549944211E-03
9.09091728239322E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
0.143479867669387
0.866666666666667
0.6
4.98291059543083E-02
0.433333333333333
0.179576037713249
0.484183344092963
0.05
9.99999295633775E-02
0.05
0.891129032258065
0.15
0.418656758916877
2.91186597030363E-02
0.224137931034483
9.90079069374011E-03
9.90064034631367E-03
0.113059660691038
9.82736074603405E-02
0.144871794871795
0.5
0
0
0.789473684210526
0.124299201104175
0.2
0.205761316872428
0.111111111111111
0.5
0.17910447761194
0.198783910196445
5.09090909090909E-02
0
0.188466246004302
0.2
0
0.4
2.86509495743288E-04
0.357412060301508
0.370849353372947
0.72409407150585
0
6.02409638554217E-03
0.266749680052575
9.11116232618883E-02
0.2
0.199996842549799
0.166666666666667
0.5
9.9009900990099E-03
0.130264701366177
0.179576037713249
0.278894689780496
6.66666666666667E-02
9.90053645905605E-03
0
0.34736161101332
0
1.92357014619133E-02
9.90104853378786E-03
9.09091728239322E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
9.90087627784532E-03
1.75708632916552E-02
9.10684109545827E-02
1.06664629029816E-02
6.05164778804709E-02
0.159335820847319
9.90093399424559E-03
0.128188000997834
0.127253403265017
0.152786974311958
3.50705045261694E-02
5.49992095124772E-02
0.061576354679803
0.112296446265708
0.032258064516129
0.578947368421053
4.89750668434667E-02
5.00005150141335E-02
0.05
0.05
0.11
0.754533716063131
0.525631723398214
0.143479867669387
0.411764705882353
0.166252574605843
0.274799617618943
0.2
0.705290330001394
0.111111111111111
0.2
0.479775359939971
0.211596448034524
0.5
0.075
8.76912216702547E-02
1.14710891845065E-02
2.91256757246261E-02
0.5
0.703703703703704
0.797366358727581
0.4
9.60614793467819E-02
3.16455696202532E-02
0.168787246429903
0.657142857142857
2.35419003021924E-02
0.15
3.46397656812295E-02
2.80849789050603E-02
0.272727272727273
0.02972877448082
0.100901457918725
0.106210146600292
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0
0.130434782608696
0.243297920793128
0.029125488781961
2.91258538031542E-02
0.048828125
0
0.0625
0
0.1
0.124223602484472
0.146934322236001
0.253731343283582
6.35930047694754E-03
2.12765957446809E-02
9.09091728239322E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
1.50442083836906E-02
5.91715976331361E-02
5.66032774624062E-02
5.66018005342662E-02
0.029125880266579
2.91283354852593E-02
2.91271919232634E-02
2.91260073833851E-02
0
3.66768602600042E-02
0.199999886756835
0.563446288087414
0
0
0.688166374439249
0.503658206124108
0.56406172102273
0.5
0.05
0.1
0.200268817204301
0.150006654147012
8.33333333333333E-02
0.151515151515152
0.68783823215299
6.92448837222936E-02
9.99730152576534E-02
0.044735523584568
5.32141336739038E-02
0
0.158946168800697
7.00748526835483E-02
0.5
3.95470070106058E-02
0.455909012481948
0.117343590340026
0.81449953070662
0.143465415363226
6.55213134737724E-02
2.91270490040012E-02
0.2
4.99902338666827E-02
2.91256757246261E-02
0.003690036900369
0.5
7.14048548160789E-02
0.012987012987013
0
0
0.140056022408964
9.80392156862745E-02
0.379650721336371
0.181818181818182
0.214285714285714
0.1
0.05
8.54700854700855E-03
0.259409380428489
0.2
0
0
0
0.368751687038968
2.24019355272296E-02
2.62888088540708E-02
4.35672896789091E-02
2.63157894736842E-02
8.70406189555126E-02
0.044735523584568
1.63616531329536E-02
0.035
0.263157894736842
0.770022264144608
0
0
0.05
0.05
0.1
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.1
9.99999837503825E-02
0.113138686131387
0.5
2.91254830876569E-02
2.91318071470427E-02
3.17124735729387E-02
1.63862547844508E-02
0
2.91255084253341E-02
2.91267323750723E-02
0.029126213592233
2.68646003113477E-02
0
7.61323771186053E-02
3.94988582361291E-02
0
0.333333333333333
6.55479811221814E-02
2.88842015790931E-02
3.35475768347444E-02
2.92682926829268E-02
3.37541353585343E-02
0
2.23580265315248E-03
7.35426710756969E-02
0.072463768115942
0
0.2625
0.5
0.206349206349206
0.2
0.2
0.833923693622604
0.111111111111111
9.09090909090909E-02
0.18
9.09090909090909E-02
0.157894736842105
0.194704049844237
0.170616113744076
0.020049321330473
0.2
0
0.05
0.003690036900369
0.121431864775188
0.159900166389351
0.150279329608939
0
0
0.162820880068012
0
0.04
0.131333263400818
0.4
0.5
0.130718954248366
0.271263681861954
0.117647058823529
0.862068965517241
0
0.288135593220339
0.217864923747277
0.05
9.99998879038125E-02
0.1
4.99990114865266E-02
4.99990114865266E-02
0.05
0.05
0.100000094847279
4.99990114865266E-02
5.00003592237892E-02
9.99999099756844E-02
0.770022264144608
5.20074890784273E-02
6.35930047694754E-03
2.86071875558734E-02
3.40425531914894E-02
0.212228267046531
0.262714718760525
0.1
0.175257731958763
0.1
8.87531366983422E-02
0.049999212114527
4.99998471887311E-02
0.08
0.107142857142857
0.1
0.1
0.167567567567568
0.21875
0.175257731958763
4.99966253965159E-02
0.033443821487891
0.1
0.159130434782609
5.45144804088586E-02
0.119617931466309
0.159130434782609
0.107142857142857
0.113092942297691
9.10647803425167E-02
0.214207139858699
0.152646972799064
0.207828663347766
0.113744075829384
2.70696959332469E-02
0
0
0.797211660329531
7.56122569979702E-02
5.88235294117647E-02
0.353634577603143
8.52475815207446E-02
0.235507571642224
9.09090909090909E-02
0.104124408384043
0
0.168378286403845
0.125105561935068
0.837446065105912
0
0.5
0.5
1.55864488264576E-02
0
0.858672376873662
0
0.15
6.74902470741222E-02
0.1
0.166666666666667
0.2
0.2
0.2
8.73015873015873E-02
0.5
0.2
0.05
0.2
0.230769230769231
0.230769230769231
0.242424242424242
0.818799220707842
0.818799220707842
0.024
0.185915765285065
0.259513269886664
0
0.106404768126412
6.61386597000612E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
0.11353711790393
5.49828178694158E-02
0.310606060606061
0.121518987341772
0.16
0.16
0.175371391751054
0.656422324445066
0.527363184079602
0.208763548760644
5.28134937093875E-02
6.24721106648818E-02
0.830508474576271
0.182292849035187
0.25
5.93031875463306E-02
5.93031875463306E-02
7.21370604147881E-02
0
0.166666666666667
0.5
0.916317991631799
0.1
0.2
0.196464443551627
0.196464443551627
0.12
7.40740740740741E-02
9.81432360742706E-02
0.8
0.105882352941176
9.93788819875776E-02
0.120164734927519
9.39278937381404E-02
0
0.7515693982191
0.532252389365862
0
2.30264801745726E-02
0.26089963222582
0
0.600516384038635
0.515898916927563
0.659999965999521
0.584372402327515
5.66037735849057E-02
0
0.05
9.09090909090909E-02
0.05
0.111111111111111
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.1
0.05
0.05
0
0
0.166666666666667
0.2
0.2
9.99997749577483E-02
0
0.68565815324165
0.2
0.166666666666667
0.244262295081967
0.2
0.1
3.05688869868248E-02
0.1
7.27994705493051E-03
1.20936044988209E-02
0.116393442622951
0.878787878787879
0.2
0.25
0.425968565041216
0.961283425855855
4.49438202247191E-02
8.34953142429647E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
0.330207635632954
4.16666666666667E-02
0.05
0.416666666666667
0.15
0
0
0.255234680996757
0.197628458498024
0.173511028462214
0.235294117647059
0
0.333333333333333
0.15
0.407889604569434
9.99999939817953E-02
0.05
0.05
9.99999485866734E-02
0.05
0.05
0
0.25
0.830508474576271
0
8.80482456140351E-03
0
0.108162676665705
0.472222222222222
0.699433908223667
0
0.56502043393821
0
0
0.100000120382721
0
0
0.310606060606061
0.16
0.176470588235294
4.49438202247191E-02
0
0
0.621837937097829
0.100000120382721
9.54660013747104E-02
0.201965312238982
0.100000120382721
0.261817507213072
0
0.12987012987013
0.122894500657299
0.77371975
0.408083483085848
0.520045366926692
0.162693226143635
0.16
0.06
0.178571428571429
0.176470588235294
0.166666666666667
8.01282051282051E-02
6.70690811535882E-02
0
0
0.18908400239331
0
0.166868911787753
0.25
0.101123595505618
6.46078304690528E-02
0
0
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.132530120481928
0.577541866516354
0.583204863434073
0.271137026239067
6.91410964897311E-02
0
0.172503920543649
0.169999236506057
0.11353711790393
0.121457489878543
0.299251418043651
0.192307692307692
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.20926243567753
0.166666666666667
0.68565815324165
0.2
0
0.595959595959596
0.255234680996757
0.227963525835866
0.235294117647059
0.166666666666667
0.2
0.217953743629949
0
0
0
0.878787878787879
2.31990231990232E-02
0.211822660098522
0.430647766014714
0.15
0
0.246407231647102
0.261007770190723
0.172003091084079
0
0.555555555555556
9.09091851875282E-02
9.09091851875282E-02
9.09091851875282E-02
0.4
0.416666666666667
0.2
1.20936044988209E-02
0.76513416710704
2.22464659264229E-02
0.103849504070316
0.642465706651336
0
0.0273
0.528537617983461
0.697350069735007
0
4.95587312964788E-02
0.45241116751269
0
0.406326029547947
4.65809685128895E-02
0.111111111111111
0.209376422394174
0.240431040588157
0.236847376065749
0.230755724999373
0.263898503521598
0.5
0.13
0.136286201022147
0.2
3.26066180190917E-02
9.61509699555712E-02
9.90217343808391E-02
5.00041401771996E-02
0.05
0.05
4.76190476190476E-02
0.05
0.375
0.03125
0.0625
0.184331797235023
0.184331797235023
0.482451329860159
0
0
9.09090909090909E-02
0
0
5.10948905109489E-02
0.25
0
0.582172381057971
0.229440234325836
0
0
1.00401606425703E-02
0.11651729796386
0.192307692307692
0.2
0.32967032967033
0.476190476190476
0
0.32284859884353
0.135135135135135
2.14340109843002E-02
0.333333333333333
4.58318755764766E-02
0.201426024955437
0.039301911274475
6.33640552995392E-03
0
0.2
7.05394190871369E-02
5.71895424836601E-02
8.37116806123598E-02
0
0.818376298886592
0.156276046007668
0
0.2
0.5
0.230859143578439
1.58840014068687E-02
0.2
0
0
0
0.2
6.15440124253133E-02
8.63787375415282E-02
8.63787375415282E-02
0
0
0
4.73907855901869E-02
7.39207569485512E-02
0.107307651035519
0.246786226367134
0.625
0
0.25
0.121457489878543
0.276651046626604
0.104370749954511
0
0.119203387601338
0.2
0
0.39768735442981
0.2
0.721428571428571
0.05
0.363636363636364
0.157047506870828
1.47758070785434E-02
5.33262811258656E-02
0.166666666666667
0.5
0.147887323943662
0.0273
0.117647058823529
0.19075388661044
0.375
0.0625
3.94303997115948E-02
5.51181102362205E-02
0.199733688415446
0.19992243552453
0.473684210526316
0.206349206349206
0.187513641398055
0
0
0.256410256410256
0.46875
0.149999997321664
1.85950413223141E-02
0.5
0.19992243552453
0.2
0.387576552930884
0.171673819742489
0.250378352837425
0.2
0.75
4.28719221588046E-02
0.296609952798106
0
0.802280709756876
0.745696519069734
0
0.113551808751644
0.5
9.22333325942842E-02
0
0.529631762791373
0.5
0.188228524217784
2.30707861116272E-02
0.199979696717814
0
0
6.83153692148933E-02
0.572281153555297
9.09090909090909E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
4.70656595002905E-02
0.1
0.100000114076921
0.100000346904227
9.99999304525706E-02
0.5
0.200918484500574
0.2
0.04
0.178571428571429
0.189473684210526
0.203821656050955
0.168378175365366
6.60501981505945E-02
0.499478414379714
0.574358974358974
0.676060900550696
1.48790066646962E-02
0.217054263565891
0.924090026869401
0.500985553531775
0.1019023762177
0
2.47589373681758E-02
0.147161272198687
0.575
0.1
0
0
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.142348754448399
0
0
0.219512195121951
0.197530864197531
0.166666666666667
0
0.2
8.98301600379198E-02
0
0.289436228877487
0.237952559300874
0.455373406193078
2.00213721473883E-02
0.2
0.420784797042102
0.39768735442981
0.2
0.390386772161061
0.661596958174905
0.525862068965517
6.53423941453215E-02
0.209775967413442
0.5
0.0273
0.990320937340805
1.43027413587604E-02
0
0
0
0.375
0
3.63582618977239E-02
0.514884073831239
0.2
0.545454545454545
0
0
8.33333333333333E-02
0
0
Additional Monitoring Cost
8000
15000
3500
15000
400
11230
9091
15000
15000
15000
20000
0
Total Cost Through Construction
2131740
3835000
2298280
17306696
7200000
420146
5795000
922999
350000
255000
401441
703269
1072305
4114132
656613
439982
19772275
7751695
449178
3000000
350000
5559000
6580000
59067808
6400000
2689400
9000000
10317500
6950000
4621500
509231
858556
5485000
526108
319394
484691
37041535
795421
200000
220000
1409458
20675000
502819
3019975
15891000
297510
79992000
1340000
427600
6610000
1750000
236602
383900
1400000
4526280
3380000
5461000
13717479
25000000
165000
299754
309450
4283056
872635
59067808
50000
60000
763898
2200000
200718
1408908
4526458
5541549
26272407
4565200
3479490
284562
2692700
706701
660977
439453
705893
2458622
6870575
503990
433379
458716
7770000
729600
3100000
19000000
6000000
9000000
1634500
9200000
4886000
102275
292184
449178
10000000
200000
679950
3011475
13391869
45320707
15922000
170583
740000
50000000
2100000
1423292
4358784
469311
2350000
5500000
21772523
52050
2566000
152867
19000000
467252
2250000
259817
320456
110000
302737
1397403
4782528
3946050
4833000
3214875
8155000
1650000
2000000
5000000
689251
497773
38660000
447800
8000000
72400000
250000
2284000
335456
603000
629000
235000
17342837
4565200
3144200
7224213
332590
204428
757299
297408
558814
753313
1250000
2692700
1957261
5389149
49000000
14510599
388838
403550
362805
3800000
31500000
8340000
148800
135254
300000
825000
13391869
170583
1374892
14500000
3562772
1058775
627900
49000000
278150
230200
962984
232620
585450
3244225
225660
825000
1940379
455642
1300000
51000000
1940558
77000
82000
2000000
510000
81700
460000
3674000
7500000
3400000
4300000
2777885
10000000
2000000
0
4067778
190195
114765
190000
517000
15900000
311304000
1020000
8696494
350000
117136
2040000
1530000
6202000
7449000
23000000
233000
5000000
1530000
3060000
1020000
2509850
650000
6153991
548000
3258447
438585
985808
183200
1341063
27000000
668350
199863
360500
425701
168959
1314380
3006607
38804000
4300000
6129000
2870635
2848939
18000000
1415234
1633974
8009000
3399387
690000
14510599
140000000
145000000
463216
165750
46475000
23808913
90000
10000
250000
51100000
2600000
51360
175000
244385
875000
75000
10000000
1300000
485829
8000000
16700000
31350
2400000
9395283
7400000
1348032
6903000
3800000
4405000
3886450
340000
36795000
400000
590000
459000
8000000
2676273
100000
252905
252905
1200000
2500000
3795575
252905
278378
4443244
8696494
45000000
625000
139825
3113750
486180
317305
327201
133350
5936570
582000
338578
168000
401873
6736891
161702.92
25000000
2516496
5882000
1476485
35392921
255294
19725000
2012000
12725000
81973
30402216
2100000
295800
478892
1215224
23900000
1075000
2440000
38804000
4962965
3244897
27050000
723138
30000000
80700
3840000
46100000
9546005
3040000
61780000
23150000
264400
200000
140000000
39000
26000
165000
2500000
1344695
4624041
142000
1561368
302395
2200000
2711000
175000000
16700000
3100000
370000000
25000000
845805
5520836
1005000
2123536
1075000
662050
3600000
4405000
493200
2937068
1815480
1594320
5800000
34530000
23900000
1700000
4019600
15201108
15201108
4250000
2200000
2500000
10200000
18000000
1466813
274623
1054000
2500000000
8459989
6452000
472787
720388
12725200
18530700
3330467
15907950
300000000
160830500
4198905
565485
4000000
2500000
2000000
4500000
4100000
2000000
2000000
100000
2000000
750000
1190876
580179
27160000
85000000
3554889
27000000
14500000
40200000
3000000
2440000
33300000
6300000
15500000
125000
755500
1800000
45000000
19150000
198000
89560000
4560000
93300000
61780000
149709
4433000
4433000
4433000
4565200
14000000
11000000
72000
200000
600000
4660750
226000000
4000000
36016000
3795000
15201108
650000
45000
6000000
350000
10755497
16616252
4436800
4436800
3890042
22193000
5690800
4000000
160000000
3600000
1812000
5000000
2100000
6501066
27000000
2617585
212942
144301
1661368
807972
3652680
16700000
330000000
7785000
61780000
267024
675185
8763228
1661368
1571240
98626186
1661368
5347236
2500000000
77000
268523
20000000
492652
25000000
2500000
22670000
5800000
4200000
45000000
1491000
293238
275142
6356222
219071
4494546
10644000
8525000
232170
260000
1600000
10200000
1861500
7815000
950500
35506477
286580
86951000
322283
17772000
7652000
615591
2711000
2274746
3606255
312000
6300000
22000000
4020000
2440000
3000000
14500000
33235000
4300000
49500000
36016000
658000
340000
240000
100015360
1497500
578719
313280
551408
19150000
4598905
101500
167390
300000
31000000
416392
161386
1506857
4637616
4500000
3857047
3857047
3857047
1070000000
600000
1250000
1800000
17031000
561887
226000000
11187738
932250
200000
15907950
2868000
50000
357152
15760000
1995000
3104443
1672388
900000
43940
38264.61
38843.58
39869
7858177
100000000
500000
146750
33235000
4600000
2727960
10733179
5750000
4436800
4436800
6310000
4436800
6420000
1550000
32000
1308500
1540023
1590092
1900000
330000000
1760000
8100000
6940000
135300000
1520000
454828
2498591
393298.5
95581
4097000
996000
617934
312000
24000000
313000
3360000
200000
2011412
370000
3965660
15000000
1572050
112200
2396830
6944000
1380439
140000000
120500
1300000
133255
2349751
15700582
95984
198168
19860400
2482803
187361
6000000
279331
1795450
45000000
14000000
4257116
3612000
3612000
30000
116625
42000
1798360
626400
4659500
1215627
40000000
368000
100000
2203497
6134785.5
708936
4637616
5033414
6300000
17722000
2379007
2440000
21000000
5000000
55000000
10188000
1850320
8945073
1430000
15907950
142000
200000
4500000
220179
400000
32000
355056
35000000
17750000
5157000
38000000
109975000
3197986
150000
2868000
1950000
3200000
93341555
190000
3200000
5157000
1050000
17145000
23319539
8363886
25625000
46800000
1937072
178000
250000000
21923000
8257850
600000
123494.29
3000000
451030
565439
4555922
15675000
14807535
461950
3930399
800000
28000000
20824011
12231750
605000
605000
605000
1500000
4100000
3506406
1153056
4313603
7400000
8710000
96000000
2500000
8000000
1265000
8150000
991815
3633600
7500000
2440000
3087000
10921428
13100000
382779
4007900
15534309
140229650
8996832
3805349
3000000
890000
1200000
300000
15000000
15000000
60000
2090500
207500
831203
109975000
17750000
7000000
2220141
26924120
441229
286149
4285161
4005000
40000000
37459970
45058000
628825
2379007
14500000
6155019
5260000
11600000
7652000
10020000
200000
98150000
839000
1900000
40000
10153000
3260000
1070000000
100000
22000000
100000000
60000000
200000000
898000
225000000
Preconstruction Funding
0
0
0
227150
64398
440000
2526200
0
440000
0
0
4145000
807500
0
0
80000
450000
0
0
180600
2100000
0
0
1320582
0
565439
117793
20000
2366230
155500
0
200000
0
0
47625
50000
1025000
225000
0
31500
210000
220000
0
105000
0
184000
77000
225000
0
249600
249500
174000
101000
17886
0
0
1000000
455346
0
3035138
251211
85000
0
120000
0
0
0
48000
120500
207500
0
160000
1300000
0
80000
816000
47444
0
210000
130000
2990000
0
2288000
0
0
0
85000
320000
0
820000
0
0
0
0
58000
150000
0
0
25000
0
240000
0
0
300000
0
0
0
98000
2000000
Construction Funding
2598320
0
0
2640850
1385602
1260000
0
0
1160000
4126000
840000
6355000
7842500
5468250
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
109471
179418
409430
0
1572097
0
9709305
291450
0
600000
0
0
0
500000
0
0
3155765
1006250
3672243
3480000
0
0
0
0
0
0
712415
0
0
822000
899000
10741042
0
382779
1000000
13495980
0
5738942
2994138
0
801000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
240778
0
0
192000
0
0
0
147720
0
0
3667181
1460000
5500000
0
0
0
0
0
442000
0
0
0
0
750000
3020000
0
0
0
0
0
0
402000
0
AEA Recommendation
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full FUnding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 2
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Withdrawn
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Withdrawn
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Withdrawn
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Withdrawn
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Withdrawn
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Withdrawn
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Partial Funding
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Full Funding
Full Funding
Full Funding
Partial Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Full Funding with Special Provision
Full Funding
Full Funding with Special Provision
Not Recommended
Did Not Pass Stage 1
Partial Funding
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Recommended
Partial Funding
Full Funding
S2 Recommended Funding
88000
809000
1227000
1025175
265200
19600
3920000
725000
397427
90922
649030
90000
650047
50000
2017818
440000
3400000
4000000
3196000
152000
2555489
792500
675000
187000
296038
111986
135000
53116
50000
429892
341335
667000
50000
40000
1251000
3925000
395200
750000
144000
1305000
307120
390000
45000
1800000
50000
90000
832635
358000
50000
60000
220000
1288018
88400
2017818
440000
3445040
200000
50000
620977
58000
379583
50000
50000
8000000
95000
325000
123500
400000
4348540
102275
240592
20000
500000
270807
493100
391200
40000
88742
627000
175000
455642
35750
800000
3453920
50000
47050
306000
97000
75000
170000
250817
311456
80000
293737
200000
4274575
342000
123500
353400
400000
428646
689251
497773
75000
225000
103000
450000
625000
2017818
440000
3096898
322903
198474
735242
288745
558814
731372
270000
620000
2352653
56841
274750
318289
1470548
35000
119000
114965
80000
560488
158771
1237403
500000
940950
125000
5914491
125000
230200
849984
232620
125000
367965
660000
75000
30700
460000
81700
40000
2988000
30000
290000
30000
30000
185000
472000
143000
250000
142500
142500
5581800
332500
207100
40000
142500
75000
332500
5538592
486000
225000
425811
985805
183200
1319088
668350
199863
350000
425701
168959
466890
6114000
2600000
356400
317788
2753364
400000
1367464
170974
6694000
3149387
236000
4000000
20000
132600
180000
3453920
60000
10000
500000
160000
41360
175000
300000
75000
213750
70000
314367
331240
200000
4000000
400000
420000
223250
240260
240260
142500
142500
240260
264459
3998920
625000
443030
301440
310841
126682
80723
555000
298078
356424
4069000
127065
1993496
467500
1436517
155294
30000
7000000
265000
279525
50000
1215224
49781
3244897
72630
448000
7800000
236000
30000
20000
125000
203000
136500
347000
84000
75000
1896836
475000
250000
61225
105050
277000
369900
99075
99075
69075
37000
500000
576080
100000
2000000
1060500
110000
250000
85000
380000
145000
2000000
472787
67500
1180000
500000
1330467
3751840
1999972
136750
565485
137750
85000
142500
275554
237500
111150
142500
90000
142500
142500
154477
300000
1184000
599200
80000
2000000
468000
93593
25000
750000
75000
2695000
700000
637500
1463200
600000
298000
298000
298000
132000
210000
100000
25000
30000
350000
213690
1060500
193200
80000
4000000
446400
142500
142500
240300
183350
142500
60000
400000
229500
2000000
247360
1900000
1954000
2589200
547611
144301
648284
140000
136500
420000
600000
1421240
1624240
1495231
67000
235523
38100
1993158
412642
84000
115000
2870000
1391000
293238
275142
1748343
1200000
850000
260000
80000
2000000
67325
252000
286580
125000
75000
500000
2000000
98149
203000
347200
2318255
240000
64000
80000
90000
2000000
4000000
428888
150000
700000
1021287
1610440
578719
34070
551408
2000000
151025
80000
255000
0
119263
90000
30000
132000
132000
132000
350000
1000000
193065
4000000
135000
1362551
100000
194540
248160
868000
639806
138210
85835
34740
1787476
435000
126750
428000
2465664
9670361
103256
117610
117610
110000
117610
30000
32500
32500
500000
130000
15000
482387
92000
101000
545934
252000
1760000
1300000
718175
632500
236000
16550
2349751
198168
88320
162000
237772
2995000
175000
395912
300000
910180
303000
915627
75000
347200
40000
500000
108000
5850000
50000
32597
500000
194540
15000
178179
250000
30000
12020000
4126000
2598320
0
0
2868000
1450000
1700000
2526200
190000
1600000
4126000
840000
10500000
8650000
5468250
80000
450000
0
180600
0
1500000
409430
565439
1689890
20000
12075535
446950
0
800000
47625
550000
550000
550000
1025000
225000
3155765
1037750
3882243
3700000
0
105000
0
184000
77000
225000
712415
249600
249500
996000
1000000
10758928
0
382779
1000000
13951326
8774080
3245349
85000
801000
120000
48000
120500
207500
0
160000
1300000
0
80000
816000
288222.3
210000
322000
2990000
0
2288000
147720
0
3752181
1780000
5500000
820000
0
0
0
500000
150000
0
0
25000
750000
3260000
0
300000
0
0
0
500000
2000000
AEA Grant Fund Request
1490077
75000
88000
809000
1227000
1025175
265200
19600
3920000
95733
725000
22748
255000
397427
90922
649030
320000
90000
650047
50000
2017818
440000
384730
150000
140000
5282000
3400000
4000000
3196000
152000
2555489
792500
675000
187000
296038
111986
135000
53116
50000
429892
341335
667000
50000
40000
1251000
3925000
440319
395200
52800
80000
750000
144000
342600
1305000
1750000
341465
307120
85000
45000
977000
102300
1800000
4000000
230000
165000
296786
295775
247560
202696
85000
75000
305000
832635
358000
50000
56000
756335
220000
198731
1288018
382400
88400
2017818
440000
3445040
279562
2495189
699163
620977
390449
698904
2016509
428646
499000
379583
454277
7620000
729600
3000000
8000000
525000
645613
123500
400000
4348540
102275
240592
384730
500000
270807
493100
391200
2797935
800000
40000
88742
627000
1250000
185000
30700
460000
81700
40000
2988000
30000
290000
30000
30000
185000
472000
143000
250000
142500
142500
5581800
332500
207100
40000
142500
75000
5538592
486000
225000
425811
985805
183200
1319088
668350
199863
350000
425701
168959
466890
6114000
2600000
356400
317788
2753364
400000
1367464
170974
6694000
3149387
236000
4000000
20000
132600
180000
3453920
60000
10000
500000
160000
41360
175000
300000
75000
213750
70000
30000
20000
125000
203000
136500
347000
84000
75000
1896836
475000
250000
61225
105050
277000
369900
99075
99075
69075
37000
500000
576080
100000
2000000
1060500
110000
250000
85000
380000
145000
2000000
472787
67500
1180000
500000
1330467
3751840
1999972
136750
565485
137750
85000
142500
275554
237500
111150
142500
90000
142500
142500
154477
300000
1184000
599200
80000
2000000
468000
93593
25000
750000
75000
2695000
700000
637500
1463200
600000
298000
298000
298000
132000
210000
100000
25000
30000
350000
213690
1060500
193200
80000
4000000
446400
142500
142500
240300
183350
142500
60000
400000
229500
2000000
247360
1900000
1954000
2589200
547611
144301
648284
140000
136500
420000
600000
1421240
1624240
1495231
67000
235523
38100
1993158
412642
84000
115000
2870000
1391000
293238
275142
1748343
1200000
850000
260000
80000
2000000
67325
252000
286580
125000
75000
500000
2000000
98149
203000
347200
2318255
240000
64000
80000
90000
2000000
4000000
428888
150000
700000
1021287
1610440
578719
34070
551408
2000000
151025
80000
255000
119263
90000
30000
132000
132000
132000
350000
1000000
193065
4000000
135000
921937
100000
194540
248162
868000
639806
138210
85835
34740
1787476
435000
428000
2465664
8000000
103256
117610
117610
110000
117610
30000
32500
32500
500000
130000
15000
482387
92000
101000
545934
252000
1760000
1300000
718175
632500
236000
16550
2349751
198168
88320
162000
237772
2995000
175000
395912
300000
910180
303000
915627
75000
347200
40000
500000
108000
2000000
50000
32597
500000
194540
15000
178179
250000
30000
2000000
2598320
0
0
2704683.7
1450000
1700000
2000000
1600000
840000
2000000
4000000
2000000
0
80000
450000
0
180600
0
1500000
409430
565439
2000000
20000
4000000
446950
0
47625
550000
1025000
225000
3155765
1037750
3882243
2000000
0
105000
0
184000
77000
375000
712415
249600
249500
996000
1000000
10758928
0
382779
2000000
4000000
4000000
3245349
85000
801000
120000
48000
120500
207500
0
160000
1300000
0
80000
816000
288222.3
210000
322000
2990000
0
2288000
147720
0
3752181
1780000
4000000
820000
0
0
0
500000
150000
0
0
25000
750000
2000000
0
4006500
0
0
0
500000
AEA Cash Match Provided
511038
0
5000
1100000
360000
50000
66300
1545000
23680
85000
34122
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
168336
10554
64448
0
0
122500
100000
725528
3000000
8000
283943
41711
2925000
33000
164053
13438
0
0
0
0
0
113000
50000
0
0
14718750
0
98800
16200
10000
750000
36000
70000
0
0
61424
0
0
280
8900
1061000
10497695
0
0
0
0
61890
50673
17000
75000
0
40000
36000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
201782
44000
0
0
30000
0
40000
49009
0
170000
0
0
0
0
0
0
50000
16000000
0
33980
6500
20000
537460
0
0
64448
250000
11000
10000
97800
6695934
0
10000
78386
113000
1250000
10000
AEA Total In-Kind Match
130625
10000
17000
15280
60680
10251
0
8400
0
38316
40000
0
0
4014
909
423275
25000
900
6566
5000
33446
33446
0
2600000
210000
154500
2500000
150000
0
0
0
0
2600000
0
49140
15000
39000
531
500
54799
37200
0
0
0
0
0
62500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
79300
15356
0
30000
0
48000
0
0
0
1000
107968
29650
0
0
0
0
3050
84708
0
19338
4000
7563
0
105773
0
7500
8840
0
0
34450
5000
220000
7538
0
25000
6989
126500
62500
89990
13796
26439
500000
92296
50000
0
27036
0
0
0
0
314381
266592
0
100000
43000
176850
0
0
100000
13000
3456
55278
0
5000
AEA Existing Grant Fund Offer
AEA Total Requested Phases Cost
2131740
85000
110000
1924280
1647680
1085427
331500
28000
5465000
157729
850000
86400
255000
401441
91831
1072305
345000
90900
656613
55000
2219600
484000
449178
150000
350000
5559000
6000000
4875528
6196000
160000
2839432
834211
6200000
220000
509231
125424
174000
53647
50500
484691
378535
780000
100000
40000
1251000
18925000
502819
494000
69000
90000
1500000
180000
1375000
1750000
420765
383900
85000
55000
4297280
506200
5461000
14497695
230000
164000
299754
325425
309450
253369
102000
150000
308050
932343
394000
50000
60000
763898
220000
200718
1288018
389900
2541549
2219600
484000
3479490
284562
2620189
706701
660977
390449
705893
2313009
491146
503990
433379
454277
7620000
736896
3100000
24000000
552036
679592
130000
1150000
4886000
102275
292184
449178
1100000
313807
679950
489000
13391869
1100000
53000
170583
740000
2500000
200000
208073
4358784
455642
47750
2700000
17045146
250000
47050
306000
152867
17500000
456252
184000
259817
320456
100000
302737
1397403
4749528
360000
130000
372000
1150000
1400000
800000
428646
689251
497773
2997000
447800
375000
160000
225000
161000
311166
450000
629000
230000
2219600
484000
3096898
159000
332590
204428
735242
288745
558814
731372
1250000
2495189
1709825
3257653
3378500
9281615
373838
274750
318289
3800000
213750
54000
133000
135254
300000
700000
12813869
167127
1323851
223536
62772
1375000
980950
587900
11828982
267150
230200
962984
1254013
492850
367965
225660
825000
1940379
455642
81000
8000000
1560558
76000
82000
181000
35700
510000
131700
55000
700000
3320000
70000
292500
172700
372000
527908
181000
695950
4067778
223195
190195
114765
190000
517000
223536
33004000
200000
190000
8696494
350000
117136
150000
150000
6202000
350000
218000
233000
350000
150000
150000
200000
350000
650000
6153991
548000
3258446
438585
1015385
189200
1341063
3485000
688400
205859
360500
437453
168959
1422693
486090
6114000
3900000
381400
2870635
2848939
2050000
1415234
170974
6709000
3399387
690000
9570434
320000
8000000
25200
165750
2190000
20797187
90000
11000
250000
1100000
190000
51360
211000
249385
875000
75000
225000
81300
485828
120200
1790000
31350
2400000
8689033
314367
125000
381320
6500000
3800000
3825000
3686450
340000
29000000
400000
590000
459000
235000
2676273
100000
252905
252905
150000
150000
4217306
252905
278378
4443244
8696494
961400
629000
139825
3113750
527908
296900
45000
48500
50000
486180
317305
327201
50000
112000
30000
50000
37000
64000
48500
133349
413619
50000
115000
587000
338578
115000
168000
401873
6715000
161702.92
341900
2516496
527500
1476485
4000000
155294
19725000
143363
170000
12725000
81973
9156402
186956
295800
323696
478981
1388995
21247840
850000
1375400
12228000
4962965
3244897
23350000
639050
78000
230700
80700
1440000
1815000
9546005
397500
1260000
16000000
233000
200000
295000
39000
26000
165000
3908162
3908162
2500000
1344695
4624041
142000
1561368
302395
2200000
229000
1455000
198000
395000
250000
100000
845805
5520836
1005000
2148536
180825
112050
2360000
4405000
493200
168625
168625
138625
350000
44400
1000000
23900000
250000
4019600
4978000
4978000
125000
270000
94250
10000000
425000
161000
274623
1054000
2000000
8050538
1327235
472787
720388
12725200
500000
3330467
14459790
5882270
9624000
265000
565485
145000
93500
150000
4500000
250000
117000
150000
100000
150000
150000
1190876
154477
360000
1875000
2500000
3554888
2579200
12725000
200000
2400000
2440000
1300000
600000
327130
125000
755500
248065
3050000
16500000
198000
850000
1314651
37792600
1780000
149709
440000
440000
440000
145200
231000
149300
72000
200000
600000
4660750
2000000
250050
1371287
3795000
9679500
850000
45000
6000000
350000
6755497
16616251
150000
150000
3890042
193000
150000
4000000
400000
2360000
229500
912000
4000000
277360
3600000
6501066
2589200
1258935
212942
144301
1661368
648284
140000
198000
500000
85000
1780000
267024
675185
8763227
1661368
1571240
2035300
1661368
5347236
4000000
77000
268523
20000000
317190
4152805
588365
100000
2500000
140000
85000
150000
3120000
1491000
293238
275142
2156010
219071
4494546
1600000
4450000
232170
260000
1600000
10000000
1861500
7815000
290500
35506477
687580
171500
322283
500000
7652000
615591
229000
395200
3308255
312000
600000
500000
200000
2332000
2400000
12725000
1235000
150000
49500000
1371287
658000
340000
240000
2013050
1275500
578719
313280
551408
16500000
4095000
101500
167190
300000
5033414
416392
161386
1486857
90000
4500000
3857047
3857047
3857047
654200
600000
1250000
248065
17031000
561887
2231768
11187738
932250
200000
15907950
2868000
50000
357152
15760000
1995000
1077706
172388
900000
43940
38264.61
38843.58
39869
2428301
600000
500000
146750
1235000
4446950
2727960
10733179
108691
123800
123800
115500
123800
160000
1600000
32000
108500
108500
1590092
1750000
5000000
1760000
8100000
6940000
13700000
20000
454828
1154512
393298.5
95581
4097000
996000
617934
312000
2750000
45500
3360000
200000
1919807
370000
3965660
15000000
1572050
112200
2396830
6944000
1380439
8580000
120500
306000
133255
2349751
24657272
95984
198168
110400
2482804
187361
4406950
279330
1795450
237772
2995000
500000
4257116
3612000
3612000
30000
116625
42000
955460
676400
4659500
1215627
40000000
368000
100000
395200
2812220.7
708963
4367616
5033414
650000
500000
2379007
2440000
21000000
5000000
55000000
10188000
1878070
552073
60000
1000000
142000
200000
5100000
220179
400000
32000
355056
6350000
15020000
5157000
38000000
2520000
3197986
150000
2868000
1950000
3200000
93341555
193600
3200000
5157000
1050000
17145000
11650000
8363886
25625000
46800000
1937072
195543
3225500
21923000
8257850
50000
123494.29
3000000
451030
565439
4555922
15675000
14875535
457505
3930399
800000
495000
20824011
12231750
605000
605000
605000
1075625
250000
3506406
1153056
4313603
7400000
8710000
131250
2500000
224000
95000
471000
991815
3633600
498480
2340000
3087000
10921428
12900000
5042539
4007900
15534309
14673250
8996832
3805349
200000
890000
1200000
300000
15000000
15000000
60000
140500
207500
831203
205000
1620000
360000
2220141
1020000
316668.7
286149
4145991
4005000
5490000
37459970
2860000
628825
2379007
14500000
6155019
5260000
11600000
7652000
2455000
10000000
200000
98150000
839000
150000
105620
95000
40000
750000
3383000
8342810
100000
22000000
775000
650000
1200000
898000
2000000
AEA Additional Monitoring Cost
3500
400
11230
9091
15000
20000
AEA Total Cost Through Construction
2131740
0
3705000
5473280
17306696
7783428
5731500
1750000
5715000
392959
955458
86400
4603385
695269
1067309
168000000
4283056
653277
431982
32840509
7606795
800000
3000000
448663
5289000
6589090
58936366
6196000
2529400
8233369
9317500
6874498
4380000
438341
858556
5598500
496526
311394
484691
50797871
826067
1814049
2600000
1365890
20744264
6300000
3016475
15400000
386000
79247000
1340000
427600
6610000
1750000
420765
383900
1400000
4526280
3380000
5461000
13717479
25000000
165000
299754
309450
4283056
872635
59067808
50000
60000
763898
2200000
200718
1408908
4526458
5541549
26272407
4565200
3479490
284562
2692700
706701
660977
439453
705893
2458622
6870575
503990
433379
458716
7770000
729600
3100000
24000000
6000000
9000000
1634500
9200000
4886000
102275
292184
449178
10000000
200000
679950
3011475
13391869
45320707
15922000
170583
740000
50000000
2100000
Internal Comments
The average load in Circle in June 2015 was 31kW, which means the minimums were in the 16-20kW range. The smallest genset, 100kW, should not operate at or below 20kW for more than a
few hours without being loaded up and run hard afterwards. The manufacturer recommends minimum loading of 30%.There is not sufficient "headroom" for any significant amount of solar
PV between the minimum load requirements of the smallest genset and the loads projected based on June 2015 PCE data. The application stated solar PV capacity of 100-200kW would be
pursued, which is greater than the peak loads reported.This application does not meet minimum requirements for being realistic. David 10-13-15
Original statement post-Stage 2, prior to reconsideration:Not recommended due to incomplete prior phase. Per the Request for Applications #16012, Sections 2, 2.4, 2.5, applicants must
complete prior phases of work prior to receiving funding for future phases. The Crater Lake hydro project proposes to offset diesel electric and heat energy generation, possibly at
a lower cost. As mentioned in your cover letter, Cordova Electric Cooperative cannot provide granular detail of cost and scope for the requested design phase until the feasibility study
is complete, which is currently anticipated to be summer 2016. That timing is very good for a REF grant application in fall 2016, but is premature for this round of funding. There
is uncertainty both in the technical and economic aspects of the project that will become more clear through the feasibility analysis. AEA recommends applying for funding when the
feasibility study is complete, as long as it indicates a technically and economically feasible project.AEA commends Cordova Electric for embarking on the self-funded feasibility study
for this project that may provide significant long-term benefits to the community, and for CEC’s strong performance as an Alaska electric utility.This project is not recommended for
funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications
#16012.
The City has numerous entities involved in the application preparation and proposed for project management, none of which exhibit a strong background in hydroelectric development including
critical aspects such as FERC licensing (DC), aquatic issues and monitoring and mitigation measures resolution and impact analysis and hydroelectric specific feasibility, geotechnical,
and engineering design. While ANTHC has dam and water pipeline experience they have little experience with rural electrical generation and hydroelectric project design and development.
A single experienced project manager is recommended, preferably the hydroelectric engineering consultant, to oversee the project. It is not recommended that AEA allow the project to
proceed without a highly qualified PM.
The project funding request is based on an apparent conservative estimation in the feasibility study as a contingency because obtaining additional grant funds is difficult. Therefore
is expected that actual development, if well handled and performed efficiently, should be less than the requested funding amount.
The AEA should be fully engaged for all work scopes, tasks, contracts, and present at all project and stakeholder meetings. AEA should obtain and review all deliverables. At the completion
of this grant the project should be fully ready for construction with permits expected, designs, specifications, and construction contracts complete, a business plan and updated feasibility
analysis along with a construction cost estimate.
Need econ score, then score stage 3 if needed.
The design budget appears low but if cost based rates are used (assume 60/hr = 240hrs) should be ok, construction budget seems low – study has 400k and that does not appear to include
a replacement structure for the new unit, and the proposed new turbine may lack a deflector system thus potentially introducing operational scenarios with rapid changes in flow which
likely require pipeline modifications, exist water right is for 7 cfs(?) and new turbine requires 10 cfs so modification required, no detailed operational data or data is provided on
spill which should have been obtained as part of the dam replacement / feasibility study. The design indicates the powerhouse is at elevation 51’ yet there was no discussion about
whether it could be moved lower. Overall the feasibility study needs additional work.
Scored as a non-diesels off scenario. diesels off is not considered an established technology, therefore AEA's analysis was run under a scenario of diesels on. We understand that the
grantee will test to determine whether a diesels off scenario is feasible.
Regardless of who performs the stream gauging work AEA should review and approve equipment, methods, and analysis work. Contractor to submit plan for gauging, proposed equipment, proposed
location for site(s), documentation of installation including location, raw level survey data for stage and elevation bench marks, raw flow measurement data, photographs, trip reports,
data downloads, and flow analysis reports.
Contractor shall generally follow standard USGS gauging and measurement procedures.
David to draft comments to include at least:technical issues: curtailing analysis not provided, secondary loads not yet installed, Application uses output from tracking system, cost
and drawings are from fixed open rack system.Applicants should include feasibility report if applying for final design funding, and should submit the final design for if applying for
construction funds.(See S2 comments at bottom of this page- David)
11/22/15 THIS STAGE 2 SCORING HAD TECHNICAL ISSUES WITH THE DATABASE. INDIVIDUAL SCORES ARE MISSING, BUT TOTALS ARE SHOWING. SAM WILL LOOK INTO THIS AND ENSURE ACCURATE RECORDING OF
SCORES.~11/24/15 Individual scores were fixed and verified by all scorers. This applicant requested reconsideration. Sara Fisher Goad agreed with staff decision and did not grant a
reconsideration. -SMS
Current status: 1. Chitina to work directly with CRW on a aREF9 grant application for design/build construction funding based on the current set of 65% drawings with some minor edits
to cost estimate2. AEA to investigate concept design changes related to pipe crossing roadway and aquatic issues3. AEA to resume stream gauging.Award will require of AEA review of concept
changes particularly with a focus on the potential for lowering the powerhouse elevation and eliminating the high pressure pipeline alignment along the highway. Prior to award review
and approve general contract, concept drawings, and bid documents. AEA to review all bids and provide recommendations. Selected contractor will be required to submit final design/record
drawings, O&M procedures and manuals, statement of construction costs by FERC accounting categories, commissioning results, and final design report.
comeback: for economic score
Primary scope of work is to investigate the hydrology and aquatics relating to the potential project configurations on Unga Man Creek and its southwest tributary basin. The reconnaissance
report does not mention this sub-basin development potential. It appears that the City may have mistaken waterfall creek for the sub-basin project that AEA identified. The feasibility
work should include alternative analysis including the combined sub-basin and Unga Man project.
Needs economists bc score and reconsider other benefits. Add Rich language.
The next steps for this project are to verify the concept design technical feasibility and propose any alternate recommendations including some evaluation of storage. The cost estimate
in particular requires additional review and detail. Consultation with agencies should commence with the proposal to eliminate fish passage in the bypassed reach (no bypass/environmental
flows). An updated economic feasibility should also be provided.
AEA considered whether this is a new project that is eligible for funding since REF funded Terror LAke turbine #3. The review committee considers this a new project since this is a
new renewable source that the community sees a future need for. The community could select a different renewable energy source, but has found this new water source to be the most economical
to develop. If the project required a new hydro plant, it would qualify. If this project were an addition to the existing power plant, it would be considered not eligible.KEA contracted
with Lachel to produce a Conceptual Design Report dated January 14, 2015. It is noted that a conceptual design report is not a feasibility report and that the basis for advancing the
project is based solely on the load projections and economics provided by KEA in their application to FERC and the AEA. AEA has reviewed both and concludes the claimed benefits from
the project are reasonable but also notes that the need for power is entirely contingent on load growth that is "due to expansions of Kodiak’s seafood processing sector,the repowering
of the City’s shipping port crane, numerous new building construction projects, and an overall communityâ€wide shift of energy sourcing from diesel fuel to renewablyâ€generated
electricity." It is further noted that Kodiak has experienced a population decline in recent years.Scope of work shall be detailed in award and include project management plan with
procurement procedures, permit acquisition, health and safety plans, work plan covering execution on site (with contingencies) and data collection and reporting, hazard analysis and
spill prevention plans, environmental compliance and onsite safety/health monitoring, quality control and assurance plan, and weekly reporting during onsite activity.
AEA recommends completing the feasibility and final design phases of this project to better understand project impact on water system infrastructure, final design cost estimate, and
subsequent economics.AEA to review selection and award of the feasibility contractor for qualifications and understanding of issues related to transient pressures under load rejection
and expected operation of combined turbine/PRV system (see section 7 of HDR April 2009 concept study.AEA to review final feasibility report as a condition to proceeding with detailed
design and permitting. Final deliverables should be detailed design drawings, permits (ADEC Water system and FERC conduit exemption expected) approvals or applications, technical specifications,
final cost estimate, updated economic analysis, and proposed financing for the constructed project.
This application was received timely, but to the wrong email address. AEA staff confirmed receipt with the applicant, but it was not forwarded to the correct email box for consideration
and went unnoticed until January 14,2015. An expedited but full review was conducted by AEA, DNR and economists. AEA found this project to not pass Stage 1 or Stage 2. Below are
the Stage 2 comments as written in the rejection letter of 1/16/15. Stage 1 comments are in the Stage 1 comments field."Alaska Energy Authority has these additional technical and economic
concerns regarding the project’s fit with the REF program as outlined in the Request for Applications (RFA), regulations, and statutes.• Applicants must demonstrate completion of
prior phases. This construction phase project does not demonstrate the completion of feasibility or final design phases. (3 AAC 107.645, RFA 2.2 Project Phase Descriptions)• There
is a lack of sufficient design detail to properly analyze technical and economic properties of the project for a construction funding application.• Using the applicant’s numbers,
the project as a whole, disregarding funding sources or tax incentives, demonstrates poor economics. (3 AAC 107.655, RFA Stage 2 Review: Project Feasibility and Benefits)• Project
benefit would go to a few customers with the means to purchase shares, which does not meet the public benefit requirement. (3 AAC 107.655)• Proposed matching funds would not garner
a score for the match criterion since the match is based upon future shareholders whose contributions have not yet been committed."
Rich will look at cost overrun from prev grant and advise.
The work proposed in this applications is a follow up to reconnaissance work. The City of Adak did this but the resulting study was not in conformance with the reconnaissance study recommendations
and was incomplete in demonstration of the analysis, benefits, and conclusions. TDX appears to suggest scope consistent with prior reconnaissance work but then reverts to water supply
power recovery only. Proposed budget is consistent with such a limited scope. The applicant should include additional analysis of the larger projects particularly with regard to review
of environmental flows and costs/benefits. The proposed budget and scope is not sufficient. Suggest recommending approval of funding for $390k to include stream gauging, mapping, additional
aquatic investigations, data collection as necessary, energy and economic modeling, concept designs, preliminary design criteria, initial agency consultation, and final recommendations
for design and permitting.
Tim will rewrite recommendations.
Sean check Tim's wording. Compare prior construction funding application for B/C and score if total cost was known at the time.
SEAN AND SHAWN ADDRESS STAGE 1 QUALIFICATIONS AND IF APPLICANT RESPONDED.
alan to look at partial funding amounts
JED look at our comments on 1150 and 1151 to clarify language on incorporating into the regional plans, and to help bring the proposed project to the regional planning efforts.
Applicant did not mark the design box, but the project is design and construction. ADD A CHECK BOX FOR AEA RECOMMENDED PHASES AND USE THOSE FOR THE EXTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS..
Kenai Hydro is a HEA owned subsidiary in the process of developing a license application for FERC. The amount of effort for environmental analysis has been extensive with expenditures
totaling $5,712,558 which includes $2,100,000 from previous REF grants (REF 635 for 1,184,000 and REF 34 for 1,020,000 both for feasibility).
The REF funded feasibility and conceptual design report has not been completed. Additionally, a draft license application has not yet been submitted to FERC.
Generally not recommended until completion or receipt of previously funded work. It is possible the project underwent scope changes that have resulted in additional work and schedule
delays (not uncommon). If additional funding is approved it should be for license application, preliminary design, and feasibility completion.
1/28/15 at REFAC meeting we received public testimony against the project from Kenai Watershed Forum or similar. This occurred after scoring and ranking so could not be reflected in
the score.
Alan will check part funding amount.
The applicant has until Nov 12 to reply with info. Come back to consider if information is provided.
Possible loan option.
IF funded, keep tight control of grant steps to ensure permitting is clear prior to funding design.
Loan potential. Good B/C, high cap cost.
ALAN B. add to the reasoning for funding recommendation.
Applicant requested reconsideration after stage 2 not recommended. Request denied due to missing deadline.
Alan B and Shawn to address match and changed total requested amount. Please correct in REval.
Alan to add to the description.
Mark with Special provision
Dev add provision look for oppty in design to reduce construction cost.
100% Design expected to be complete by July 2015.
Owner/AEA desire to procure materials separately but low cost and contractor markup savings are not likely to make up for the extra coordination cost.
Value of land donated needs to be verified with appraisal or comparable and deed of easement or quitclaim executed before crediting as match.
Additional stream gauging work recommended to verify low flows in winter/spring. Discharge rating curve derivation not included in CDR. Stream gauging data collection should adhere to
USGS standards and daily average stage and flow with rating curve should be published.
Review of design required before construction authorization.
ADNR water rights and ADF&G permitting efforts and requirements not adequately documented in CDR or application.
Need to verify hydrology and energy production, perform geotechnical investigations, obtain site control and other permits, and reassess project size, cost, and economics prior to release
of funds.
Technical Review of Design
Preliminary review of the design documents identified the following concerns:
No geotechnical information at the intake site and insufficient topographic and other data in vicinity of intake
• No geotechnical information available regarding bedrock depths.
• Plans do not show river topography in adequate detail and extent of plans does not cover full width of floodplain. Aerial imagery not shown either.
Intake winter operation
• Exposed trash racks and lack of insulation – proper intake functioning in arctic winter requires intake works are submerged below ice levels and insulation provided in critical
areas to avoid ice buildup and subsequent clogging.
Concern about geomorphology of Yerrick Creek during flood events and intake stability or potential for rerouting of creek.
• Areas of concern include debris flushing mechanism and flood flow modeling. Flood events can result in high amounts of material deposition in the reservoir. If allowed to build up
then there is potential for rerouting of the creek onto the floodplain.
• Potential for rerouting from blockages created by avalanches.
• Assessment of flood flows, spillway hydraulic design, and downstream scour potential.
Original AEA recommendation statement, prior to reconsideration:
AEA does not recommend funding the requested phase of this project at this time due to incomplete prior phases. The design phase shall be complete prior to consideration for construction
funding, per the AEA Request for Applications 15003 section 2.2 to 2.6.
Additionally, construction funding is not recommended until AEA's concerns regarding the resource potential and economics of the project have been adequately addressed. Additional details
of the prior stream gauging effort are required including flow measurements, determination of stage discharge relation, daily average stage and calculated daily average flow for the
period of record. The economic concerns relate to the demonstration, at the conclusion of the design phase, of the project cost and ability of the project to deliver the expected benefits.
No funding recommended.
Alan to update final statement. Need BC from Cady. Need to estimate level of funding.
Alan F to check partial funding amount. If changed, change match to 10% of grant amount.
SHAWN send question to applicant whether (Y/N) $20,000 feasibility is acceptable. Done and applicant replied.Email from David and Cady 11/12/14:We recommend AEA stay with its offer
to fund a feasibility project for $20k for the following reasons:1. AEA requested the detailed cost estimate 10/22 with a response by 10/27. Shawn received a detailed cost estimate
that met most of our requirements on 11/8. This does not leave us enough time to review the info provided.2. Alan Mitchell, our economist, is unavailable until some time next week
and is busy with other work. Cady and I are scrambling to catch up.3. Brad’s PVWatts analysis was based on dual axis trackers, but that is not reflected in the cost estimate. The
Homer analysis he provided assumed fixed panels. There should not be confusion about such basic elements of the project at this late date.4. The array plan provided by KEA on 11/8
shows fixed panels, which contradicts Brad’s statement on 10/27 that he is planning on using dual axis trackers.
Jim will examine numbers closer to check for possible AEA managed. Jim will check with Rick about AEA managed, if desired.11/Jim checked, Tazlina is now requesting AEA managed.
The resource appears more than adequate to meet the energy needs of Whale Pass. Recommend proceeding with feasibility followed by permitting and final design.
As a follow up to the SEIRP, SEAPA is currently under contract with the state to perform a regional hydropower evaluation that is expected to address the recommended sequence of capacity
and storage additions in the southeast region. Completion and acceptance of this study should be precursor to funding further design/construction projects in the Southeast.
City of Saxman requests funds for the Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Project to provide for the following: revise final design and specifications, obtain permits for construction, review
ways to increase storage potential of project, update cost estimate, begin power sales negotiations and prepare a business and operational plan based upon power sales agreement. AEA
has the following concerns: the market for the power is uncertain, given it would be the last to be used in the SEAPA system, including the proposed additions of energy from Whitman
Lake Hydroelectric Project and the proposed Swan Lake expansion and Metlakatla - Ketchikan Intertie. The Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 application (#909) was recommended for partial
funding of $500,000 but did not score within the funding limit. The project did receive a $200,000 FY14 legislative grant for pre-construction activities, but that work has not been
completed. Work to be completed under the legislative grant includes: a hydrology update, license, market, operational, site, and financial reviews, design analysis, and an update of
construction cost.As a follow up to the SEIRP, SEAPA is currently under contract with the state to perform a regional hydropower evaluation that is expected to address the recommended
sequence of capacity and storage additions in the southeast region. Completion and acceptance of this study should be precursor to funding further design/construction projects in the
Southeast.Given the current FY14 funding from the legislature, the project is moving forward to answer key questions; therefore, the project is not recommended for funding from the
RE Fund at this time.
The scope of work being requested includes complete feasibility and concept design although there is limited supporting data to suggest this will be an economically viable project. A
number of conditions should be met before undertaking this secondary hydro development in the Tok region including additional assurance with regard to energy availability and project
operability and subsequent economics. Stream gaging is recommended to evaluate the energy resource prior to undertaking more extensive studies. The gaging will improve confidence in
energy availability for Yerrick Creek as well. Demonstration of cost and operability of Yerrick Creek is also recommended before proceeding with Clearwater Creek development.AEA's funding
recommendation is therefore limited to the proposed stream gaging work in the application consisting of $40k of RE Grant Funds, $10k Grantee Matching Funds, and $3k Other Funds.
Reconsider at end of reviews for full funding through conceptual design versus only funding wind feasibility study. $90K vs $200k (removes geotech expenses too. Are they an IPP?
Change if not. Change ratio of match too.
Application was not recommended. applicant requested reconsideration. Sara recommended, staff reconsider. Staff scored. Application did not pass Stage 2.
Did not pass S2, reconsideration requested. Rescored. Did not pass stage 2 upon reconsideration.
S1Evaluator
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
David Lockard
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Sean Skaling, Shawn Calfa
Calfa, Skaling
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Calfa, Skaling, Lister, Binnian
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily, Karin
Sean, Shawn, Nick, Emily, Karin
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
Shawn, Sean, Nick, Emily
white
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
Crimp, White
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp, Ott, Moller
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
Crimp / White
Crimp / White
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White / Ott
White / Ott
White/Ott
White / Ott
White / Ott
White, Crimp, Kerr, Brown, Harper
White/Ott
White / Ott
White, Crimp
White / Ott
White, Crimp
White / Ott
Crimp / White / Ott
White / Ott
Crimp / White / Ott
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White
White / Ott
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White / Ott
White, Crimp, Landis
White / Ott
White / Ott
White / Ott
White / Ott
White, Crimp
White, Crimp
White / Ott
White / Ott
White, Crimp
White / Ott
White / Ott
White / Ott
Butch / Doug
bw & dco
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Peter, Jim, Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter and Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Jim, Peter
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter and Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter and Jim
Butch, Peter, Crimp
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter and Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter and Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Peter, Jim, Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Butch, Peter, Jim
Stage 1 Pass Fail
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
fail
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
N
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
N
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
M
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
M
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
n
M
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
n
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
n
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
S1 Eligible Applicant
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
S1 Eligible Project
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
?
pass
pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
Maybe
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
M
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
M
y
y
y
y
n
y
n
M
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
S1 Auth Doc
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
fail
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pas
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
?
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
n
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
n
n
n
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
n
n
n
y
y
S1 OK Description
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
PASS
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
Maybe
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
M
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
S1 Complete
pass
pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
fail
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
PASS
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
N
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
Maybe
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
M
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
?
n
y
n
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
n
n
n
y
y
y
S1 Site Control
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
Pass
Pass
pass
Pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
?
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
S1 Comments
S1#4 and 5: P.3 of application states that it is a feasibility study, but construction box is checked. Box 2.5 (Scope of Work) says it is a feasibility study and preliminary design.
Box 2.4 asks for a one paragraph description, but the applicant response is less than a sentence.S1#5: Sections 5.1.1, 5.4.1, 12 and 13 are incomplete.Applicant notified of missing
information 9/23--SMC9/29- Applicant responded to Shawn's 9/23 e-mail after the 9/28 deadline. He didn't identify which section he was responding to and didn't address resource in
section 5.1.1. However, the application is for a feasibility study and PVWatts provides a good estimate of the solar resource. Section 5.4.1 info is still not complete. The current
diesel genset minimum loads, O&M costs, and efficiency are critical to analyzing the proposal, and should be easy for the operator to provide. I recommend passing this application
in stage 1 and requesting the additional info for stage 2 evaluation. David
Application is not Signed.
Applicants POC was notified on 9/21 and 9/23 that a signed application is required in order for the application to be considered.--SMC
9/30-Applicant provided signed application, Resolution and Authorized signers form--SMC
Feasibility study forthcoming.Resolution will be provided in October.
Sean to determine eligible project status.
Resolution and Authorized Signers form will be sent after Sept 30thDesign and permitting phase work forthcoming
Resolution will be delivered in October.
This application has numerous potentially fatal flaws: AVEC only allows up to 8.5kW total of distributed generation in Minto, yet this application is for 100kWAverage electric loads
are 70kW in Minto, with minimums about 35kW.The proposed system will be on buildings not owned by the applicant (the store is owned by the ANCSA Village Corporation).9/23 Applicant
notified that signed documents are required by 9/28 at noon--SMC9/29 Applicant submitted signed documents--SMC9/29 Mark Bryan of AVEC, in discussion with applicant and David Lockard,
agreed to allow up to a 10kW solar installation. Did the applicant submit a revised application?
The governing body resolution required in Section 14 is missingSections 11-14 of the application are missing.
9/23 Applicant notified that they did not pass S1 and give until 10/5 to appeal--SMC
the Applicant did not check the box indicating that they would own and operate the asset for the public benefit.
The scope of work is clear but the phase description itself may require subsequent revision.
Sections 1.2.3, 4 and 5 are not checked.Section 5.4.1 is incomplete. The applicant should provide this info as soon as possible.Wind turbines are already curtailed. This should be
factored into stage 2 review.Section 6.2.3: applicant intends to adjust scope based on funding and/or cost increases.Applicant may have overlooked O&M and limited life aspects of dual-axis
tracking system.
(9/21- Shawn said he and Sean would complete the S1 review)9/23 Emailed Applicant's POC informing them of deficiencies in the application and allowing them until 9/28 to provide missing
info--SMC9/28- applicant provided updated info.
Removed transmission from project type as denoted in application. Transmission line was constructed in 2008 with federal funding. -Sam
Changed technology from wind and transmission to transmission only. -Sam
Originally entered into REval as HeatBiofuel project type. Changed to Biomass on 10/12. -Sam
Originally entered into REval as HeatBiofuel project type. Changed to Biomass on 10/12. -Sam
Originally entered into REval as HeatBiofuel project type. Changed to Biomass on 10/12. -Sam
Originally entered into REval as HeatBiofuel project type. Changed to Biomass on 10/12. -Sam
Originally entered into REval as HeatBiofuel project type. Changed to Biomass on 10/12. -Sam
Is MOU strong enough Evidence for Site control?
From "did not pass" letter sent: Under the Stage 1 eligibility review, and in accordance with 3 AAC 107.610, an applicant must be an eligible applicant defined in AS 42.45.045(l) and
will own the renewable energy project. While Homer Electric Association is an eligible applicant, the owners identified in the application will be a group of 34 member shareholders.
The Authority may authorize the conveyance of an ownership interest to an eligible applicant if the Authority determines that the conveyance protects the public interest and benefit
provided by the grant. Individual shareholders are not eligible applicants and the public benefit would not serve the public, rather a small set of individual owners.
Authorized Signer needed before a grant
Eligible project?
Eligible Project?
Authorized Signer need before Grant
Authorized Signers form need before grant can be issued.
Site Control ?'s
Used Wrong Application / Insufficient information / application not signed/ requested applicant provide additional information in the following letter: Mr. George, Thank you for applying
to Renewable Energy Fund Grant Program Round VIII. The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) has received and reviewed your application from Akiachak Native Community Electric Company/Akiachak
Native Community IRA Council for a biomass energy project. While reviewing applications the AEA review team uses six standard criteria on a pass/fail basis to determine if an application
passes the stage 1 review. The stage 1 review assesses if the application is complete, meets the minimum submission requirements and had adequate information to proceed to stage 2—the
technical and economic evaluation. The review team identified that your application did not meet one of the criteria. Not enough information was provided that was sufficiently responsive
to the Request for Applications to review and score your application. It appears that your application was submitted on an older application form from 2009 and as such did not provide
information for many fields of required information. The AEA review team has determined that because your application did not meet one of the six review criteria, AEA is unable to
advance your application past stage 1.AEA would like to encourage you to perform the prefeasibility work associated with a potential biomass project through the Alaska Wood Energy Development
Task Group. Guidance and assistance for this process may be obtained by contacting AEA’s Biomass Project Manager, Devany Plentovich, at 907-771-3068 or via email at dplentovich@aidea.org.Per
regulations for the Renewable Energy Fund [3 AAC 107.650(a)], an applicant whose application does not pass Stage 1 review may request that the AEA Executive Director reconsider the
decision of the authority’s staff to reject the application. Any request for reconsideration must be received in writing, including by email, must state the basis for reconsideration,
and must be received by 5:00 p.m. Alaska time, October 13, 2014. All appeals must be addressed to Shawn Calfa, AEA Grants Administrator: scalfa@aidea.orgSincerely,Shawn
Site Control ?'s
Site Control ?'s
Ask Brian Bjorkquist about Eligibility
Follow-up with Brian Bjorkquist eligible applicant Check site control in Stage 2
Follow-up with Brian Bjorkquist about eligible applicant
needs a resolution, not sufficient information to determine scope of project, cannot determine site control due to lack of information, did not meet AEA CDR deadline, despite extension.
ineligible for further review because the applicant did not provide a conceptual design report as required and identified in Sections 1.12, 2.5 and Section 4 of the Request for Grant
Applications dated July 2, 2013
needs a resolution
Resolution not an issue for this stage of review.
This appears to be a duplicate of application #1005 but this one is more complete. 1005 will not be reviewed further. Shawn to notify applicant. 10/29/13 -SMS.
need authorized signers form
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
needs a resolution
Does not meet the RFA specifications for a CDR to be available.
Ineligible for further review because the applicant did not provide a conceptual design report 30 days prior to the application deadline as required and identified in Sections 1.12,
2.5 and Section 4 of the Request for Grant Applications dated July 2, 2013
Grant manager will contact applicant for a resolution
Resolution not an issue for this stage of review.
Grant manager will contact applicant for a resolution
Grant manager will contact applicant for a resolution
Grant manager will contact applicant for a resolution
Community Non-Profit.
Grant Manager will contact applicant for clarification of to verify eligible applicant.
Ineligible for further review because the applicant is not an eligible party as defined in Section 1.4 of the Request for Grant Applications dated July 2, 2013.
Applicant requested reconsideration of S1 rejection. SFG approved if they clarify that the utility is the applicant. Applicant submitted letter naming Tanalian Electric Co-op, Inc.
as the applicant instead of Port Alsworth Improvement Corporation. Application was considered for S2, but was not recommended.
Grant administrator has noted applicant is not compliant with Federal single audit act and has been notified by the Alaska Dept of Revenue
Grants Manager will request a resolution from the applicant
Nuvista is not an eligible applicant. Ineligible for further review because t he applicant is not an eligible party as defined in Section 1.4 of the Request for Grant Applications dated
July 2, 2013.
Not an eligible project: this transmission project does not connect renewable projects as required by statute. The transmission project proposed does not ?link an eligible renewable
energy project or eligible natural gas project to other transmission or distribution infrastructures? as required in Section 1.5.
Site control for follow-up in Stage 2
Grant Manager will request resolution from applicant.
Resolution not an issue for this stage of review.
Site
Grants Manager will request a resolution
Grants Manager will request resolution from grantee
Site control concern in application for stage 2 review
Grants Manager will request resolution before match can be counted.
Resolution not an issue for this stage of review.
This is a duplicate application, and less complete than application #1085. Do not evaluate this application further. Shawn to notify applicant. 10/29/13 -SMS
Applicant marked 3 phases.
Site control adequate for feasibility but not for final design and permitting
Need a resolution and verify eligibility
Site control
Note - Does building-level waste heat qualify as an RE project?
Note - follow-up on compliance with bi-annual filings
Note - Compare with EETF grant to see if this is the same project or a competing project
Funds requested exceed potential funding cap.
Need resolution and is not an eligible project based on statutory regulations 1.5.2
Check on previous rounds
Note - None of the specific biomass questions were answered and no pre-easibility study is attached
Note - Energy information appears lacking.
None of the specific biomass questions were answered and no feasibility study is attached
For stage 2 review, how with this impact the Ouzinkie rebuild?
Levelock Village Council is not in compliance SOA single audit act
Looks like a reconnaissance study rather than conceptual design.
Revisit
Need feasibility numbers or an example where this is in commercial operation
Section 4.4.5 Project Cost Worksheet needs information
At least a portion of the proposed project is eligible
Application withdrawn by applicant
The proposal does not meet the stage 1 criterion of "The 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 of evaluation."
The work that is proposed, while potentially valuable to Igiugig, is more effectively accomplished through the existing Rural Power System Upgrade project .
Alaska Gateway School District proposes building a new greenhouse. Although the proposed project includes a connection to the existing wood-fired heating plant, 75% of the proposed
grant would go toward design and construction of the greenhouse. Furthermore less than 25% of the benefit of the project would be from displaced fossil energy. Therefore AEA does
not consider the proposed facility to "be a project that generates energy from or involves the direct use of " renewable energy, as required by section1.3 of the RFA.
Alaska Gateway School District proposes building a new training and administration center. Although the proposed project includes a connection to the existing wood-fired heating plant,
almost all of the proposed grant would go toward design and construction of the new center. Therefore AEA does not consider the proposed facility to "be a project that generates energy
from or involves the direct use of " renewable energy, as required by section1.3 of the RFA.
The work that is proposed, while potentially valuable to St. Michael, is more effectively accomplished using standard methodology on a statewide and regionwide basis that builds on the
work already done in the statewide energy plan. The proposal does not meet the stage 1 criterion of "The 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 of evaluation."
The proposal does not demonstrate sufficient level of feasibility analysis and design required for construction. Thus, the proposal does not meet the stage 1 criterion o f "The 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 of evaluation."
Recommend that proposer submit application for consideration under the Emerging Energy Technology Fund program.
Combined with #825
Application is for design and construction of a wood pellet production facility. RFA provision 1.15 limits funding for biofuels facilities to recon and feasibility.
CVEA is requesting funds to replace the Francis hydro turbine runner in Solomon Gulch unit #2 with a new stainless steel runner that will increase efficiency of energy generation by
10%. The total cost of the project is $2,440,000. Of this amount, CVEA has committed $1,082,600 to July 2011. The application requests that the balance of the costs be shared 50/50
between CVEA and the state grant.
The proposed project is a service activity that all hydro projects eventually require. AEA finds that this project is not eligible for funding under the RE Fund since it is not an addition
to an existing project, but is instead a routine maintenance activity.
The proposal does not demonstrate sufficient level of feasibility analysis required for design and construction. Thus, the proposal does not meet the stage 1 criterion o f "The 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 of evaluation."
Recommend that proposer submit application for consideration under the Emerging Energy Technology Fund program.
Butch check w BB
Butch check w Brian B on Applicant elig
Butch: Check with Brian B on applicant eligibility
See 606
Wanting to export power to Canada?
City & Borough of Sitka owns the property the boathouse is on and leases the boathouse to a non-profit in Sitka established to restore the boathouse.
Refer to #14, 62, 290
Too broad of an application
Refer to #484
Round 0 (#16), 65 (not funded), 447
Refer to #473 (Current project is broader than Hope regional study.)
Question: Too broad of a study? Check with protocol on R3.
Refer to #86, 494
Round 0 (#17), #446
Refer to #475
Refer to #508
Refer to #236
Refer to #63
Refer to #472
Score #670--not this proposal--Unless Doug/Audrey find something different between hydro gen and TX proposals.
Score this proposal--not #671--Unless Doug/Audrey find something different between hydro gen and TX proposals. Fore earlier app, refer to #523.
Refer to #59
Refer to #284 (WTE project, but not as general as current proposal.)
Refer to #98, 222
Question whether they are maxed out on FD, construction grant.
Project capped out for grant funding, per RFA.
Refer to #479
Refer to 480
Refer to # 2 for biomass heat project. This project has no earlier proposal.
Refer to #482
Refer to #502
Refer to #500
Refer to #426 (appears modified)
Refer to #460
Refer to #20, 449
Refer to #450
Refer to #466
Refer to #401
Refer to #477
Refer to #454
Refer to #424
Refer to #46
Refer to #511
Refer to #514
Refer to #298, 516
Refer to #73
Refer to #211
Refer to #34
Refer to Round 0
Refer to #501
Refer to #438
Project has received received $4M in construction grant already.
Failed Stage 1 - already has a Round III grant for $4,000,000 and has been capped out at that level.
Refer to #441
Refer to #439
Round 4 gen issue: Project is a component of Reynolds Creek Hydro Project. It has received received $2M in grant already. Pass to S2 with caveat that if less than $50M in projects,
may allocate funds to project.
Refer to #223, 440 / Project is inline to receive an additional $90,000 if FERC issues resolved (Round III grant) 12/6/2010 - Grantee indicated it won?t pursue this project
Refer to #437
Refer to #226, 443
Round 0
Refer to #218
refer to #246, 470
Auth doc did not come with app
Refer to #37, 425
Interacts with Reynolds Cr Hydro round 0, #104, 439
Question whether feas, final design sufficient
refer to #452
refer to #49
Problem with match
refer to #109
refer to #491
refer to #406
refer to #414
refer to #412
refer to #413
refer to #245
refer to #404
refer to #213, 402
App 410 follow up.
refer to competing apps: round 0 (#2,24), #122, 600
refer to #1
refer to #315 recon
Refer to #434
General issue: wind project in the same community (Bethel) construction. Given established protocol in round 1, allow?
Combined with #517 / only this one (#523) scored
AEA is requested to manage the project.
Applicant proposes to use natural gas input to fuel cells to provide energy to City of Houston facilities. Project not eligible because it uses natural gas in a location that has economically
viable renewable energy resources including hydro and wood.
See letter to applicant.
Combined with #523 / only #523 scored and not this one
Applicant proposes to firm up wind farm using a natural gas resource in the Jarvis Creek area. Although having a readily available source to supplement wind power would be potentially
valuable, natural gas is not a critical component of the wind project since the wind power can be supplement by other resources on the Railbelt grid. Natural gas projects can be funded
under the re Rund if they serve a population of 10,000 or less that does not have an economically viable renewable energy resource.
See letter to applicant.
Earlier phase was funded. S2 review will need recon work.
Project definition is sufficiently narrow in resource (hydro, tx, geothermal) and location (Chakachamna, west forelands, Mt. Spurr) to pass to stage 2.
Maybe. Project goal is to assess wave energy resources, but assessment is not directed to one or more specific projects. Although the proposed work would be useful, scope is too broad
to be funded through RE fund. Consistent with AEA recommendations for round 2 application for statewide assessment of biomass energy resources (#283) project is not recommended to
pass to stage 2 (???).
See letter to applicant.
Budget numbers appear to be off. Butch to clarify with applicant.
Maybe. Project goal is to assess biomass resources, but assessment is not directed to one or more specific projects. Although the proposed work would be useful, scope is too broad
to be funded through RE fund. Consistent with AEA recommendations for round 2 application for statewide assessment of biomass energy resources (#283) project is not recommended to
pass to stage 2 (???).
See letter sent to UAF
Maybe Crimp: Applicant proposes to assess renewable energy resource options for Chistochina and the Ahtna region. The proposal does not address a specific type of project in a particular
location thus can be considered general energy planning. While the proposal would likely yield potentially valuable information it is better supported by general energy planning funding,
not the RE Fund.
See letter to applicant.
Maybe. Project goal is to assess run-of-river hydro resources, but assessment is not directed to one or more specific projects. Although the proposed work would be useful, scope is
too broad to be funded through RE fund. Consistent with AEA recommendations for round 2 application for statewide assessment of biomass energy resources (#283) project is not recommended
to pass to stage 2 (???).
See letter sent to applicant.
App will need documentation of feas and final design. Ott to obtain for S2 review.
Maybe. Applicant did not check boxes 1.2.2-5. Will they own and operate the project. Applicant requests design and construction but did not provide feasibility report. Butch to request
boxes checked and feas report.
Applicant considered as an IPP since they are in GVEA service territory.
Butch: Grant needs to go to IRA council.
Maybe Crimp: Applicant proposes to assess renewable energy resource options for existing and planned facilities in the Mat-Su. The proposal does not address a specific type of project
in a particular location thus can be considered general energy planning. While the proposal would likely yield potentially valuable information it is better supported by general energy
planning funding, not the RE Fund.
Steve H accepted applicant appeal. Pass to stage 2.
Note that project includes a genset, cost of which would need to be excluded if project recommended.
Crimp: Applicant proposes to assess renewable energy resource options for existing and planned facilities in SE Alaska. The proposal does not address a specific type of project in a
particular location thus can be considered general energy planning. While the proposal would likely yield potentially valuable information it is better supported by general energy
planning funding, not the RE Fund.
Maybe. Applicant proposes to consume all power onsite. This is not consistent with definition of an IPP. Butch to contact and ask whether VFDA will sell 100% power to CVEA.
White 11/16: Valdez Fisheries said they basically have to sell to CVEA, since any power generated will have to move from the refinery to their hatchery over CVEA?s lines.
Pass to s2 since they meet IPP def.
Complete enough for requesting feas analysis.
Complete enough for requesting feas analysis.
Maybe. Needs more information on feasibility and concept design before funded for construction.
Crimp11/16: Butch received wind data from Aurora. Pass to s2.
Maybe. Proposal section 7 says that applicant has made progress since unsuccessful proposal # 230 in round 2. Comments for not recommending passing to stage 2 review were that the
applicant did "not provide sufficient engineering and economic detail on system proposed for heat and power production".
Butch to request feasibility and final design work justifying construction
Crimp11/18: Applicant provided sufficient info for s2 review.. Passed to s2.
Applicant proposes recon level work to assess feasibililty of biofuel production in Bethel, Eyak, Nenana, Nome, and Fairbanks. The scope and project locations are sufficiently narrow
to meet requirement that work should address discrete project locations. (Note Round 2 comments supporting rejection of project 283: "Project goal is to assess biomass resources,
but assessment is not directed to one or more specific projects. Proposal is more closely associated with the Alaska Energy Inventory project.")
Maybe. Appears that applicant request funds for feasibility and construction of a greenhouse that requires energy--not for a heat recovery project. Butch to question grantee on how
much of project is heat recovery vs greenhouse.
Maybe. Appears that applicant request funds for feasibility of a greenhouse that requires energy--not for a heat recovery project. Butch to question grantee on how much of project
is heat recovery vs greenhouse.
Discussed project with others--concluded that doesnt fit bill since HCCP not in operation now.
See Letter to applicant
Crimp: Pass to stage 2. BESS upgrade may be considered part of Eva Creek wind (and other wind or RE systems on the GVEA grid. If we decide to say that BESS upgrade only necessary
for Eva, then we may want to limit funding to feasibility only since Eva is only funded to the feas stage. If we think that the upgrade is necessary for Delta Wind project, which is
funded already through construction, then we may wish to recommend full funding (assuming all other aspects of the proposal are appropriate.)
Project is an energy efficiency project, not a renewable energy project.
Maybe. Lean toward approving, but question is whether the distribution extension connects an "eligible project" as defined in 1.5.1. Butch to work with lawyer.
Applicant proposes underground distibution project to replace existing overhead distribution. Project would not result in any additional renewable energy being made available to the
grid.
11/19: Peter wants to move this application to Stage II review.
Govt entity porposes to become an IPP.
No resolution found
Application is for an \'energy assessment department\' - Noatak wants to hire an individual to help with identifying funding sources for assistance with the high cost of energy
Application & resolution not signed
Biomass project / needs further review
Crimp: proposal to build wood combustors out of local material. No design info provided. Not enough info provided to assess application.
Biomass project / needs further review
Crimp: Project would result in biofuel manufacturing plant. Elig.
Other projects proposed in Chignik area. Therefore, one has to assume there are other viable renewable energy resources in the area; thus this project would not be eligible.
Crimp: Chiginik area has viable hydro and wind resources. Not eligible.
There is another wind project proposed in Sand Point too.
No resolution found
Assessment funds should be ok, but construction may not be - especially if funds are to be used to address the environmental issues at the generating plant.
Same application as #311; but different communtiy.
Application signed by secretary?
Indirect costs listed in Budget - not eligible.
I don\'t believe this is an eligible project?
Needs further review
Crimp: Project would utilize liquified and compressed natural gas in an area that has economically viable renewable energy resources. Bethel has class 4-5 wind resources that appear
viable. Project is not eligible.
Project is similar to Round I applications for this type of project; with the same problem - no interaction or contact with the entities that actually have the landfills mentioned.
Crimp: Applicant proposes analyzing feasibility of deploying proprietary plasma gasification waste-to-energy system in Alaska. The application lists as potential project sites landfills
at Eielson AFB, Juneau, Fairbanks, and Anchorage but does not provide sufficient information on potential energy market, waste stream, or local partners.
This one is a tough call. There is a current waste-heat system in Ambler; but it has failed and this request is to refurbish and upgrade that system. (So, is it eligible because the
heat is currently being wasted? Or, is the project not eligible because this is a refurbish of an existing system?)
Also, the budget is way too vague with ANTHC involvement. Any grant for this project will need detailed costs for ANTHC\'s effort.
Crimp: Existing heat poorly utilized from Ambler power plant. This project is a repair of old system. Elig.
Application not signed / resolution not found
Will donate at least 50% of energy produced to the local utility.
Needs further review
Crimp: IPP wind project selling to local community above that used by public radio station. Pass to stage 2 review, but request clarification from M Mitchell.
Resolution not specific to this project. pass
Significant fish & habitat issues
Kasidaya Hydro (3 MW) being started up now; Other regional Skagway/Haines hydro projects being proposed for development using RE funds are West Creek (#262) and Burro Creek (#42)
Project transmission and access is within Chikat Bald Eagle Preserve and Haines State Forest
Have received some notice of public opposition to this project, but larger support for it amongst general public.
FERC has ruled it has licensing jurisdiction; but land is in process of transfer from BLM to State and jurisdiction will likely change when patent is complete;
No corporate document found
No resolution found
No resolution found
At least the wind turbines should be eligible; but the transmission line needs furhter review; as the eligibility requirement for a transmission line states the line "...links an eligible
renewalbe energy project....". It appears this line would contect to the current diesel generators.
No resolution found
No resolution found
No resolution found
No resolution found
No resolution found
This application is also from same person that submitted #295 (Delia Creek Hydro).
Resubmittal of Round I application that failed in Stage I review. Applicant did make contact with MEA;
Since the application was submitted, the applicant has publicly announced the auction of the lodge and powerhouse site to be sold in March 2009 so site control is in question......a
problem.
Some technical questions arose during Stage 1 review but were deferred to Stage 2
No resolution from the City. City Manager willing to sign resolution for grant, but doesn\'t want to do a City & Borough Assembly resolution just for the applicaiton. City Manager
is willing to do a resolution if a grant is awarded. City is acting as pass-thru for applicant.
Bill Wall involved with this project too.
Bill Wall involved with this project too
This application is similar to one submitted in Round I for McGrath; but not exactly like the Round I application; therefore, needs to be reviewed.
Bill Wall involved with this project too
There are several other proposed projects in the area.
The project application has significant technical /financial shortcomings in the preparation of the construction cost estimate and the hydrologic investigation. Funding in the amount
of $150,000 has been provided in Round 1 to obtain stream gauge data, permits and perform final design. Information resulting from that phase will help support a future grant request
for construction funding.
Recommend it not pass Stage 1 review
Will need Power Purchase Agreement and cost-based rates acceptable to RCA in the future if construction funds become available
See revised budget / hard-copy in file.
Application not signed
What about the other wind mill in St. Paul and all the issues surronding it
Need power purchase agreement in place
Need power purchase agreement in place
Need power purchase agreement in place
Application not signed / no resolution
Electronic file empty. This appears to be a resubmittal of a Round I application that was rejected because the scope was too broad. UAF appears to have refined the application.
Project goal is to assess biomass resources, but assessment is not directed to one or more specific projects. Proposal is more closely associated with the Alaska Energy Inventory project.
Assessment of tidal energy possibilities in Kachemak Bay
Application not signed
Appears that AGE has been working with the local community members and utility;
No prior studies are cited;
Concept of project is blurred between run-of-river hydro and hydrokinetic which raises questions on validity of cost estimate, economic analysis and energy production;
FERC licensing issues of time and cost are significantly understated;
Much technical information including energy production and total cost are unsupported;
Red salmon run on Tanalian River is significant
Located within the Lake Clark National Park and Preserve which will further complicate licensing issues
Application not signed
Solar heating demonstration project ?
Needs additional review
Crimp: Solar heating project on elig (housing auth) facility. Elig.
Application not signed / no resolution found
This application may not eligible, since it is for a new waste heat recovery system on a recently completed AEA funded project. Need to determine if heat \'is currently being wasted\'
and for how long has it been wasted.
Crimp: Project is straightforward heat recovery add-on to 2008 diesel power plant upgrade. Eligible for RE Fund.
Unsure if 4 Dam Pool is eligible entity
Unsure if project is eligible - Integrated Resource Plan
Needs further review
Applicant is eligible per Mike Mitchell Per Brian B. there is statutory language that says the 4 Dam Pool doesn\'t need a CPCN right now.
Application withdrawn by applicant / Don\'t review
Application not signed / no resolution PASS
Lightining for a harbor with renewable energy
Needs further review
Crimp: Project appears to request assistance for windpower applied to dock load.
Chaninik Wind Group involved
Application not signed / no resolution included
Chaninik Wind Group involved in this study / design project
Application is not sufficiently complete to allow evaluation.
Application signed by Director of Public Works rather than City Manager?
Heat appears to be currently wasted; if so, then project is eligible.
Power produced will only be used by one facility on campus, is this eligible?
Needs furhter review
Crimp: PV project would supply university facility. Elig.
Applicant is a non-profit corporation per DCCED website; which may be the \'governing\' group, but are not eligible per HB 152. The applicant may be considered an IPP, when the Whitestone
grid is connected to the GVEA grid.
Need to check with Mike Mitchell on eligibility / per Mike the group is currently not eligible.
Waste heat project, this project is an upgrade to current system; thus not eligible
Crimp: Proposal says project would recover 13 million lb/yr of steam currently wasted from summer operation of coal-fired power plant. Proposal does not provide enough information
on feasibility to justify proceeding to final design but refers to UAF Utility Development Plan. Pass this project to stage 2 if UF can provide justification in Plan. Otherwise fail
for stage 1 if not enough info available.
Waste oil project ? Eligible?
Application not signed / Did not find resolution - PASS
Needs further review
Crimp: Project would develop local sources of waste veg and fish oil for biofuel.
Didn\'t see a resolution / PASS
Application appears to be weak, but needs to go to Stage II for further review
Paying for the commercialization portion of the project may need to be rejected.
Application not signed, resolution not as specific as required / PASS
Funds requested for studying the issue
Other projects also proposed in Skagway
Project powerhouse site, tailrace and a portion of the penstock within the Klondike Gold Rush National Historic Park which will complicate project licensing Additionally, Mental Health
Trust Lands may be impacted by needs for project access and power transmission.
Uncertainty if FERC license needed (not accounted for in budget)
Uncertainty if r-o-r or conventional storage hydro
Dr. William Wall involved with this project too
Budget needs to be firmed up; or only allow feasibility study
Dr. William Wall involved with this project too
However, indirect costs mentioned in the budget narrative - these costs are not eligible
no resolution found
There is a Round I application for a Mt. Spur project also.
Scaled down project for Round I
Project is a general study of heat pump feasiblity and applicability, not for a specific site(s). Not eligible for RE Fund
Assessment of the Chena Hot Springs project ?
Needs further review
Crimp: Project assesses geothermal resource. No prohibition in RFA from assessing resources of existing project.
Hydrogen power for vehicle conversions?
Crimp: Project would make H from geothermal resources. Eligible.
TDX power also has an Alternative Energy construction grant for geothermal in Manly Hot Springs
Electronic file empty? No resolution found / PASS
This is a repair project of an earlier constructed AEA (APA) project / eligible
There are other Akutan projects proposed.
Design costs for project. Other Akutan projects also proposed.
Recon costs for geothermal project. There are other Akutan projects proposed.
design costs for transmission line
Needs further review
Crimp: Can\'t reasonably conclude that Atqasuk has economically viable renewable energy resources beyond seasonal solar. Elig.
Resolution provided is draft and unsigned
Project eligible if heat is currently being wasted. If not, then project is not eligible.
Per email from NSB, "... Currently Pt. Lay using only about 5% of waste heat..."
Proposer claims that project will recover 110,000 gpy equiv diesel. Eligible.
Eligible project if heat is currently being wasted.
Application is not signed and resolution not complete /PASS
Per email from NSB waste-heat recovery system in place; "...but it only uses a small percentage of waste heat..."
Crimp: Proposer claims that project will recover equiv of 61,000 gpy of diesel. Eligible.
Don\'t know if there are other viable renewable energy resources in Wainwright - if not, then ok to go to Stage II. If there is, then no.
Crimp: Wainwright appears to have an economically viable wind energy resource that can be developed. The wind map indicates class 5 wind resource. It is midway between Barrow (weather
station data indicates class 4 wind resource) and Pt. Lay (weather station data indicates class 6). Therefore the proposed gas project is ineligible.
There are other viable renewable energy resources in the North Pole area and on the Railbelt grid.
No resolution and application not signed. Not producing power so not an IPP. Project doesn\'t appear to be eligible, though the application is not real clear on what happens with the
waste oil.
Crimp: Waste oil project not eligible.
Peter said to review this one.
Latter parts of the application discuss tidal energy production (?)
Crimp: Applicant is an IPP.
Requested AEA\'s assistance with project
Is the value of donated land ($500,000) considered to be "Other Funds" or "Local Match Funds (cash)" ? Ans: Land donated to the project can be considered as cash match; valuation
determined through assessment by other second party means.
Waste heat project; however it appears waste heat is already being put to use. Per SH, upgrades to waste heat recovery systems not eligible.
Crimp: Project will recover heat from stack, not utiliized currently.
Electronic file not complete IF project is eligible, then it would appear only portions would be. The natural gas option would not be eligible and the waste heat option would not be
eligible, unless the heat was previously wasted - unable to determine this.
Needs further review
Crimp: pass to stage 2
Application not signed, unable to open resolution / pass
However, still unsure about this project ( also submitted in Round I)
Needs further review
Staff Review before assigning to Economist per Peter
Application not signed & no resolution / pass
Unsure about this project / Needs further review
This is a repeat of a Round I application,which did not pass stage 1 because "Budget and cost work sheets are blank. No reconnaissance level work is demonstrated. Team has inadequate
technical background. There appears to no arrangement to handle technical analysis."
Budget and cost worksheets are now sufficiently complete.
Application not signed, no resolution provided / pass
Proposal included information that would be collected as part of a research study, but did not provide sufficient engineering and economic detail on system proposed for heat and power
production.
All electricity would go to the AVTEC facility and not the local utility.
That said, this looks like a good project that needs to coordinate with the local utility.
Peter says this is a State facility; therefore ok to move forward
attached hydro study completed in 1997
Build a power line to the border, with no assurance there would be line to connect to?
Peter says to review
Resolution not specific to project / pass
Year round hydro operation is doubtful in concept of a 13000 ft long penstock carrying Carlson Lake water to powerhouse in the winter in one of the coldest parts of the state.
Why would this project be built if there is an inter-tie going right by? Ans- Provides additional capacity to Ketchikan area should the Swan-Tyee Intertie go out of service.
The Total Project Cost does not include cost of the intertie; if the intertie was not already in place, the power from Triangle Lake could not be sold. The Metlakatla-Ketchikan intertie
received $820,000 for final design under Round 1 of the RE Fund.
AP&T applying for Haines Assisted Living group
This is a Round I applicant that was rejected because the applicant was not eligible. Ok to review this time
Resolution not specific to project / pass
Suggest contacting the local aquaculture association to ensure their concurrence with the project.
This project is duplicate of project # 98 from Round 1. The legislature has approved $80,000 for final design and permitting for this project in Round 1.
It has been previosuly determined this is an eligible applicant. Unable to determine if this is an eligible project. Peter says review Applicant submitted revised info
Unsure if this project is completely eligible. Gas turbines with waste-heat recovery proposed. The waste-heat recovery is not, as this is a new project. Gas turbines?
Crimp: This is a new combined heat and power project. While beneficial as FAQ3, #1 inidates "new projects to be designed and built to include waste heat recovery are not eligible"
Chaninik Wind group involved
Coordination between Cordova Elec and Eyak also demonstrated
Checked with the Fisheries Lab since I know people working there. Verbal support of the project provided.
All electricty produced will go to the lab? Yes
Lab is a federal facility;
Per Mike Mitchell / federal facility is not the public, thus not eligible
Steve agreed with this
Housing authority is the applicant
Not sure this is an eligible project as proposed; installing air-source heat pumps to see if the heat pumps are cost effective.
Needs furhter review
Crimp: Air source heat pump uses energy in ambient air (not ground or geothermal) therefore not a renewable energy project. Not eligible project.
no resolution and application not signed / pass
Request for recon study This is a revised application from Round I
Cantwell has contacted Earle Ausman of Polarconsult also.
the application provides marginal resource information needed to evaluate technical or economic review, however the application requests only recon funding. Additionally AEA has visited
the Jack River site and can attest to its hydropower potential; pass
resolution missing / pass Requested AEA assistance with project
Same project as #203 Only this one (212) is to be scored.
wood-use project / needs further review
Application not signed / no resolution
Application very similar to #208; same applicant - different school
AEA assistance requested
Housing authority is applicant, therefore ok
Study cited is from the early 1980\'s? If nothing else, provide funding to update this study?
AVCP resolution found / pass
One of two sites, Kisaralik, lies within the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge.
The $150K Other Funds is strictly for AVCP admin expenses, etc.
Wood-use project / needs further review
Application, cover letter and resolution all not signed
Needs further review
This is a wood-use project / needs to be reviewed further
Requested AEA assistance with project
APPLICATION WITHDRAWN BY SCHOOL DISTRICT
This project has the same problem the Kenai Winds project had - all power going to Valdez Fisheries and not into the grid, per our current definitioin of an IPP. However, the VFDA agues
that they basically are the \'public\'
Suggest additional review before moving to Stage II
Per Mike Mitchell / Valdez Fisheries proposed project would not serve the public
Steve wants to review this one and discuss more
This is for the construction phase of this project / $1.3 Million was granted in Round I for final design
Resolution missing / pass
This appears to be the same application / project from Round I.
So we carry Round 1 scores forward to Round 2.
Duplicate of Round 1 application
Application is very similar to the Round I / application #6 from Nushagak Elec; but for a different part of the overall project (and a larger request this time). This application requests
funds to construct the Grant Lake Hydro project.
This application is a follow-up to an application received from the City of Petersburg in Round I (for a reconnaissance study of this project).
This application asks for funding to complete a detailed feasibility study and licensing for the 20 MW Ruth Lake Hydro Project.
Need to review hard copy
Note that proposal was not available for stage 1 review. However, we are passing the proposal to stage 2 provisionally, since it is likely a follow-up of the earlier DC/AEA AE RFP proposal.
PM should make initial assessment that stage 1 criteria 4-6 are fulfilled, and if in question pass back to Peter and Jim for full stage 1 review.
Application not signed / resoluiton ok
Note app #75 AVEC proposes a 50 kW PV system without batteries. Recommend PM assess feasibility, merits of combined and separate systems. Not clear what wind resource is. Recommend
that PM work with wind PM on joint review.
Application signed / no resolution - if grant awarded, will need to get a resolution
Applicant requests AEA assistance. Recommend PM consider funding for resource assessment and feasibility assistance; Consider AEA assuming role of project manager. PM to set budget
for recon/feasibility.
Application signed / resolution ok
Application not signed / resolution ok
Application signed / no resolution - will need to get resolution if grant awarded; or use resolution with App #107
Application not signed / resolution ok
Application signed (by an Energy Specialist ???) and not a corporate official / resolution ok
Application signed / resolution names Kongiganak (?)
Application not signed / only one resolution here (should be one from each entity involved in project / Also did not see anything from Nome Joint Utilities about interacting with this
project.
Application signed / resolution ok Project eligible if no waste heat recovery system in place already
Application signed / resolution ok
Application signed / resolution ok Received funding from the Alt Eng for this project ($1 Million)
Application signed / resolution ok Initially selected for funding by Alt Eng - later rejected by LB&A committee
Application not signed / resolution ok No local support found, access to the site???
Note to PM: Project is very expensive and project is not well enough defined for feasibility or construction. Consider partial funding to accomplish reconnaissance.
Application signed / didn\'t find a resolution Is this an eligible project? I don\'t see how - power for a private facility?
Page 16 states that the wind farm would export power less than 5% of the time. This is less than that which is required to meet the definition of IPP.
Application signed / no resolution No support from Nenana City goverment - local traditional council did offer support. Nothing found from the local utility either.
Applicaiton not signed / resolution signed - uncompatiable format (reviewed hard copy)
Proposal did not provide enough description of tasks, milestones, and deliverables.
Proposers appear to have excellent skills and interests in community system operation, but appear not to have sufficient energy resource/systems assessment skills.
Application signed / resolution ok Unable to determine if this entity has access to the site Match offered is reduction in lease payments and royalty payments?
Applciation signed / resolution ok
Application signed / resolution ok This applicant does not have approval yet to even use the landfill. MoA - SWS also submitted a similar application.
Project looks fine, but is the same as gas owner Munic Anchorage Solid Waste Services proposal #68. Recommend PM coordinate review of the two proposals, but score each separately.
Application signed / no resolution Project benefits a private lodge near Hatcher Pass
Peter, Jim reviewed paper submittal - Applicant did not identify how much power would be donated to state facility (i.e. >50%?), so eligibility as IPP in question. Not clear to us whether
or not state facility satisfies "public".
Applicant does not supply feasibility documentation, although they say both recon and feas studies are complete.
Application signed / resolution ok Battery Storage System - eligible project?
Application signed / no resolution found - will need one if grant awarded. Grantee already has a $1,000,000 Alt Eng grant
Application signed / resolution ok Isn\'t there some history with this community (Nikolski)?
Unsure if this is an eligible project? Also unsure if applicants are eligible (private individuals) Application not signed / no resolution
This is in a grey area between statewide assessment and site specific resource assessment that is eary work for a discrete energy project. We pass this through stage one for further
consideration by the pm.
Application not signed / resolution ok
Application not signed / resolution ok
Suggest PM review adequacy of existing reconn and feasibility work. Consider partial funding for reconn/feasibility for this grant cycle.
Application signed / resolution ok Application presented as a report
Application not signed / resolution ok
Appliation signed / resolution ok I can\'t tell if this is an elgible project (battery techonolgy?) Application presented as a report
This project appears to be eligible; It involves the direct use of wind energy.
Application signed / resolution ok Someone else needs to determine if this an eliglible project (I don\'t know)
This project demonstrates a technology to construct a 10 KW fuel maker, that employs electrical energy from a hydro facility that would otherwise be spilled over a dam, to produce an
ammonia fuel, which could then be conveyed to small towns and villages.
It is of moderate size and is "a project that generates energy from or involves the direct use of.....hydropower.
This fuel is to be used to fire an intercombustion generator that will be interconnected to the Juneau AEL&P network.
Vendor / no specific project / no resolution
No specific application is given. The description of the proposed system is very generic. No particular source or description of recovered heat is provided.
The project appears to have a total budget of $28M. Applicants are requesting funding to identify a site, and configure the project to the community. However, the project description
on page 7 of the grant application indicates Ormat intends to use the exhaust stream of an existing GE LM2500 gas turbine that is presently in operation "at the project site". Proposers
need to better describe the proposed project, as the application appears to be internally inconsistent.
Application signed / resolution ok Can\'t really tell if this is an eligible project?
Peter and Jim: Project is natural gas -fired in a grid serving more than 10,000 people that has viable renewable energy resources. Not eligible.
CBM assessment best done in context of Alaska Energy Inventory project.
Application not signed / Resolution ok Match offered Multiple energy sources suggested I can\'t really tell if this is an eligible project?
Applicant claims IPP status. Therefore, recommend evaluation of the power producing parts of the proposal and consider the funding of these discrete projects. Do not consider other
portions of the project, since they are not within the intent of the program. Recommend PM consider funding up to feasibility stage for the power projects.
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA No information availalbe on line
No electronic version of this app. Assume same proposal as for Ambler.
This project\'s feasibility interacts with feasibility of the app#74, Kobuk River hydro feasibility. Recommend consider do not construct until results of Kobuk feas study are available.
At that time hydro and PV should be considered together in an IRP.
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
This project\'s feasibility interacts with feasibility of the app#74, Kobuk River hydro feasibility. Recommend consider do not construct until results of Kobuk feas study are available.
At that time hydro and PV should be considered together in an IRP.
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
Application signed / resolution not as specfic as detailed in RFA
Electronic version of grant app is for Toksook Bay. Refer to paper.
Application signed / draft resolution only (Assembly will meet and approve the resolution - I was aware of this) Match offered
Application signed / resolution submitted names another project (Delta) If grant awarded, will need a resolution
The Utility has not yet agreed to support integration of large wind power development into their network. Arrangements for interconnection, land access for the project, tariff, and
permitting are not in place. Therefore recommend PM consider funding to feasibility.
Application signed / resolution ok
Application not signed / no resolution found
This is a simple effective project that may have sufficient definition to allow for funding though construction. Suggest requirement of project manager approval before beginning construction,
to assure regulatory compliance and adequate design.
Application not signed / resolution ok Match offered Could not find where the borough had coordinated with local utilities.
Application not signed / resolution ok Match offered Could not find where the borough had coordinated with local utilities.
Application not signed / resolution ok Match offered Could not find where the borough had coordinated with local utilities.
Note that app# 14 Chignik Lagoon hydro, app# 62 Chignik hydro/wind feas, and app#40 Chignik Hydro all address the same subregion. Pass all three to stage 2 review but if funded recommend
consider requiring the 3 applicants to coordinate on study and milestones. This study appears to be expensive. Consider offering less funding.
Application signed / resolution ok Project eligibile as heat is currently being wasted per application.
Application signed / no resolution found (letter of committment only). Will need resolution if grant awarded
Although applicant references recon level work, no feasibility analysis appears to have been done. Issues that should be addressed include technical risk since biopower unit is precommercial,
and availability/delivered cost of wood fuel. These items should be assessed in stage 2 review. Suggest this project be funded only for feasibility.
Application signed / resolution ok Match offered
Appears that adequate reconnaissance work has been accomplished to justify funding to completion of feasibility/concept design.
Application signed / resolution ok Match offered
Application signed / resolution not as specific as defined in RFA
Report provided in the form of the \'application\' Resolutions provided from the Norhtwest Arctic Borough, Deering and Buckland. Did not see one from Noorvik. Project appears to be
eligible However, Deering (Ipnatachiaq Elec Co) has a grant from Alt Energy for wind assessment.
Suggest project manager confirm wind resource and turbine placement have been established during review.
Application not signed / resolution ok
Project interacts with No. 6 - Nushagak regional hydro project. Application does not provide sufficient documentation and project definition to proceed to construction. Recommend we
consider providing feasibility fund for this project in conjunction with Project No. 6. Given scale of these projects, cooperative planning approach is needed between applicants, utilty
and community.
Application signed / resolution incomplete
Did not see power generation going to the public Applicaiton signed / resolution not as detailed as specifed in RFA.
Jim: The project team does not include an Alaska based engineer. The proposal requests funds for feasibility, design and construction. Suggest moving forward to Stage 2 for Project
Manager Review. Project involves creation of a biomass waste process not yet in existance. Suggest full funding, with first funding to confirm feasibility and complete design, and
construction funds on PM approval. Some feasibility information included in proposal.
Application signed / resolution ok
Applicant doesn\'t appear eligible / project doesn\'t appear eligible Application is not signed / no resolution
Application signed / resolution ok Match offered
Application signed / resolution ok Match offered
This is actually a recon study. Application not signed - draft resolution only. City Council needs to act on it 10/10/08. (I was aware of this when Whittier submitted their application
- CR and I decided this was ok.) Looked at description at the ftp site.
Application signed / resolution ok
Preliminary work funded by a grant from Alt Energy solicitiation. Application not signed and no resolution Would need a resolution if this is recommended for funding
Project construction will be delayed if funding limited to feasibility--project size and complexity relatively small, so stage 2 and 3 review should consider recommending full funding
upon achieving milestones.
Does not appear to be an eligible applicant, project eligibility ? and no resolution - application also is not signed. $300,000 to save $9,000????
This project capitalizes logging operation.
Initial indications that applicant has minimum capabilities. Further assessment required. No apparent arrangement for MOA to buy heat or log forest.
Application not signed / Resolution not very specific. Unsure if this is an eligible applicant and whether it is an elgible project. No indication of local support. The City of Whittier
also has submitted a project on their own.
The project is of a size where the power will flow into the Railbelt Grid and serve other communities; therefore the assertion that it serves a community less than 10,000 appears incorrect.
On that basis, Peter/Jim feel the project is ineligible, and should not be further considered.
Application not signed / Resolution not very specific. Unsure if this is an eligible applicant and whether it is an elgible project. Local support not demonstrated.
The project is of a size where the power will flow into the Railbelt Grid and serve other communities; therefore the assertion that it serves a community less than 10,000 appears incorrect.
On that basis, Peter/Jim feel the project is ineligible, and should not be further considered.
Application signed / Resolution ok. Appears this will be a legitimate IPP if the project were completed as proposed.
Application signed / Resolution not as detailed as specified in RFA / It appears this project is eligible.
Application signed. It appears Trident Seafoods owns the site to be improved - is this really eligible? No resolution from the City Council
Peter and Jim recommend pass. Letters from city council good enough?
Note that app# 14 Chignik Lagoon hydro, app# 62 Chignik hydro/wind feas, and app#40 Chignik Hydro all address the same subregion. Pass all three to stage 2 review but if funded recommend
consider requiring the 3 applicants to coordinate on study and milestones.
A grant to another State agency? A project to heat their office? Application not signed (typed in) and no resolution - where would it come from?
Jim and Peter: project is eligible.
Application signed / resolution ok Same consultant as for the Ketchikan project.
Good description; ask for clarification on the date under section 2.1 of the grant application that Petersburg would seek a FERC application for preliminary permit. App says 2/1/2008;
date has passed; what is correct date.
Application signed / resolution ok
Note supply of hydro to Ktn is in addition to Mahoney, Metlakatla, Tyee, Ruth L, ... Planning required.
Applicant appears to be a vendor, wanting to do a project Application not signed / no resolution
Project description is not well expressed; concern that the concept is valid. Recommend further review by project manager of level of technical definition and feasibility.
There is a duplicate of this application @ #80
Application signed / no resolution
These folks have grants from the Alternative Energy fund already. Application not signed / resolution not as detailed as specified in RFA Match offered
We discussed this one in our meetings and made the decision to accept the application. Application not signed / Resolution also not signed or evidence that it was acted on. Will need
to get resolution if recommended for funding Match offered
Application signed / no resolution; but letters of support. Also, budget has indirect costs detailed - not eligible.
Project goal is to assess biomass resources, but assessment is not directed to one or more specific projects. Proposal is more closely associated with the Alaska Energy Inventory project.
Application signed / Resolution ok. Before any funding decisions made for this project, need to determine exact amount of all funidng being put towards this project. This project received
$808,500 from the Alt Energy solicitation and at least one federal grant. Same consultant prepared this application and the McGrath one.
Application signed / Resolution ok, not detailed as specified. Match offered
Is this a real utility? application signed / resolution not as specific as detailed in the RFA
Is this a real utility? appliation signed, resolution ok; but not as detailed as specified in the RFA
Application signed and resolution not as detailed as specified in the RFA
Possibly eligible project based on 10/8/08 meeting. Resolution ok
Discuss during further review.
Haines Assisted Living, Inc. is not eligible; not an IPP or any of the other 3 choices. Further, applicaion modified to appear as an eligible applicant. (See page 2 of the application;
changes made to IPP definition.)
Resolution is not specific as detailed in the RFA / Application signed
Resolution is not specific as detailed in the RFA / Application signed
Eligible project IF the heat is currenlty being wasted / unable to tell at this time. Application not signed; resolution not specific
Resolution ok / application not signed
Resolution and application signed
Resolutions from Angoon and Gustavus (draft) and the companies involved. Eligible project?
Project is selective recon, prototype testing, conflict analysis and detailed feasibility for 4 sites, Icy Straits, Angoon, Wrangell Narrows, and Central Cook Inlet.
No resolution and application not signed If this moves on, will need to get a resolution
No resolution and application not signed
No budget or cost worksheet was included. Application did not respond to subsections 3.2-4, 3.6 and section 4.
IPP? No CD, so no information on line / Will need to review hard copy. Still need to see a resolution
Request is for 2 year Phase I study. ($500,000, $200,000, $250,000)
In preliminary review, we could not ascertain whether the applicant has legal access to the resource. This should be verified in State 2 evaluation.
Application not signed / resolution ok
Application signed / resolution ok
Note that app# 14 Chignik Lagoon hydro, app# 62 Chignik hydro/wind feas, and app#40 Chignik Hydro all address the same subregion. Pass all three to stage 2 review but if funded recommend
consider requiring the 3 applicants to coordinate on study and milestones.
Is this an IPP? Project eligible? Resolution is from Don West, sole managing member and the resolution is not signed.
This passes stage 1; recommend PM review project budget, as high level review raises concerns that travel and per diem budget are high and labor budgets are low, and overall cost for
reconnaissance appears high.
Is this an IPP? Project eligible? Resolution is from Don West, sole managing member and the resolution is not signed.
This passes Stage 1. Recommend PM review as high level review raises concerns that travel and perdiem are hgh and labor budget is low. Overall cost for recon appears high.
Application signed / resolution ok (draft submitted - need enacted one)
Proposal does not specify energy systems to be developed, but does outline reasonable process for identifying systems to be installed.
Application not signed / Resolution of comunity support demonstrated (City of Gustavus resolution 2008-12)
Application signed / no resloution found - will need one if a grant is awarded; but is this an eligible project - converting boilers from diesel to electric?
Recommend PM explore the potential use of heat pumps with applicant.
Application signed / resoluiton ok If the MoA and this company already have a MoU to do this project; why is a grant needed?
Recommend DGGS verify potential resource
Recommend PM consider partial funding to recon level.
No resolution found, application not signed
Budget and cost work sheets are blank. No reconnaissance level work is demonstrated. Team has inadequate technical background. There appears to no arrangement to handle technical
analysis.
Applicant did not provide feasibility and final design documentation to justify proceeding to construction.
Application signed, resolution not detailed as specified in the RFA.
y
Project interacts with No. 55 - Bristol Bay Health Corp Wind project. Application does not provide sufficient documentation and project definition to proceed to construction. Recommend
we consider providing feasibility fund for this project in conjunction with Project No. 55. Given scale of these projects, cooperative planning approach is needed between applicants,
utilty and community.
IPP? Project? Resolution is from Don West, sole managing member and the resolution is not signed - nor is the appliation signed.
Note to PM: No recon study appears available to justify feasibility phase. Consider possibility of funding only reconnaissance.
IPP? Project? Resolution is from Don West, sole managing member and the resolution is not signed / nor is the application signed
Note to PM: No recon study appears available to justify feasibility phase. Consider possibility of funding only reconnaissance.
Is this an IPP? Project eligible? Resolution is from Don West, sole managing member and the resolution is not signed.
Note to PM: No recon study appears available to justify feasibility phase.
Possibility of funding only reconnaissance, however, note two competing applications that are based on existing reconn/feasibility reports proposing to construct projects using landfill
gas.
CE2 report appears to provide recon/feasibility data. Applicaiton not signed?
Resolution ok
Application signed / Resolution ok
S1 Reconsideration
Accepted
Accepted
S2 Evaluator 1
Daniel Hertrich
David Lockard
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Josh Craft
David Lockard
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Kirk Warren
Rich Stromberg
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Josh Craft
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Alan Fetters
Karl Reiche
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Tim Sandstrom
Jim Vail
Tim Sandstrom
Alan Baldivieso
Rich Stromberg
David Lockard
Alan Baldivieso
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
David Lockard
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Josh Craft
Alan Fetters
Kirk Warren
Josh Craft
Alan Baldivieso
Rich Stromberg
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Daniel Hertrich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Josh Craft
Alan Fetters
Josh Craft
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Helen Traylor
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
David Lockard
Audrey Alstrom
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Josh Craft
Rich Stromberg
David Lockard
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
David Lockard
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Audrey Alstrom
David Lockard
Josh Craft
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Kirk Warren
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Alan Baldivieso
Kirk Warren
Alan Baldivieso
Helen Traylor
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Rich Stromberg
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Helen Traylor
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Audrey Alstrom
Alan Baldivieso
David Lockard
Warren
Stromberg
Plentovich
Traylor
Stromberg
Stromberg
Traylor
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Plentovich
Stromberg
Traylor
Ott
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Stromberg
Baldivieso
Plentovich
Stromberg
Stromberg
Craft
Craft
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Craft
Vail
Reiche
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Baldivieso
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Traylor
Traylor
Traylor
Ott
Ott
Warren
Traylor
Plentovich
Plentovich
Traylor
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Warren
Ott
Ott
Traylor
Stromberg
Ott
Ott
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Ott
Ott
Baldivieso
Ott
Baldivieso
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Ott
Stromberg
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Stromberg
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Stromberg
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Stromberg
Stromberg
Strandberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
McMahon
McMahon
Plentovich/Traylor
McMahon
McMahon
Stromberg
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Stromberg
Ott
Plentovich/Traylor
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Strandberg
Combined with #825
Strandberg
Ott
McMahon
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Ott
Strandberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Strandberg
Ott
Ott
Ott
Strandberg
Stromberg
McMahon
Ott
Ott
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
McMahon
Jensen
Did not pass Stage 1 Review
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Ott
Did not pass Stage 1 Review
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Ott
McMahon
Ott
McMahon
McMahon
Jensen
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Stromberg
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Plentovich
Plentovich, Brown
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Plentovich
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Ott
Stromberg
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
McMahon
Jensen
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich/Brown
McMahon
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Jensen
Plentovich/Brown
McMahon
McMahon
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Jensen
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich
Ott
McMahon
McMahon
Ott
Landis
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich
Plentovich
Ott
Jensen
Landis
Jensen
Ott
Landis
Landis
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Landis
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Brown/Kerr
Landis/Kerr
Jensen
Jensen
Lenny Landis
Brown/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Jensen
Ott
Lenny Landis
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Reiche
Reiche
Landis/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Brown
Brown/Kerr
Ott
Reiche
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Ott
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Ott
Lenny Landis
Brown/Kerr
Jensen
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Reiche
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Landis
Ott
Ott
Lenny Landis
Ott
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Brown/Kerr
Jensen
Brown
Ott
Lenny Landis
Brown/Kerr
Lenny Landis
Landis
Ott
Landis/Kerr
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Landis
Ott
Jensen
Lenny Landis
Jensen
Brown/Kerr
Jensen
Reiche
Reiche
Jensen
Brown/Kerr
Ott
Brown/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Lenny Landis
Ott
Repeat of Round 1 application #106
Ott
Ott
Dabo
Jensen
Dabo
Brown
David Lockard
Dabo
Jensen
David Lockard
Dabo
Dabo
Jensen
Ott
Dabo
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
David Lockard
David Lockard
Jensen
James Jensen
David Lockard
Jensen
Dabo
David Lockard
Ott
Ott
Jensen
David Lockard
Jensen
David Lockard
Jensen
David Lockard
David Lockard
David Lockard
Ott
Ott
Dabo
Dabo
Dabo
James Jensen
Dabo
Dabo
Ott
Dabo
Brown
Dabo
James Jensen
James Jensen
Brown
Ott
Ott
Dabo
WITHDRAWN
Brown
Crimp
Dabo
Dabo
Brown
Ott
Dabo
Brown
Ott
Brown
Ott
Crimp
Ott
Ott
James Jensen
Dabo
Ott
Brown
Crimp
Brown
Ott
Ott
Ott
Brown
Ott
Ott
James Jensen
Ott
Ott
David Lockard
David Lockard
David Lockard
Brown
Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Ott
Ott
David Lockard
Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Brown
Ott
S2 Project Manager
Alan Fetters
Alan Fetters
Tim Sandstrom
Tim Sandstrom
Alan Fetters
Alan Fetters
Josh Craft
Tim Sandstrom
Karl Reiche
Rebecca Garrett
Tim Sandstrom
Alan Fetters
Alan Fetters
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Tim Sandstrom
Karl Reiche
Rebecca Garrett
Rebecca Garrett
Rebecca Garrett
Karl Reiche
Tim Sandstrom
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Karl Reiche
Tim Sandstrom
Tim Sandstrom
Rebecca Garrett
Alan Fetters
Tim Sandstrom
Tim Sandstrom
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
Josh Craft
Jim Vail
Rebecca Garrett
Jim Vail
Tim Sandstrom
Josh Craft
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Alan Fetters
Karl Reiche
Tim Sandstrom
Karl Reiche
Alan Fetters
Rebecca Garrett
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Jim Vail
Tim Sandstrom
David Lockard
Jim Vail
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Alan Baldivieso
Josh Craft
David Lockard
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Jim Vail
Josh Craft
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Jim Vail
Daniel Hertrich
Jim Vail
David Lockard
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Devany Plentovich
Jim Vail
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Karl Reiche
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Alan Fetters
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
Devany Plentovich
Alan Fetters
Devany Plentovich
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
Josh Craft
Alan Fetters
Rich Stromberg
Daniel Hertrich
Rich Stromberg
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
David Lockard
Daniel Hertrich
Jim Vail
Jim Vail
Alan Fetters
Karl Reiche
Daniel Hertrich
Daniel Hertrich
Josh Craft
Alan Baldivieso
Daniel Hertrich
Josh Craft
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Helen Traylor
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
David Lockard
Audrey Alstrom
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Josh Craft
Rich Stromberg
David Lockard
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
David Lockard
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Audrey Alstrom
David Lockard
Josh Craft
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
David Lockard
Kirk Warren
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Alan Baldivieso
Kirk Warren
Alan Baldivieso
Helen Traylor
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Rich Stromberg
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Audrey Alstrom
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Audrey Alstrom
Helen Traylor
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Audrey Alstrom
Alan Baldivieso
David Lockard
Kirk Warren
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Alan Baldivieso
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Helen Traylor
Doug Ott
Alan Baldivieso
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Josh Craft
Josh Craft
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Josh Craft
Jim Vail
Karl Reiche
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Alan Baldivieso
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Kirk Warren
Helen Traylor
Devany Plentovich
Devany Plentovich
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Doug Ott
Helen Traylor
Doug Ott
Kirk Warren
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Helen Traylor
Rich Stromberg
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Rich Stromberg
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Alan Baldivieso
Doug Ott
Alan Baldivieso
Alan Baldivieso
Rich Stromberg
Doug Ott
Rich Stromberg
Stromberg
Ott
Stromberg
Ott
Stromberg
Ott
Ott
Stromberg
Stromberg
Strandberg
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Plentovich
Stromberg
Stromberg
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Plentovich
Ott
Stromberg
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Ott
Plentovich
Stromberg
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Strandberg
Strandberg
Strandberg
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Stromberg
Stromberg
Strandberg
Ott
Ott
Ott
Strandberg
Stromberg
McMahon
Ott
Ott
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Jenson
Jensen
Ott
McMahon
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
Jensen
Plentovich
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Ott
McMahon
Ott
McMahon
McMahon
Jensen
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Stromberg
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Plentovich
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Plentovich
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Ott
Stromberg
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
McMahon, Lockard
Ott
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon, Lockard
Jensen
Jensen
Strandberg
McMahon
Jensen
McMahon, Lockard
McMahon, Lockard
McMahon, Lockard
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich, Brown
Ott
Ott
Ott
Strandberg
Plentovich, Brown
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon, Lockard
Plentovich, Brown
Plentovich, Brown
Plentovich, Brown
McMahon, Lockard
McMahon, Lockard
Plentovich, Brown, Landis
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
McMahon, Lockard
Ott
Jensen
Plentovich, Brown
McMahon, Lockard
McMahon, Lockard
Jensen
McMahon, Lockard
Ott
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Jensen
Plentovich, Brown
Plentovich, Landis
Ott
McMahon, Lockard
McMahon, Lockard
Ott
Landis
Ott
Ott
Plentovich, Landis
Ott
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Ott
Ott
McMahon, Lockard
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich, Landis
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Plentovich, Brown
Plentovich, Landis
Plentovich, Landis
Ott
Jensen
Landis
Jensen
Ott
Landis
Landis
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon, Lockard
Plentovich, Brown
McMahon, Lockard
Plentovich, Brown
Ott
Landis
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Plentovich, Brown
Ott
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
James Jensen
James Jensen
Lenny Landis
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Lenny Landis
Ron Brown
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Ron Brown
James Jensen
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
David Lockard
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
Ron Brown
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Ron Brown
David Lockard
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Lenny Landis
Lenny Landis
James Jensen
Ron Brown
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
David Lockard
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Lenny Landis
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Jensen
James Jensen
Ron Brown
David Lockard
James Jensen
James Jensen
David Lockard
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
James Jensen
David Lockard
David Lockard
Jensen
James Jensen
David Lockard
James Jensen
James Jensen
David Lockard
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
Jensen
David Lockard
James Jensen
David Lockard
James Jensen
David Lockard
David Lockard
David Lockard
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Ron Brown
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Brown
James Jensen
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Jim Strandberg
Doug Ott
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
David Lockard
David Lockard
David Lockard
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Doug Ott
Doug Ott
David Lockard
Doug Ott
James Jensen
James Jensen
James Jensen
Ron Brown
Doug Ott
S2 Economist
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Information Insights Peter Crimp
Information Insights Peter Crimp
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Information Insights Indra Arriaga
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics Gary Eaton
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics David Weiss
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Northern Economics
Information Insights Peter Crimp
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Information Insights Indra Arriaga
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Northern Economics Gary Eaton
Information Insights Peter Crimp
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics Gary Eaton
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics Gary Eaton
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Northern Economics David Weiss
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Northern Economics David Weiss
Information Insights Peter Crimp
Information Insights Jana Peirce
Northern Economics
Information Insights Peter Crimp
Information Insights Jana Peirce
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Information Insights Jana Peirce
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics Gary Eaton
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Information Insights Jamie Hansen
Analysis North
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Northern Economics Cal Kerr
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics Gary Eaton
Analysis North Alan Mitchel
Steve Pratt
Information Insights Jana Peirce
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Alan Mitchel
Steve Pratt
Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Alan Mitchel
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Alan Mitchel
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Alan Mitchel
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Information Insights
Information Insights
Information Insights
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Alan Mitchell
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Information Insights
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Steve Pratt
Steve Pratt
Alan Mitchell
Steve Pratt
Alan Mitchell
Alan Mitchell
Information Insights
Steve Pratt
Northern Economics
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
Pratt
Kerr
Kerr
Pratt
Pratt
Pratt
Pratt
Kerr
Pratt
Pratt
Pratt
Kerr
Pratt
InfoIn
Pratt
Pratt
Pratt
InfoIn
Kerr
Kerr
InfoIn
InfoIn
Kerr
InfoIn
Kerr
InfoIn
Pratt
Pratt
InfoIn
Pratt
Kerr
Kerr
Kerr
InfoIn
InfoIn
Kerr
InfoIn
InfoIn
Pratt
InfoIn
Pratt
InfoIn
Pratt
NEcon
InfoIn
InfoIn
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
NEcon
NEcon
InfoIn
Linda Snow
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
NEcon
Linda Snow
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Linda Snow
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Linda Snow
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
NEcon
Alan Mitchell
InfoIn
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
NEcon
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
Robert Logan
InfoIn
Alan Mitchell
Robert Logan
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Linda Snow
NEcon
NEcon
Robert Logan
NEcon
NEcon
Linda Snow
NEcon
NEcon
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
Robert Logan
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
InfoIn
Alan Mitchell
InfoIn
NEcon
Robert Logan
InfoIn
Linda Snow
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Robert Logan
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Alan Mitchell
NEcon
Robert Logan
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
InfoIn
NEcon
NEcon
NEcon
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Hubbard
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Linda Snow
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Lovas/Hubbard
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Hubbard
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Hubbard
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Linda Snow
Robert Logan
Lovas
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Robert Logan
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Hubbard
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Lovas
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Hubbard
Lovas/Hubbard
Linda Snow
Lovas
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Lovas
Robert Logan
Hubbard
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Hubbard
Lovas
Hubbard
Linda Snow
Lovas
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Lovas/Hubbard
Northern Economics
Lovas
Northern Economics
Robert Logan
Lovas/Hubbard
Tom Lovas
Hubbard
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Robert Logan
Linda Snow
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Linda Snow
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Robert Logan
Emerman
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Robert Logan
Tom Lovas
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Tom Lovas
Robert Logan
Linda Snow
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Linda Snow
Emerman
Emerman
Tom Lovas
Linda Snow
Robert Logan
Linda Snow
Robert Logan
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Emerman
Emerman
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Emerman
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Emerman
Emerman
Tom Lovas
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Emerman
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Emerman
Northern Economics
Emerman
Robert Logan
Emerman
Emerman
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Emerman
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Northern Economics
Tom Lovas
Tom Lovas
Emerman
Northern Economics
Emerman
Emerman
Robert Logan
Emerman
Tom Lovas
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Linda Snow
Robert Logan
Emerman
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Emerman
Emerman
Linda Snow
Emerman
Robert Logan
Robert Logan
Northern Economics
Emerman
Stage 2 Score Total
0
0
67.33
56.33
45.17
73.67
48.83
59.5
73
10
83.17
0
0
40.67
61.5
83.33
0
49.67
72.5
54.5
78
58.17
0
31.17
0
0
75.67
56.67
66
52.5
71.67
68.5
41.83
73.67
60.83
59.67
50
44.67
59.5
49.17
40.5
72.5
59.67
62
82.67
57.17
0
63.17
37
7.5
79
58
0
63
0
35.67
75.67
61.5
78
36
34.83
40
0
0
0
48
0
0
0
0
0
40.83
89.33
45.67
56
0
62.67
89.33
0
83.17
30.33
42.83
79.17
48.83
77
0
64.33
49.33
86.5
0
0
0
42.83
40.67
47.67
50
2.5
49.33
0
47
40
71.17
59.33
61
56
59
75.83
42
71.67
68.67
82.5
63.5
0
0
42.83
81.83
83.5
0
37.33
73.83
81.33333333
73.16666667
71.16666667
94.33333333
61.5
46.33333333
52.33333333
43.66666667
58.33333333
45.83333333
46.66666667
74.16666667
47
64.16666667
47.5
65
60.83
79.16666667
52.16666667
56.33333333
42.83333333
87.66666667
57.66666667
27.5
53
35.33333333
57.66666667
67.66666667
87.66666667
59.83333333
74.16666667
65.83333333
88
46.5
80.16666667
85.16666667
85.16666667
70.16666667
85.33333333
83
62.83333333
84.33333333
86.33333333
0
54.83333333
69.33
58.16666667
66.83333333
35.33333333
61
85
82.83333333
73
39
81.16666667
90.33333333
88.5
39.33333333
52.16666667
76.66666667
77.83333333
89.33333333
64.5
61.16666667
57.66666667
80.5
66.33333333
54.66666667
49.33333333
0
21.16666667
39.16666667
46
60.5
82
57.33333333
45.66666667
80.5
39.5
47.83333333
60
28.83333333
0
27.16666667
82.33333333
74
85.33333333
29.83333333
48
87.16666667
54.33333333
55.66666667
52.16666667
45
46.83333333
40
59.16666667
62
42.66666667
61.66666667
89.66666667
75.33333333
71.5
78.83333333
82.66666667
87.33333333
35
84
59.66666667
73.66666667
81.5
76.5
84.16666667
79.33333333
80
62.5
81.5
42
65.5
89
57
78.33333333
61
29.5
42
92.5
90
75.66666667
60.5
94
72.66666667
67
49.33333333
91.66666667
63.83333333
77
31
76.16666667
61.66666667
58
28.16666667
0
28.33333333
66.66666667
40
0
92
69.5
62.33333333
72
58
79.83333333
79.83333333
57
62.33333333
79.83333333
74.83333333
54
65.66666667
0
84
79.33333333
82.5
0
0
0
0
0
79.83333333
68.83333333
0
79.16666667
77.5
63.16666667
82.83333333
36
78.66666667
55.16666667
87
74.83333333
54
56.83333333
27.5
83.66666667
64.16666667
44.5
61
59.83333333
61.5
42.33333333
44.33333333
90
0
49.5
51.66666667
50.33333333
73
0
0
80.66666667
75.33333333
52.16666667
58.16666667
42.5
66.66666667
89.33333333
61.66666667
72.83333333
53.16666667
78.66666667
34
82.33333333
55.33333333
52.66666667
52.66666667
90.33333333
57.16666667
57.5
89.66666667
0
75
55.33333333
74.66666667
67.83333333
81.33333333
62.66666667
37.83333333
77.16666667
90.33333333
41.66666667
49.33333333
86.66666667
86.33333333
75.16666667
50
69.5
64.16666667
49
63.83333333
64.5
79.66666667
60
57.33333333
60.33333333
59.33333333
57
81
76
62.83333333
15
34
51.33333333
46.83333333
50.66666667
37.66666667
47
56.33333333
56.66666667
59.5
68.5
81.66666667
0
78.83333333
88.33333333
53.33333333
53.33333333
54.66666667
57
73.33333333
74.66666667
46.33333333
36
66
77
57.33333333
72.33333333
37.83333333
84
75.16666667
0
61
57.33333333
59.83333333
53.66666667
72.66666667
60.83333333
33.83333333
39.33333333
74.16666667
45.5
43
93.33333333
62.66666667
45.66666667
55.66666667
70.5
59.66666667
59.33333333
84
62.16666667
63.33333333
50.66666667
26
57.83333333
76.5
77
43.83333333
74.5
72
65.66666667
46.83333333
85.66666667
82.33333333
47.83333333
64
74.16666667
56.83333333
86
41.66666667
45.33333333
54.33333333
49.66666667
88
81.66666667
59.16666667
40.66666667
52.66666667
56
80.83333333
75.66666667
48.83333333
61.16666667
56.16666667
45.33333333
63.33333333
72
80.5
75.83333333
64
30
62
49.66666667
23
63.33333333
52.83333333
56.33333333
69.16666667
52.16666667
64.33333333
85.66666667
67.66666667
47
40.08333333
50
54.5
50
69.5
76.66666667
61
93.66666667
58.16666667
81.33333333
64.5
35.33333333
84.83333333
65.66666667
89.33333333
68.66666667
77.33333333
76
67.33333333
69.33333333
62.66666667
69.33333333
74
66
71.33333333
62.66666667
72
74.66666667
78.66666667
68
67.33333333
66.66666667
64.66666667
70.66666667
60
60
42.66666667
57.33333333
86
76.66666667
68
86.66666667
69.33333333
58.66666667
68
50
88.66666667
58
82.66666667
75.33333333
86.66666667
86.66666667
70
66
66
69.33333333
85.33333333
93.33333333
52.66666667
65.33333333
60.66666667
76.66666667
63.33333333
67.33333333
78.66666667
62.66666667
93.33333333
42
36.66666667
87.33333333
77.33333333
61.33333333
86.66666667
68
79.33333333
38
40
78.66666667
92
76.66666667
86
48
74.66666667
64
71.33333333
90
93.33333333
63.33333333
34
66
68.66666667
58
80
86
39.33333333
81.33333333
77.33333333
69.33333333
88
68
72
69.33333333
43.33333333
68
56.66666667
60
60
60
49.33333333
76
70
70
67.33333333
96
66
82
60
78.66666667
64
66.66666667
92.66666667
63.33333333
64.66666667
92
95.33333333
68.66666667
98
76
82
77.83333333
79.33333333
56.66666667
74.16666667
70.66666667
74.66666667
72
91.33333333
49.33333333
94.66666667
98.66666667
23.33333333
54
83.33333333
94.66666667
62.66666667
54
67.33333333
58.66666667
96.66666667
78
84
95.33333333
88
95.33333333
93.33333333
30.66666667
32
10.66666667
76.66666667
88.66666667
28.66666667
27.33333333
54.66666667
100
88.66666667
30
54.66666667
42
40.66666667
40.66666667
72
75.33333333
S2 Project Management, Development, and Operation
17.33
16
8.67
14
4.67
9.33
13.33
16
12
16
18
10
16
14
14
19.33
8.67
15.33
12.67
18
16
11.33
15.33
12.67
14.67
17.33
10
12.67
12
14
8.67
10
18
14.67
16
18
11.33
15.33
10.67
15.33
13.33
18
6.67
16
12
16
7.33
9.33
6
14
8
16.67
10.67
16
14
18
18
6
10
13.33
14
15.33
16
14
16.67
12.67
12
8.67
14
14
10
12
12
15.33
11.33
16
14.67
14.67
6
14
18
16
14
10
18
20
11.33
14.67
16.66666667
16
15.33333333
20
14
16
12
12
9.333333333
10.66666667
12
14
16.66666667
12
8.666666667
16.66666667
20
18
15.33333333
11.33333333
12.66666667
17.33333333
18
8
11.33333333
11.33333333
13.33333333
12
17.33333333
12
14.66666667
17.33333333
16.66666667
8.666666667
18
18
18
18
16.66666667
16.66666667
17.33333333
16.66666667
19.33333333
16
16.67
13.33333333
18
10.66666667
11.33333333
17.33333333
17.33333333
14
8
19.33333333
19.33333333
18
6.666666667
10.66666667
17.33333333
14
19.33333333
13.33333333
16
16
15.33333333
15.33333333
16.66666667
10.66666667
8
12
9.333333333
18
17.33333333
16.66666667
6.666666667
14
11.33333333
6
14
6
4
16.66666667
14.66666667
16
5.333333333
14.66666667
17.33333333
18
16
16
13.33333333
12.66666667
11.33333333
18
18
12.66666667
16.66666667
16.66666667
13.33333333
14
18
16.66666667
17.33333333
7.333333333
18
16
18
17.33333333
16
16.66666667
14
14
14.66666667
16
10
13.33333333
18
10
14
16
6
8
18.66666667
18.66666667
17.33333333
10.66666667
20
14
18
6.666666667
20
12.66666667
14
8
13.33333333
18
10.66666667
8.666666667
4
19.33333333
8.666666667
20
20
12.66666667
12.66666667
15.33333333
16
16
18
16
16
16
12
20
16
16
16
18
13.33333333
18
20
18
17.33333333
8
14
15.33333333
18
12
12
7.333333333
16
16.66666667
10
10
18
15.33333333
12
13.33333333
20
8
15.33333333
14
16
16
16
12.66666667
14
7.333333333
10
18
14
17.33333333
17.33333333
18.66666667
7.333333333
16
16
16
10.66666667
20
16.66666667
12
20
14
16
13.33333333
16.66666667
14.66666667
17.33333333
8.666666667
16
19.33333333
11.33333333
13.33333333
17.33333333
16.66666667
20
12.66666667
20
18
16.66666667
18
18.66666667
18
18
18
15.33333333
18
18
19.33333333
14
15.33333333
8.666666667
14.66666667
9.333333333
16
10.66666667
12.66666667
14
14.66666667
13.33333333
20
18
18.66666667
18
18
18
18
16.66666667
14.66666667
12
11.33333333
10.66666667
17.33333333
18
16
14
9.333333333
14.66666667
16.66666667
18
18
18
18
18
18
10
9.333333333
18
10
10
16.66666667
18
13.33333333
13.33333333
18
18.66666667
16.66666667
18
12.66666667
18
14
7.333333333
16
20
17.33333333
8
20
18
14
8.666666667
16
16
14.66666667
18
17.33333333
17.33333333
20
10
16
16
12
16
16.66666667
18
10
16.66666667
12.66666667
16
14.66666667
12.66666667
14
16
14.66666667
14.66666667
16
14.66666667
18.66666667
16
8.666666667
9.333333333
11.33333333
7.333333333
18.66666667
12
16
20
18
16.66666667
18
19.33333333
16
7.333333333
16.66666667
16.66666667
16.66666667
16.66666667
19.33333333
16.66666667
20
16.66666667
16
10
10.66666667
18
18.66666667
19.33333333
18
20
20
17.33333333
13.33333333
10
16
18
14.66666667
18
18
18
18
18
18
16.66666667
16.66666667
12
14
12
12.66666667
8.666666667
16.66666667
18
20
16
16.66666667
18
16
16.66666667
14
18
20
18
16
17.33333333
17.33333333
10
14
14
14.66666667
17.33333333
19.33333333
12
14.66666667
16
16.66666667
14.66666667
14
18
12
19.33333333
10.66666667
7.333333333
18
16
12.66666667
18
14.66666667
16
12.66666667
3.333333333
18
20
16
19.33333333
9.333333333
16
14.66666667
18
20
20
16
5.333333333
14
16
4.666666667
16
17.33333333
12
14.66666667
18
16
18
16
16.66666667
17.33333333
14.66666667
18
11.33333333
16
16
16
12
17.33333333
18.66666667
18.66666667
18
19.33333333
12
16
14
18
18
12
19.33333333
9.333333333
18.66666667
18
19.33333333
16.66666667
18.66666667
12.66666667
17.33333333
17.33333333
17.33333333
14
15.33333333
20
12.66666667
20
18
12.66666667
20
20
4.666666667
13.66666667
16
20
14.66666667
14
20
17.33333333
20
16
18.66666667
18.66666667
18
20
18
11.33333333
16
3.333333333
20
17.33333333
4.666666667
5.333333333
15.33333333
20
16
8
6
10.66666667
10.66666667
10.66666667
20
16
S2 Qualifications and Experience
17.33
15.33
16.67
10
12
12
13.33
16
10
12.67
16
10
12.67
12.67
14
16
8.67
12
15.33
16
16
16
14
10
14.67
18
12
12.67
12
12.67
12
6
20
20
20
20
12
14
12
18.67
14
15.33
8.67
12
12
14
8
10
6
10
6
18
10
14
10
18
18
7.33
11.33
15.33
12
12.67
16
10
17.33
15.33
8
8
10
10
11.33
12.67
14
14
14
14
14
14
8.67
14
18.67
18
14
10.67
17.33
20
8
14
16.66666667
14.66666667
17.33333333
20
14.66666667
14.66666667
14
10
12.66666667
8
12
14.66666667
14.66666667
12
14
16
16
15.33333333
16
14.66666667
15.33333333
17.33333333
16.66666667
8
14.66666667
12
15.33333333
15.33333333
18
16.66666667
12.66666667
15.33333333
18
10
16.66666667
16.66666667
16.66666667
16.66666667
17.33333333
18
16
16
17.33333333
16.66666667
17.33
14
19.33333333
10.66666667
10.66666667
19.33333333
16.66666667
16
10.66666667
19.33333333
18
19.33333333
6
12
16.66666667
13.33333333
20
16
18.66666667
18.66666667
18.66666667
16.66666667
14.66666667
16
5.333333333
14.66666667
13.33333333
16
16.66666667
16.66666667
6.666666667
18
10.66666667
5.333333333
12
10.66666667
6.666666667
16.66666667
13.33333333
17.33333333
6.666666667
13.33333333
16.66666667
14.66666667
14.66666667
14
14
14.66666667
14.66666667
14.66666667
14.66666667
14.66666667
14
18.66666667
14
16
15.33333333
16
16
14
16
16
16.66666667
16
16
14
16
18
16
16
14
16
16.66666667
10
16
18
8
6
20
19.33333333
17.33333333
14
20
19.33333333
18
8
18.66666667
13.33333333
16
9.333333333
16
18
8
8
4
19.33333333
12
20
20
16
16
18
16
16
18
16
16
16
18
18
16
16
16
18
13.33333333
16.66666667
17.33333333
16
18.66666667
12
15.33333333
14.66666667
16
10.66666667
16
6
16
16
15.33333333
16
18.66666667
17.33333333
13.33333333
14
20
8.666666667
15.33333333
15.33333333
15.33333333
14.66666667
14
12.66666667
13.33333333
10
16
18
15.33333333
16
16
18
10
17.33333333
17.33333333
17.33333333
14
20
18.66666667
16.66666667
20
14
17.33333333
13.33333333
13.33333333
18
14
12.66666667
18
17.33333333
13.33333333
14
17.33333333
20
20
14.66666667
18
18
15.33333333
18
18
15.33333333
18
18
18
18
18
20
16
19.33333333
11.33333333
17.33333333
9.333333333
16
13.33333333
13.33333333
14
14.66666667
16
20
20
18.66666667
16.66666667
16
16
16
17.33333333
15.33333333
14.66666667
14
10
20
16.66666667
19.33333333
14
13.33333333
16
18
18
18
18
18
17.33333333
17.33333333
11.33333333
12.66666667
18.66666667
15.33333333
16
19.33333333
18
17.33333333
18
18.66666667
15.33333333
15.33333333
15.33333333
13.33333333
16.66666667
16
5.333333333
14
17.33333333
18.66666667
14
20
18
13.33333333
10.66666667
16.66666667
16
16.66666667
18
17.33333333
16
20
13.33333333
11.33333333
16
15.33333333
20
16.66666667
20
10.66666667
13.33333333
18
16
14
12.66666667
14
16.66666667
15.33333333
18.66666667
18
16.66666667
18.66666667
16.66666667
8
14
14
5.333333333
18
16
20
20
16
16
18.66666667
18.66666667
13.33333333
6
14.66666667
14.66666667
14.66666667
18
19.33333333
16
20
16
19.33333333
10.66666667
10
18
16.66666667
19.33333333
18
20
20
18.66666667
14
13.33333333
16.66666667
20
17.33333333
14.66666667
16
14.66666667
16
16
18
12
12
12.66666667
14
15.33333333
18
9.333333333
18
18
18
14
18
18
18
16.66666667
13.33333333
17.33333333
20
19.33333333
16
17.33333333
17.33333333
14.66666667
15.33333333
15.33333333
14.66666667
18
19.33333333
12.66666667
14
16.66666667
13.33333333
18
16
16
14
20
10
9.333333333
14.66666667
14
18.66666667
16
13.33333333
16
13.33333333
2
20
18
14
18
16
14
13.33333333
17.33333333
20
20
15.33333333
6
13.33333333
17.33333333
10
18.66666667
17.33333333
12
19.33333333
16
15.33333333
18.66666667
17.33333333
17.33333333
16.66666667
16.66666667
17.33333333
10
18
18
18
14
16
20
20
18
17.33333333
12
14
14
14
14
12
20
10.66666667
18.66666667
17.33333333
19.33333333
16.66666667
20
12
17.33333333
17.33333333
18
18.66666667
12.83333333
20
14
20
16
12.66666667
20
20
10
13.33333333
19.33333333
18
14
14.66666667
16
18
18.66666667
16
18.66666667
20
14.66666667
20
18
9.333333333
13.33333333
2
20
17.33333333
8
5.333333333
16
20
19.33333333
12
12.66666667
12
12
12
17.33333333
19.33333333
S2 Technical Feasibility
12.67
16
11.33
16
8
9.33
14.67
18.67
14.67
18.67
16.67
11.33
18.67
18.67
16.67
16
6.67
16
16
18.67
14
14
16
13.33
14
18
14
12.67
12
18.67
13.33
9.33
17.33
19.33
17.33
20
14.67
16
10
15.33
12
16
12.67
18.67
12
16
14
10
10
18
8
16
10
16.67
20
19.33
20
8.67
16.67
17.33
11.33
18
12
18.67
14
11.33
12
13.33
19.33
18.67
8.67
10
15.33
14
14
15.33
16
14.67
9.33
12
15.33
13.33
15.33
7.33
15.33
18
12
14
20
14
16.66666667
20
10
11.33333333
13.33333333
16.66666667
9.333333333
10
14
14
13.33333333
14
11.33333333
17.33333333
17.33
16
13.33333333
14.66666667
11.33333333
20
14.66666667
6.67
14.66666667
8
13.33333333
17.33333333
20
18
15.33333333
19.33333333
16.66666667
5.333333333
20
20
20
20
18
20
12
17.33333333
20
16
18
14
16
10
10
15.33333333
17.33333333
14
10
13.33333333
18
18.66666667
6
15.33333333
16.66666667
16
18
16
17.33333333
16
17.33333333
15.33333333
17.33333333
16
4.666666667
8
17.33333333
18
14.66666667
18
8.666666667
18.66666667
10
7.333333333
12
8.666666667
9.333333333
20
14
18
4.666666667
12
18.66666667
16.66666667
20
14.66666667
13.33333333
12
8
14
16
10.66666667
16
20
15.33333333
20
16
16
20
6.666666667
16
20
20
16.66666667
17.33333333
18.66666667
17.33333333
16
16.66666667
16
11.33333333
14
20
6.666666667
16
17.33333333
10.66666667
6.67
20
17.33333333
16
8
19.33333333
16
16
6
20
11.33333333
16
6
16.66666667
20
8
7.333333333
12.66666667
16.66666667
7.333333333
16.66666667
20
14
14
16
18
18
14
13.33333333
18
18
14.66666667
18
20
15.33333333
20
19.33333333
10
20
20
18
18
10.66666667
18.66666667
17.33333333
18
19.33333333
18
14.66666667
20
18
9.333333333
11.33333333
17.33333333
14
9.333333333
10
18
8.666666667
14
14
14
18
14
11.33333333
7.333333333
17.33333333
15.33333333
20
10.66666667
16
11.33333333
20
7.333333333
16
16
12.66666667
8.666666667
18.66666667
16.66666667
15.33333333
18.66666667
14.66666667
16
14
9.333333333
12.66666667
15.33333333
8.666666667
10
18
15.33333333
16
15.33333333
16.66666667
14.66666667
16.66666667
18
16.66666667
10.66666667
17.33333333
18
17.33333333
16
13.33333333
20
15.33333333
14
18.66666667
20
8
6
13.33333333
14.66666667
10
6
13.33333333
17.33333333
15.33333333
18
20
12
18.66666667
16
13.33333333
13.33333333
14.66666667
16
11.33333333
10
14.66666667
8.666666667
14.66666667
16
12.66666667
17.33333333
8.666666667
19.33333333
13.33333333
15.33333333
15.33333333
15.33333333
10.66666667
15.33333333
16
8
6.666666667
16
11.33333333
10
19.33333333
15.33333333
6.666666667
14.66666667
20
15.33333333
16
16.66666667
10
16
14.66666667
5.333333333
15.33333333
16.66666667
18
11.33333333
14
16
7.333333333
4
16
18
11.33333333
16
15.33333333
15.33333333
14.66666667
11.33333333
7.333333333
16.66666667
10.66666667
18
15.33333333
12
12
16.66666667
20
18
18
10
12
10
6.666666667
14
16
17.33333333
10
10.66666667
6.666666667
9.333333333
10
5.333333333
14.66666667
13.33333333
11.33333333
20
13.33333333
14
15.33333333
18
11.33333333
10.66666667
12.66666667
14.66666667
12.66666667
14
16
16
20
15.33333333
13.33333333
8.666666667
8.666666667
17.33333333
16.66666667
18
10
20
20
15.33333333
17.33333333
9.333333333
8
13.33333333
13.33333333
15.33333333
14.66666667
12
14.66666667
16
16
14.66666667
14
10
10.66666667
15.33333333
15.33333333
6.666666667
9.333333333
20
20
11.33333333
17.33333333
15.33333333
12.66666667
8.666666667
12.66666667
17.33333333
10.66666667
15.33333333
14.66666667
18
16.66666667
12.66666667
9.333333333
9.333333333
14
16
16.66666667
12
10.66666667
10
16.66666667
10
17.33333333
10.66666667
11.33333333
16.66666667
8.666666667
10
20
11.33333333
20
20
8.666666667
16
5.333333333
12.66666667
18.66666667
18
16
16
12
16
8.666666667
12
17.33333333
16.66666667
12
6.666666667
16.66666667
15.33333333
13.33333333
16.66666667
11.33333333
11.33333333
15.33333333
12.66666667
18
20
4.666666667
10
16
2
14.66666667
13.33333333
16.66666667
16.66666667
16.66666667
8
17.33333333
16
16
16
20
8.666666667
16
14
16.66666667
16
12
17.33333333
12.66666667
13.33333333
18
20
13.33333333
20
16
18
13.83333333
20
6
12.66666667
12.66666667
14.66666667
14
18.66666667
16
18
20
3.333333333
11.66666667
13.33333333
20
10
10.66666667
15.33333333
4
20
9.333333333
10
18
16
19.33333333
20
4
2.666666667
2
20
17.33333333
5.333333333
4
15.33333333
20
20
6
5.333333333
6.666666667
5.333333333
5.333333333
18
14
S2 DM LW Comments Feasibility
An easement (or other appropriate authorization as determined by SCRO) will be required for any submerged electrical cable in the Kvichak River, and a lease (or other appropriate authorization
as determined by SCRO) from SCRO will likely be required for the RivGen unit itself. (Depending on how ORPC connects a submerged electric cable from the unit in the Kvichak River, it
could impact ADL 226067, an avigation and hazards easement to DOT&PF, Central Region, ADL 221403, a Management Right issued to DOT&PF, ADL 230875, a private, non-exclusive easement
issued to United Utilities, Inc., and ADL 231288, a public utility easement issued to the Village of Igiugig. If any portion of electrical cable would cross uplands it may impact three
seperate management agreements (ADLs 221403, 224031, and 228387) for the Airport at Igiugig.)
As per application, project is not on state-owned land.
The Elfin Cove Utility Commission (Community of Elfin Cove) has submitted two Applications for Water Rights (LAS 29817 and LAS 29818). The Elfin Cove Utility Commission may need to
apply for a Temporary Water Use Authorization prior to the construction phase of the project. The DMLW Water Resources Section recommends the applicant consult with our Southeast
Office to determine specific water use authorization requirements. May need a shoreland public easement.
The City of Tenakee Springs holds a current Permit to Appropriate Water (LAS 27836). The City of Tenakee Springs may need to apply for a Temporary Water Use Authorization prior to
the construction phase of the project. The DMLW Water Resources Section recommends the applicant consult with our Southeast Office to determine specific water use authorization requirements.
A shoreland public easement may be needed and an upland easement ADL 106204 to USFS exists.
DNR OPMP coordinated permitting process underway or completed including RSAs with MLW Land and Water Sections.
A DMLW Water Resources authorization is recognized to be required. City of Chignik holds title to most affected uplands, remaining potentially impacted parcel owned by Chignik Lagoon
Native Corporation.
Feasibility study to determine economically viable options/potential improvements to combined wind and deisel power generation system. No improvements planned at this time.
On-going feasibility study. DNR MLW is recognized as the water rights manager for Alaska & applicant notes that additional consultation with DNR and DFG is required with respect to management
of environmental flow restrictions (described as a significantly limiting factor affecting power generation and resevoir development.) Land ownership presumed to be Aleut Corp. or City.
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative will need to apply for a Permit to Appropriate Water for this project and may need to apply for a Temporary Water Use Authorization if the project
moves forward to the permitting stage and prior to the construction phase, respectively. The DMLW Water Resources Section recommends the applicant consult with our Southeast Office
to determine specific water use authorization requirements.
No DMLW permits required at this time; proposal is for continued and expanded data collection, review and interpretation requiring installation of interial facility monitoring devices.
No DMLW Managed lands per ADL 215129 Muni. Entitlement and ADL 18018 Tideland Conveyance. No water withdrawal associated with closed-loop system design.
Project does not appear to be on state-owned land, but application does not yet contain info regarding permit which may be required.
No impacts to state land.
A Water Rights Certificate may be required from the DMLW Water Section. No SCRO involvement. The project may require review by the DNR Dam Safety Program.
As per the application, project facilities are not on state-owned land.
The previous comment from 2014 is unchanged: No SCRO involvement.
The City and Borough of Skagway and/or Alaska Power & Telephone Company (per MOU dated August 7, 2014) will need to apply for a Permit to Appropriate Water for this project and may need
to apply for a Temporary Water Use Authorization if the project moves forward to the permitting stage and prior to the construction phase, respectively. The DMLW Water Resources Section
recommends the applicant consult with our Southeast Office to determine specific water use authorization requirements.
The previous comment from 2014 is unchanged: A Water Rights Certificate may be required from the DMLW Water Section. No SCRO involvement.
Project not on state-owned land, however RS 2477 Right of Way is in the vicinity. If RS T 1623 will be used as a route for pipe system, DMLW should be contacted to determine if use
will require public notice or permitting.
The previous comment from 2014 is unchanged: No SCRO involvement.
The application states that a portion of the intertie project will cross State of Alaska land, and acknowledges that DNR utility easements and water permit will be required. The anticipated
timeline for permitting, however, is described as "July 2016 to August 2016". If this is intended to reflect an anticipated application to issuance turnaround of 1 month, this timeline
is not possible for an easement. It could take a year or possibly longer to process easements from the point of application to final issuance, as easements require review and resolution
of any conflicts, a period of public notice, written decision with appeal timelines, and potentially survey requirements. Applicant is encouraged to contact DMLW Northern Region as
soon as possible to verify land ownership and if applicable, begin application process.
The wind facility is not on state land (application notes that it is on Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation-own land); permitting list includes ADNR Coastal Zone Consistency Determination,
and plans to coordinate permitting through the ADNR Office of Coastal and Ocean Management Permitting - this is outdated, as ACMP program is no longer implemented.
Project is not on state land. As per application, it is located on land already leased from Kikikitagrug Inupiat Corporation.
Review finds no SCRO involvement.
The PMCF is located on State owned, DMLW managed lands that have been assigned to the Department of Corrections for the PMCF facility (DNR's file reference is ADL 227302). Please note
that Item 7 of Attachment B of the ILMA document states that "The DOC shall comply with the requirements of AS 38.95.160 during the term of this ILMA. AS 38.95.160 requires that publically
financed improvements costing more than $100,000 be documented by a recorded plat." As this request is for $140,000, and is proposed to be located on state lands, SCRO requests that
DOC coordinate the completion of this survey with DMLW. Additional questions about this requirement may be directed to Candice Snow, SCRO ILMA coordinator, at 269-5032, or candice.snow@alaska.gov.
May require a public easement from the state.
Not on State Land. No SCRO involvement but may require water rights certificate from DMLW Water Section.
This project is on State land within the legislatively designated Kenai River Special Management Area (AS 41.21.500-41.21.514). The project appears to be incompatible with the purpose
and management of KRSMA and would require legislative action to make this activity allowable. Local opposition (Kenai Peninsula Borough, City of Seward and the community of Moose pass)
has been stated during the FERC review process. Site access via a crossing of the Alaska Railroad has not been obtained. DMLW has serious questions about the feasibility of this project
if issues related to KRSMA and the AKRR crossing are not resolved.
Not on State Land. No SCRO involvement.
The project is proposed on DOT -owned lands (1983 quitclaim deed from Shishmaref Native Corporation to DOT/PF). The application acknowledges that applicant must obtain site use authorization
from DOT.
Not on State Land. No SCRO involvement.
Property is subject to EVOS/Conservation Easements. A FERC license is required for DNR to amend the conservation easement.
Not on State Land. No SCRO involvement but may require water rights certificate from DMLW Water Section.
Feasibility study and conceptual design of Unga Man Creek for potential hydro involves State submerged lands within OSL 977 (DOT&PF False Pass Airport) and ADL 224133 management agreement
for airport. This project involves placement of stream gauges, which may require DMLW or DOT&PF permits.
No impacts to state land.
No impacts to state land.
No DMLW authorizations required based on application statement that that proposed wind tower locations are on NANA Corporation land. Application does note that the project contractor
will be tasked with in- depth land ownership and authorization requirement research -if future project revisions result in state land being involved, DMLW authorizations may be required.
Infrastructure is not on state land, and most biomass resource proposed for use is not state-owned; however, reports cited in application note potential for some state-owned biomass
resource. If state timber resources are planned for harvest, state timber sales will be required.
The Rural Energy grant should have no impacts to state land
no DMLW authorizations required for facilities, based on application statement that facilities targeted in this application will be sited entirely on City property. Application notes
that biomass resource study of surrounding lands was conducted to address availability of resource, but application does not specify if any of the biomass resource area is cited on
state land, Native Corp land, etc. If biomass is located on state lands, state resource sales would be needed.
Should this project move forward, beyond feasibility, a formal navigability determination should be requested to determine the status of the Kogoluktuk River. In a letter dated 8/20/2010
to AVEC, it was noted the navigability status of the river is currently unknown. If the river is navigable, state authorizations will be required.
No impacts to state land.
The Rural Energy grant should have no impacts to state land. It is for solar photovoltaic panels to be placed on the Chugach Electric Campus at 5601 Electron Drive which they own.  Â
If the grant is carried out as described in the application, the Chugach Electric would not need any DNR authorizations.
No impacts to state land.
No impacts to state land.
Some of the infrastructure will be on state land and require DMLW easements or leases and material site designation. In spring 2015, APT was issued a permit for hydro data collection.
On October 8th 2015, APT submitted updated development plans to compliment previously submitted easement and material sale applications. These applications had been closed out in
2013 due to lack of response by the applicant. updated plans will need review and full Best Interest Finding adjudication prior to to be applicant's proposed construction start date
in start date inreviewed and applications fully adjudicated, as applicant proposes construction to begin in summer 2016.
Feasibility study and conceptual design of potential hydrokinetic energy involves State submerged lands. This project involves mooring placement of ORPC TidGen devices and associated
cables, which may require DMLW authorizations.
Alaska Power Company (Alaska Power & Telephone Company) will need to apply for a Permit to Appropriate Water for this project and may need to apply for a Temporary Water Use Authorization
if the project moves forward to the permitting stage and prior to the construction phase, respectively. The DMLW Water Resources Section recommends the applicant consult with our
Southeast Office to determine specific water use authorization requirements. May also require a shorelands public lease.
project involves state land. phase II involves placement of stream gauges, which may require DMLW permits. If futue phases of the project are undertaken, infrastructure will require
DMLW authorizations. Access is described as going through a state campground - consultation with Division of Parks early in process will be necessary.
The City of Craig will need to apply for a Permit to Appropriate Water for this project and may need to apply for a Temporary Water Use Authorization if the project moves forward to
the permitting stage and prior to the construction phase, respectively. The DMLW Water Resources Section recommends the applicant consult with our Southeast Office to determine specific
water use authorization requirements. May also require a shorelands public lease.
Existing SAPA Terror Lake Hydro project previously approved under SCRO lease ADL 204024, is seeking to add diversion works from Hidden Basin creek into Terror Lake. SCRO has an active
permit to KEA under LAS 29042 for stream gauges. A portion of the proposed tunnel, and the entirety of the diversion dam and access road are proposed for construction on State-owned
lands and would require SCRO authorization if built. Additional authorization from the DMLW Water Section may also be later required.
The Rural Energy grant should have no impacts to state land. The micro water turbines will be place within the current city owned water treatment facility. If the grant is carried
out as described in the application, the City of Unalaska would not need any DNR authorizations.
Not on state land
Existing project installed in 1947 needs upgrades. Pipeline crossing of Indian Creek authorized by Public Utility Easement under ADL 229178; replacement or upgrade of the lines authorized
under ADL 229178 requires prior notification of DMLW and additional authorizations may be required. Otherwise, the project is not on state-owned lands. A Water Rights Permit issued
from the Water Section. Non FERC project.
A Water Rights Certificate may be required from the DMLW Water Section. No SCRO involvement. The project is not located on State-owned land and the hydro source is not shown as navigable
according to a review of DNR records.
As noted by the applicant, timber harvest for biomass supply may require DNR Division of Forestry to be notified. No SCRO involvement. The project and related biomass sources are not
located on State-owned lands. No DMLW interests such as Section Line Easements or RS 2477 Rights of Way.
No SCRO involvement. Applicant does not identify land ownership, but review indicates that the project is not on State-owned lands. No DMLW interests such as Section Line Easements
or RS 2477 Rights of Way.
Lakes targeted for feasibility study are unclear, but may include Lake De Marie, Lake Leone and Lake Bonnie Rose, all of which are BLM meandered, so any structures eventually placed
on lands below mean high water within this water bodies will require a DMLW authorization. It doesn’t appear that any improvements will run under Sweeper Cove, so authorization will
not be required there. No uplands are state-owned.
Not on state land
Not on state land
Does not qualify for FERC exemption. Wishes to develop existing ADL 100853 upland ROW & possible needs authorization for below MHW. Plans Spring 2015 site visit. Water Right application
received.
A Water Rights permit issued from the Water Section. No opposition known. Non FERC. No SCRO involvement. (Likely no SCRO involvement as it appears Delta Creek and tributaries are
not navigable.)
Proposed project is within the Deadhorse Airport DOT ILMA - coordination/approval from DOT/PF will be necessary.
Although precise met tower locations are not known/identified, the general location apears to be within Selawik National Wildlife Refuge - not on state land.
Not on state land
No SCRO involvement. (Improvements are to existing heat infrastructure.)
No SCRO involvement. (Exact location is unclear, but it appears the project will not be within the boundaries of USS 4394 or RST 456. If it does cross the boundaries of either, location
should be moved.)
Possible Div. of Forestry authorization if tree harvest on State lands is proposed but otherwise no evident DMLW permit requirements for this proposal.Wood-burning boiler installation
to displace current use of fuel oil in 3 communities: Nodalton, Pedro Bay and Port Alsworth. Tree harvests on private updlands identified for Nondalton and Pedro Bay but no information
on wood source provided for Port Alsworth.
No SCRO involvement. (St. Paul community energy use baseline study and products including collection of data and production of reporting tools. No land usages or infrastructure installation
proposed. No DMLW authorizations required based on reported methodology.)
No SCRO involvement. (Adak community energy use baseline study and products including collection of data and production of reporting tools. No Installation of infrastructure or other
land usages proposed. No DMLW authorizations required based on reported methodology.)
Initial reconnaissance phases of proposed run-of-river hydro electric generation plants in Lowell Creek near Seward and Ship Creek at Ft. Richardson. No maps, plans or specific site
locations yet provided but general project description indicates that DNR-managed state upland and shorelands underlying potentially navigable streams (depending on specific site location)
may be involved. Proposed setting of stream gauges within navigable waterways will require authoriztion from SCRO Permitting Unit. Additional DMLW authorizations from SCRO and /or Water
Resources appears likely for any development beyond this investigative phase.
A Water Rights Certificate likely not required during feasibility study. The in-river equipment may need DMLW permits. Feasibility and Conceptual Design phase, three years of in stream
gauging and 35% of design for the hillside hydro project. Penstock is on land owned by the Askinu Native Corp.
Not state land
Project is on DNR managed land and DNR authorization required for the project. Current authorizations are for the environmental studies only. No applications received for any facility
authorizations and consultation not complete for the Iditarod National Historic Trail. Concurrence required from USFS, KPB, KRSMA and SCRO for any trail reroutes per the area plan.Â
Iditarod National Historic Trail is at this location and project is within KRSMA. Water Right application received. It is a FERC project.
Feasiblility study/reporting phase will likely not require DMLW permits; however, if in future a biomass project is pursued, biomass products which are expected to be purchased on the
open market may come from timber sales from state land.
Not state land
Not on State Land
Not state land
Not state land
Not state land
Not state land. (Final design and permitting for 5 wind turbines on City of Chefornak lands.)
A Water Rights permit pending. Non FERC project. Lat/Long is incorrect. No SCRO involvement. (Final design and construction of a hydro including run of the river with penstock and
power house on lands owned and managed by Ouzinkie Corperation.)
Not on state land
Not on state land
Lat/Long indicate limited state holding (Ded Division Law and Finance)
Not state land. (This project would occur inside an existing power plant and within existing homes in Kwigillingok.)
No state lands are affected, as the project is proposed for City property.
Project not on state-owned land, however RS 2477 Right of Way is in the vicinity. If RS T 1623 will be used as a route for pipe system, DMLW should be contacted to determine if use
will require public notice or permitting.
Not on state land
Not state land. (This project would occur inside an existing power plant.)
Timber harvest for biomass supply may require DNR Division of Forestry to be notified. (Biomass Plant is in the vicinity of three separate management agreements to DOT&PF (ADLs 221521,
221534, and 221522) for the Nikolai Airport. DNR, Division of Forestry should be consulted regarding any potential harvest of timber from State land for use in the Biomass plant.)
An easement will be required for any submerged electrical cable in the Kvichak River, and a lease or permit from SCRO will likely be required for the RivGen unit itself. (Depending on
how ORPC connects a submerged electric cable from the unit in the Kvichak River, it could impact ADL 226067, an avigation and hazards easement to DOT&PF, Central Region, ADL 221403,
a Management Right issued to DOT&PF, ADL 230875, a private, non-exclusive easement issued to United Utilities, Inc., and ADL 231288, a public utility easement issued to the Village
of Igiugig. If any portion of electrical cable would cross uplands it may impact three seperate management agreements (ADLs 221403, 224031, and 228387) for the Airport at Igiugig.)
On DMLW tide and/or submerged lands. DMLW permit LAS 28655 in place, additional permit applications planned for submission May 2015 correspondending to next phase of project.
Infrastructure is not on state land, and most biomass resource proposed for use is not state-owned; however, reports cited in application note potential for some state-owned biomass
resource. If state timber resources are planned for harvest, state timber sales will be required.
Infrastructure and most potential biomass resources proposed are not on state land. If biomass is proposed for harvest from state lands at some phase of the project, applicant will need
to obtain timber sales from the State of Alaska.
No SCRO involvement.
Proposed project is entirely on Chitna Native Corp fee estate and/or BLM 17(b) access easement. However, page 8 of the 2014 application notes that Chitina Electric has abandonded an
existing hydro project located partially within Town Lake (aka Trout Lake?) in Chitina; lake is not BLM meandered, but is approximately 35 acres in size. Removal of abandoned infastructure
needed? A Water Rights application received.
Application does not appear to involve state land, however DOT ILMA (casefile ADL 55622) is in immediate vicinity; if pipe systems must cross property, coordination with DOT would be
appropriate.
Timber harvest for biomass supply may require DNR Division of Forestry to be notified. Likely no SCRO involvement: Community roads (ADL 222349) or RST 22 and 32 possibly required for
travel; project vehilces may exceed GAUs, as page 5 includes dump trucks, loader, etc. No DMLW fee simple involvement; biomass to be sources from Akiachak Village Corp Lands, and further
there are no substantial areas of DMLW fee estate for 80+ miles from village.
Some of the infrastructure will be on state land and require DMLW easements or leases and material site designation. Easement and material applications were filed during a previous
phase of the project, but were suspended in 2010 when non-state land use negotiations faltered. On July 16, 2013, APT was notified that the files were being closed out due to non-action
and no updates from applicant. The notice informed them that applicant would need to contact DMLW to re-activate applications if project resumed. To date, no re-activation requests
have been received. No Water Right application received.
Project does not appear to involve state land; however RS 2477 rights-of-way ( RST casefile 105, 115, 124) are in the vicinity. If RS 2477 routes are intended to be used for the project,
applicant should contact DMLW Northern Region to review proposed use.
Not on state land. (Inspection of existing facility.)
Not on state land
SoA holds the development rights for a significant portion of the project under an EVOS acquisition; Feds hold the fee (LSH 478). SoAs Conservation easement may preclude the construction
of the project, however, Cindy Schoniger / Title is presently working to modify the consevation easement to allow (no ADL reference). Water Right application received. Requires FERC
review.
Not on state land
Not on state land
Not on state land. Longitude does not appear to be correct.
Most of dam, intake, penstock, etc are proposed for construction on DMLW managed water or fee estate and will require SCRO authorization. Issued SCRO pededrian public access easement
ADL 226467 may be affected. A Water Rights application recieved. Non FERC project. One or more stream gauges are presently installed on DMLW lands without application/authorization.
Timber harvest for biomass supply may require DNR Division of Forestry to be notified, but no SCRO involvement. (Proposed location for Biomass plant is near/within a building complex
on Native alloted land, but within the vicinity of an ILMA with DOTPF ADL 52590, the Tazlina River, and a conveyed subdivision.)
SSRAA Lease ADL 106174. Uplands designated Public Facilities (P) and Public Recreation Undeveloped (Ru). ADFG has also recently inquired to place a trail in this area.
ADL 106840 lease dam to port facility / ADL 106442 Swan Lake -Tyee Intertie. Use of additional state land required for impoundment area. Water Rights application received. FERC project.
Ketchikan George Inlet 2013-08-28 KPU requests Resolution to Endorse Project. Uplands-native corporation land. Anadromous stream Adjacent tidelands. Water Right LAS 14359.
Project involves state land. Phase II involves placement of stream gauges, which may require DMLW permits, though application states that none would be required until phase III. If
futue phases of the project are undertaken, infrastructure will require DMLW authorizations. Access is described as going through a state campground - consultation with Division of
Parks early in process will be necessary.
Existing SAPA Terror Lake Hydroproject previously approved under SCRO lease ADL 204024, is seeking to add diversion works from Hidden Basin creek into Terror Lake. SCRO has an active
permit to KEA under LAS 29042 for stream gauges. A portion of the proposed tunnel, and the entirety of the diversion dam and access road are proposed for construction on State-owned
lands and would require SCRO authorization if built. Additional authorization from the DMLW Water Section may also be later required.
Water general comment: Many construction projects will require use of water and may require Temporary Water Use Authorizations during construction regardless of land ownership. This
is not noted in each project.
No State Land
This project is not located on DMLW-managed land.
No DNR/DMLW lands affected.
No apparent DMLW lands or permit requirements beyond the Water Use Permit self-reported by applicant in the project description. DNR resources do not currently identify Waterfall Creek
as navigable. If this determination changes, infrastructure proposed for installation on the creekbed may need to be evaluated for additional lease or easement authorizations by SCRO.
Project may involve an RS2477 trail. Applicant must apply to DNR/DMLW for any clearing, grading, or other road development within the route. This RS2477 trail is catalogued under casefile
# RST 619, Stetson Creek Trail.
DNR/DMLW lands will not be affected by the feasibility study. The application mentions possible evolution of the current project, so if structures are to be built under this grant,
re-assessment may be needed with better location information. If the project is entirely on Chugach Electric Corporation\'s land in Anchorage, no DNR/DMLW lands will be affected.
No apparent DMLW managed lands or permit requirements according to the provided project description.
No apparent DMLW managed lands or permit requirements according to the provided project description. Proposed infrastructure planned for placement on non-State lands which ADOT&PF either
previously or currently held limited management rights for operation of local airport.
No DNR/DMLW lands affected.
This project was originally applied for by AP&T (ADL 418154 - easement, ADL 418921 - material sale. New application states that the Yerrick Basin will be protected from outside intrusion:
it is unlikely that DNR would issue authorizations that would impede the use of existing 17(b) access through Tanacross land to the state land in the remainder of the basin.
No state land involved. No other state land management issues noted.
Project will require water right, and possibly a land use authorization from DNR/DMLW for the water line, unless included in the water right. If the generator is outside applicant\'s
property, it will require a land use authorization as well. Boundaries are described in USS 3905 and accompanying notes, but application is not sufficiently descriptive to determine
generator location.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
Applicant\'s immediate funding objective is completion of a feasibility study; system plan and design efforts have not yet been undertaken. Test equipment is proposed for placement on
Village Council lands so no DMLW authorizations appear to be required at this stage of project develoment. Applicant should provide DMLW with site location and design information when
available to determine if any lease, easement, or permit authroizations are necessary for implementation.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
No apparent DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements according to the project description provided.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
Any cross country travel (winter or summer) crossing navigable water bodies may require a permit from DNR as underlying lands are state owned, even if the adjacent uplands are owned
by a village or regional native corporation. It appears that the main intertie between Stebbins and St Michael will be within the road right-of-way?which has an existing?federal right-of-way.???
However, if there are spur roads/lines to the wind turbines or other areas outside the existing right-of-way and they cross navigable water bodies, an easement from DNR may be needed.
For any supporting gravel mining operations, a Reclamation Plan is required for gravel mining operations even on non-state land, if the operation disturbs more than 5 acres or excavates
more than 50,000 cubic yards. There may be a minimal benefit to state resources as there will be a slight decrease in their use of diesel fuel.??
No state managed land involved.
No state managed land involved.
Expect a water right application and DNR is aware of the project. No other authorizations appear to be needed.
Applicant self-reports a requirement for DMLW Water Use Permit and on-going involvement of Water Resources Unit staff. No apparent DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements based on
the project description provided. DMLW resources do not currently identify Mountain Creek as navigable; if this determination is amended the project should be reviewed again for potential
additional lease or easement requirements from SCRO.
No apparent DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements according to the project description provided.
The submerged velocity monitoring research equipment referenced in this application are currently authorized by SCRO temporary permit LAS 28655. Applicant states that "The tideland access
near the airport at False Pass...is considered a municpal tideland. The area is retained in state ownership and managed by the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities.
If the [proposed] transmission line route is designed within the boundaries of the airport\'sjurisdiction, application and approvals would be needed from ADOT&PF." However, ADOT&PF
acquired their airport management right from non-State upland owners rather than DNR and so do not necessarily have use of adjoining tidelands. In addition, SCRO recently issued an
easement for municipal use of submerged lands near False Pass that would not have been required if an ATS to the City or Borough had been in force at the project location. Applicant
is advised to contact DMLW SCRO in addtion to ADOT&PF Airport Management personnel well prior to finalization of plans for any project component intended for placement on tide and submerged
lands in order to determine accurate jurisdiction and permitting requirements.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
Should this project move forward, a formal navigability determination should be requested to determine the status of the Kogoluktuk River. In a letter dated 8/20/2010 to AVEC, it was
noted the navigability status of the river is currently unknown. If the river is navigable, state authorizations will be required.
No apparent DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements according to the project description provided with the possible exception of some sort of water authorization during construction
or operations if needed.
Project appears to be entirely off of DNR/DMLW lands.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
No apparent DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements apparent from review of the project materials provided.
No DNR/DMLW lands affected.
No State Land - replaces existing boilers in Community Buildings
This project is not located on DMLW-managed Land.
Proposal for waste heat recovery system for AGSD\'s existing woody biomass energy facility. Possible AS 38.05.850 permits/easements needed for transmission lines on state land.
The project site was conveyed to Bristol Bay Borough by DNR in 1968 under Patent 695 (amended in 1987). No apparent DMLW permits required.
2.6 and 2.7 cost figures don?t match. No state land involved; within BLM-managed NPR-A, City of Atqasuk, ASRC, and UIC. Section 4.3.3. lists state of Alaska land use permit and easement
are needed; no state land involved so no DNR authorizations are necessary.
Coastal Zone review no longer applicable since the ACMP program sunset in 2011; ADNR will not be coordinating a coastal zone management review. Project review should take place, but
should be initiated by the NSB. US Fish and Wildlife Service must be included for review given endangered species, migratory birds, and proximity to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
No state land involved; KIC lands.
Application states that biomass resources would be obtained from adjacent Native Corporation lands, therefore, no state forest resources are expected to be impacted. The application
states that this project is on land owned by the City of Galena, however Alaska Mapper shows that this is within OSL 328. OSL 328 was granted to DOT&PF on 2/7/1966 under the Omnibus
Act and DNR records do not show that this parcel has been transferred. Regardless, this is in no case on DMLW-managed lands.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed land. (This is not the project that was previously reviewed as #932 during round 6.)
Initial land status research indicates the project will not impact state land.?? The applicant indicates that pipes carrying heat between the power plant and the clinic will be installed
along existing Rights Of Ways (ROW) on City property. ??A brief search for Alaska Department of Transportation (DOT) involvement in roads in Venetie resulted in identifying a 2011 DOT
document that listed two roads in Venetie as ?rural major collector? and ?rural minor collector?? It is not clear if these DOT designations as ?rural collectors? means these roads include
DOT ROWs.? The applicant should verify who holds the right-of-way and coordinate with that entity.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed land.
The listed location of this project is incorrect (lat/long given in application are the same as project 1005). Based on project description this is on lands owned by the city of Eek
and is not located on DMLW-managed land.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed land.
There are no apparent conflicts with rights-of-ways for the arctic piping between the power plant and the end-user buildings, as the route is entirely within existing road rights-of-way
and on city, school, and AVEC property. Rhino-Flex pipe will be buried between the washeteria and the AVEC power plant.? This route includes one creek crossing at Sherman Creek.? COE
and ADF&G permits being requested.? It is not navigable; therefore not state managed land. The application mentions the possibility increasing the potential fuel savings with the heat
recovery system if a planned intertie of the power system with the neighboring village of Teller is constructed.? It appears that the intertie is a separate proposal.
No state lands are affected, as the project is proposed for City property.
No State Land - replaces existing boilers
A DMLW Water Permit is in force for this project under file LAS 27818. Packers Creek is not currently identified as navigable on DNR maps. If the navigability determination of this waterbody
changes, impacted creekbed sites should be reviewed for potential additional easement or lease requirements from SCRO.
Source- USFS land Tenakee Creek head of Tenakee Bay. Anticipates transmitting power to Hoonah & Pelican
ADL 108139 easment application
No known issues
The facility and supporting biomass harvest are proposed to take place on Village or Native Corporation lands, therefore no state lands are directly affected. Roads to facilitate timber
harvest are described; any direct road connection to the Elliott Highway may require driveway permitting through DOT/PF.
No DNR/DMLW lands affected.
No apparent DMLW permitting requirements from the project description provided; however the route of proposed new powerlines should be reviewed when more detailed alignment plans are
available to ensure that they fall entirely within ADOT&PF or municipally-managed ROWs as currently planned.
The State of Alaska considers portions of the Jack River to be navigable and state owned. It appears that all three prospective sites are located within the navigable portions; landowner
authorization would be require for all activities exceeding Generally Allowed Uses below OHW.
Project includes a water line and intake structures on state lands. DMLW land use authorizations will be required for these structures.
No state lands are involved.
A DMLW Water Permit was issued for this project in 2005 under file LAS 23103. According to the information presented, currently proposed work will be limited to modification of existing
facilities (no new construction). No DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements apparent.
Gunnuk Creek - Kake Hatchery-Anadromous stream/ City Water supply conservation easements created in exchanging land at Jenny Creek
ADL 108134 easement application - HSF - UA land possible access concerns
ADL 106840 lease dam to port facility / ADL 106442 Swan Lake -Tyee Intertie. Use of additional state land required for impoundment area
No known issues
No known issues
No known issues
No known issues
Proposal for rehabilitation and upgrade of existing facility sited primarily on non-DMLW uplands. Applicant reports that a DMLW Water Permit and Dam Safety clearance will be required.
The installed raw-water transmission line referenced in this application is approved for its crossing of Indian Creek under SCRO Easement file ADL 229178. Any design that includes placement
of additional infrastructure on the creekbed should be reviewed to determine if additional SCRO Easement or Lease requirements apply (based on the navigable status of the stream at
the specific location).
No known issues
No State land - installs at existing facilities.
Project is on DNR/DMLW lands, requires land use authorization. A land use permit is currently being processed by DMLW. A decision favorable to the project was issued, but the land
use authorization has not been issued, pending the results of the appeal period.
Project appears to be entirely off of DNR/DMLW lands. No permits required.
No known issues
No known issues
No known issues
No known issues
Application references State lands within the future Nenana Tochacket Agriculture Project as a potential source of wood, noting that purchasers of state land must clear timber to prepare
for cultivation - while this is true, it must be clearly understood that Ag land sold by the state of Alaska is subject to covenants, and development of the parcel (including the extent
and nature of clearing) must take place consistent with a state-approved farm conservation plan.
This project is not located on DMLW-managed land.
No known issues
No DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements apparent from the information presented.
No DMLW-managed lands or permit requirements apparent from the information presented.
Ketchikan George Inlet 2013-08-28 KPU requests Resolution to Endorse Project Uplands-native corporation land Anadromous stream Adjacent tidelands GU WTR RTS LAS 14359
Project is will be based in navigable waters, and needs land use permit for location of float, anchors to shore, and electric line. Applicant has obtained this already, and the permit
is attached to the application file, starting on page 304 of the full application.
The Rural Energy grant should have no impacts to state land.? It is for solar photovoltaic panels to be placed on the Northwest Arctic Borough building in Kotzebue which they own.??
There may be a minimal benefit to state resources as they will be a slight decrease in their use of diesel fuel.?? If the grant is carried out as described in the application, the Northwest
Arctic Borough would not need any DNR authorizations.
Preliminary study, no authorizations needed at this time. Utility easements and other DMLW authorizations would be required if project moves forward.
No state land.
No state land interest.
Possible Forestry permit if wood harvested from DMLW managed lands.
No state land.
No state land involved or DMLW authorizations required.
Feasibility study only with no final site selected. No authorizations needed at this time.
This project has not changed from the previous rounds. DMLW is now in a position to issue an Early Entry Authorization under case file number ? ADL 108047. This permit will allow the
City of Tenakee Springs to construct the project and then complete the as-built survey of it so DMLW will be able to issue the easement. DMLW public notice process is done and no
public comments expressing concerns were received.
While most uplands in the vicinity of the project are not state lands, DMLW authorizations may be needed if project work involves state-owned beds of navigable waterways.
Water permit. No additional authorizations needed.
Water permit required. While the physical project is on private land, the effected lands could include Chugach State Park, possibly requiring additional DNR authorizations.
This is the same project as proposed in previous rounds and AP&T has worked with the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA) and developed a better project description
and layout with respect to where the project components will be located and integrated with SSRAA?s existing aquaculture facility.
No state land.
Insufficient info regarding scope of project and land ownership to determine if DMLW authorizations required. No final site has been determined. The proposed site involves no state
land, nor would any site within approximately 10 miles of central Akiak.
Project describes usage of state managed land. Possible .850 permits may be required during the study phase.
No State land involved or DMLW authorizations required.
No DMLW authorizations required if existing facility selected.
No State land involved for this wind project.
No DMLW authorizations required.
The consultant identifies that the Haines State Forest will be the majority provider of pellets for this project.? ?Forestry should comment.?
This is the same project as reviewed in the previous rounds. This project proposes to put two small dams, one on South Excursion Inlet Creek (type is rockfill 5? high by 40? long)
and the other on North Excursion Inlet Creek (type is concrete diversion 5? x 70?). The two proposed locations of the dams are on Federal land but both streams have mean annual flows
of about 120 cfs, comparable to Montana Creek. The gradients from the topo map indicate a relatively low gradient and both streams are identified as anadromous. The division may recommend
that a navigability determination be made for these two streams. For North Excursion Inlet Creek a portion of the project is on state land the improvements includes portions of the
flume, the powerhouse, and portions of the transmission line. For the South Excursion Inlet Creek it is more difficult to determine but a short section of the flume may have to go
into State land. There may be some resource concerns rearding the flumes that would divert water from fairly significant lengths of both streams and if there would be sufficient remaining
water to support the fish.
Water permit, tideland lease and possible AS 38.05.850 permits required.
Insufficient information regarding location of study towers. Possible authorizations required if on DMLW managed land.
No state land or authorization for this wind project.
Currently under permit for study phase (LAS 28046). Additional AS 38.05.850 permits or lease will be required for Phase VI (the post study phase).
No state land.
No state land interest.
Exact location of project site in still undetermined, but most uplands in the area are not state-owned.
No DMLW permtting requirements evident. Land not state owned.
No DMLW permtting requirements evident. Land owned by four village corporations.
No DMLW permtting requirements evident. Land not state owned.
As this project is in the assessment phase, exact locations for the facilities and intertie routes, geotech work, etc and not specified - while most uplands in the vicinity of the project
are not state lands, DMLW authorizations may be needed if project work involves state-owned beds of navigable waterways.
Most uplands in the area of the project are not state lands; however, if geotechnical work/future intertie cross state-owned beds of navigable waterways, then DMLW authorizations may
be needed.
Proposed wind turbine is not on state land.
Insufficient information to review. Request for funding for feasibility study. No location selected for placement of meteorological study tower at this time. DMLW permit required
if DNR managed land selected.
Insufficient information to review. Request for funding for feasibility study. No location selected for placement of meteorological study tower at this time. DMLW permit required
if DNR managed land selected.
Actual Met tower placement appears to be on non-state land, however state easements or permits may be required depending on access routes and equipment type.
Proposed project site potentially within right-of-way for RST 168 (Paimute-Marshall). ; unclear if RST and project are colocated. If not, lands are private, no DMLW authorizations
needed. The issues with locating RS2477s can add complexity to the permitting as there may be disagreement between parties regarding location of the easement.
No DNR land authorizations appear to be required.
Proposed project access road and tower 62Y07 (see propoal page 59 and 71) appear to be potentially located on top of a portion of RST 120 (Kotlik-Marshall). The issues with locating
RS2477s can add complexity to the permitting as there may be disagreement between parties regarding location of the easement. Rest of land private.
Project is not on DMLW managed land.
No DNR land authorizations appear to be required.
Project is not on DMLW managed land.
No DNR land authorizations appear to be required.
AS 38.05.850 permits/easements needed for transmission lines on state land. Possible lease needed for community store.
No DNR land authorizations appear to be required.
Feasibility study and no State land type interest identified.
Project is not on DMLW managed land.
Project is not on DMLW managed land.
Project is not on DMLW managed land.
Appears to be study only, with no development. If development were to occur, the biomass resource ownership not identified. If on state land, resource sale likely required. Even if
not on state land, state easements or permits may be required depending on access routes.
Biomass resource ownership not identified. If on state land, resource sale likely required. Even if not on state land, state easements or permits may be required depending on access
routes.
Application references State lands within the future Nenana Tochacket Agriculture Project as a potential source of wood, noting that purchasers of state land must clear timber to prepare
for cultivation - while this is true, it must be clearly understood that Ag land sold by the state of Alaska is subject to covenants, and development of the parcel (including the extent
and nature of clearing) must take place consistent with a state-approved farm conservation plan.
Hydroelectric project. AS 38.05.850 permits/easements required for electric transmission line and penstock. Easement applications ADL 231698 rec\'d 10/25/2012. LAS 27334 (land use permit)
and LAS 28393 (water right application) also on file for this project.
Application for hydroelectric facility. AS 38.05.850 permits/easements required for transmission lines and penstock on state land. Possible lease required for powerhouse on concrete
slab. Water rights application LAS 27738 currently on file with DMLW.
Feasibility study to include bathymetric survey and geological marine study. No AS 38.05.850 permits needed at this time unless coring or placement of utility lines takes place.
Biomass plant is not on state land. Forest resources have not been identified on state land. Doing an inventory to determine biomass sources.
Proposal for waste heat recovery system for AGSD\'s existing woody biomass energy facility. Possible AS 38.05.850 permits/easements needed for transmission lines on state land.
Tok biomass project. DOF issueing long-term contracts. DMLW might be involved in easements or materials sales for access.
No DMLW permits or authorizations required for project as currently described
No DMLW permits or authorizations for project as currently described.
No DMLW permits or authorizations required for project as currently described.
This project is primarily on State land within the Haines State Forest. DMLW has received an application for this project and assigned it case file number - ADL 108134. The applicant
is Southern Energy Inc. This is not the same entity that is seeking funding from AEA, the applicant for AEA?s Renewable Energy Fund is the Tlingit-Haida Regional Electric Authority.
There does not appear to be a cooperative relationship between the two entities in forwarding this project. Instead there may be a competing interest and presently we understand that
both entities have applied for a FERC license. The division is not in a position to comment on the feasiblity of this application because we cannot adjudicate anything until we know
which party will be issued the preliminary FERC permit.
This is the same project that was reviewed in previous rounds. DMLW has received an application for the portion of the intertie on State tide and submerged land, case file number ADL
108139. Presently this case is in the agency/public notice step of adjudication.
Municipal entitlement not complete and application rests dependency on that. Timing of that decision may affect project timelines. Secondly water rights needed.
Propose to raise the height of the dam to increase capacity in the reservoir, increase from 342? to 425?.? Land that will be inundated is Forest Service land.? No State land type interest
identified.
No state land interest.
Not on state land.
This project has not changed from the previous round reviews. Possible public concern will probably be those related to the potential impact of the project to the Chilkat Bald Eagle
Preserve. There may be secondary impacts with opening of the old logging road, also identified as an RS2477 in the application, increasing access into the Chilkoot valley. This could
be controlled with gates. There may be some permitting challenges and resource management concerns related to the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve.
Applicant self-reports potential requirements for DMLW authorizations (probably Water and/or AS 38.05.850 Permits and Easements); need more specific project information to confirm.
No DMLW permits or authorizations at this time - funding requested for data collection only at this time;. Possible future requirement for AS 38.05.850 permits/easements possible depending
on selection of eventual project site but unlikely due to availability of village-managed lands.
No DMLW permits or authorizations at this time - funding requested for data collection only at this time;. Possible future requirement for AS 38.05.850 permits/easements possible depending
on selection of eventual project site but unlikely due to availability of village-managed lands.
No DMLW permits or authorizations at this time - funding requested for data collection only at this time;. Possible future requirement for AS 38.05.850 permits/easements possible depending
on selection of eventual project site but unlikely due to availability of village-managed lands.
No state land interests but water rights needed.
No DMLW permits or authorizations at this time - feasibility study for replacement of existing turbines only. Potential requirement for amendment of existing SCRO authorizations depending
of extent of facility upgrade.
No state land issues.
From the application it is difficult to tell if an easement to cross State land will be needed and in all probability existing platted easements within State developed subdivision(s)
will probably be used.
Location is not fully identified but appears by proposal to not include state land.
Not state land
Not state land
Application for hydroelectric facility. AS 38.05.850 permits/easements required for transmission lines and penstock on state land. Possible lease required for powerhouse on concrete
slab. Water rights app. LAS 27738 currently on file with DMLW. State land may be in reservoir and thus flooded. May take more than the projected 6 months to authorize.
No DMLW Permits or authorizations for project as currently described.
Not on DMLW land. May require permits from DNF-DOF for biomass source.
Project involves state-owned land and navigable waters. DNR permits required.
It is unclear from the application if this project impacts state-owned lands or waters. DNR permits may be required.
High probability use of State land needed for access facilities and transmission line(s). Navagibility determination needed for lakes.
Project involves state-owned land and navigable waters. DNR permits required.
Project involves meanderable water body. DNR permits are likely required.
Not on DMLW land. No land permits required
Not on DMLW land. Use of subsurface may require DMLW authorization
Not on DMLW land. Requires permit for water rights. Cross-country travel permit may be required for site access
Not on DMLW land. Requires permit for water rights
Not on DMLW land - no DMLW land permit required for installation. Cross-country travel permit may be required for access.
Project as described does not involve state land. Therefore, no land permits or easements from the state are required.
Requires authorizations from DMLW for submerged ROW and potentially for construction.
No state land ownership.
No state land involved. Assume biomass is from corporation lands.
Project as described does not involve state land. Therefore, no land permits or easements from the state are required.
No state land involved.
Not on DMLW land - no DMLW land permit required for installation. Cross-country travel permit likely required for access, as such permits were acquired for previous installations at
this site.
Not on DMLW land - no DMLW land permit required for installation. Cross-country travel permit may be required for access.
No state land involved.
Not on DMLW land - no DMLW land permit required for installation. Cross-country travel permit may be required for access.
Not on DMLW land - no DMLW land permit required for installation. Cross-country travel permit may be required for access.
No state land involved.
No state land involved.
No state land involved.
No state land involved.
No state land involved.
Authorizations from DNR are expected, but insufficient information to identify how many and what type.
Insufficient information to determine if a DNR authorization is required.
Project as described does not involve state land. Therefore, no land permits or easements from the state are required. Please note however, that if any of the recovery lines cross
state land or follow existing Rows, then a permit may be required, or discussion with DOT may be required.
No state land involved.
Authorizations from DNR are expected, but insufficient information to identify how many and what type.
No State land or easement interest
Insufficient information to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been fully evaluated.
Insufficient information to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been fully evaluated.
No state land involved.
No state land involved.
Insufficient information to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been fully evaluated.
No State land or easement interest
No state land involved.
Insufficient information to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been fully evaluated.
Insufficient information to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been fully evaluated.
Insufficient info to determine if a DNR authorization is required.
As the project is proposed to take place on municipality lands, no land permits are required from DMLW. Also since this is only a feasibility study, no permits are required if no part
of the project is on state land. Note that if the project location gets moved, permits or easements may be required for MET towers, access roads, etc. Also, if material is required
for the project and none is available within the city, then the city will need to apply for a material sale contract.
No state land involved.
Insufficient info to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been evaluated.
Insufficient info to determine if a DNR authorization is required. Application indicates land ownership has not been evaluated.
No state land involved. As the project is proposed to take place on municipality lands, no land permits are required from DMLW. Also since this is only a feasibility study, no permits
are required if no part of the project is on state land.
No apparent DNR land authorization is required based on information provided
No apparent DNR land authorization is required based on information provided
No state land involved.
Resource feasibliltiy analysis - no specific project identified
Assume biomass is from corporation lands. Some state selected lands about 5 miles away.
No state land involved.
No obvious DNR land authorization indicated. Development may affect Section Line Interest depending on how improvements are placed.
Packers Creek DNR 35.05 authorizations may be required depending on location of this project and whether it affects tidally influenced portion of Packer?s Creek. Additionally, the mouth
of the creek occurs within a DOT/PF managed ILMA for the airport.
There are serious deteriorating conditions on the existing dam. It is in a non-failure emergency status and there will most likely be required measures to prevent full failure. This
funding is obviously essential for both hydroelectric and water supply issues for Ouzinkie. Appropriate design approval would be required for replacement.
On KPB land and requires no land authorizations from DNR.
All facilities on DNR land. Will need full spectum of authorizations. Also: within KRSMA, potentially conflicts with existing DNR easement to the USFS, and may affect a national historic
trail. There is substantial public interest on whether this project should be done in this location.
No State land or easement interest
As proposed, project only for a regional feasibility study, and not a specific on the ground project.
Within Haines State Forest - Classified Public Recreation
State tide & submerged land - submarine cable portion of intertie
No State land or easement interest
State tide & submerged land - submarine cable portion of transmission line & marine access facility
No state land involved.
Not DNR land
Assume biomass is not from state lands.
No permits or easements required for the construction of the actual facility.
Assume biomass is from corporation lands. Possible Forestry or DNR authorization for fuel collection, depending on the proposed access and method of harvest.
USFS land, but possible water permit needed.
Upgrades to existing lease. No additional authorizations needed.
Site selected all on DNR lands. Full spectrum of authorizations required.
Possible Forestry or DNR authorization for fuel collection, depending on the proposed access and method of harvest.
State Land - EEA issued, ADL 107151
Possible permit authorization required (insufficient location information to determine).
Not a project but an analysis of the feasiblility of what and where
No State land or easement interest
Potential to use State land within existing SEAPA transmission line corridor, ADL 106442
Application for easement, ADL 106437 for portion over State tide & submerged land
Application for easements, ADL 107601/107792, portions in Haines State Forest & Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve
Mostly within DOT R/W. If not may need a DNR r/w authorization. Project description does not provide enough detail to determine if any of the power lines will run on state land. Project
as described should only require coordination with DOT easements. However, if any of the powerlines should cross state land outside of existing easements of ROWs, then coordination
with DNR may be required for additional permits or easements.
Increase in water elevation will affect private and possibly USFS land
Additional 38.05 authorizations required for the described project.
Project itself not on state land, but an extension of the road authorized in ADL 229859 would be required to access the project area.
No State land or easement interest
No exact location. May involve state land or state selected land. Authorzations would be required.
Municiple conveyance survey underway, but Skagway has management authority at this time.
As brought up on page 15 on the application, there may be some delays in conveying tidelands if that is how they choose to pursue site control. It is possible to issue this authorization
under lease or ROW also. Nonetheless, they are correct in the risk of delays because of permitting in Southeast.
It appears that they are requesting funds to construct this project, DNR has not seen anything on this project to date, water rights, proposed dam evaluation, hydrology, FERC exemption,
habitat study or fish study.
It appears that the consultant has determined the by-pass flow needs for fish without having the hydrology necessary to do so. Gaging ASAP.
The proposed cost for this seems very high, there are state agencies available to conduct a majority of this type of work, including DNR, ADF&G. It might be interesting to work with
DNR and ADF&G and see if they would be interested in conducting this type of study for Southcentral Alaska. If AEA continues to fund recon work for hydroelectric projects, it appears
that Polarconsult, Earl and David Aussman will get to every possible SC site eventually if funded. There should be a consideration of the effects of one business servicing so many projects.
Gaging ASAP. FERC?
System of two hydro projects: It appears that some hydrology work has been conducted, but these projects will require gaging ASAP. Likely FERC project.
This project will gain much attention as it involves a legislatively designated Knik River Public Use Area which recently had a management plan adoption. Heavy recreational use. Expect
substantial resistance as it changes a relatively undeveloped area that is used for recreation and tourism. Hydrology ASAP. FERC Project very likely.
Believe the land ownership is incorrect at this time. I believe it is still BLM land. This is a popular recreation area, although future land transfers to Eklutna will eliminate the
ability to voice complaint, but will have some public opposition. No existing hydrology, gage should be installed ASAP. If they build Glacier Fork Knik River Hydro this project will
not be needed.
The proposal states that the village corporation has signed a letter of intent to supply wood for this system. The Forest Service estimate for the Sitka spruce timber type is about
75 bone dry tons per acre. It is estimated that the Garn unit will use 120 bone dry tons per year or about 1.6 acres of forest land per year. On a green ton basis and using 1.53 tons
per cord, the Forest Service estimate is about 64 cords per acre. This figure correlates well to a previous Tanana Chiefs Conference native allotment timber cruise in the Port Graham
area. In the cruise, the allotments averaged 6,400 cubic feet per acre. On a green basis, the Garn unit would require about 100 cords per year. This amount appears sustainable given
the acreage available for harvest (16,000 acres village corp., 2,877 acres allotments). Native allotments however are held in trust status with the Bureau of Indian Affairs and individual
allottees as well as the BIA would have to approve of timber sales on these lands.
DMLW has issued the private non-exclusive easement for hydropower facilities to the Pelican Utility District.
Not enough information to make analysis.
Seems like a very broad scoping project with almost no detail of what the applicant wants to do. Can not give input.
As this project suggests both river and ocean applicability, there will be slightly different set of permits for each application. State and federal authorizations are needed. In the
proposal to attach to an oil platform, there should be consideration placed on the life expectancy of a specific platform because there are discussions of decommissioning certain platforms
in Cook Inlet and this would be a secondary use that would probably not drive the decision whether to remove the platform after decommissioning.
What happened to the Trout Lake hydro project in downtown Chitina? This project was permitted and built 10-15 years ago but seemed to have problems, from the first day of operation.
Hydrology will be necessary for Fivemile Creek ASAP.
It is estimated that 88 cords of wood in total would be needed per year for the project in the following ratios: 22 cords(ILI), 15 cords (KOK), 39 cords (IGG), 12 cords(PTA). The annual
wood cost is estimated to be $36,841 or about $419 per cord. It is unclear what extent of timber resources is available in the particular villages especially for Igiugig which is located
in an alder dominated vegetation type on the west side of Lake Illiamna. The Tanana Chiefs Conference has performed Native Allotment inventories in the Kokhanok area. These volumes
per acre summaries could provide useful data concerning the forest resources in this area. At first glance however, the relatively small amount of wood required for this project appears
to be sustainable.
Can not open grant application file.
[AEA assumes similar situation as nearby False Pass]
Interesting project, feasibility will be interesting, will need hydrology, as diversion of the Kuskokwim River will need to be evaluated, once you divert a portion of a river this size,
putting it back, if necessary, can be a major problem.
Will require DNR authorizations. It is unclear where on Eska Creek this project would be envisioned. Depending on location, there may be some conflicts with other uses in this popular
use area.
FERC project. Water rights required for the diversion of water from Battle creek to Bradley Lake/reservoir. DNR Water Section working with applicant.
FERC Lic. Issued, construction delayed due to cost. Project will require water rights, land permits for transmission lines. Environmental studies still underway under FERC/State/federal
agreement.
Not sure if the 25\' trail vacation necessary is a ANCSA 17(b) trail or some other type, but may or may not be an issue depending on public input.
Already permitted.
It appears the applicant is working through the largest hurdle which was doing the project in the Admiralty National Monument. The USDA Forest Service appears to be honoring the provisions
of ANILCA.
It appears the applicant is working through the largest hurdle which was doing the project in the Admiralty National Monument. The USDA Forest Service appears to be honoring the provisions
of ANILCA. DNR has required this applicant to file for a permit to appropriate water in the past and they have claimed that because it is a native project, they did not have to file
for any state, or federal permits. It?s been a few years since DNR last contact with Kootznoowoo Incorporated, maybe they have changed their mind, as the grant application mentions
permitting as a cost.
Possible .850 permits required. Project describes usage of what is presumed to be state managed land or water based on information furnished. Narrative identifies DNR permits required.
This project is a feasibility analysis for a proposed biomass fueled combined heat and power (CHP) project for the Tok electrical utility. Roughly $60,000.00 of the total project cost
of $425,000 is for conducting a detailed biomass energy resource assessment. A significant amount of the raw forest inventory data will come from the Division of Forestry?s inventory
work in the Tok area. The forestry consultant, Clare Doig (Forest & Land Management, Inc.) will conduct a thorough review of delivered biomass costs and supply. The $45/green ton
fuel supply cost used in the cost worksheet may be optimistic given transportation, management, reforestation and other costs that will need to be imbedded in this delivered cost.
This uncertainty illustrates the importance of the proposed economic analysis to determine whether a sustainable operable supply of biomass exists to provide the estimated 300 acres
per year (40 tons per acre) needed for the operation of the CHP facility. The resource analysis section in the grant proposal appears to be well thought out and should provide the needed
information for determining whether a sustainable operable supply of biomass is present for the near and long term horizons of the project.
The wood supply for the Garn will be from Kenai Peninsula spruce forests where a volume determination has already been conducted in a Phase II resource analysis. The project proposal
also states that many thousands of acres of spruce beetle killed forests still remain on the peninsula and are a wild fire hazard according to Alaska State DNR foresters. It is estimated
that annual wood use would between 40 and 50 cords at a delivered price of around $160/cord. This wood use appears sustainable in light of the proximity of the total available resource.
It is estimated that 40-50 cords of fuelwood will offset 4,200 gallons of heating oil. Current price of the displaced fuel oil is $12,600. Ionia is currently operating two Garn boiler
units in other buildings within the community.
This project is for the installation of 3 small sized pellet and hammer mills for the village of Gulkana. The project proposal is also requesting personnel funds for one year of equipment
operation. At full production it is estimated that 9,600,000 pounds of finished pellets would be produced annually (4,800 tons). There was no estimate of annual supply needs of raw
material but existing supply was noted at 300 cords of wood ready to be chipped and a hazard fuel reduction clearing of 75 acres of wood. There was also mention of a potential military
clean up area of 80 acres. Based on a two to one ratio of green raw material to finished pellet product, it is estimated that 9,600 tons of raw material would be needed to sustain
the project at full capacity. The project proposal states that Ahtna would consider the sale of wood volume for this project. Based on a completed forest inventory for Gulkana Village
Lands conducted by Tanana Chiefs Conference, timber stands within the Gulkana village area average around 29 tons per acre. Thus approximately 330 acres per year would be required
for the project. The inventory report calculates an allowable harvest level of 177 acres per year. The deficit could be made up from additional areas owned by Ahtna, Inc. or by state
owned forest classified lands. These areas however would be more distant from Gulkana with the possibility of increased raw material costs.
Narrative identifies DNR permits required. As with project 660, there may be significant issues to address with the beluga whales and debris management to have a viable project.
Progressing with permitting for first phases of construction. There is still concern how the beluga whale issues will turn out since there is additional scrutiny being directed toward
the protection of that species. In addition, some of the debris studies are important to determine if the turbines can be kept year round on the sea bed. Would require state permits.
Because this area is a critical habitat area and a research reserve, the biologic and environmental review will be in the forfront of feasibility. Would require state permits.
Doesn\'t seem to offset much other energy costs. Does this type of project fit the grant criteria? Project has expired DNR Permit to Appropriate Water, but water has not been used
since 1990. This permit is likely no longer valid as water has not been used for the past 5 years. City will be required to re-file for water rights.
It appears that MIC does not recognize the need for the state to issue an easement for the submerged cable for the intertie once off of the reservation.
There may be no oversight by FERC because of the Indian reservation, but not sure if that holds if they are going to tie into a grid through an intertie that extends beyond the boundaries
of the indian reservation.
Power use for proposed Rock Creek Mine and others. Rock Creek Mine is not in operation, and is looking for buyers. Project will require TWUP for drilling, and water rights depending
on the temperature of the geothermal resource.
Currently operational with valid permits. May require additional water rights or amendments to existing permits to appropriate water. Will be a FERC project.
May need temporary water permits not identified.
At the minimum they will need to get AOGCC approval for their wells. Of bigger concern is that the Naknek Electric Association filed for bankruptcy on Sept 29th.
The Superior Pellets facility is new and in the startup phase of development. The delivered cost estimate used for pellets from the facility may be questionable over the long term based
on the operating experience once this new manufacturing facility is in full production and has some operating history. Given this uncertainty, it may be prudent to get cost estimates
of pellet delivery from other outside vendors such as Atlas Pellets to have a backup source of pellets and another delivered cost estimate.
Possible .850 permits required. Project describes usage of what is presumed to be state managed land or water based on information furnished. Applicant states that significant improvements
would affect an EVOS easement. Lots of work already completed including on going gaging.
Project map is in close proximity to known RST trail in the area. Unclear whether this is a DOT managed airstrip so unsure whether state authorizations are needed.
Debris management is a serious concern for all types of hydrokintetics in river and tidal applications. Without solving this isssue, there will be challenges to insuring long term application
of hydrokinetic devises in AK. If this project were funded, the information and data should be made public to all to benefit. May need DMLW authorization.
This seems to be more of a planning exercise than a feasibility study of a project. If funded this project will be a good starting point to determine an operable sustainable biomass
resource supply for the region.
This project is for a proposed cordwood fueled Garn boiler school heating system. It is estimated that 160 cords of fuelwood will be required annually and will offset 18,699 gallons
of heating oil. Current price of the displaced fuel oil is $67,500. The contract for wood delivery is estimated at $25,800 or about $161 per cord. The wood supply for the project
seems more than adequate given the fact that large sources of Forest Service timber would be available on Prince of Wales Island. The annual resource supply of 270 million board feet
may be in fact the sustained annual harvest level but the sale of timber off of Forest Service lands has been substantially less than this in recent years. It appears that prospective
wood delivery contractors have been contacted for this project.
Pre-Application meeting already occurred with applicant. Unsure of whether there will be any conflicts with the historic Iditarod Trail. Well into hydrology and fishery studies. Water
right applied for already. Will require State land for transmission line. FERC Project.
No Comments - recognition of permits needed.
The applicant claims that things are progressing well with negotiations with Tanacross, but no agreement is reached. 1/2 of the project is on Tanacross land and as of Sept. 8th, 2010,
Tanacross has not consented to allow development. DMLW authorizations on hold pending indication that APT and Tanacross are making progress toward land use agreements.
Getting the approval from the USFS to allow the project in a roadless area may be a substantial hurdle with the current administration. Has no plans to collect hydrology until 2012 after
they conduct feasibility. They should gage the system ASAP.
FERC Licensed project. Permit to Appropriate Water issued. Construction postponed. State ROW and dock applications received
Will need hydrology for permitting
The applicant is aware of some of the potential oppositions because of the eagle preserve. Will be a FERC project. Lots of past information available.
No flow data or Lake data to date, gaging will not start until Fall 2011. Asking for full funding for a project that has no hydrologic data to determine feasibility. Will need a minimum
of 5 years of real or derived flows. TWUP, Water rights, land use and habitat permits at a minimum. FERC project?
The state would probably request a navigabilty determination to understand whether the inlet creeks are state owned. The project would have to adress the anadromous fish habitat in the
streams. Two proposed sites and little or no discharge date. Review of past proposals and studies may provide basic information, but hydrology will require up to 5 years of flow data.
This project is for a proposed cordwood fueled Garn boiler school heating system. It is estimated that 253 cords of fuelwood will be required annually and will offset 20,800 gallons
of heating oil. Current price of the displaced fuel oil is $58,448. A report completed for AEA?s feasibility funded study of this project (Northern Economics Report 2009) estimated
an annual timber harvest area of 16 acres. The study also estimated a delivered price for wood at approximately $200 per cord or $50,600. The project proposal states that the wood
supply will come primarily from Mat-Su Borough owned forests located in relatively close proximity to the school. It states that 1,400 acres of ?dedicated borough land? will provide
a sustainable harvest block. The assumptions are using approximately 16 cords per acre with an 88 year rotation length. The 16 cords per acre may be somewhat generous given the fact
that the harvesting may not be all by the clear cut method. A more conservative estimate of 10 cords per acre would require roughly 25 acres per year or 2,200 acres of a sustainable
harvest block. The Mat-Su Borough has just recently completed a land management plan which has allowed the sale of timber to begin again after a moratorium was placed on timber sales
prior to the plan?s adoption and completion. The project proposal states that it is the Mat-Su Borough?s intention to offer between 400 and 600 acres per year of commercial timber
sales. This figure may vary depending upon public input on individual timber sales. The management plan mentioned supplying a proposed boiler facility from its management units, but
did not specifically mention ?dedicated borough land? for the project. The Division of Forestry is currently preparing an inventory for forest classified lands in the Mat-Su valley.
This inventory will update the volume and acreage of lands available for timber harvest. Significant accessible timber areas are present in the Willer-Kash road area. State timber
areas will allow additional timber supply from more than just the Mat-Su Borough land ownership. Currently the State is scheduling approximately 1,000 acres per year in the Mat-Su
valley. The supply of timber from borough and state lands would appear to be more than adequate to supply this project. The location of specific sales however will still have an influence
on the delivered price of the raw material.
This project is for a feasibility study for the utilization of waste wood and cardboard to heat one or a few public buildings. The study will analyze the community?s energy needs.
The project proposal also states that alder growing on village corporation land to the east will also be considered as a potential fuel source. The Forest Service is currently conducting
a Lidar remote sensing analysis of the extent of this resource. This project appears to be a reasonable approach to analyzing the feasibility of utilizing biomass for a building heating
program. Most of the feasibility research focuses on the waste wood and cardboard aspect. Analyzing the feasibility of alder use may require additional study of the economic operability
and sustainability of the resource not specifically mentioned in the project proposal.
Will require Temporary Water Use Authorization (TWUP) for drilling. The project may need water right if developed, depending on the water temperature. AOGCC would still regualte the
geothermal drilling.
Project is progressing with permitting mostly done. May need slight adjustment to move the location of the access road.
Hatchery has existing Water rights, will likely need additional water rights or amendment to existing water rights for hydro.
Been discussed as a hydro site for 20+ years. Past feasibility studies should be evaluated. Will be a FERC project. Will need water , tideland, and fish habitat permits. From the cursory
review it appears that Silver lake is actually in Chugach National Forest rather than Native Corp Lands as stated in the application. There is no federal power withdrawal so Chugach
NF would have to make a specific decsion to allow this use of increasing the size of the lake. Secondarily the lake appears to be of sufficient size to make this a navigable lake, thus
state owned lands under the lake and would require state permits. This ownership issue may get sticky when determining who owns the beds of the lake. Finally LSH 536 is a conservation
easement that recognizes this potential hydro site but limits the us to 15 acres and needs approval from both Tatitlek and USFS.
It is also stated in the proposal that based upon current fuel oil consumption; the wood boiler is estimated to use 800 tons of wood fuel each year. Using the figure of 40 tons per
acre as estimated in the above AP&T project (AEA #665), 20 acres per year would be required to heat the school. This amount appears to be available in a sustainable manner for the
Tok area. Even if one uses the more conservative 27 tons per acre as calculated in the Tanana Valley State Forest Inventory Update 2010 for poletimber and sawtimber types, then approximately
30 acres per year would be required to heat the school. This material is projected to be available to the school at roughly $60/ton in chipped form. Thus 800 tons of wood chips would
cost the school $48,000 versus about $138,000 for fuel oil, a $90,000 annual savings. The applicant at page 5, item 2.6, incorrectly states that the Alaska Division of Forestry will
be chipping the 1,000 to 1,200 green tons of decked material resulting from fuel reduction projects. While the material is available to the project, the Alaska Gateway School District
will be responsible for hiring and paying for contractors to process the decks using the Tok Umbrella Corporation?s rotochopper. Because some of the forest supply would be land outside
of State Forest land, there may be a need for additional DMLW permits for the fuel reduction projects in the long term.
This is now in the process of permitting and evaluation by DNR. Access for construction is the biggest challenge to get the turbines up the mountain and across the river, but GVEA is
evaluating the requirements.
Possible .850 permits required. Project describes usage of what is presumed to be state managed land or water based on information furnished.
Section 3.4 in AEA application lists DNR environmental permits under "Project Resources" but does not specify which permits
It is estimated that between 17,000 and 23,000 green tons of biomass would be required for the fuel oil offset. Utilizing conversion estimates from the Tanana Valley State Forest Inventory
Update 2010 of 34 pounds per cubic foot and 90 cubic feet of solid wood per cord, this biomass demand is equivalent to over 11,000 cords per year. In perspective, Fairbanks Area State
Forestry which currently has the largest timber sales program in the Interior sold 8,724 cords of wood for fiscal year 2010. Conversion of this amount of Galena?s fuel oil use would
entail a significant timber harvest program.The Tanana Chiefs Conference forestry program has conducted a forest inventory consisting of timber type mapping of Galena village corporation
lands. This inventory will be invaluable in determining a sustainable and operable wood supply. TCC has conducted a rough estimate of biomass availability in a ten mile radius of
the village and has calculated a volume of over 840,000 tons. The proposal states that a separate grant application will fund a more detailed inventory to refine the volume estimate.
TCC has the expertise available to define operable and sustainable biomass resources to help develop an appropriately scaled facility for the village.
Not sure of navigability of Jack River but there was a previous dispute of the navigability. May or may not need authorizations from DNR beyond that for dam construction if it went beyond
feasibility study. There is mention of a dam being constructed near the Denali Fault. Feasibility of getting a dam construction approved would be an issue our dam safety engineer would
have to evaluate. This project must include stream gaging. A gage in this area operated by USGS could cost as much as $50,000 per year. It will take 5+ years of data to determine if
the project is feasible from a water stand point, not including any other studies that may be required.
This project is for a proposed wood chip fuel drier system. The biomass supply for this project is mill waste generated from the Viking Lumber Company?s sawmill. Most of the round
log material supply for the mill is coming from the Tongass National Forest. Uncertainty of a consistent log supply from the National Forest continues to arise however timber from
State sales has also supported the Viking Mill and provides another potential source of raw material. This project is aligned with broader efforts of the state administration and the
multi-agency Tongass Team to support remaining timber processing facilities in Southeast.
Because the project location was not specific enough, can\'t tell whether any state lands will be involved.
This project will be authorized by FERC under a federal power withdrawal. Uplands will be owned by the municipality. FERC will have jurisdiction of the dam. There may be an issue that
gets bogged down in the ownership of the beds of the Lake. The lake is large enough to be considered navigable. If so, the beds are state owned. Typically the USFS disputes ownership
of lakes within the boundaries of the Tongass NF. Part of the project construction would be on the beds of the lake, therefore this might get sticky around the debate of who owns the
lands under the lake. A secondary concern may be if there is any road built to support the transmission line because there may be local concerns about a new road from Sitka to Baranof.
Will need state tideland and water permits.
Scope of Work cited as Attach C not in package for review. Reference to lake utilization affecting several possible lakes in Section 4.1. MTP maps does not show the federal withdrawals
affected several of the larger lakes. Possible .850 authorizations from DMLW.
Possible .850 permits required for the pipeline from Petro to the parcel applicant intends to purchase. DOT has encroachment permits, but those are not likely to be sufficient authorization
under a grant program to demonstrate site control. Needs to address the permitting for taking water from Abercrombie Creek for cooling.
no comment except it seems that this should be combined with project 517
Concerned that they have not filed for FERC permit yet. Also ignores the need for land authorizations from the state. There will be questions from commercial fisheries groups about impacts
to harvest or fish species.
no comment except it seems that this should be combined with project 523
In process of data gathering before leasing.
Would require some additional coordination in reviewing both gas and wind leases. Because the land in question was supposed to be conveyed to the University but a law suit stopped that
conveyance, there is question of how long the University conveyances will take. This will add in some uncertainty in the leasing without knowing whether this land will be conveyed.
Although this is just design, there are some future hurdles to consider. First, attaching generators to operating oil platforms would require separate authorizations that are not included
in the oil lease operations permits. If the intention is to attach to "aging" infrastucture that will be decommissioned as oil platform, this has considerable risk by having an investment
attached to a platform that will need to be removed unless the power company is willing to assume the platform removal liability. Lastly, there are existing FERC authorizations that
have "locked up" Cook Inlet until the existing permit holders fail to advance their projects to licensing.
Normally the applicant for a power project is the one doing the environmental baseline studies once the project concept is approved. That way the correct information is collected for
the agencies making decisions. It potentially seems premature to gather this data before understanding the scope of the proposed projects. This may be more appropriate once projects
start moving forward and funding is approved for power projects.
Extra hurdles have been placed by the listing of the beluga whales on the endangered species list. Would require land authorization and ROW but ORPC is in communication with DNR on this.
Depending on location may need state land authorizations. As noted in the application, habitat concerns will be paramount to address because of the critical habitat areas and the Estuarine
Research Reserve.
This project describes very well the lack of attention on the source market for the biomass fuels for many of the biomass projects. Without adequate "available" supply, those authorized
and sustainable, a biomass project won\'t work.
State land lease and ROW
This project will gain much attention as it involves a legislatively designated Knik River Public Use Area which recently had a management plan adoption. Heavy recreational use. Expect
substantial resistance as it changes a relatively undeveloped area that is used for recreation and tourism.
This is a popular recreation area. Not sure of the exact location and impact but that may engender substantial comment during the public permitting process.
Would probably require State ROW and dock permitting. This project may have higher probability for problems in that it is nearer to Petersburg than Angoon and Ancoon alreasy has its
own hydro project at Thayer Lake.
This project will require state authorizations. Hurdles will be dealing with ice flows, transmission line ROW, Beluga Whale ESA listing, and fundamentally understanding the impact of
a new technology on fish and mamals.
Contact Rick Rogers with State Forestry (269-8473) for additional assessment of biomass availability.
Believe the land ownership is incorrect at this time. I believe it is still BLM land. This is a popular recreation area, although future land transfers to Eklutna will eliminate the
ability to voice complaint, but will have some public opposition.
This is a popular recreation area. Not sure of the exact location and impact but that may engender substantial comment during the public permitting process.
This is a popular recreation area. Not sure of the exact location and impact but that may engender substantial comment during the public permitting process.
This is a popular recreation area. Not sure of the exact location and impact but that may engender substantial comment during the public permitting process.
New technology may generate concerns. Require land lease and ROW.
Seward owns the tidelands there so no land permit. May or may not need a water right - normally DNR does not issue water rights for use of marine water.
State ROW needed
Past experience with projects in Tenakee is that there is generally an active involvement by the community with diverse view points.
State permitting
Because this project potentially closes off access to certain tidelands this could be challenging to reconcile with the public trust doctrine. Unknown habitat issues with anadromous
species. This will be a challenging permit process.
State permitting.
Although area plans identify options for hydroelectric and fish hatchery, since SSRAA has developed a fish hatchery operation, we are unsure whether there would be any potential conflict
between the two uses.
State ROW and dock applications received.
Application on file. 1/2 project on Tanacross Native Corp land, but records indicate Native Corp may not be interested in authorizing proposed activity on their lands.
Permits required for stream gauging also. Not sure of impact on Bald Eagle Preserve but will gather attention as do most proposals that potentially touch the Bald Eagle Preserve. Some
public concerns expressed.
As expressed in previous rounds, this project is in Wood Tikchik State Park. Although this project is contemplated in the park management, the way in which the transmission lines are
constructed will be of great interest to the park.
Area next to Kachemak Bay State Park and Kachemak Bay Estuarine Research Reserve. Public will be very interested in the environmental impact to the shore birds and visual aesthetics.
Note area is popular for paragliding and hanggliding which may cause some community conflict.
State ROW. Some confusion because the proximity is to Petersburg rather than Angoon.
DMLW has already issued early entry authorization.
Not sure of the exact start location so there could be state land crossed before Forest Service Land. If so, there would be other state permits required beyond what was stated in application.
While state authorizations are minor, there may be public concerns on this project (based on past discussions).
Unsure of navigability of Sunrise lake and if it is navigable, then the permits for stream gauging would be from the state, not USDA.
Not sure if this project location is on land that has agricultural covenants that may restrict development.
Conflict in application - 1 billion or 1 million total cost? No comment
probably only water rights needed.
Water Right, Dam approval potential lease because of submerged land ownership. Also dock improvments.
Unsure biomass availability.Contact Rick Rogers with State Forestry (269-8473) for additional assessment of biomass availability.
Contact Rick Rogers with State Forestry (269-8473) for additional assessment of biomass availability.
Not sure of navigability of Jack River but there was a previous dispute of the navigability. May or may not need authorizations from DNR beyond that for dam construction if it went beyond
feasibility study. There is mention of a dam being constructed near the Denali Fault. Feasibility of getting a dam construction approved would be an issue our dam safety engineer would
have to evaluate.
OK - probably only need to change development plan if the land footprint stays the same.
This has $2 million approved from AEA so this match is from AEA. Contact Rick Rogers with State Forestry (269-8473) for additional assessment of biomass availability.
New technology - environmental concerns and not sure of ramification of the Beluga Whale listing on this project. This project is progressing with FERC permit requirements.
Most components of this project sit wholly or partially in the Knik River Public Use Area and the National Natural Landmark areas. Recent management plan for the public use area did
not address this use, therefore there will be challenges to permit this because of the necessity to revise the management plan.
This has land issues in the Supreme Court. May affect capability to get this permitted until decision is made.
New technology - environmental concerns and not sure of ramification of the Beluga Whale listing on this project.
Within a National Park and Preserve which may take some time to permit.
Environmental concerns with new technology expected to be raised during permitting may slow this project.
Environmental concerns with new technology expected to be raised during permitting may slow this project.
New technology, therefore will take a bit longer to permit to address environmental studies.
Similar to the first round. May have substantial challenges obtaining authorizations for gathering wood in Anchorage.
Complicated landownership. If the foot print varies from existing project, permitting may take more time.
Because the project lies inside a NWR and the ownership of the river bed is disputed between the state and federal agencies, the permitting will be complicated.
As stated in Round 1, this project will have significant public scrutiny durning the permitting required by Division of Parks. The project is in Wood-Tikchik State Park.
DNR Division of Forestry is involved with this project. The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force completed the feasibility study for this project and recommended it for construction. Large
heat demand makes this a viable project.
Possible competetive interest which may make for more challenging permitting.
Underway
Being permitted.
No state permits yet.
The Geothermal resource identified in this proposal is well understood from prior scientific, drilling and geophysical evaluations. It is clearly a viable resource that should be developed
if proper commercial terms can be reached between all interested parties. It would not be prudent for the State to spend Public funds on further scientific evaluation of this resource,
and such funds would be better utilized in drilling and development. DGGS reccomends this project is not funded in it current form.
FERC permitted area to another company. This project was completed without permits and is now in process to get permits.
Palmer project will require a number of drilling permits and produced fluids permits from AOGCC, DEC and possibly the Div. of Oil & Gas.
Although this is moving forward and possible, there is a risk that an associated lawsuit about land ownership being given to the University could effect this project.
Project appears viable. The area has a wood supply, including a lot of beetle-killed spruce.
Underway
state land
The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force completed the feasibility study for this project. Large heat demand makes this a viable project. The DNR Division of Forestry is involved with this
project, which has particularly strong community support.
The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force completed the feasibility study for this project; it is a viable medium heat-demand project.
Red flag: Should not proceed. Harvesting would be on Municipality of Anchorage land, but proposers have not yet contacted the Muni. Major pitfalls in project. Proposers are high school
students, which is impressive -- they deserve encouragement, but not $300,000.
Permitted to Trident Seafoods. May be challenge with second applicant.
DNR Division of Forestry is involved with this project, and it is a demonstration project for a state office building. The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force recommended this as a demonstration
project.
This is one of 3 projects in same area. Is AEA considering other energy projects that are proposed for same area to evaluate whether it is necessary to do all projects?
Underway
The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force completed the feasibility study for this project; large heat demand makes it a viable project. The DNR Division of Forestry participated in development
of a forest stewardship plan for Native lands around Fort Yukon in support of this project.
The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force completed the feasibility study for this project. Large heat demand makes this a viable project. Lands for biomass harvesting have not yet been identified.
Alder is the proposed biomass source. Proposed boilers are both manual feed which will require commitments of personnel.
The Gustavus portion of the project may have certain issues that may effect National Park land and waters, depending on where they place it. Permitting challenges will be high for any
project that is in park waters or are seen as directly affecting marine life going into the park. Gustavus just got a hydro project funded (part of another grant proposal) and in construction
that may supply all power needs. Beluga whales were just placed on the endangered species list and therefore permitting just became more difficult for the Nikiski portion. This project
has good merit but may have some permitting challenges.
They didn\'t get geothermal bids - Ormat did. Where do they get access to the geothermal resources? Probably major show stopper.
Wood Tikchik State Park- know of strong public opposition. Parks may have a challenge in permitting, but it is recognized as a compatible use.
The Alaska Wood Energy Task Force completed the feasibility study for this project; it is a small project and easy to accomplish.
S2 Forestry Comments Feasibility
This project is for reconnaissance, feasibility and conceptual design of an electrical power plant that will utilize recycled construction and demolition cellulose biomass waste. No
additional biomass from timber harvest operations will be required. It is anticipated that up to 2,000 tons of material will be diverted from Alaskan landfills. Biomass supply appears
sustainable for this project and Central Environmental Incorporated maintains a recycling service which is able to separate out the cellulose biomass required for this project.
This project, for design and construction, will install a wood fired chip boiler to heat two main school buildings. The source of the chips would come from Viking Lumber located about
½ miles from the Klawock School location. It is expected that 188 tons/year of dry fuel would be required to heat the main building and gymnasium at a cost of $22,560 ($120.00/ton).
The required amount of biomass is well within the realm of sustainability as the Tongass National Forest is stated to have an annual resource availability of 60-70 million board feet.
The State of Alaska also provides timber sales which are purchased by Viking Lumber.
This project was reviewed for the Round 8 application period. No changes for wood requirement have been made in the current application (approximately 77 cords per year) or delivered
price ($300/cord). This project is for design and construction of a biomass heating system to heat the Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plan. A manually fed cordwood boiler
would be installed in a prefabricated building. Resource availability has been previously examined by the Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program. A detailed inventory report was
written that provides a preliminary assessment of the biomass energy resources within a 25-mile radius of Huslia. A significant volume was available indicating that the 77 cords can
be harvested relatively close to the village. A detailed harvest plan will be written as part of this proposal. This harvest plan should answer resource sustainability and harvest
location concerns.
This project is for design and construction of a biomass heating system to heat the City Hall and washeteria it was previously reviewed for the Round 8 application period. A manually
fed cordwood boiler would be installed in a prefabricated building. It is estimated that 30 cords annually would be needed at a price of $210.00/cord. This amount and price is unchanged
from the Round 8 submittal. Resource availability has been previously examined by the Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program. A detailed inventory report was written that provides
a preliminary assessment of the biomass energy resources within a 25-mile radius of Ambler. A significant volume was available indicating that the 30 cords can be harvested relatively
close to the village. A detailed harvest plan will be written as part of this proposal. This harvest plan should answer resource sustainability and harvest location concerns.
This project was reviewed for the Round 8 application period. This project is similar to the above project 1208 because it is a conversion to pellet boilers from fuel oil. This project
is for feasibility and design of a larger scale system that will supply heat to a variety of Gateway Borough owned buildings from a central installation. It is estimated that 2,203
tons of pellets would be required annually at a price of about $300.00 per ton. Currently the Federal Government, Forest Service and City of Ketchikan have pellet boilers in service
so delivered prices as well as a reliable supply chain should be well established in this area.
This project was reviewed for the Round 8 application period. This project is for construction of pellet/biomass fired boilers for the Ketchikan High School. Although the square footage
serviced remains the same, the wood requirement has been revised downward from 1,049 tons of pellets annually to 708 tons per year. Currently the Federal Government, Forest Service
and City of Ketchikan have pellet boilers in service so a reliable supply chain should be well established in this area.
This project is for construction of a Garn biomass district heating system that will heat four community buildings. Cordwood would come from road accessible village corporation lands
near the facility. It is anticipated that 100 cords per year would be needed. A biomass inventory assessment prepared by Chugachmiut Forestry stated that the annual allowable harvest
on Port Graham village corporation lands is over 7,000 cords. As long as harvest areas are agreed upon, the resource should well be able to sustain this biomass system. The project
proposal states that fuel source agreements are currently being negotiated with Port Graham Corporation and some Native allotment owners.
This project is for a feasibility study for a biomass district heating system. The system would heat multiple buildings and a proposed greenhouse. Up to 32,000 gallons of heating fuel
would be displaced using biomass. The Forest Service has been involved with Hoonah in looking at solutions to the high energy costs. Two mills near the town produce waste material
that may be suitable for biomass. Landowners including the Forest Service, Hoonah Totem, and Sealaska may also be a source of biomass. The project appears to have adequate supplies
of raw material available. Firewood is currently available for $250/cord. The study would determine a delivered price of wood pellets.
This project is for construction of cordwood fueled outdoor wood boiler heating systems located in the Lake Illiamna region of southwest Alaska. The heating systems would be installed
in three different villages within the region (Nondalton, Pedro Bay, and Port Alsworth). It is estimated in the proposal that 9,104 gallons of fuel oil per year would be offset annually
at an average price of $5.65 per gallon. The proposal states that area landowners support the project and have signed letters of intent to provide wood for the boilers. These landowners
comprise the associated village corporations in the area. It is estimated that 20-80 cords of wood in total would be needed per year for the project. The annual wood cost is estimated
to be about $29,000 or about $360 per cord. It is unclear what extent of timber resources is available in these particular villages although a boiler is currently operating in Kokhanok.
The Tanana Chiefs Conference has performed Native Allotment inventories in the Kokhanok area and these volumes per acre summaries could provide useful data concerning the forest resources
in this area. At first glance however, the relatively small amount of wood required for this project appears to be sustainable.
This project was reviewed for the Round 7 application period. No changes for wood requirement have been made in the current application (approximately 250 cords per year). This project
is for upgrade of two Garn boilers at the Thorne Bay School to larger capacity units. The original units would be moved and installed in the Whale Pass and Hollis Schools. The project
would also fund a Garn installation at the Naukati School. All of the schools are located within the Tongass National Forest on Prince of Wales Island. The proposal states that approximately
20-40 million board feet is available sustainably per Forest Service estimates. A vendor has been delivering wood to the Thorne Bay School and it appears other vendors are available.
A sustainable wood supply for the approximately 250 annual cord consumption does not seem to be a problem.
This project is for a feasibility study for three Interior Regional Housing Authority facilities in Fairbanks and Nenana. The study will look at various types of biomass for heating
that include cordwood, wood pellets and pellet logs. All these biomass types are available in the Fairbanks-Nenana area and with the State Division of Forestry, Toghotthele Corp. and
the Fairbanks North Star Borough all offering timber sales, supply should not be a problem. Superior Pellet Fuels is also producing wood pellets and pellet logs in North Pole. Fairbanks
Area state forestry is currently offering timber in the area well below its allowable cut threshold.
This project is similar to the above project 1140 because it is a conversion to pellet boilers from fuel oil. This project is for feasibility and design of a larger scale system that
will supply heat to a variety of Gateway Borough owned buildings from a central installation. It is estimated that 2,203 tons of pellets would be required annually at a price of about
$275.00 per ton. Currently the Federal Government, Forest Service and City of Ketchikan have pellet boilers in service so delivered prices as well as a reliable supply chain should
be well established in this area.
This project is for construction of two pellet fired boilers for the Ketchikan High School. Pellets are being made locally in Ketchikan and are also available from commercial vendors
in Southeast. It is estimated that 1,049 tons of pellets would be required annually at a price of about $275.00 per ton. Currently the Federal Government, Forest Service and City
of Ketchikan have pellet boilers in service so delivered prices as well as a reliable supply chain should be well established in this area.
This project was reviewed for the Round 7 application period. No changes for wood requirement have been made in the current application (212 cords annually). This amount is well within
the realm of sustainability as the Tongass National Forest is stated to have an annual resource availability of 60-70 million board feet. There are commercial vendors available who
are currently supplying biomass boilers for Coffman Cove and Thorne Bay schools.
This project is for the installation of a manually fed cordwood boiler to heat the community building, city lodge, school and city shop. It is estimated that 81 cords annually would
be needed at a price of $300.00/cord. Resource availability has been previously examined by the Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program. A detailed inventory report was written
that provides a preliminary assessment of the biomass energy resources within a 25-mile radius of Nikolai. A significant volume was available indicating that the 81 cords can be harvested
relatively close to the village. A detailed harvest plan will be written as part of this proposal. This harvest plan should answer resource sustainability and harvest location concerns.
This project is for design and construction of a biomass heating system to heat the Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plan. A manually fed cordwood boiler would be installed
in a prefabricated building. It is estimated that 77 cords annually would be needed at a price of $300.00/cord. Resource availability has been previously examined by the Tanana Chiefs
Conference Forestry Program. A detailed inventory report was written that provides a preliminary assessment of the biomass energy resources within a 25-mile radius of Huslia. A significant
volume was available indicating that the 77 cords can be harvested relatively close to the village. A detailed harvest plan will be written as part of this proposal. This harvest
plan should answer resource sustainability and harvest location concerns.
This project is for design and construction of a biomass heating system to heat the City Hall and washeteria. A manually fed cordwood boiler would be installed in a prefabricated building.
It is estimated that 30 cords annually would be needed at a price of $210.00/cord. Resource availability has been previously examined by the Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program.
A detailed inventory report was written that provides a preliminary assessment of the biomass energy resources within a 25-mile radius of Ambler. A significant volume was available
indicating that the 30 cords can be harvested relatively close to the village. A detailed harvest plan will be written as part of this proposal. This harvest plan should answer resource
sustainability and harvest location concerns.
This project’s first step is examining the feasibility of offsetting fuel oil use with biomass. The source of biomass will be from forests on village corporation lands. Forest inventory
data for this area is lacking and the only known sources are LandFire and the National Land Cover Dataset which have rather coarse estimates of biomass volume per acre. Depending upon
how much biomass is ultimately needed this dataset could be used to provide initial resource estimates. Other data sources include recent Spot and Quickbird satellite imagery which
covers much of the area around the village. More detailed forest inventory estimates may be required if timber resource sustainability becomes a question.
The project is for the replacement of an oil fired boiler with a pellet boiler to provide heat for eight residential buildings and one community center in Klawock. Similar to the above
grant application 1113, pellets would be provided by existing pellet manufacturers either in Southeast, Interior or out of state suppliers. It is estimated that the annual fuel cost
would be $330.00 per ton with an annual fuel usage of 42 tons. Delivered pellet vendor price estimates were not included in the proposal though commercial scale pellet utilization
is successfully occurring in various Southeast communities.
The project is for the replacement of an oil fired boiler with a pellet boiler to provide heat for eight residential buildings and one community center in Angoon. Pellets would be provided
by existing pellet manufacturers either in Southeast, Interior or out of state suppliers. It is estimated that the annual fuel cost would be $360.00 per ton with an annual fuel usage
of 103 tons. Delivered pellet vendor price estimates were not included in the proposal though commercial scale pellet utilization is successfully occurring in various Southeast communities.
This project was reviewed for the Round 7 application period and is for design and construction of a wood chip fired boiler at Tazlina. The system would be used to heat four collocated
community public buildings. The supply of chips is expected to come from NRCS funded moose habitat clearings occurring on Ahtna lands and on BIA funded hazard fuel breaks. Roughly
116 green tons will be required annually. Based on state lands inventory data collected in the Glennallen area, roughly 30 green tons per acre of above ground biomass is present on
the forest lands. The amount of raw material required for Tazlina would be quite sustainable if harvested in the Copper River Basin area. In the event these publicly funded projects
are unable to provide biomass, Tazlina is willing to procure the raw material at an estimated cost of $90.00/green ton. They would also be willing to purchase fuel wood locally at
$250-300 per cord and then chip prior to burning. At a fuel price of $90.00/ green ton, the annual fuel purchase price would be $10,400. This amount is significantly lower than the
annual cost ($39,582) of 8,078 gallons of fuel oil. Tazlina expects to use information from the Mentasta village boiler for possible purchase of a similar system for trial. If it
does not perform adequately for Mentasta then Tazlina may default to a more standard Garn solid wool boiler.
This project was reviewed for the Round 7 application period. This project is for construction of a new biomass boiler to heat the Craig High School. The boiler will be in addition
to one that is currently operational and is heating the elementary and middle schools. The system will use dried wood fuel from the AEA funded drier at Viking Lumber. Wood supply
for this project appears sustainable because Viking’s raw wood supply originates from a variety of land owners including the Tongass National Forest, Southeast State Forest and village
corporation lands.
This project is for final design of a wood chip fired boiler to heat several buildings within the Organized Village of Kake tribal government campus. The boiler is expected to displace
60,000 gallons of fuel with 1,000 tons of biomass fuel sourced from forest stewardship thinning activities on adjacent Kake Tribal, Sealaska and Forest Service lands on an annual basis.
Although the availability of the raw resource appears to be sustainable, there is no mention in the proposal of a pool of vendors to supply the chips or if there are any issues in
supply if potentially publically funded pre-commercial activities do not materialize.
This project submitted by Chugach Electric Association is for a reconnaissance study to determine the feasibility of developing a waste to energy system for electricity generation.
The waste to energy system would be located in Anchorage and utilize a portion of the approximately 330,000 tons of refuse disposed in the municipal landfill. At this time it is not
known if the project is sustainable relying solely on the landfill. Annual usage of refuse will be determined in this study.
This project is a resubmittal of a Round 5 proposal for construction of a combined wood pellet boiler and solar thermal system that would provide heat for both a 3,200 square foot shop/office
building and a 1,160 square foot administration building. This is a similar system that is installed in the Ionia community located in Kasilof. It is expected that this combined system
will displace 1,818 gallons of diesel fuel per year and 1,022 gallons of propane for a combined savings of $11,560. Wood pellets would come from either in-state suppliers such as Superior
Pellets in North Pole or from Gulkana Village?s small pellet plant. Pellets may also be purchased from local building supply stores. Given the relatively small annual pellet requirement,
sourcing a reliable supply should not present a problem. The project proposal lists a purchase price of pellets at approximately $250.00/ton and a 15 ton requirement which totals $3,750
per year in pellet costs.
This project submitted by the City and Borough of Yakutat requests design and construction funds for two Garn 2000 boilers. The boilers will displace about 7,000 gallons of diesel and
consume 38 cords of wood. Forest Service and village corporation lands are nearby with an extensive road network built from previous harvest operations. From recent inventory analysis
as stated in the proposal, a sustainable annual supply of 800 cords is available. Stands are generally second growth on previous cut over lands. Many of the forest stands are in need
of pre-commercial thinning. The Village Corporation and Forest Service have committed to making the timber available. The current rate of fuelwood in Yakutat is $200 per cord. It
is not clear in the proposal of who would provide this material or what firewood vendors are currently doing business in the area.
This project submitted by the City of Galena requests construction funding for a biomass boiler for the Galena Interior Learning Academy campus. The projected amount of biomass needed
per year is 2,500 tons with a delivery cost of $200 per ton. An updated forest inventory completed by Tanana Chiefs Conference in 2012 reported biomass dried tons within various radii
of Galena. A sustainable annual harvest level of over 3,600 tons is available within a 4 mile radius indicating ample resource availability for the project. The village corporation
has signed a letter of support and is willing to enter into a contract for the sale of timber which will support procurement of the biomass. This commitment combined with nearby state
lands that would also be available as a raw wood supply should provide a means for a sustainable timber harvest operation in this area of Alaska.
This project submitted by the City of Kotzebue requests final design and construction funding for a refuse derived wood fired boiler that would also be capable of burning wood pellets.
The project will utilize 300 tons of refuse derived fuel. If wood pellets are used as a supplemental feed stock, the price is anticipated to be around $300 per delivered ton. This
project appears to be sustainable in that the roughly 22 million BTUs of paper waste are generated per day in Kotzebue. This project requires about 3,442 million BTUs per year or about
40% of the total yearly generated paper waste.
This project submitted by the Ketchikan Gateway Borough requests construction funding to install two pellet fired boilers. One boiler would be installed in the Ketchikan Airport and
the other in the Ketchikan Gateway Borough High School. The boilers would be designed to use standard grade pellets which allow for higher ash content. The total combined demand is
approximately 1,230 tons per year at an average price of $275 per ton. Discussions for a long term pellet supply contract have been made with Tongass Forest Enterprises that is offering
contracts up to 5 years in length for volumes exceeding 500 tons per year. A silo would house the bulk delivery of pellets in Ketchikan. This successful fuel delivery model is similar
to what is employed in Juneau to provide pellets to the Sealaska corporate building.
This project submitted by the Minto Village Council seeks final design and construction funding to install a hydronic wood boiler serving the multi-purpose building and the health clinic.
The actual boiler type will be determined in consultation with the Council and AEA. The proposal states that the wood will be sourced from local forests owned by the village corporation,
Seth-do-ya-ah. A forest inventory conducted by the Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program concludes that a project using about 100 cords per year could easily source all its fuel
within one mile of the Elliot Highway. Wood species would primarily be fire killed spruce with some green timber as well. TCC will also assist the village in developing a harvest
and operations plan to ensure sustainability of the project. It is expected that 11,400 gallons of fuel oil will be offset by the use of wood. Oil prices average about $5 per gallon
and the delivered wood price is estimated at $200 per cord however this amount seems low for Interior Alaska and may be closer to $250 per cord. An important aspect of the project
is a statement from the executive director of the village corporation supporting the project and committing to resource supply. The letter states that the corporation supports harvest
in the burn area that is located approximately 40 miles north of the village.
This project submitted by the Haines Borough seeks funding to conduct construction of ten wood pellet boilers and storage silos in several Borough-owned buildings. It is expected that
the pellet boilers will displace 80,000 gallons of fuel oil annually for a savings of $59,000. This is based on a pellet delivered price of between $300 and $360 per ton and consuming
about 695 tons of pellets. The borough is working with Sealaska and other potential pellet suppliers to provide a secure, long-term supply of pellets. Pellets are sourced from Washington
and delivered by Sealaska of Juneau. This project appears to be well thought out and likely to be successful given the fact that the Sealaska Corporation already is utilizing a significant
amount of pellets with a proven fuel delivery system. The proposal also mentions that Chilkoot Indian Association in Haines is considering the construction of a pellet plant in Haines.
If this materializes, it could provide another source of pellets to the borough. Timber resources in the Haines State Forest are adequate to provide a significant local source of
raw material for pellet production. The State Division of Forestry is currently updating the Haines State Forest inventory to be able to more accurately describe the volume estimates
of its lands.
This project is for upgrade of two Garn boilers at the Thorne Bay School to larger capacity units. The original units would be moved and installed in the Whale Pass and Hollis Schools.
The project would also fund a Garn installation at the Naukati School. All of the schools are located within the Tongass National Forest on Prince of Wales Island. The proposal states
that approximately 20-40 million board feet is available sustainably per Forest Service estimates. A vendor has been delivering wood to the Thorne Bay School and it appears other vendors
are available. A sustainable wood supply for the approximately 265 annual cord consumption does not seem to be a problem.
This project is for design and construction for 4 Garn wood fired boilers adjacent to the Hydaburg school site. The units would plumb into the school?s heating system, four teacher
housing units and a greenhouse. It is estimated that 200 cords of wood per year would be required to fire the Garn units. This is well within the realm of sustainability as the Tongass
National Forest is stated to have an annual resource availability of 60-70 million board feet. It is not clear what firewood vendors are in place to supply this volume but the project
proposal states that the Howard Valentine School in Coffman Cove purchased 200 cords from a commercial vendor. If vendors are available to supply the raw material, and the Forest Service
offers up volume, then there should be sufficient biomass available for the project.
This project is for design and construction of a wood chip fired boiler at Tazlina. The system would be used to heat four collocated community public buildings. The supply of chips
is expected to come from NRCS funded moose habitat clearings occurring on Ahtna lands and on BIA funded hazard fuel breaks. Roughly 116 green tons will be required annually. Based
on state lands inventory data collected in the Glennallen area, roughly 30 green tons per acre of above ground biomass is present on the forest lands. The amount of raw material required
for Tazlina would be quite sustainable if harvested in the Copper River Basin area. In the event these publicly funded projects are unable to provide biomass, Tazlina is willing to
procure the raw material at an estimated cost of $90.00/green ton. They would also be willing to purchase fuel wood locally at $250-300 per cord and then chip prior to burning. At
a fuel price of $90.00/ green ton, the annual fuel purchase price would be $10,400. This amount is significantly lower than the annual cost ($39,582) of 8,078 gallons of fuel oil.
One good aspect of this proposal is that although ease of stoking is achieved by a chip system, Tazlina expects to use information from the Mentasta village use of a similar system
for trial. If it does not perform adequately for Mentasta then Tazlina may default to a more standard Garn solid wool boiler. A commitment from Ahtna to provide the moose clearing
residue at no cost other than chipping was stated in the application with attachment. The attached letter was not available for this review.
This project is for design and construction of a new biomass boiler to heat the Craig High School. The boiler will be in addition to one that is currently operational and is heating
the elementary and middle schools. The system will use dried wood fuel from the AEA funded drier at Viking Lumber. Wood supply for this project appears sustainable because Viking?s
raw wood supply originates from a variety of land owners including the Tongass National Forest, Southeast State Forest and village corporation lands. The overall annual demand of the
new and old boiler installations will only consume about 2% of the annual production of biomass at the mill.
This project was reviewed for the Round 6 application period. No changes for wood requirement have been made in the current application (approximately 1,037 green tons 30% moisture
content). The approximately 20-75 acres of timber per year required for this project, depending on timber harvest equipment configuration, would be quite sustainable for this area
of the Tanana Valley.
This project is for feasibility and design of a wood heating system and district heating loop for an office building and lodge owned by the Organized Village of Kake. The assessment
will expand on previous reconnaissance level work performed by Dan Parrent in 2008. The scope of the study will include examining the suitability and economics of various wood boiler
systems, comparing costs of locally sourced cordwood and imported bulk fuel and conducting a resource inventory for local cordwood production. The study will also compare job creation
attributes between locally sourced wood and imported pellets. At this time no known sources of forest inventory information exist for this area but potential sources could include
the Forest Service, since much of the surrounding area is within the Tongass National Forest. Sealaska or the Division of Forestry may also maintain some useable inventory data. It
is expected that adequate biomass resources are available to sustain the project given that the project proposal estimates a demand of 53 cords per year.
This proposal submitted by Mentasta Traditional Council (MTC) seeks construction funding for the installation of a cordwood fueled Garn boiler heating system for four community facilities
located centrally in the village of Mentasta. MTC has consulted with the City of Tanana and Gulkana Village Council which both have operating Garn units. This project hopes to displace
approximately 22,000 gallons of heating oil. This would require the burning of about 220 cords annually to meet the heating loads of the four facilities. The amount of wood stoking
may be somewhat optimistic given that the village of Tanana is burning between 35 and 50 cords per Garn unit. However, this depends on the number of times per day each Garn boiler
is fired.
Seasoned cord wood sells for $200 per cord in Mentasta. This supply is expected to come from vendors in the Tok area. Harvest of Tok fuel wood is managed on a sustainable basis by
the State Division of Forestry, Tok Area Office. The harvest generally occurs on Tanana Valley State Forest lands which have established an annual allowable harvest amount. The delivery
of 220 cords annually would not exceed this amount.
This project submitted by the Haines Borough seeks funding to conduct design and construction of six wood pellet boilers and storage silos in several Borough-owned buildings. It is
expected that the pellet boilers will displace 31,000 gallons of fuel oil annually for a savings of over $50,000. This is based on a pellet delivered price of $350 per ton. The borough
is working with Sealaska and other potential pellet suppliers to provide a secure, long-term supply of pellets. Pellets are sourced from Washington and delivered by Sealaska of Juneau.
This project appears to be well thought out and likely to be successful given the fact that the Sealaska Corporation already is utilizing a significant amount of pellets with a proven
fuel delivery system. The proposal also mentions that Chilkoot Indian Association in Haines is considering the construction of a pellet plant in Haines. If this materializes, it could
provide another source of pellets to the borough. Timber resources in the Haines State Forest are adequate to provide a significant local source of raw material for pellet production.
The State Division of Forestry is currently updating the Haines State Forest inventory to be able to more accurately describe the volume estimates of its lands.
This project submitted by the Fairbanks North Star Borough seeks additional funding to continue with the construction of a wood pellet boiler for the Ticasuk Brown Elementary School
in North Pole. It is expected that 20,000 gallons of fuel oil will be displaced annually by the wood boiler. The installation of a pellet boiler is expected to save the school district
an estimated $31,000 per year. The supply of pellets should not be a problem since Superior Pellet Fuels is located only a short distance from the school and manufactures pellets for
the Fairbanks area. The supply of raw wood to the pellet plant is also sustainable and is in part being sourced from state timber sales in the Tanana Valley State Forest. In the project
proposal it mentions working with the local supplier of pellets and alternative sources if the local provider is unable to meet demand. This is a plus for this project to have multiple
supply sources identified. The proposal provides an estimate of $295 per ton as the delivered price of pellets to the wood boiler.
This project submitted by Interior Regional Housing Authority will provide feasibility studies for additional Interior villages. The project is essentially a continuation of last year?s
project # 822 proposal. It will provide for a feasibility study of seven Interior villages and for pre-engineering analysis of the size and type of boilers required. The studies will
examine the use of proposed cordwood fueled Garn boiler heating systems similar to the facility in use for the village of Tanana but, the analyses are not limited to these systems.
The proposal seeks to acquire forest inventory data from Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program. The studies will include forest inventories and wood harvest assessments prepared
by TCC and will use a combination of existing inventory data and classified satellite imagery. This project will continue work to determine an operable sustainable biomass resource
supply for individual communities within the region.
This project submitted by Interior Regional Housing Authority would design and construct wood heating facilities in three Interior Alaska communities out of a total of 12 that have conducted
or will conduct feasibility assessments. The studies include forest inventories and wood harvest assessments prepared by Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program and use a combination
of existing inventory data and classified satellite imagery. Tanana Chiefs has currently assessed the villages of Hughes, Ruby, Nulato, Kaltag, and Holy Cross. The selection process
will also look at village capacity to help ensure a particular project?s success. It is likely that the wood heating systems will be similar to the village of Tanana which utilizes
Garn boilers. Many of these villages are within forested areas along the Yukon River. A sustainable supply of wood is generally thought to be available for the scale of these projects.
Three entities including the Nenana City School District, the City of Nenana, and the Nenana Native Council have submitted this project for design of a wood fired district heating system.
Toghotthele Corporation owns a significant amount of timber land near Nenana and has offered support for this project and is interested in participating in sales of the raw resource.
The area is also close to the Tanana Valley State Forest which maintains a logging road infrastructure and offers timber sales in the Nenana area. This raw resource woodshed combined
with volume potentially from state land agriculture clearings and Mental Health Trust Authority lands should ensure a sustainable harvest operation. It is anticipated that this project
will utilize a woodchip boiler that requires approximately 1,037 green tons (30% moisture content). The Tanana Valley State Forest Inventory update estimates 59 tons of above ground
biomass per acre. Thus approximately 20 acres of timber per year would be required for this project. The amount would be quite sustainable for this area of the Tanana Valley.
This project submitted by the City of Galena seeks to design and construct a biomass boiler for the Galena Interior Learning Academy campus. The boiler will be located at the Galena
Base Steam Plant adjacent to the former Galena Air Force Base. The chosen system consists of a 4-7 MMBTU woodchip steam boiler, using wood fuels up to 40% moisture content. The projected
amount needed per year is approximately 2,900 tons of woodchips which would displace 224,831 gallons of #1 fuel oil. An estimate of delivered biomass modeled for other off-the-road
communities is $175-$200/ton. Current fuel oil at $4.91/gallon results in an annual fuel savings of $523,920 per year using $200/ton for the woodchips. The Louden Tribal Council previously
conducted a feasibility study of the project. As part of the feasibility study an initial estimate of available biomass on Galena village corporation lands was conducted by Tanana
Chiefs Conference Forestry Program in June 2012. The estimate confirmed that adequate supplies of biomass are available. The estimate was general in nature and a more detailed estimate
has been contracted with Geographic Resource Solutions. This project would also be able to potentially harvest timber on nearby state lands however, detailed estimates of available
timber volume from these lands has not been conducted. This project appears to be well thought out and likely to be successful given the fact that a significant amount of pre-planning
has been undertaken. The village corporation has signed a letter of support and is willing to enter into a contract for the sale of timber which will support procurement of the biomass.
This commitment combined with nearby state lands that would also be available as a raw wood supply should provide a means for a sustainable timber harvest operation in this area of
Alaska.
This project submitted by Alaska Power & Telephone seeks to undertake final design and permitting of a 2MW combined heat and power system located in Tok. This project has had extensive
review of the wood resource in and around Tok. The state Division of Forestry has performed work to update the Tanana Valley State Forest inventory and has also completed an analysis
of wood availability within several mileage distance radii of the proposed CHP facility. In addition to the forest inventory work, Tok Area Forestry has conducted research to determine
local values of total above ground wood weight by species and size class. Regression equations developed from this research will be applied to the forest inventory update to calculate
green weight values in addition to more common volume measurements such as cubic and board feet. Currently the state is developing a preliminary best interest finding to determine if
it should proceed with a competitive 25-year timber sale contract for biomass.
This project undertakes final design and construction of a wood-fired hydronic heating system in three Seward schools. The project is essentially a continuation of last year?s project
# 834 proposal in that it seeks design and construction funds. The project was reviewed in a document similar to this last year. Briefly, in pre-feasibility reports prepared by USDA
Forest Service, State and Private Forestry, a wood pellet system that replaces the oil fired boilers appears to be cost effective with a reasonable simple payback time period. Pellets
would be shipped to Seward either from in state or out of state suppliers depending on price and availability. It is estimated that 80% of the annual fuel oil consumption could be replaced
by wood for an annual savings of approximately $117,330. This is based on a fuel oil cost of $461,794 at $3.83 per gallon. The project estimates an average wood resource demand of
1,121 tons of wood pellets per year though it is not clear at what price the pellets would be bought for. Working backwards from the amount claimed in savings, roughly $344,464 would
be spent for the pellets or $307.28 per ton. The pre-feasibility study researched commercially available pellet providers and identified vendors from both in-state and Outside including
Superior Pellets in North Pole, a small plant in Ketchikan and Pacific Northwest and Canadian sources. It also looked at BTU comparisons between pellets and fuel oil with an estimated
price of $453/ton equating to $3.82/gallon. As mentioned above for project # 921, ideally several quotes should be available for pellet delivery to the facility to enable a range of
estimated raw material costs to be calculated.
This project submitted by the Native Village of Afognak would produce a feasibility study and conceptual design for the installation of a biofuel system to heat the Kodiak High School.
The proposal seeks to explore and assess identified potential feedstock material. This focuses on the use of available recycled material in Kodiak that may consist of cardboard, other
paper resources and woody material species (if required). The boiler configuration proposed is downdraft gasification technology capable of converting locally available waste streams
into power used to heat the school. Project implementation will depend on the amount of material available. If it is determined that there is not enough material, then other sources
such as pellets and possibly chips may be able to supplant the raw resource. Afognak Island timber harvest operations could possible be a supplier of this resource but delivered costs
are unknown at this time. The main information gathered on feedstock supply currently consists of Coast Guard base info of 707 tons of fiber waste that was recycled last year.
This project would design and construct a wood pellet boiler to provide heat to an Association of Village Council Presidents Rural Housing Administration campus in Bethel. The campus
provides housing for 48 low-income households, a 30-bed aviation dormitory, and a 20-bed construction worker bunkhouse. It is anticipated that 540 tons of wood pellets would be required
annually. It is estimated that with shipping costs included the annual cost would be $248,347 or $459.90 per ton. A silo would house the bulk delivery of pellets in Bethel. AVCP
estimates $103,264 per year in fuel savings through the conversion to pellets. This is based on a diesel fuel cost of $6.28 per gallon. At these prices and a total grant cost of almost
$3.4 million, the simple pay back time is about 33 years. Pellet costs were obtained from an engineering study investigating the use of pellet boilers at the AVCP Regional Housing
Authority Complex. This study however was not included in the application. Ideally several quotes should be available for pellet delivery to Bethel since these prices form the overall
cost savings assumptions used in the proposal.
A letter of support from the president of AVCP acknowledges the benefits of woody biomass and considers the possible future use of biomass from the upper Kuskokwim River area.
The project is for the replacement of oil fired boilers with wood boilers that utilize either wood pellets or chips to provide heat for the Hydaburg Schools campus. The campus consists
of an elementary school, high school and a gymnasium each with its own oil-fired boiler. If pellets are the chosen fuel source, Sealaska has committed to delivering pellets to Hydaburg
on a bi-monthly basis shipped from Juneau to Hydaburg for about $300/ton. A silo would house the bulk delivery of pellets in Hydaburg. This fuel delivery model is similar to what
is employed in Juneau to provide pellets to the Sealaska corporate building. Hydaburg estimates $18,000 per year in fuel savings through the conversion to pellets.
If wood chips are the chosen fuel source, Viking Lumber in Craig has committed to delivering chips to Hydaburg for $75 per ton. Hydaburg estimates $27,000 per year in fuel savings through
the conversion to chips. This project appears to be well thought out and having two confirmed sources of delivered raw wood supply is an added bonus. The proposal however examines
the total life cycle cost and when considering the increase in operation and maintenance costs associated with wood heat sources there is little economic incentive to convert the buildings
to wood heating. The use of in state produced wood chips however has other economic spin offs of a positive nature to the southeast Alaska economy. This project may have a better
pay back if a solid fuel wood heater such as a Garn boiler is used in a single building installation.
This project is for the construction of two centrally located Garn boilers to heat 5 community buildings within the village. This project was reviewed last year in the Round 4 applications
and it has been revised somewhat this year. Total wood use is estimated at 101 bone-dry tons per year. Chugachmiut?s GIS and forest inventory data identifies 4,025 acres of Sitka
spruce on accessible Native allotments near Port Graham that contain an average 98 bone-dry tons per acre. In addition 10,640 acres of Sitka spruce covered Village Corporation lands
are also present. There is a developed logging road system to these lands. Using the 98 BDT per acre volume, approximately one acre of timber would be enough to supply the annual requirements
of the Garn boilers. The project appears quite sustainable based on the stated quantities of the raw wood resource.
This project is similar in scope to the above Tanacross project # 881. It is for the construction of three centrally located Garn boilers to heat five clustered community buildings.
It is expected that about 10,800 gallons of heating oil will be displaced by the project. The annual wood requirement is 110 cords of seasoned fuel wood at $220 per cord. The Mentasta
Community Wildfire Protection Plan calls for 1,200 acres of forest managed for hazard fuel reduction. Based on the Tok Management Area?s average of 14 cords per acre, a significant
amount of volume could be available from the hazard fuel reduction clearings. Fuel wood is also available for purchase from Tok at the delivered price of $220.00 per cord.
The Tanana Chiefs Conference forestry program conducted a forest inventory for Mentasta Village Lands in 1989. In the report a spruce allowable harvest of 106 acres per year was calculated
yielding over 2,000 cords. Thus, the annual wood requirement for this project appears sustainable even if the wood resource was mostly sourced from village lands.
This project is for construction of three centrally located Garn boilers to heat four clustered community buildings. It is expected that about 26,000 gallons of heating oil will be
displaced by the project. At a price of $5.00 per gallon, $126,500 is spent annually on fuel oil purchases. Based on the village of Tanana?s experience in operating the Garn boilers,
one cord of seasoned fuel wood is roughly equivalent to 100 gallons of fuel oil. Thus this conversion equates to an annual wood requirement for Tanacross of about 260 cords or 87 cords
per boiler. This amount of wood stoking may be somewhat optimistic given that the village of Tanana is burning between 35 and 50 cords per Garn unit. However, this depends on the
number of times per day each Garn boiler is fired. Cordwood can be purchased for $200 per cord for a total price of $52,000.
A large fire burned in the Tanacross area in 2010 which contains significant dead material suitable for firewood. In addition Tanacross has identified hazard fuel reduction areas of
1,800 acres that would also be a supply of firewood. The 2010 Tanana Valley Inventory Update indicates the Tok Management Area averages about 14 cords per acre. Tanacross would then
need to harvest approximately 19 acres per year to supply the Garn boilers. This amount appears to be sustainable based on the number of forested acres within the State Forest and
Tanacross Inc. lands and with the additional burned over lands. An appropriate harvest schedule would need to be developed to plan access to these areas.
This project will extend a new hot water heating and return loop from the recently completed Tok biomass heating plant to two additional buildings. A combined heat and power system
will be added to the biomass heating plant and completed in the fall of 2011. When this CHP system is operational it will generate waste heat as a byproduct. The intent is to recover
the surplus heat and supply it to the additional two buildings. This project was reviewed last year in the Round 4 applications and it has been revised slightly this year. Estimated
biomass fuel use for the entire facility including electrical generation and heating the additional buildings is stated between 25 and 35 acres per year. There would also be hazard
fuel reduction material and sawmill waste material available as a biomass fuel source. The acreage required for the facility is well within the sustained yield estimates for the Tok
Management Area. The 2010 Tanana Valley Inventory Update indicates the Tok Management Area can sustain an annual harvest of 984 acres within existing poletimber and sawtimber types.
This does not account for additional acreage available through in-growth of reproduction types and burned timber salvage which would increase this amount.
This project will complete a study to determine the feasibility of a biomass fuel system for the existing water treatment and wastewater treatment plants. It is unknown in the project
proposal what system is favored or information about the known raw material resource. The project proposal states that Klawock is surrounded by forests and that biomass supply sources
are readily available in and around the community and throughout Prince of Wales Island. The proposal does mention the benefits of Craig?s wood biomass system. This chip based system
sourced from sawmill waste could include wood chip deliveries to Klawock.
This project is for a feasibility study to review the potential for a biomass heating system for the City of Lower Kalskag water treatment plant. The project proposal doesn?t state
what system it is in favor of or the potential fuel oil offset. If a Garn boiler system similar to Kobuk were installed, then a likely scenario would be a wood demand of about 35 cords
per year. The feasibility study will include a forest data and harvest assessment to determine the extent to which biomass could be potentially utilized. An assessment of forest resources
in this area would ensure that the proposed project is sustainable. In 2004 the Tanana Chiefs Conference conducted a Native allotment forest inventory for the Bureau of Indian Affairs
along the lower Kuskokwim River including the Lower Kalskag area. This data could provide some valuable on the ground per acre timber volume estimates to assist in the forest data
assessment.
This project is for design and construction of a Garn boiler system to heat Kobuk?s water treatment plant building. It is estimated that 35 cords per year would be required for the
facility. The fuel source would be purchased at $259.50 per cord. A total of 4,200 gallons of diesel would be displaced by the wood boiler. A pre-feasibility report examined the
available wood resources near the village and stated that more than adequate resources were available to support a larger multi-building biomass system rated at 183 cords per year.
At this time due to some uncertainty in resource access and operability which was mentioned in the resource assessment, a 35 cord annual use appears sustainable. This is a good first
step for a remote village to utilize woody biomass in its area.
This project will provide final feasibility and conceptual designs, build, and install of a wood-fired hydronic heating system for the three Seward schools. It is estimated that 80%
of the annual fuel oil consumption could be replaced by wood for an annual savings of approximately $239,000. Pre-feasibility reports have been prepared by USDA Forest Service, State
and Private Forestry. A wood pellet system that replaces the oil fired boilers appears to be cost effective with a reasonable simple payback time period. Pellets would be shipped
to Seward either from in state or out of state suppliers depending on price and availability. Given that the Interior?s Superior Pellet Fuels is located near the Alaska Railroad a
potential to ship pellets to Seward by rail may exist.
This project will provide final feasibility and conceptual designs, build, and install of a wood-fired hydronic heating system for the three Seward schools. It is estimated that 80%
of the annual fuel oil consumption could be replaced by wood for an annual savings of approximately $239,000. Pre-feasibility reports have been prepared by USDA Forest Service, State
and Private Forestry. A wood pellet system that replaces the oil fired boilers appears to be cost effective with a reasonable simple payback time period. Pellets would be shipped
to Seward either from in state or out of state suppliers depending on price and availability. Given that the Interior?s Superior Pellet Fuels is located near the Alaska Railroad a
potential to ship pellets to Seward by rail may exist.
The project is for the replacement of an oil fired boiler with a pellet boiler to provide heat for Kake City School District buildings. Pellets would be provided by Sealaska Corporation
and shipped from Juneau to Kake in bulk quantities. A silo would house the pellets in Kake. This fuel delivery model is similar to what is employed in Juneau to provide pellets to
the Sealaska corporate building. Kake estimates $80,000 per year in fuel savings through the conversion to pellets. This project appears to be well thought out and likely to be successful
given the fact that the Sealaska Corporation already is utilizing a significant amount of pellets with a proven fuel delivery system.
This project is for a feasibility study to utilize biomass to provide sustainable energy for a 30,000 square foot public health center in Tazlina. The study would seek to determine
if the biomass would be better utilized by existing Copper Valley Electric Association facilities or as stand-alone biomass power units within individual facilities such as the health
center itself. The project proposal lists the volume availability from the Division of Forestry?s Glennallen inventory report and then applies the sustained yield ratio to total volume
to Ahtna forested lands. This method provides a good starting point on volume availability. The project proposal further states that operability will affect the final volume availability
amount. It should be noted that the Division of Forestry is currently conducting volume assessments on Gulkana, Gakona and Tazlina areas of Ahtna lands. The Glennallen inventory will
be applied to timber type acres within the three villages. This data will be useful in the final analysis of sustainability and wood sourcing.
This project will provide feasibility studies for additional Interior villages. The project is essentially a continuation of last year?s project # 637 proposal. It will provide for
a feasibility study of seven Interior villages and for pre-engineering analysis of the size and type of boilers required. The studies will examine the use of proposed cordwood fueled
Garn boiler heating systems similar to the facility in use for the village of Tanana but, the analyses are not limited to these systems. The proposal seeks to acquire forest inventory
data from TCC?s existing village forest inventory projects in the region. Two villages, Nenana and Tanacross are also adjacent to State Forest lands. Inventory data for the Tanana
Valley State Forest is available that provides data for additional wood source areas. This project will continue work to determine an operable sustainable biomass resource supply for
individual communities within the region.
The resource supply analysis for Huslia?s two Garn boiler system would identify specific areas to be harvested and utilize Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program?s GIS system along
with other existing regional forestry and Native allotment inventories conducted Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program and others. A preliminary feasibility assessment prepared
by the Juneau Economic Development Council confirms that driftwood can be a significant source of wood. This project will require approximately 254 cords of fuel wood which equals
about 125 cords per year for each Garn unit to displace approximately 21,736 gallons of #1 fuel oil. This resource supply analysis would assist in determining if Huslia has sufficient
accessible harvest areas.
This project would design and construct wood heating facilities in three Interior Alaska communities out of a total of eight that are currently conducting feasibility assessments. The
ongoing studies include forest inventories and wood harvest assessments. The selection process will also look at village capacity to help ensure a particular project?s success. It
is likely that the wood heating systems will be similar to the village of Tanana which utilizes Garn boilers. Many of these villages are within forested areas along the Yukon River.
A sustainable supply of wood is generally thought to be available for the scale of these projects.
"This project is for a proposed wood chip heating system for Glennallen School Facilities. The system would utilize a Messersmith Boiler System similar to the ones constructed in Tok
and Delta. The project proposal states that the system would displace 1,266,300 gallons over a 20 year period or about 63,300 gallons per year. It is estimated that 1,007 green tons
of biomass would be required annually for the boiler. An important positive aspect to this proposal is a letter of support from the local sawmill that states a commitment to provide
wood chips at $80 per ton.
The Division of Forestry?s Glennallen forest inventory indicates that within a 30 mile distance from the town center there is an estimated 4,400 tons of biomass annually available on
a sustainable basis. An average of 11.37 net tons per acre of volume is present. The 1,007 tons needed annually for the boiler would equate to approximately 89 acres per year. In
light of biomass availability, which doesn?t factor in additional supply potentially available from Ahtna and BLM lands, the project appears quite sustainable.
"
This community has a completed Forest Stewardship plans developed with DOF which should help assess wood supply.
DOF has not been directly involved but has discussed fiber supply with Ahtna. Ahtna has been very supportive of the chip fired boiler proposed for the Kenny Lake School, and would likely
make fiber available for this project in the future. Having Ahtna develop a pellet facility would create a market that would greatly increase the ability of all landowners in the area
to manage their forests for wood production, reduction of wildfire hazards, and wildlife habitat enhancement.
This community has a completed Forest Stewardship plans developed with DOF which should help assess wood supply.
This community has a completed Forest Stewardship plans developed with DOF which should help assess wood supply.
This community has a completed Forest Stewardship plans developed with DOF which should help assess wood supply. The AK Wood Energy Development Task Force completed a feasibility study
for this project with very promising results. The high cost of heating fuel and the problems with delivery due to low water levels, made this project pencil out with a very short return
on the investment (less than 10 years). The wood resource would come solely from MTNT native corporate land. MTNT would have to be willing to enter into a long term timber supply
commitment. The 2002 Vinasale Fire burned most of the timber that was accessible by road. The burned timber may still be a viable wood source. The resource availability would have
to be reassessed.
Proposers have not yet talked with Municipality of Anchorage about proposed harvesting on municipal park land. Review proposers\' qualifications.
The Div. of Forestry assisted the training center with this project.? The center has an isolated site powered by 3 diesel generators.? The plan is to utilize timber from the Tanana Valley
State Forest and other State land surrounding the site and DOF would accommodate the need for wood.? If the project is successful, the technology could be applied to a village for power.
Gasification is an expensive and technology driven process.? Because of these factors, the project may not pencil out.? ?Feasibility? would be a step in the right direction.
This community has a completed Forest Stewardship plans developed with DOF which should help assess wood supply.
S2 DG GS Comments Feasibility
Geothermal could be considered as a potential energy source as well. The Navy conducted a study from 1976 to 1982 and drilled geothermal observation holes, reported in Katzenstein, Allan
M., and Whelan, James A., 1985, Geothermal potential of Adak Island, Alaska: China Lake, California, Naval Weapons Center, NWC TP 6676, 92 p. They reported that: “Favorable results
point to the desirability of further drilling to verify the existence of an economic geothermal energy source.†The Adak Renewable Energy Reconnaissance Report (AEA REF Grant #2195450,
August 29, 2011) reports that a consultant hired to evaluate geothermal potential on Adak was unable to obtain the results of those test. DGGS recently obtained a copy of this report
and AEA has this document as well.
The proposed project plans to conduct a LIDAR survey initially to locate faults and topographical details to design a drilling program that will be also based on an earlier reconnaissance
study in 2011 (Renewable Energy Grant number 7040073) that included collection of detailed water analyses, conduct a shallow temperature probe study and to locate a number of hot springs
in the area. The reconnaissance study suggested that the geothermal zone at Tenakee Inlet is broader than originally thought and that water geochemistry from this site suggests temperatures
of (127?C, 260?F) are sufficient for binary electrical power generation (Organic Rankine Cycle). It further suggests that ground-based geophysical studies such as SP and magnetotellurics
would not be suitable because of the water saturated ground and the lower temperature of the resource. It appears that is why the Round VII proposal will add a LIDAR survey to attempt
to examine local structures. This Round VII proposal includes the drilling of two slim holes to about 2,500 feet each to collect thermal temperature data and conduct well testing.
This is more within the capabilities of a slim-hole drill rig than an earlier proposal (Round VI) that called for drill holes up to 4000 feet deep. The project will prepare a conceptual
design to develop the resource and refine their economic analysis with the primary goal to collect the necessary data to verify resource viability and determine whether the project
should move on to an investigation and development in a Phase 3. The proposal costs seem reasonable for slim-hole drilling to 2500 feet as well as the time necessary to drill two holes
with a slim-hole drill rig (about 50 days for completion).
We recommend that the applicant provide a detailed outline of the methodology that will use the reconnaissance thermal probe and chemistry data along with the LIDAR data to select and
justify the drilling locations for the first drill hole, understanding that the second drill hole would be determined on the basis of the results of the first drill hole. It may be
that after the first drill hole is completed, two 1250 ft deep holes may be necessary rather than a single 2500 foot deep hole. This is the nature of exploratory drilling. Additionally,
we suggest a summary description of slim-hole drill rigs being considered and their depth capabilities and bore hole diameters should be included. It appears from the proposal that
they will not be actually coring with these rigs, but rather collecting cutting chips for their studies that will include fluid inclusions.
The proposal seeks to explore near the village of Elim for low to moderate temperature geothermal resources to determine their potential for binary (Organic Rankine Cycle - similar to
Chena Hot Springs) electrical power generation for the community. The proposal recognizes the need to locate a nearby geothermal source that is of sufficient temperature to be economically
viable to generate electricity using a binary system. They propose a 4 stage approach to evaluate any potential geothermal resource: 1.) Thermal Infrared Mapping and Analysis; 2) Ground
Based Reconnaissance-water chemistry and geologic mapping. 3) Develop a Conceptual Model of the System; and 4) Preliminary Design Analysis and Cost. We concur that collecting new chemistry
data for Clear Creek hot springs is an important step and would show if there are any changes in the predicted reservoir temperatures from the earlier 1970?s era chemistry and is a
valuable component of this proposal. Visiting the other four springs identified in Figure 1 and collecting water temperature and water chemistry data is important as well. Assuming
those results are positive, the next step in evaluating the potential geothermal resource, after the reconnaissance investigation is completed, would be to determine the best location
to conduct test drilling. It is not clear in the proposal how these determinations will be made, and we recommend that the applicant provide details on how the thermal and geologic
mapping will be used to select the best drill sites with the highest chance of encountering the active hydrothermal system, and sufficient porosity and permeability to evaluate the
resource potential.
This project proposes to conduct detailed gravity and SP geophysics in several areas where a study published in 1985 suggested there are helium anomalies that may denote geothermal potential.
One area in the 1985 study was suggested as a drilling target. The proposed project states on page 18, under .Milestone or Task 2c ?Conduct geothermal resource studies?. In order to
complete our review of the geologic feasibility of this proposal, the applicant needs to provide details on the specific geothermal resource studies they plan to conduct, what geological
and/or geophysical methods will be used, what are the results these methods will report, and where these studies will be conducted (including location maps). Additionally, the proposal
should address their plan for transmitting energy from the proposed geothermal sites to the local power grid.
The proposed project is requesting ~$32.5 million for geothermal reconnaissance that will include drilling, feasibility, design and permitting and construction of a road to the drilling
area. $20 million is indicated for drilling of test wells. The proposal plans to design a field exploration campaign to delineate the geothermal system as accurately as possible and
will use reservoir modeling and other tools to analyze the exploration and drilling data as the project proceeds. The proposal lacks sufficient information to review the approach that
will be used to select the drilling sites in the reconnaissance phase. The applicants should provide a detailed outline of the methodology for this proposed study, what necessary information
it will provide that will directly lead to development of the geothermal resource, and provide a detailed list of the planned drilling and geothermal testing operations. This information
should include a description of the current data that indicates the existence and quality of a geothermal resource in the planned project area, any planned non-drilling mapping of the
field, how the wells will be located, the type of drill rig and diameter of the drill holes for the test wells (i.e. are these production test well size?), and how the geothermal reservoir
and flow testing will be evaluated. Additionally, it will be important for the applicant to show how these operations will change what is currently known about the resource from work
performed in the 1980s. It is not possible to evaluate this proposal without significant additional information.
The proposed project plans to conduct mostly slim-hole drilling for up to two drill holes, each to about 4000 feet, to evaluate the geothermal resources. An earlier Renewable Energy
Grant (grant number 7040073) provided funds to conduct a reconnaissance study in 2011 that included collection of detailed water analyses, conduct a shallow temperature probe study
and to locate a number of hot springs in the area. This study suggests that the geothermal zone is broader than originally thought and that water geochemistry suggests temperatures
(127?C, 260?F) sufficient for binary electrical power generation (Organic Rankine Cycle). It further suggests that ground-based geophysical studies such as SP and magnetotellurics would
not be suitable because of the water saturated ground and the lower temperature of the resource. A conceptual model has been developed as the result of the earlier study, and the geothermal
resource may be shallow rather than deep. The proposal costs seem reasonable for slim-hole drilling as well as the time necessary to drill two holes with a slim-hole drill rig (60-75
days). We recommend that the applicant should provide a detailed outline of the methodology that will be used to select and justify the drilling locations for the drill holes. Additionally,
a description of slim hole drill rigs being considered and their depth capabilities and bore hole diameters should be included, along with information on drill coring (continuous or
selective) and how these cores will be used in the study.
Geothermal heat pump
The proposal seeks to investigate the geothermal potential of the Ivanof Bay area and is based on fumaroles fields related to Kupreanof Volcano and a deep oil and gas exploration well
drilled in 1976-77, the Big River A-01. The proposal will gather literature and thermal satellite images, and proposes to test geothermal prospecting and exploration techniques including
geochemical sampling, shallow temperature surveys using thermal probes, gravity and/or magnetotelluric surveys in select locations and evaluate the Big River A-01 core. The proposal
could be improved by providing a map showing the locations of the communities, fumarole fields, oil and gas well and be more specific in delineating the areas where geothermal exploration
will be conducted. The resource proposed for study is distant from the Chignik communities (~90 km, with at least some FWS Refuge land in between). Although the Big River well encountered
geothermally interesting temperatures (~190F) the depth was great (~12,000\') and the drilling log mentions significant hydrothermal mineralization which would would presumably have
a large negative impact on reservoir characteristics. Significant spring systems suggestive of a shallower, more accessible, hydrothermal system do not exist.
The proposal seeks to explore near the village of Elim for low to moderate temperature geothermal resources to determine their potential for binary (Organic Rankine Cycle - similar to
Chena Hot Springs) electrical power generation for the community. The 4 stage approach appears to be reasonable (1. Thermal Infrared Mapping and Analysis; 2) Ground Based Reconnaissance-water
chemistry and geologic mapping. 3) Develop a Conceptual Model of the System; and 4) Preliminary Design Analysis and Cost. The proposal recognizes the need to locate both a nearby source
and of sufficient temperature to be economically viable to generate electricity using a binary system.
The project proposes to seek warm (40?F) ground water to be utilized for a geothermal heat pump system. The proposal refers to Anaktuvuk Pass as being near one of four distinct geothermal
regions, citing AEA?s 2011 Renewable Energy Atlas of Alaska. The nearest identified hot springs is over 150 miles away to the southwest of Anaktuvuk Pass. Because there are no known
nearby geothermal springs, specific details that provide their rational behind this aspect of their proposal, and the methodology used to conduct a reconnaissance study on potential
geothermal resource opportunities within the vicinity of Anaktuvuk Pass, should be provided. This is essentially a heat pump proposal, although the area is well north of areas of successful
heat-pump utilization. Because of the lack of thermal springs in the area, it is likely that 40F water would need to be produced from ~2000-foot wells. The cost of drilling, and the
significant risk of not finding a reservoir at depth with sufficient capacity, need to be considered along with heat-pump economics.
Pilgrim Hot Springs has been known to be a major geothermal anomaly, and suspected for decades of hosting a significant moderate-temperature geothermal resource. Earlier exploration
(?70s and early ?80s) failed to find the upflow zone which produces the surface springs. Location of and drilling into the upflow zone is essential for an understanding of this resource
that is an adequate basis for development decisions. This project suggests a stepwise progression, with drilling following geophysical surveys, which in turn followed geological surveys.
The surveys are proceeding under Phase I of this project, although results are not given. This proposal is for Phase II, drilling and results of phase I are needed to fully evaluate.
The timeline given in the proposal states that this Phase II drilling will be done between about February and November of 2012.
The proposal states that a geothermal resource has not (yet) been positively identified at Spurr, however, enough encouraging signs are present to proceed with exploration. This is
very encouraging news, yet more information from the current efforts is necessary to provide an independent review of the results and evaluate the proposal for funding. The proposal
for ?Phase III? of Spurr geothermal development, which is drilling a full size production well as part of well-field development is scheduled for the summer of 2012, but only after
a go/no-go decision is made at the end of August, 2011, which in turn will be based on Phase II results. Funding should logically proceed stepwise, like exploration, with support for
the next level of effort contingent upon favorable results from the preceding phase.
The current information provided in this proposal, as well as that provided in previous proposals, fails to establish the existence of a robust geothermal resource capable of generating
the amount of electricity described.? In fact, the current data outlined in the press suggests ?the temperature and flow rates in the initial well are insufficient to maintain the level
of electrical production stated as the goal of the project.? In order to correctly evaluate the current proposal, the state will need additional information.? This information should
include:
- Sustained down hole temperature profile from well G1
- Sustained and long term affective flow rates from Well G1
- Any down-hole geophysical information to substantiate water flow, porosity, permeability, and cement bond to casing. (to determine level of fluid influx into wellbore and from what
horizon)
- Any additional observational or deterministic information that could be used to quantitatively evaluate the potential operational capacity of the geothermal system identified.
We will be unable to evaluate the proposal further until this information is provided.
Tenakee Inlet (as opposed to Tenakee Springs) has the highest surface temperature and the highest apparent reservoir temperature (based on chemical geothermometry from the ?80s statewide
inventory program) of any of the southeast Alaska hot-spring systems. There is a reasonable chance of encountering a moderate temperature geothermal resource that would be capable
of generating hundreds of KW to a few MW. Evaluation of the resource generation potential will require direct investigation of reservoir characteristics through properly sited drilling.
The two-phase plan outlined in this proposal; (a) geological and geophysical studies followed by (b) site test drilling, is a reasonable approach and necessary to firmly establish
the existence, location, and characteristics of a resource. However, the proposer?s ability to identify the exact location of the sub-surface resource through geological and geophysical
investigation cannot be determined from the proposal because the work description lacks sufficient detail to fully evaluate. For example, in section 3.2 Phase I it is stated that ?LIDAR
and aerial photography will be collected as well, if deemed useful for this work?. Similarly, site-specific aeromagnetic surveys are mentioned but not described ? it?s unclear what
the target would be (imaging the reservoir?) and how the survey would be configured to achieve the goal. Additional clarification and details of the work plan, and how the information
will be used to provide drilling locations and/or indication of reservoir should be provided to fully evaluate the proposal. Additionally, if chosen for funding, it would seem reasonable
to provide the funds in a phased manner that coincides with the phases of the work: drilling to occur only after geological and geophysical fieldwork and economic, environmental, and
permitting issues are resolved favorably.
Drilling at Akutan during the summer of 2010 confirmed the presence of a high-temperature geothermal resource. This resource is comparable to that at Makushin, and is in the tens-of-megawatts
class, as distinct from resources such as Chena, which is in the hundreds-of-kilowatts class. Akutan?s combination of a good resource and coordinated management and investigation teams
make Akutan the most promising high-temperature geothermal resource in the state. This proposal documents as fully as possible the extent of results of previous and ongoing work.
The proposal itself is for Phase III, final design and permitting. This is clearly the next step, but is somewhat removed from the geologic aspects of the project on which DGGS can
provide meaningful technical comments.
The proposal mentions ?previously discovered gas-bearing strata in shallow holes drilled during exploration at the coal prospect at Jarvis Creek? . The Jarvis Creek coal field was rotary
drilled with air to very shallow depths (<150 ft) and chips not core was collected. A single drill hole encountered a small, pocket of ignitable gas in a sandy black zone beneath shallow
frozen gravels (likely the base of permafrost) between 61-70 ft depth (U.S. Bureau of Mines OFR 7-73). The source and composition of this gas is unknown. It should be noted that small
pockets of biogenic methane is sometimes encountered at shallow depths beneath the permfrost during water well drilling in interior Alaska.
Grant application mentions the CIRI proposed in situ coal gasification study and further states that the resource, technology and economics in the western Cook Inlet is unproven. This
is an accurate assessment
Tenakee Inlet hot springs is known to be one of the hottest springs in southeast Alaska -- ~175F at the surface and ~240F at depth (by geothermometry) ? somewhat hotter than Chena Hot
Springs. This suggests the existence of a resource capable of generating a moderate amount of electricity (as much as a few MW, but probably not tens of MW). However, not much is
known beyond the temperature and flow rate of the springs at the surface. Any attempt to utilize this resource must be preceded by a more focused investigation of the size, temperature,
and depth of the reservoir and the rate at which fluids can be sustainably produced. This proposal is aimed at producing that next-level understanding in a direct and simple way ?
surface geophysics to target small-diameter drill holes that will intersect the resource. The work outlined in this study needs to be done before a rational decision can be made about
the potential utility of Tenakee Inlet springs as a power generation site. This proposal is recommended for funding, but at a lower priority than other geothermal proposals recommended
for funding in this round.
[Round II comments apply] Ormat submitted a similar proposal to AEA for REF Round II, and all of our comments on that proposal remain valid. This proposal is for staged, sequential
geothermal resource investigation moving from reconnaissance to detailed field studies, with confirmation by drilling is warranted. Ormat is clearly aware that go - no go decisions
will need to be made at each stage, depending on the results of the previous stage. The state needs to know if there is a geothermal resource at Spurr or not, and Ormat is correct
in assuming that the prospects are encouraging although the presence or absence of a resource has not yet been confirmed. Geotechnically, this is a very solid proposal and deserves
to be supported.
Ormat is among the most highly experienced companies in the world in geothermal exploration and development. This proposal is for appropriate resource assessment work. The proposed
work is correctly stepwise, with surface geology leading to targeted geophysics and exploratory drilling, leading to resource confirmation drilling. Ormat is clearly up to speed on
previous work which has been done at Spurr, including the largely unpublished (at least in geothermal literature) conclusion that existing petrologic and geochemical data do NOT suggest
the existence of a persistent high-level magma chamber/heat source ? but note the unequivocal fact that high temperatures must nevertheless exist at shallow depths. They also note
that existing exploration data is permissive of the existence of an accessible geothermal resource, yet in many respects is equivocal. Their view of the Spurr system is accurate.
<P> It is in the State?s interest to know if there is a geothermal resource at Spurr, and to move toward development of that resource if feasible. This proposed work is the best way
forward. It may be problematic for the State to fund a private for-profit entity, but that issue is outside DGGS? responsibility.
[Round II comments apply] This proposal represents the continuation of a successful geothermal resource investigation at Akutan. The work is appropriately progressive ? from reconnaissance
to detailed surface geophysical and geochemical studies to exploratory drilling and reservoir testing. From the DGGS perspective the nature and quality of the work, the pace, and the
team are all part of a robust prospecting project. Recommend continued support.
Hot Springs Bay/Akutan is one of four stand-out high-temperature geothermal systems identified during the statewide geothermal resource inventory of the late 1970?s and early 1980?s.
The other three are Makushin/Unalaska, Geyser Bight/central Umnak Island, and Atka. Makushin was chosen for additional study, including drilling, only because of the larger nearby
electrical load (Unalaska/Dutch Harbor). Surface studies, including chemical geothermometry of spring waters, have always indicated that the geothermal resource at HSB is substantial.
<P> This proposal seeks to take the next step ? drilling (after necessary prospecting) to confirm the temperatures inferred from surface samples and make direct observations of the
depth of the system, and, through flow testing, reservoir volume and permeability. The proposed project is very similar in scale to that carried out at Makushin during the 1980?s.
<P> In terms of geologic science and resource exploration DGGS fully supports this proposal. The management team is fully capable and all indications are that a resource exists
and is capable of megawatt-scale electrical production. The fact that the City of Akutan is an active participant, rather than a potential customer (as at Makushin) bodes well for
successful integration of a geothermal resource into the local economy and infrastructure.
[Round II comments apply] This study was recommended for funding during Round II -- that recommendation from DGGS still stands. This is a comprehensive, appropriately sequential study.
A resource of some sort must exist at Pilgrim, and the likelihood that it is capable of generating the amount of power discussed in this proposal is high. The recent award by DOE
of funds for portions of the greater Pilgrim project, of which this proposal is part, does not necessarily obviate the need for funding from the state for this proposal.
In terms of temperature, chemistry, and flow rate of fluids coming to the surface Pilgrim is one of the most attractive of the moderate temperature geothermal systems in the state.
Because of this it was targeted for detailed study, including drilling, in the 1970s to early ?80s. Frustratingly, the drilling only pierced a thin perched layer of hot water, with
strong temperature reversal below the layer. Finding the upwelling source which feeds this outflowing layer remains. Understanding the full potential of Pilgrim requires knowing
the dimensions of this zone and its temperature and volume at depth . <P> This proposal is for a clearheaded stepwise exploration program which will gather necessary preliminary
data and, ultimately, correctly site a drill hole for direct sampling of the upwelling fluid.
This study has the objective ?to determine the potential extent and amount of the energy resource that is available? at Melozi Hot Springs. However, the only data that are proposed
to be collected and analyzed are remotely sensed (satellite and airborne), along with ?limited field validation?. The proposal also outlines an economic feasibility study of ?developing
the resource?. Satellite and airborne visible and infrared data are necessarily restricted to surface evaluation, where emerging geothermal fluids cool by mixing with surface waters
and by conduction and convection. Surface temperatures underestimate reservoir temperatures by an unpredictable amount. For evaluation of the geothermal resource the reservoir itself
must be characterized in terms of volume, temperature, depth, porosity, and permeability (i.e. the temperature and sustainable rate of production of fluids need to be known). This
proposal should be considered a minimal first step in acquiring the data necessary to evaluate Melozi as a geothermal resource. Not recommended for funding at this time.
"This project has changed dramatically in presentation since Round I. The applicant now anticipates (quite correctly) a normal geothermal gradient and that the resource will be created
using EGS (Enhanced Geothermal System) techniques. EGS involves drilling into warm or hot rock and artificially creating a fracture system with sufficient volume to host a geothermal
reservoir; surface waters are then injected and heated by contact with the country rock; finally the heated waters are brought to the surface, the contained heat energy extracted and
used, and the waters reinjected. EGS is not a mature technology. There are a few developmental demonstration projects in the world, but none produce electricity in the megawatt range,
and none approach economic viability. (In addition, there are earth process which work against the probability of producing an engineered reservoir with the high volume, porosity and
permeability necessary to host a geothermal reservoir). Because EGS is unproven despite decades of investigation the probability of success of this project is extremely low.
Additionally, at the normal geothermal gradient that the proposers anticipate, temperatures of only about 300F are accessible at 14,000? ? lower than the 390F reservoir temperatures
at known high-temperature resources such as Makushin, yet higher than the temperature of fluids at Chena Hot Springs. The total amount of electricity that can be extracted from a geothermal
system is directly limited by the difference in temperature between the hot and cold reservoirs. It is unclear if the 25MW described can be produced from a single injection/production
doublet.
Finally, it is known that current activity at the proposed site is well under way and that a significant amount of new subsurface data has been gathered. These un-interpreted data would
be critical for the reviewers to make further determination of the geothermal potential and make a more informed decision. Nevertheless, given that EGS continues to be in a research
phase and is an unproven technology at the scale proposed for this project, and that no new information is presented by this proposal to substantiate the existence of a viable geothermal
resource at the proposed site, the reviewer suggests the current proposal should not be funded."
This project suggests the use of an unsubstantiated low-temperature geothermal fluids in the lower Susitna Basin (roughly, near Houston) to provide space heat for Anchorage. However,
the existence of these fluids has never been confirmed, and indirect evidence of their existence is equivocal. Nearly three decades ago exploration wells drilled in the area for oil
and gas and reported elevated bottom-hole temperatures. However, no attempt was made at the time of drilling to analyze or collect other pertinent data in order to record equilibrium
crustal temperatures and identify a geothermal resource. In fact, the area is an unlikely candidate for such a resource. A follow-up geothermal resource investigation in the 80?s was
unable to find direct evidence of geothermal fluids. Subsequent studies have also been unable to confirm elevated crustal temperatures. Finally, recent DGGS investigation of physical
samples from the exploratory holes has provided strong evidence that the elevated temperatures reported during drilling did not reflect crustal conditions. Given there is no direct
evidence that the ?geothermal resource? which underpins this proposal exists, and there are many reasons to doubt its existence, the primary activity in this area (if any) would need
to be resource identification and quantification. However, most of the proposed activities are not related to resource confirmation, they are instead various aspects of system design,
permitting, and land rights analysis. Even the geotechnical activities proposed in the pre-feasibility study at the end of the proposed work period will not, in themselves, provide
direct evidence of a resource. In short, this project and proposal make unwarranted assumptions about the existence of a geothermal resource to power a regional space heating system
and the proposal is not recommended for funding.
It was our understanding that HB 152 does not provide funding for CBM projects unless other alternate forms of energy are not available. CBM potential in the Chignik region is unknown
at this time. The proposed Chignik CBM Assessment provides for two phases: Phase 1 ? Reconnaissance and Phase 2 ? Feasibility Analysis, Resource Assessment. The proposal does not
designate a specific site for CBM resource assessment, but rather alludes to the site selection taking place during the Geologic Survey portion (2.2) of Phase 2. The actual methodology
of conducting this geologic survey is not specified in the proposal. The basis for the proposed project is a preliminary study (presented in Reports A and B in the proposal) that lists
a number of communities that have may have CBM potential. This list was generated by DGGS, BEG, USGS, and BLM in the late 1990s and very general in nature. The authors of the Chignik
Lake CBM proposal were told in a meeting in Fairbanks with DGGS personnel (October 2008) that the potential in many of these 38 communities has been discounted or significantly reduced.
Only very few communities are now thought to maintain reasonable CBM potential and the State is in the process of better quantifying that potential across the state, including the
Chignik region. Prior to selecting a drill site in the Chignik area, a detailed structural study, including field mapping is necessary to locate a specific site for test drilling.
This is because of local block faulting in the Chignik region. Project proposers should contact DGGS for details on best approach. Prior to selecting a drill site in the Chignik area,
a detailed structural study, including field mapping is necessary to locate a specific site for test drilling. This is because of local block faulting in the Chignik region. Project
proposers should contact DGGS for details on best approach.
Based on work already being performed by the state, and the fact the data justifying the proposal is outdated and in the process of being replaced, DGGS recommends that this proposal
not be funded.
This proposed project focuses on design study and engineering phases (I and II) for a LCNG system for the City of Bethel, Alaska. As such, this proposal has no direct component that
would involve the use of local energy resources through exploration or development. If the proposed project later proceeds to construction issues involving geologic hazards and the
use of wetlands (addressed on page 34, 4.8.3 Wetlands/Protected Areas) would potentially involve a geologic component. If funded, we suggest that the applicant include an assessment
of potential geologic hazards as part of their feasibility study.
The applicants correctly state that:
a) these springs are poorly known,
b) the springs are likely to be moderate temperature, with potential for production of hundreds of kilowatts (as opposed to tens of megawatts),
c) current understanding of the tectonics is that there may be some rifting in the area. [Note: rifting may be associated with movement of the Bering microplate, which is moving independently
of both the Pacific and North America plates. It is unlikely that there has been enough crustal thinning associated with such rifting to result in the kind of mantle upwelling and
elevated heat flow associated with rifting in places like Iceland, the Salton Sea, or Nevada. The rifting may instead result in deep faults along which geothermal fluids can rise.]
The proposed work includes ground-based mapping and sampling, satellite and airborne mapping, including imaging capable of returning quantitative ground temperatures (FLIR). Based on
this reconnaissance, sites most likely to contain resources will be selected and imaged by ground-based EM, which will in turn be used to site drilling sites. This work plan is generally
reasonable, and is a stepwise way to gather information on these geothermal sites. There is nothing in here which is totally fabricated, offbase, or outlandish.
There are some geosciences concerns with the proposal (in order as they appear):
a) The geochemical survey mentions rock, soil (As, Hg), and water sampling on a grid, but not specific detailed sampling of spring waters for standard geothermometry. This may be an
oversight. However, no-one on the project has specific expertise in geothermal fluid chemistry. Mention is made of the UU Energy and Geoscience Instute (who specialize in innovative
technology, not routine exploration) but specifics are not given. Fluid inclusion studies on bedrock samples that are merely adjacent to the geothermal system will not return information
relevant to geothermal resources.
b) The shallow temperture probe survey presumably will use the same 2m probes that HDL used at Naknek. It seems unlikely that this technique will be useful in permafrost areas, or that
it will be usefull unless temperatures are collected well below the seasonal freeze/thaw layer.
c) Several satellite remote sensing platforms are mentioned ? there is substantial duplication between many of these platforms, with newer instruments making older data obsolete. Few
(perhaps none) of these satellite systems can image the small (magnitude and size) surface anomalies generated by hot springs.
d) There is no discussion of a way to ascertain that any of these spring systems are capable of delivering the large amounts of hot water necessary (e.g. flow rates similar to the ~1,000
gal/min Chena uses.
Also, the following are noteworthy, although outside the direct expertise of DGGS.
a) Most of these spring systems are several tens of miles from the nearest communities ? if these springs are used for producing electricity long transmission lines will be required,
even though power production is low and the load is moderate.
b) Discussion of economic feasibility makes use of current figures of diesel fuel currently used and PCE expenses currently incurred, and also estimates of the cost of development from
outside the proposing group. We have not seen the economic study, which apparently concludes that developing these springs would be economic over 30 years. It appears to be an internal
NANA document prepared by Kolker.
This is not a conventional geothermal project and DGGS does not have specific expertise or comments. (Summertime temperature regulation of west ridge buildings has been a problem for
years.)
In terms of temperature, chemistry, and flow rate of fluids coming to the surface Pilgrim is one of the most attractive of the moderate temperature geothermal systems in the state.
Because of this it was targeted for detailed study, including drilling, in the 1970s to early ?80s. Frustratingly, the drilling only pierced a thin perched layer of hot water, with
strong temperature reversal below the layer. Finding the upwelling source which feeds this outflowing layer remains. Understanding the full potential of Pilgrim requires knowing
the dimensions of this zone and its temperature and volume at depth .
This proposal is for a clearheaded stepwise exploration program which will gather necessary preliminary data and, ultimately, correctly site a drill hole for direct sampling of the upwelling
fluid.
Ormat is among the most highly experienced companies in the world in geothermal exploration and development. This proposal is for appropriate resource assessment work. The proposed
work is correctly stepwise, with surface geology leading to targeted geophysics and exploratory drilling, leading to resource confirmation drilling. Ormat is clearly up to speed on
previous work which has been done at Spurr, including the largely unpublished (at least in geothermal literature) conclusion that existing petrologic and geochemical data do NOT suggest
the existence of a persistent high-level magma chamber/heat source ? but note the unequivocal fact that high temperatures must nevertheless exist at shallow depths. They also note
that existing exploration data is permissive of the existence of an accessible geothermal resource, yet in many respects is equivocal. Their view of the Spurr system is accurate.
It is in the State?s interest to know if there is a geothermal resource at Spurr, and to move toward development of that resource if feasible. This proposed work is the best way forward.
It may be problematic for the State to fund a private for-profit entity, but that issue is outside DGGS? responsibility.
Chena is representative of a class of moderate-temperature geothermal resources capable of producing electricity at the scale of hundreds of kilowatts. These are distinct from high-temperature
resources such as Makushin. Such systems are spread throughout southeastern and interior Alaska and are potentially attractive targets for exploitation. However, because of their
moderate temperature and often fault-hosted geometry they are substantially different than bigger, better-known systems elsewhere in the world. Understanding reservoir limitations
of these systems is paramount if they are to be considered part of the State?s energy portfolio.
This proposal seeks to investigate the reservoir characteristics of one of these systems (Chena) ? the only one with drill data and a production history. The benefit for the State is
not the additional information that will be gained about Chena, but the additional information that will be gained about this class of system. The PI (Mongrain) is well suited for
this because of her previous experience in reservoir modeling in the petroleum industry.
While this proposal is not about producing power at a particular site, it is an essential part of understanding energy alternatives statewide.
Manley is one of few sites in Alaska where a resource (probably) capable of generating electricity for local consumption exists geographically within the community. Hence it is a clear
target for investigation of the potential of using that resource for power generation. The scale of the potential development would be very similar to that of Chena. It is logical
and appropriate that Bernie Karl (Chena) and Gwen Holdmann (UAF/ACEP) be involved in this project.
Moving forward with understanding the capabilities of the resource at Manley, and evaluating the potential for its exploitation, is a clear priority of the geothermal community in Alaska.
This proposal is a clear way forward.
The main issues at Manley involve management, engineering, and development cost. They are not in the geosciences realm.
As noted in the proposal, resolving land use issues is paramount, since much or all of the resource lies on private land. Additionally, Manley Village Council and TDX (current power
provider) need to start to work together. These issues are not within the expertise or influence of DGGS.
Robust hot spring systems do not exist within the region addressed (except for Akutan, subject of a separate very strong proposal by a different group). Those springs which exist are
(with one exception) located on USFWS Wilderness Areas and are up to several tens of miles from the communities whose power needs are considered. The geosciences merits of the proposal
are difficult to determine because this proposal and Application Number 304 (Seward Peninsula/AVEC) are, for sections 2 and 3 (workplan description) word-for-word identical for the
vast majority of the text, including such details as the number and rate of placement of shallow temperature probes, and the number and depth of proposed drill holes. The budgets vary
by an even $35,000.00. Personnel vary only in upper level management and oversight by AEB vs. AVEC. The project timelines for the two are identical for 18 out of 20 items ? committing
the proposers to, for instance, two 120 day drilling programs, both starting on October 1, 2010 (each with the challenge of a winter drilling program). Thus at least one of these proposals
is a cookie-cutter proposal not actually geared toward the particular resources in the areas. Since the AVEC proposal mentions the geothermal sites to be investigated, and this proposal
does not, it is likely that this is the carbon copy.
Because this proposal has the same words as AVEC, there are the same geoscience concerns (in order as they appear):
a) The geochemical survey mentions rock, soil (As, Hg), and water sampling on a grid, but not specific detailed sampling of spring waters for standard geothermometry. This may be an
oversight. However, no-one on the project has specific expertise in geothermal fluid chemistry. Mention is made of the UU Energy and Geoscience Instute (who specialize in innovative
technology, not routine exploration) but specifics are not given. Fluid inclusion studies on bedrock samples that are merely adjacent to the geothermal system will not return information
relevant to geothermal resources. b) The shallow temperture probe survey presumably will use the same 2m probes that HDL used at Naknek. It seems unlikely that this technique will
be useful in permafrost areas, or that it will be usefull unless temperatures are collected well below the seasonal freeze/thaw layer. c) Several satellite remote sensing platforms
are mentioned ? there is substantial duplication between many of these platforms, with newer instruments making older data obsolete. Few (perhaps none) of these satellite systems can
image the small (magnitude and size) surface anomalies generated by hot springs. d) There is no discussion of a way to ascertain that any of these spring systems are capable of delivering
the large amounts of hot water necessary (e.g. flow rates similar to the ~1,000 gal/min Chena uses.
In summary, hot spring systems in the general area are small and of only moderate temperature, unlikely to produce megawatt scale electricity. In addition, they are in Wilderness Areas,
and unreasonably distant from communities (esp. Sand Point). Coupled with the flawed and vague proposed exploration program this makes for a very weak proposal.
Hot Springs Bay/Akutan is one of four stand-out high-temperature geothermal systems identified during the statewide geothermal resource inventory of the late 1970?s and early 1980?s.
The other three are Makushin/Unalaska, Geyser Bight/central Umnak Island, and Atka. Makushin was chosen for additional study, including drilling, only because of the larger nearby
electrical load (Unalaska/Dutch Harbor). Surface studies, including chemical geothermometry of spring waters, have always indicated that the geothermal resource at HSB is substantial.
This proposal seeks to take the next step ? drilling (after necessary prospecting) to confirm the temperatures inferred from surface samples and make direct observations of the depth
of the system, and, through flow testing, reservoir volume and permeability. The proposed project is very similar in scale to that carried out at Makushin during the 1980?s.
In terms of geologic science and resource exploration DGGS fully supports this proposal. The management team is fully capable and all indications are that a resource exists and is capable
of megawatt-scale electrical production. The fact that the City of Akutan is an active participant, rather than a potential customer (as at Makushin) bodes well for successful integration
of a geothermal resource into the local economy and infrastructure.
It was our understanding that HB 152 does not provide funding for CBM projects unless other alternate forms of energy are not available. The proposed AIN Coalbed Methane Project at
Wainwright is presented as Phase III of a multi-year project. The authors propose to drill delineation wells in the Wainwright area and conduct pump testing of the wells to determine
the quality, quantity and availability of methane. As proposed the AIN Coalbed Methane project does not provide details on the specifics of the pump testing of the wells, whether long
term production testing is planned and whether a water disposal method (i.e. downhole reinjection) will be tested as part of this project. This location for coalbed methane has one
of the highest likelihoods of success in rural Alaska based on geology, coal rank, coalbed seam abundance and location at favorable depth beneath Wainwright. If not funded through
HB152, DGGS strongly encourages additional funding sources be sought to finalize the project. DGGS recommends that a more detailed plan of operations and full explanation of the proposed
testing be presented to the AEA.
This project is a feasibility study to prepare a conceptual design of a new natural gas distribution system in the North Pole area, Interior Alaska. This project does not propose the
exploration for or development of natural gas resources. The proposal states: The feasibility study will serve as the first step toward understanding the impact of a gasline to/through
Fairbanks and North Pole on local energy resources and the energy infrastructure. Therefore, the Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys (DGGS) has no comment on engineering
feasibility study for a gas pipeline.
The proposal does not state the expected temperature of water as it exits the well field, but does make it clear that this system, through heat exchange, is expected to provide domestic
hot water ? presumably > 100F ? in addition to space heat. Ground temperatures at 125? should be near the mean annual temperature (~40-45F). If heat pump technology is capable of doubling
the temperature of the water then this proposal could work. If the proposers expect the water exiting the well field to be substantially warmer than 45F (they use the term ?geothermal?)
then the feasibility of this proposal is doubtful. DGGS does not have expertise in heat pump technology and restricts comments to ground temperature.
It was our understanding that HB 152 does not provide funding for CBM projects unless other alternate forms of energy are not available. Nevertheless, CBM potential at the proposed
test site in Palmer is unknown at this time. There is a reasonable chance that methane will be produced, but ultimate permeability and saturation are unknown, and close monitoring
with long-term tests will be required to substantiate the existence of a sustainable resource. Component 2 should not be funded until that resource has been identified and proven sustainable.
Component 3 of the project description sites that 38 communities were identified by State and Federal agencies has having CBM potential. This list was generated by DGGS, USGS, and
BLM in the early 1990s and very general. The authors of this proposal were told in a meeting in Fairbanks with DGGS personnel (October 2008) that the potential in many of these 38
communities has been discounted or significantly reduced. Only very few communities are now thought to maintain reasonable CBM potential and the State is in the process of better quantifying
that potential across the state. Based on work already being performed by the state, and the fact the data justifying component 3 of the proposal is outdated and in the process of being
replaced, DGGS recommends that component 3 of this proposal not be funded.
The Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys (ADGGS) has reviewed this proposal and recommends against providing funding. The available geological data and regional scientific
information, as well as the information provided in this proposal, does not provide sufficient evidence for the existence of a sufficient geothermal resource, nor does it provide sufficient
evidence for the potential of such a resource in the project area. If other data exists that provides reasonable evidence of a geothermal resource, ADGGS would be willing to include
such new data in the interpretation and re-evaluate the potential for the project?s success.
Reject because of no identified method of accessing geothermal resouces
The Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical surveys has reviewed this proposal and recommends against providing funding. The available geological data and regional scientific
information, as well as any information provided in this proposal, does not indicate the existence of a geothermal resource, nor a reasonable chance of the existence of a sufficient
geothermal resource for the planned project. If non-public information is available that indicates the existence of a geothermal resource, we encourage the proposal writers to include
that in a revised proposal.
S2 DG GS Comments Geohazards
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone and associated tsunami. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures
should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes,
liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a
geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary
fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone and associated tsunami. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures
should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes,
liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a
geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary
fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical
site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence,
storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as
a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database:
http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical
site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence,
storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as
a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database:
http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Queen Charlotte/Fairweather fault system located ~70 km from the project. All projects proposing the development
of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis,
landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be
required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available
in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Queen Charlotte/Fairweather fault system located ~30 km from the project. All projects proposing the development
of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis,
landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be
required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available
in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical
site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence,
storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as
a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database:
http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions from earthquakes generated on the Aleutian subduction zone. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical
site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence,
storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as
a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database:
http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions from earthquakes generated on the Narrow Cape fault zone and the Aleutian subduction zone. All projects proposing the development of permanent
structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides,
volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to
perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the
Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Ground motions from earthquakes generated along the Aleutian subduction zone and associated tsunami hazards should be considered in project planning and design. All projects proposing
the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes,
active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate
the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information
on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Ground motions from earthquakes generated on the nearby Dot "T" Johnson and Cathedral Rapids faults should be considered in project design. All projects proposing the development of
permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis,
landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be
required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available
in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Project should consider ground motions from earthquakes generated on the Narrow Cape fault zone and the Aleutian subduction zone. All projects proposing the development of permanent
structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides,
volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to
perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the
Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Strong ground motions from subduction zone earthquakes should be considered in design. All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site
survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm
surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition
of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alask
a.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
The proposed project is ~150 km from the Queen Charlotte/Fairweather fault, ground motions from earthquakes on this source should be considered in design.All projects proposing the development
of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis,
landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be
required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional information on active faults is available
in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
The proposed project is ~150 km from the queen Charlotte/Fairweather fault, however given the size of the dam ground motions from earthquakes on this source should be considered in design.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
Additional information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as flooding,
earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate measures
to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site. Additional
information on active faults is available in the Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone and Castle Mountain fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone. Consider tsunami hazards.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone. Consider tsunami hazards.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Dot "T" Johnson and Cathedral Rapids faults.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone and Chugach St. Elias mountains faults.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Bendeleben fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone and Narrow Cape faults.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone and other upper plate crustal faults such as Hanning Bay and Patton Bay faults.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone. Consider tsunami hazards.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone. Consider tsunami hazards.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone. Consider tsunami hazards.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Fairweather fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Fairweather fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Denali fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Denali fault and Park Road fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Cathedral Rapids fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Fairweater fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Denali fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Fairweater fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Denali and Fairweather faults.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Fairweather fault.
Consider seismic ground motions from Aleutian subduction zone. Consider tsunami hazards.
Consider seismic ground motions from Aleutian subduction zone.
Consider seismic ground motions from the Narrow Cape fault zone and Aleutian subduction zone.
Consider ground motions from Fairweather fault.
Earthquakes on the Denali fault and Park Road fault should be considered in project design (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Lake Clark fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). The relative activity
of this structure is unknown.
Project should consider earthquakes along the Castle Mountain fault in project design (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should consider earthquakes along the Queen Charlotte-Fairweather fault in project design (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Feasibility study should incorporate impacts of strong ground shaking due to earthquakes on the Bendlebeden fault on design costs and design plan (see Quaternary fault & fold digital
database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Feasibility study should incorporate impacts of strong ground shaking due to earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone on design costs and design plan (see Quaternary fault & fold
digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Feasibility study should incorporate impacts of strong ground shaking due to earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone on design costs and design plan (see Quaternary fault & fold
digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Insufficient info regarding scope of project and land ownership to determine if DMLW authorizations required. If all development sites are within the community, no state land is affected.
Feasibility should consider ground motions due to earthquakes on the Denali fault (Chilkoot River section) for design purposes.
Facilities should incorporate design to withstand strong ground shaking due to the Aleutian subduction zone (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
The feasibility study should consider the impacts of strong seismic shaking due to earthquakes on the Aleutian subduction zone on project design costs (see Quaternary fault & fold digital
database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
The proposed project should consider shaking from earthquakes along Cook Inlet fault-cored folds and Aleutian subduction zone (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov
/pubs/id/23944).
The proposed upgrades should consider seismic shaking from the Queen Charolotte-Fairweather fault in design considerations (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pu
bs/id/23944).
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Bendlebeden fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). However, this fault
is located south of the project (>140 miles) and likely should not affect the proposed project.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Denali fault (Togiak-tikchik section) (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Consideration of seismic shaking should be done in assessing project costs during feasibility studies.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Kaltag fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). Due its close proximity
to the fault, appropriate design considerations should be employed for seismic shaking.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Kaltag fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). However, this fault
is located north of the project and likely should not affect the proposed project.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Bendlebeden fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). However, this fault
is located north of the project and likely should not affect the proposed project.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Kaltag fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). However, this fault
is located north of the project and likely should not affect the proposed project.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Kaltag fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). However, this fault
is located north of the project and likely should not affect the proposed project.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Queen Charlotte-Fairweather fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should be designed to withstand appropriate ground motions.
The Aleutian subduction zone, faults of the Chugach-St. Elias fold and thrust belt, and the Patton Bay fault have potential to cause strong ground motions at the site (see Quaternary
fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). Appropriate design should be implemented to withstand these forces.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Aleutian subduction zone which is capable of generating strong ground motions at the site (see Quaternary fault & fold digital
database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). Designs should be implemented to withstand these forces.
The proposed project does not cross any known fault zones. The closest seismic sources are the Narrow Cape fault zone and the Aleutian subduction zone. Both sources are capable of
generating strong ground motions and should be considered in future project design (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
The project sits between the Queen Charlotte-Fairweather fault and Denali fault (Chatham Strait section) (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should be designed to withstand appropriate ground motions.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Eastern Denali fault (Chilkoot River section) (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should be designed to withstand appropriate ground motions.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Eastern Denali fault (Chilkoot River section) (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should be designed to withstand appropriate ground motions.
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Queen Charlotte-Fairweather fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should be designed to withstand appropriate ground motions.
The project is located in the vicinity of the Eastern Denali fault (Chilkoot River section) and the Chatham Strait fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs
/id/23944). Project should be designed to withstand strong ground motions related to earthquakes on these structures.
Feasibility study should consider design impacts of earthquakes on proposed facilities in regard to project cost.
Project should be designed to withstand ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23
944).
Project should be designed to withstand ground motions generated by earthquakes along the Aleutian subduction zone (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23
944).
The closest seismic source to the proposed project is the Queen Charlotte-Fairweather fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
Project should be designed to withstand appropriate ground motions.
The only known potentially active fault in the project vicinity is the Lake Clark fault (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944). The
relative activity of this fault is unknown.
Active fault structures in the vicinity of the site include the Denali fault and associated thrust faults. (see Quaternary fault & fold digital database: http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/23944).
The dam should be designed with considerations for strong ground motions based on a seismic hazards assessment. A detailed site specific geotechnical investigation should be performed
to insure that no previously unrecognized faults extend through the dam site.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Engineering considerations for strong ground shaking from subduction zone earthquakes is appropriate. There is high potential for un-mapped fold and thrust faults nearby, warranting
focused seismic hazard studies in the area. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
There are no known active faults in the project vicinity. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Tsunami and strong ground motions from Aleutian subduction zone earthquakes are the primary seismic hazards at the site. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Tsunami and strong ground motions from Aleutian subduction zone earthquakes are the primary seismic hazards at the site. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
There are no known active faults in the project vicinity. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
The project is located ~17 km northeast of the Chatham Strait segment of the Denali fault, however this structures activity is unknown. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Tsunami and strong ground motions from Aleutian subduction zone earthquakes are the primary seismic hazards at the site. See general DGGS comment.
Strong ground motions from the Aleutian subduction zone and Narrow Cape faults are the primary seismic hazards at the site. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Primary seismic hazard is strong ground motions from subduction zone earthquakes. See general DGGS comment. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
The project is close to the Chilkat River segment of the Denali fault. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
There are no known active faults in the project area. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
There are no known active faults at the project site. See general DGGS comment.
There are no known active faults at the project site. See general DGGS comment.
There are no known active faults at the project site. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Strong ground shaking from earthquakes is not considered in the environmental issues identified in the EA and FEA. The project site is ~214 km from the Queen Charlotte fault. Low to
moderate ground shaking should be considered in engineering design. The Canoe Passage fault is listed as a Neogene fault on the Neotectonic Map of Alaska, however, little is known
about it. Although it may not be a major issue, the applicant should search for any studies done for other projects that may have assessed this structure. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Located in the vicinity of the eastern Denali fault (Chilkoot River section) and the Chatham Strait fault. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
No known active faults near proposed project. See general DGGS comment.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
***See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Located near Denali fault and associated thrust faults. Dam should be designed with considerations for strong ground motions based on a seismic hazards assessment. A detailed site specific
geotechnical investigation should be performed to insure that no previously unrecognized faults extend through the dam site.
Project is ~20 km away from Chilkat river segment of the Denali fault. See general DGGS comment.
Subduction zone earthquakes should be considered in engineering design. See general DGGS comment.
The project site lies ~12 miles west of the Chatham Strait segment of the Denali fault. Strong ground motions from earthquakes on this fault should be considered in engineering designs.
See general DGGS comment.
Engineering considerations for strong ground shaking from subduction zone earthquakes is appropriate. Potential un-mapped fold and thrust faults occur nearby. See general DGGS comment.
The project site is in between the Denali and Queen Charlotte-Fairweather fault systems. The Fairweather fault extends ~15 miles west of the site. Engineering designs should account
for large earthquakes on these structures. See general DGGS comment.
Proposal states that geotechnical risks will be evaluated during the design phase. Engineering designs should consider strong ground motions from earthquakes on the subduction zone,
Castle Mountain fault, and fold and thrust structures associated with the Chugach Mountains. See general DGGS comment.
Engineering designs should consider strong ground motions from earthquakes on the subduction zone and Castle Mountain fault. See general DGGS comment.
This project is close to a complicated tectonic junction between the Transition and Fairweather faults. However, it is an upgrade project for an existing facility. The upgrade should
use engineering designs that consider strong ground motions (i.e. strongly attached foundation elements). See DGGS general comment.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
See general DGGS comment.
The Castle Mountain fault extends very close to the project site. Earthquakes on this fault should be considered in engineering design. See general DGGS comment.
The Chatham Straight segment of the Denali fault passes ~6 miles west of the site. Strong ground shaking from earthquakes on this fault should be considered in engineering designs.
See general DGGS comment.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Primary seismic hazard is strong ground motions from subduction zone earthquakes. Upper plate sources (i.e. Narrow Cape fault zone) should be considered in design. See general DGGS
comment.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Primary seismic hazard is strong ground motions from subduction zone earthquakes. Upper plate sources (i.e. Narrow Cape fault zone) should be considered in design. This is a small
system and thus, there is not a major hazard risk. However, emphasis should be in securing project foundation elements to withstand shaking. See general DGGS comment.
Primary seismic hazard is strong ground motions from subduction zone earthquakes. See general DGGS comment.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
The projects site is near the newly discovered Cathedral Creek fault zone. This fault is not shown on many geologic maps. The applicant should consult DGGS for the most recent maps
of fault traces. This fault should be considered in engineering design. Additionally, DGGS has recently published surficial geologic maps in the proposed site area. These maps should
supercede surficial maps presented in some of the preliminary reports. See general DGGS comment.
The Chilkat River segment of the Denali fault extends near the project site(~10 miles to the west). Strong ground motions due to future earthquakes on this structure should be considered
in engineering designs. See general DGGS comment.
The site is over 60 miles from the Queen Charlotte fault zone, thus seismic hazards should be considered low. However, towers constructed for the transmission line should take low to
moderate ground motions into consideration. See general DGGS comment.
The Queen Charlotte fault passes about 85 miles to the west of the project site, thus seismic hazard is low and structures should be designed to withstand low to moderate ground shaking.
See general DGGS comment.
The Chilkat River segment of the Denali fault extends near the project site(~6 miles to the west). Strong ground motions due to future earthquakes on this structure should be considered
in engineering designs. The powerhouse was considered vulnerable to seismic activity in an earlier reconnaissance report which noted that the site was in seismic zone 3, a reference
to the obsolete Uniform Building Code. This should be reevaluated in light of new probabilistic seismic hazard maps and the current International Building Code. See general DGGS comment.
The Denali fault passes ~10 miles to the northeast of the project site and should be discussed in the geotechnical report. Large magnitude earthquakes along this fault should be considered
in engineering designs of structures. See general DGGS comment.
The Chatham Straight segment of the Denali fault passes ~15 miles east of the project site. Strong ground motions due to future earthquakes on this structure should be considered in
engineering designs. See general DGGS comment.
See general DGGS comment on hazards.
Strong ground shaking from earthquakes is not considered in the environmental issues identified in the EA and FEA. The project site is ~110 miles from the Queen Charlotte fault. Low
to moderate ground shaking should be considered in engineering design. The Canoe Passage fault is listed as a Neogene fault on the Neotectonic Map of Alaska, however, little is known
about it. Although it may not be a major issue, the applicant should search for any studies done for other projects that may have assessed this geologic feature. See general DGGS
comment.
The site lies just within the zone that was uplifted during the 1964 Prince William Sound earthquake. This should be accounted for in design considerations. The project calls for an
18 mile submarine cable for power delivery. Submarine landslides due to strong ground shaking and earthquakes and other causes have been documented in Valdez Bay. This hazard to the
transmission line should be addressed. Proposed geologic studies if conducted should incorporate the above topics. See general DGGS comment.
The proposal does not mention the Denali fault which passes a few miles north of the project site and was the source of the 2002 m=7.9 earthquake. Strong ground motions due to another
event on the Denali fault should be considered in the cost estimates of engineering a proper structure to withstand such strong ground motions. See general DGGS comment.
The site lies between two major strike slip fault systems. Known active faults do not occur on the project property, however the site is close enough to major sources to experience
strong ground shaking. Project is relying on a 1968 report that states that the conditions at the site are adequate for construction of a concrete arch dam. The City is evaluating
the need for additional geotechnical studies. An updated geotechnical study should be performed to assess seismic hazards, incorporating information from probabilistic seismic hazard
maps. In particular, strong ground motions from earthquakes along the Queen Charlotte-Fairweather and southern Denali fault systems should be addressed. The proposal mentions a proposed
geotechnical study that will conduct a query with BLM to see if there are any mineral claims prior to building. This is not the purpose of a geotechnical report. Seismic hazards are
not listed as one of the environmental issues to be addressed in the EA. See general DGGS comment.
General DGGS statement. Located in the vicinity of the eastern Denali fault and Chatham Strait fault. Dam construction guidelines for high seismic hazard zones should be followed.
The projects are located in the vicinity of the western Castle Mountain fault, Lake Clark fault, and Bruin Bay faults. All infrastructure related to the proposed projects should incorporate
seismic safety design based on a seismic hazards analysis and complete geotechnical reports
General DGGS statement. Located near the Kenai lineament and the Johnson Bay fault
Located in the vicinity of the eastern segment of the Castle Mountain fault, Caribou fault, Hicks Creek fault, and East Boulder Creek fault. Given the large dam proposed, the project
should incorporate a complete geotechnical report and seismic hazards assessment.
General DGGS statement. Located in the vicinity of the eastern segment of the Castle Mountain fault.
General DGGS statement. Located near the Kenai lineament, a structure depicted as suspicious on the Neotectonic map of Alaska
General DGGS statement. Located near the eastern section of the Castle Mountain fault, the Caribou fault, Hicks Creek fault, and the East Boulder Creek fault.
General DGGS statement. Located near the Kenai lineament, a structure depicted as suspicious on the Neotectonic map of Alaska
General DGGS statement. Located in close proximity to the Denali fault.
General DGGS statement. Located in the vicinity of the eastern Denali fault (Chilkoot River section and the Chatham Strait fault.
Proposed system may cross active traces of the Dot "T" Johnson fault. A site investigation should be conducted to determine the feasibility of moving the proposed location of the project
to insure that infrastructure does not cross this active fault.
Located in the vicinity of the eastern Denali fault (Chilkoot River section) and the Chatham Strait fault.
Seismic hazard assessment and detailed site specific geologic study should be completed to insure long term safety of this large structure.
Located in the vicinity of the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte fautl and the Eastern Denali/Chatham Straight fault to the west and east, respectively. A seismic hazard assessment and a
detailed site specific geologic study is necessary.
Located near Denali fault and associated thrust faults. Dam should be designed with considerations for strong ground motions based on a seismic hazards assessment. A detailed site specific
geotechnical investigation should be performed to insure that no previously unrecognized faults extend through the dam site.
General DGGS statement. Located in general vicinity of Kodiak fault, Narrow Cape fautl, and Aleutian subduction zone.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
All projects proposing the development of permanent structures should conduct a geotechnical site survey to determine the potential detrimental effects from natural hazards such as
flooding, earthquakes, active faults, tsunamis, landslides, volcanoes, liquefaction, subsidence, storm surges, ice movement, snow avalanches, and erosion, and incorporate appropriate
measures to mitigate the risks. Projects may be required to perform a geohazards site survey as a condition of receiving construction permits, depending on location of proposed site.
S2 Economic Feasibility
0
0
12.5
2.5
2.5
25
22.5
25
25
10
25
0
0
7.5
25
0
12.5
17.5
2.5
25
0
0
0
0
0
25
7.5
7.5
2.5
25
15
0
25
2.5
15
7.5
0
7.5
7.5
7.5
10
0
0
15
12.5
0
12.5
0
7.5
25
12.5
7.5
0
25
20
22.5
2.5
2.5
12.5
0
15
25
12.5
2.5
12.5
25
17.5
0
0
25
7.5
25
10
0
25
0
0
10
0
2.5
0
12.5
0
25
10
15
2.5
7.5
25
15
25
7.5
25
15
12.5
25
17.5
2.5
22.5
16
20
12
20
12
0
6
0
20
10
2
20
0
16
6
8
20
20
2
8
0
20
0
0
8
0
8
14
20
2
20
6
20
16
14
18
18
6
20
16
8
20
18
0
0
7.5
8
0
0
20
20
20
20
6
20
20
20
14
6
14
20
20
8
2
0
18
8
0
0
0
0
0
20
0
14
18
2
20
14
0
0
0
16
20
20
6
2
20
0
0
2
0
0
0
6
6
0
8
20
20
10
18
20
20
0
20
0
8
18
14
20
20
20
6
20
0
8
20
20
20
0
0
17.5
20
20
16
20
20
14
8
20
20
16
20
0
18
0
20
0
0
0
6
0
20
2
8
16
0
20
20
0
8
20
16
2
0
0
20
20
20
0
0
0
0
0
14
20
0
14
10
0
20
0
20
0
20
20
0
20
22
20
2
2
10
0
2
0
0
20
0
14
0
0
16
0
0
20
20
8
14
0
14
20
14
14
2
12
2
20
0
0
12
20
0
6
20
20
0
20
14
20
8
0
20
20
0
0
20
20
6
0
2
2
0
2
2
16
0
0
0
0
8
12
12
12
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
0
12
20
0
0
0
0
20
20
0
20
20
0
20
14
0
0
2
0
8
2
0
0
10
0
0
20
0
0
0
6
0
0
20
14
0
0
0
2
10
12
2
6
8
20
14
20
20
0
0
10
0
20
0
0
0
0
20
20
2
0
0
0
20
16
6
6
6
0
8
12
20
20
8
0
20
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
20
0
0
10
0
2
0
6
12
0
20
2
20
20
0
20
0
20
12
0
0
0
12
16
18
12
8
8
0
12
12
14
0
8
8
20
20
0
0
10
0
20
0
14
20
0
0
12
0
16
0
20
18
20
20
20
12
12
12
18
20
0
16
8
20
10
10
20
14
20
0
20
20
0
20
16
16
0
12
2
20
14
18
0
12
12
20
20
20
8
6
12
0
20
12
20
0
18
20
0
20
20
14
0
6
0
12
0
0
0
0
14
0
0
0
20
18
20
8
12
0
14
20
18
0
20
20
6
20
16
12
12
4
8
18
0
20
0
20
0
20
20
0
0
20
20
4
0
0
10
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
0
0
0
0
20
0
0
0
20
18
0
18
0
0
0
0
10
S2 Financing Plan
4.83
4.17
3.67
3.33
1.33
2.5
4.33
4.83
2.33
4.67
5
3.5
4.67
4.67
4
4.83
2.83
4
3.17
4.83
4
3.33
3.5
3.83
3
5
3.67
3.5
4
4.67
3.33
3
4.5
4.67
4
5
2.67
3.33
2.67
4.33
3.83
3.17
3
3.33
2.83
3.5
2.17
2.67
3.5
4.67
2.5
5
2.5
3.5
4.5
4
5
3.67
3.17
3.5
3
4.67
3.33
4.67
4.83
1.5
4
3.33
4.67
4.67
3.5
3.67
3.5
3.33
2
4.17
3.17
3.17
2
3
4.17
3.17
3.17
1.67
3.83
5
3.5
3.67
5
3.5
4.5
5
3.833333333
3.333333333
3.5
3
2
2.666666667
3.5
3.5
2.333333333
3.5
4
5
4
3.833333333
4
3.333333333
1.5
4.666666667
5
1.83
2.333333333
2
4.666666667
2.833333333
4
4.666666667
3.5
4.666666667
4
2.5
5
5
5
5
5
5
3.5
4.666666667
4.833333333
4.833333333
4.5
4.833333333
4.833333333
3
3
4.666666667
4.5
3
1.833333333
4.166666667
5
3.833333333
1.833333333
2.666666667
3.5
3.5
4.666666667
4.5
5
5
5
4
3.333333333
5
2.166666667
2.833333333
5
4.833333333
4.666666667
5
3.5
5
4.666666667
2.5
3.833333333
3.166666667
2.5
5
4.333333333
5
5
4.833333333
4.833333333
5
5
5
4.333333333
4.5
5
5
4.833333333
4.666666667
5
5
4.333333333
5
5
5
5
2.333333333
5
5
5
5
5
4.833333333
4
5
3.666666667
4.833333333
4
3.833333333
5
3.666666667
5
5
3.5
2.83
4.166666667
5
5
2.5
5
4.166666667
5
2.333333333
5
4.5
5
2.666666667
5
5
5
3.166666667
5
5
2.5
5
5
4
4
5
4.5
4.5
5
5
4.5
4.5
3.166666667
5
5
5
3.5
5
3.833333333
5
5
4.833333333
2.5
3.333333333
3.666666667
4.166666667
5
2.5
5
0.833333333
5
5
2.666666667
3.833333333
2.5
5
5
3.666666667
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4.5
5
4.166666667
3.833333333
5
3.166666667
5
5
5
3.833333333
5
5
5
4.333333333
5
2.166666667
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
3.833333333
3.833333333
5
0.666666667
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4.166666667
4
5
1.666666667
5
5
5
5
5
4.833333333
2.5
5
4.5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.666666667
5
5
4
4.5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.833333333
5
5
2.5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.5
5
5
2.5
5
5
5
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
1.333333333
3.833333333
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.5
1.166666667
5
5
2
5
2
5
3.833333333
5
2.5
3.166666667
5
5
5
5
2.25
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.5
5
4.5
5
S2 Other Benefits
2.67
2.33
2.33
5.33
0.33
1.33
2.33
2.67
1.67
2
2.67
2.33
3
2
4.33
2
4.33
3.33
2
1
0
2
4.67
2
2.33
0
5
1
4.67
2
4.33
4.67
2.67
1
4.67
4.67
4
2
1.67
0.33
2.33
3
4.67
0.67
2.67
6
2
0.33
2
1.33
1.33
8.67
0
3.33
1.67
5
4.67
4.67
1.67
4.67
1
1.33
7
2
8.67
2
4.67
4.33
2
2
1
1.67
1.33
2.67
4.67
4
3.67
4.33
1
3.67
5
7
2
0.67
2.33
3
0
5
3
0
2.333333333
4.333333333
4
1
2
2
0
2
2.666666667
3
0
2.666666667
2
0
1
1
1
2.333333333
2
3.333333333
3.333333333
3
0
2
1
2.666666667
3.333333333
6
3
1.666666667
7.666666667
0
3
3
3
3
3.333333333
3.333333333
4
4.666666667
2.333333333
1.333333333
5.33
2
8.666666667
1
1
3.333333333
2
1
1
0
5
3.666666667
1.333333333
4
5
6
2.333333333
4.666666667
1.666666667
2
1.666666667
5
2.666666667
1.666666667
1
1.666666667
1
3.666666667
3.666666667
1
2.666666667
2.333333333
0.333333333
1.666666667
0.666666667
0.333333333
4.666666667
4
2.666666667
4
0.666666667
0.666666667
4.666666667
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
1
0
0
4.333333333
3.333333333
4
2
4
4
4.666666667
4
2.666666667
4
4
4.666666667
5
3
2
4
3.666666667
2.666666667
8.333333333
4.333333333
1.666666667
2.333333333
4.666666667
1.333333333
1
4.666666667
4.666666667
0
0.333333333
4.666666667
1.666666667
0
1.333333333
3
2
1
5
2.666666667
0.666666667
1.333333333
1
2.666666667
6.333333333
2
5.333333333
2
5.666666667
5.333333333
3.666666667
0.333333333
0.333333333
2
2
0.333333333
0.333333333
3.666666667
4.666666667
2
2
2
2
3.333333333
2
2.666666667
6.333333333
1.333333333
2
2
3.666666667
5
5.333333333
3
3
1.666666667
6
4.666666667
7.333333333
3.333333333
7.333333333
2.666666667
3.333333333
2
1.666666667
2
2
2.666666667
2
1.333333333
1
1
3.666666667
4
3.333333333
1
1
1
2
3
3
1
1.666666667
0
1.666666667
3
1
2
2.333333333
1
4
6
6
1
4
4.333333333
5.666666667
1
1
6.666666667
4
8
1
6
4
1.333333333
3
2.333333333
4
3
3
2
3
2
8
7
1
4
1
4.333333333
3.666666667
2.666666667
2.666666667
6
7
7.333333333
6
1.666666667
3.333333333
7.666666667
1
1
1
2
2
8
3.666666667
1.666666667
9
1.333333333
5.333333333
2
2
4
4.666666667
4.666666667
1
1
2
7
2
1.666666667
5.666666667
4
6.333333333
2
8
6.333333333
4.333333333
4.666666667
1.333333333
5.333333333
6.333333333
4
3.666666667
7.666666667
1
3
5
5
3
3
8
5
1
1
7
2.333333333
2.666666667
7
6.666666667
5.666666667
1.333333333
2
5.666666667
2.666666667
6.666666667
4
3
1.666666667
3
1
4
2
4
1
8.666666667
1
3.666666667
1
2
4.333333333
2.333333333
5.666666667
1.666666667
2.333333333
9.333333333
3
7
7.666666667
4
6.666666667
1.666666667
2.666666667
3.666666667
6.666666667
1.333333333
1.333333333
1
1
1
8.333333333
2
7.333333333
3.666666667
2.666666667
2.666666667
7.666666667
1
2
8.666666667
12.66666667
10.66666667
17.33333333
16
16
12.66666667
14
10.66666667
10.66666667
12.66666667
15.33333333
14
15.33333333
14
14.66666667
16
16
16
10
12
17.33333333
14
8
13.33333333
10
18.66666667
12.66666667
14.66666667
18
12
14
10
20
7.333333333
10
10.66666667
14
15.33333333
12.66666667
15.33333333
15.33333333
14
16
18
16
10
10
10
10.66666667
10
14
11.33333333
17.33333333
12.66666667
10
14.66666667
16
10
12.66666667
15.33333333
15.33333333
6.666666667
10
20
16
16.66666667
14.66666667
10.66666667
16.66666667
15.33333333
4
12.66666667
16.66666667
12
10
10
20
10
16.66666667
20
4
14
10.66666667
20
11.33333333
10
14
19.33333333
4
18
10
9.333333333
9.333333333
9.333333333
15.33333333
11.33333333
15.33333333
15.33333333
15.33333333
19.33333333
15.33333333
16
10
18
16
16.66666667
16
12.66666667
14
18.66666667
16.66666667
16
19.33333333
19.33333333
17.33333333
17.33333333
20
10
15.33333333
18
13.33333333
18
18.66666667
8
16.66666667
18.66666667
5.333333333
15.33333333
14.66666667
16.66666667
20
14.66666667
16
9.333333333
18
16.66666667
16.66666667
18.66666667
19.33333333
16
17.33333333
6
0
3.333333333
16.66666667
16.66666667
10.66666667
12.66666667
8
20
15.33333333
4
12.66666667
12.66666667
12.66666667
12.66666667
16.66666667
16
S2 Comments
The proposal from the Igiugig Village Council to complete final design and construction of a river hydrokinetic power project follows years of work starting in 2008 with resource assessment
and continuing with site characterization through device demonstration. It also builds on experience and information gained from an Emerging Energy Technology Fund (EETF) award and
other significant state and federal investments in hydrokinetics. The community has actively pursued a hydrokinetic installation and the project team has been on the forefront of hydrokinetic
development, including design and permitting.The proposed location in the Kvichak River is widely considered the most promising for a hydrokinetic device in the state with clear water,
consistent current velocities, and lack of river ice formation. Significant salmon runs will play a central role in project permitting and require extensive biological monitoring. While
the site and river characteristics are unique in Alaska, many aspects of the project could result in information transferrable to other sites and other device types and could contribute
to lowering costs for similar projects in the future. The project proposes to use a second generation device that has not yet been constructed and would still need to overcome numerous
hurdles to be successful. As a first-of-a-kind project, costs are expected to be high. Costly device retrieval and redeployment would need to occur annually, at a minimum. As proposed,
the calculated benefit to cost ratio under current assumptions is around 0.2. Given the state of development of the technology, the proposed project does not compete favorably in the
Renewable Energy Fund (REF) process on economic or technical terms with more mature technologies. AEA examined what it would take to obtain a benefit to cost ratio of 1. In order to
be economical it is projected permitting and engineering costs must be drastically reduced, the device cost would need to drop, and operations costs would have to be very low. It is
within the realm of possibility that continued development and testing could result in a significant reduction in the upfront engineering work and a streamlined permit process. Continued
development and testing could also result in lower capital and maintenance costs. Advancing this technology may solve the economic issues. The Renewable Energy Fund regulations require
that for demonstration projects, recommendation can be made if there is potential for application in other areas of the state; the need for the project is shown; and the risks of the
proposed system are reasonable and warrant demonstration. There is certainly a large need, and potential, for a viable hydrokinetic project. Extrapolating application of this device
to other hydrokinetic sites throughout the state remains a significant hurdle. The Kvichak River site in Igiugig is somewhat unique in that the water in that portion of the river is
very clean and generally lacks debris and sediment load because it is at the outlet of a large lake. Most sites across Alaska however have significant amounts of debris and sediment
loads. Progress is being made on a debris diverter but such a device adds to the cost of the system further challenging the project economics. On the basis that the ORPC technology
appears to have limited potential economical application at other river sites throughout the state this project is not recommended. AEA recognizes that the quality of the resource,
the outstanding commitment of the community and project team, and the investment in site characterization and preparation combine to make this a compelling river hydrokinetic project.
However, the technical and economic challenges of this developing technology do not yet allow it to compete well as a standard REF project, and the project's ability as a demonstration
project to apply to other parts of the state are limited due to unique river characteristics. Therefore AEA does not recommend funding this project at this time.This project is not
recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request
for Applications #16012.
Circle Utilities Inc. applied for a $75,000 grant to fund a $85,000 feasibility study of a 100kW to 200kW solar photovoltaic project. The project would be located adjacent to the powerplant
on utility property. This project is not recommended for the following reasons:
1. 100kW to 200kW is too large a solar PV project to integrate onto a grid that had annual average loads of 44kW in FY15 unless a significant percentage of the solar output is curtailed.
2. The smallest genset is 100kW. According to John Deere, it should not be run below 30% load for extended periods of time. Since the loads are already below this threshold, adding
solar PV would only reduce the minimum loads on the diesel genset.
3. The project economics are poor. Even when evaluated with a more reasonably sized 10kW solar system, at an installed cost of $8 per Watt (less than Eagle’s recent experience at
approximately $10 per Watt), the benefit cost ratio is 0.44. The total construction cost in this scenario is only $80,000, which is less than was requested in this application for
a feasibility study.
4. Not enough detail was included in the application. It does not appear that the applicant used the best practices checklist for solar, as was recommended on the first page of the
Request for Applications #16012.
This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section
4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The Community of Elfin Cove Non-profit Corporation applied for an $88,000 grant to partially fund a $110,000, 140kW hydro project's permitting process.
AEA has the following concerns about this project, which should be monitored if it is funded by the legislature:
The population is low and has decreased in recent years. The electric demand is very seasonal. If population continues to decrease in the off-season, it may be difficult to operate the
hydro facility continuously. Many hydro projects experience cost overruns. If this one is financed by the community, cost overruns could be problematic for the project and the community.
This project is recommended for full funding.
The grant request is to augment existing funding to reduce the new debt applicant requires to complete the project. The project recently completed the first phase of construction and
is expected to resume construction after bids are advertised the first half of 2016.
If awarded, the additional funding is expected to reduce the cost of energy by $0.13/kWh through a decrease of $45k in the predicted annual debt service payment.
The applicant has performed well recently in executing the development and construction phases of this project resulting in high scores for project management and qualifications. The
first phase of construction completed the highest risk geotechnical portion of the project consisting of the access road and site grading at the intake and powerhouse sites. Remaining
construction carries less risk and designs for infrastructure are complete and fully detailed. All permits have been obtained. Consequently the project scores well technically.
The additional funding request would cover project costs that are above the original estimates. As the overall project cost has increased and the benefit has remained constant the economic
score has declined to slightly less than 1.
Recommended for full funding.
This application was initially not recommended due to incomplete prior phase (per the Request for Applications #16012, Sections 2, 2.4, 2.5, applicants must complete prior phases of
work prior to receiving funding for future phases).
AEA found uncertainty both in the technical and economic aspects and recommended CEC apply for design funding when the feasibility study is complete, as long as it indicates a technically
and economically feasible project.
The applicant requested reconsideration and provided recently completed draft memoranda from the feasibility study contractor. The draft memoranda describe a 500 kW power project with
an estimated total cost of approximately $17 million that will offset approximately 2 million kWh's of diesel electric generation annually.
Through the appeal process, AEA agreed with the applicant in that feasibility data was available and requested that staff score the project. Consequently staff scored the project and
is recommending it for full funding with the special condition that the feasibility study is completed, reviewed and approved by AEA, and demonstrates a technically and economically
feasible project.
The City of Chignik has made significant progress on rehabilitation and development of the proposed project since acquiring the aging hydro and water conveyance system from private ownership.
The ownership transfer allowed the City to utilize REF funds for the feasibility study which found that a modified project with a powerhouse located near the upstream limit of salmon
habitat had the best economic and environmental benefits. Significant benefits include improvement in resource utilization, public water system improvement, potential for hatchery development,
access and recreation improvement. Potential concerns include aquatic and permitting issues.
This grant request is for funding the design and permitting work required to advance the development which is expected to result in nearly complete displacement of diesel electric generation
for the long established fishing community. Proposed work consists of aquatic, cultural, FERC permitting investigations, LIDAR topographic surveying, geotechnical investigations, and
hydroelectric engineering design with the end goal of having a construction ready project.
AEA recommends the applicant focus on retaining qualified engineering, regulatory, biological, and cultural consultants through an experienced hydroelectric developer/project manager
as a condition of award.
The project would produce valuable information on choosing between renewable energy, fossil-fuels and energy efficiency for high-contribution wind systems. The proposal is thin on details.
The cost is high for a normal reconnaissance and feasibility scope with no met tower or other renewable resource assessment. Recommend full funding but with a series of gating deliverables
to be determined by AEA and written into the grant agreement, if issued, that must be reviewed before funding for the next deliverable is released.
Adak appears to have good hydroelectric potential if water use issues can be mitigated to allow for increased project benefits which are needed to reach economic parity with the cost
of development. Both the Mitt Lake project and the PRV power recovery, if technically feasible, are impacted by existing water reservations for non-anadromous aquatic habitat.
TDX proposes to proceed with the PRV project under the assumption that the development time will be short and that the economics are about equal. It is noted that there is a considerable
range in the estimated development cost for the power recovery project and that the overall project size is significantly below present energy needs.
It is clear from the previous reconnaissance study by Hatch that continued hydroelectric development should be pursued. The next step would be a feasibility study. TDXs proposal to perform
the feasibility study for the power recovery turbine represents a component of the required overall feasibility work that would include the Mitt Lake project.
Recommended for partial funding to complete only the feasibility study proposed by TDX, not design or construction phases.
The City of Kake's application for construction funding is based on a reconnaissance report and IPECs self-funded continuance of the feasibility and design phases. The reconnaissance
report is of good quality and demonstrates the excellent economic benefits that follow from the utilization of existing infrastructure. The existing infrastructure includes a dam with
an outlet sized for the future penstock and an existing building proposed to serve as the powerhouse. Overall the project technical and development risk appears very low.
AEA notes some concerns including an unrealistic timeframe for completion of design and permitting. Additionally the conclusions in the reconnaissance study stated further feasibility
work is required to determine whether two other alternatives warrant further consideration. AEA also suggests additional feasibility work address, in detail, additional head potential
through powerhouse, dam modifications, and turbine selection (francis versus crossflow) and the subsequent costs and benefits. Finally, there are no concept designs provided from which
to base the construction costs.
Based on the low technical and permitting risk, this project is recommended for funding contingent upon completing remaining feasibility, design, and permitting work prior to issuing
an award.
This project is not recommended due primarily to poor economics: high cost of study for marginal benefits, required long life for the investment to achieve economic payback and the associated
uncertainty about whether the resource will be available for its economic life. The proposed project economics require a 17 year project life to achieve parity with the diesel alternative.
It is noted that about half the potential savings (preheating the diesel plant) requires the demand to remain relatively the same and the percentage of hydro generation and the operation
methods to remain relatively the same. Additional changes such as alternative utilization of excess power (i.e. transportation), installation of a flywheel and/or battery, or major
demand changes could curtail the electric boiler completely (a similar change in conditions appears to have resulted in the ORCs current inoperable state). A static situation is unlikely
and the feasibility study currently underway for the Crater Lake hydro should include an excess energy analysis that will shed more light on the potential benefits for heat utilization.
Frequency controlling electric load governors, which also perform as electric boilers, are prevalent and commonly used to regulate small hydroelectric plant operation. Overall, AEA
does not expect the actual installation and use of electric boilers powered by excess energy only to be an overly challenging or costly effort, probably not much more costly than the
proposed feasibility work itself (AEA estimated construction costs to be less than $100k per boiler). The proposed feasibility study appears to cost nearly the same as performing the
proposed work. Past efforts have already concluded the potential for savings and found the project to be technically feasible. There appears to be little value to the additional study
other than making operational improvements at existing generation facilities (work that is potentially excluded from Renewable Energy Fund eligibility). Further, the additional study,
by being such a large component of cost, significantly reduces economic benefit without an apparent commensurate gain. This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance
past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The City of Seward, applying as a local government, requests funding in the amount of $725,000 for the design and construction of an ocean/ground source heat pump system to offset the
use of #1 diesel for heat in buildings owned by the City. The proposed project’s total cost is estimated at $995,458 including the cost of a major component replacement in year 25
and the capital cost associated with connecting to the new shower house. $125,000 will be provided as match and the applicant has expended $72,999 in completing a feasibility study
and conceptual design that provides the foundation for the proposed project. Additionally, the buildings proposed for inclusion in the heat pump system have undergone $32,497 in energy
efficiency upgrades. The City of Seward has experience installing and operating heat pumps and the proposed district heat loop architecture may provide a model for other communities
wishing to use heat pumps.Full funding is recommended. A 65% design must be accepted by AEA prior to release of funds for items requiring long lead times. A 95% design must be accepted
by AEA prior to release of funds for construction. All deliverables must be accepted by AEA prior to the release of the final 10% of funds.
Minto Development Corporation submitted an application for $22,748.80 to partially fund the feasibility study, conceptual and final design, and construction of a $56,872, 10.8kW solar
photovoltaic system in Minto. This application is not recommended for funding for the following reasons: 1. Per Section 2 of the Round 9 Request for Applications #16012, there is not
enough information provided in the application to assess the feasibility and cost of this project, or properly review the design for construction funding eligibility. The application
is for all four phases of construction. 2. The applicant did not document that it had reached a written agreement with the electric utility regarding interconnection standards or rates.
The Request for Applications #16012 on page 1 directed applicants to the Best Practices Checklists to ensure complete applications. This was a checklist item under "Common Pitfalls"
on the Solar Program Best Practices Checklist. The original application was ineligible because the applicant was the Minto Development Corporation. AEA gave the project developers an
opportunity to amend the application, which resulted in the Native Village of Minto becoming the applicant. When AEA pointed out that the application violated AVEC's interconnection
standards for maximum distributed generation capacity and did not include a written agreement with AVEC, the applicant got verbal agreement from AVEC to allow interconnection of a 10kW
solar PV system. The application still does not address interconnection standards or costs, net metering, or electric rates. This project is not recommended for funding and will not
advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The City of Ouzinkie's application seeks funding for the design and replacement of a turbine and generator which is a component of a larger project to reconstruct the existing hydro
in Ouzinkie which has reached the end of its useful life. The replacement effort began when the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) constructed a new dam to replace the wooden
dam that failed recently. The City proposes to have ANTHC complete the remainder of the project reconstruction.
In Round 8 AEA concluded the replacement penstock and turbine is an addition to the existing hydro project and that only the projected incremental increase in hydro power production
is allowable in the economic analysis. However, it is noted that the dam failed and the turbine and generator apparently require replacement. The pipeline is also reported to have
issues as well. Despite continued operation it appears that the project is at the end of its useful life.
The City's application only requested grant funding for the turbine and generator replacement. In evaluating the project economics consistently AEA has included the entire project cost
and benefits. The prior investment of the dam has also been included as match. AEA has concerns that the proposed budget for design work is too low. Recommended for full funding.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a significant amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project demonstrates marginal economic value. AEA believes
that cost saving measures can be identified during the design phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
Partial funding of $90,922 recommended for the final design phase only.
The proposed system offers a new option in balancing diesel generation with variable wind energy generation. Reduced diesel loading is possible without damaging under loading that is
seen with standard fixed-RPM gensets. The ultra-capacitor bridging allows the system to provide spinning reserve while keeping voltage and frequency within spec. The system will allow
for significant periods of diesel-off operation and the generator's power converter doubles as a grid-forming inverter during periods when the wind turbines are the sole power generator
on the system. The applicant has a good track record with wind energy projects in Sand Point and Saint Paul and is very cooperative in providing high-resolution operational data for
those systems.
Recommend full funding.
The scope of work is to conduct an environmental review to meet the requirements of FERC licensing. The basis for undertaking the licensing and development of the project has not been
demonstrated through a feasibility study. Per the Request for Applications #16012, Sections 2, 2.4, 2.5, applicants must complete prior phases of work prior to receiving funding for
future phases. The feasibility study should be prepared by a licensed Alaska professional engineer.
Lacking a feasibility study AEA performed a basic analysis of the project benefits and technical feasibility. Significant issues remain unaddressed, particularly whether the City would
be able to acquire a long term (20+ years) power sales agreement with the multiple cruise ships sufficient to finance the project. Alternatively, there is no identifiable revenue stream
associated with the emissions from the ships and the detrimental air quality results. The City itself does not appear to require the power and energy available from the project, yet
under-developing the resource is probably not feasible or desirable either. A long-term development plan identifying regional opportunities for demand growth coupled with a regional
hydroelectric resource evaluation is the recommended first step for Skagway.
This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section
4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The City of Scammon Bay requested funding for stream gauging and preliminary design for the continued development of the hydro project based on the recommendations of the feasibility
study completed in 2014. Those recommendations included verifying the hydrology followed by design and permitting. AEA is limiting the funding to stream gauging only for the first year
in order to verify the resource potential. The City did not provide a detailed budget and scope for the stream gauging. AEA believes the proposed scope is higher than need be and is
recommending a reduced amount of funding.
AEA recommends the project for partial funding to complete stream gauging to better understand the hydroelectric resource potential of Hillside Creek in Scammon Bay. AEA notes that AVEC
is currently performing a feasibility study of the wind energy potential in Scammon Bay. Following the completion of this phase, a feasibility update should be conducted to compare
diesel electric generation, heat recovery, wind, and hydro to identify the best mix of energy solutions for the community.
AEA recommends partial funding of $90,000 for stream gauging only. The work shall generally conform to USGS procedures.
The project demonstrates the best economic value of any heat recovery applications received this year with a B/C ratio of 1.44.
AEA recommends full funding of the final design and construction phases.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a significant amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project demonstrates marginal economic value. AEA believes
that cost saving measures can be identified during the final design phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
AEA recommends funding only the design phase to allow for improved construction cost estimates prior to funding the construction phase. Requested design costs of $75,760 (17.5% of total
project cost) is higher than expected based on the complexity of the project. Partial funding of $50,000 recommended for final design phase only.
This current application is for final design and permitting for the “Barrow to Atqasuk Transmission Line and Home Conversions to Electric Space Heatingâ€.
This project was funded in rounds 2 and 4 of the Renewable Energy Fund for feasibility study and conceptual/preliminary design. The North Slope Borough also applied for but did not receive
funding in round 7 as the preliminary design from round 4 was not yet complete.
Prior to application during round 9 the Preliminary design report was completed in a satisfactory manner and thus, AEA recommends full funding for the final design and permitting of
this project.
Kaktovik has received REF Round 4 funding to complete a wind resource analysis, feasibility study and conceptual design. That project is complete. The existing power plant is easily
adaptable to integration of wind energy. The application includes a good summary of permitting and environmental concerns. NSB has a long history of maintaining village power systems
at a high level of reliability and functionality. The budget is higher than standard wind project designs due to increased avian/environmental assessment and permitting needed on Barter
Island. The project will need to address cold weather design considerations for the proposed wind turbine. Good wind resource. Recommend full funding.
Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA) has applied for a $384,730 grant to fund a $449,178 100kW solar photovoltaic project at the electric utility's wind energy site. AEA does not recommend
funding this project for the following reasons: The application included a confusing combination of solar racking configurations: section 5.1.1 describes a dual-axis tracking array,
section 5.3.1 states the panels will be south-facing, yet the array plan submitted with the application shows fixed panels oriented E, SE, S, SW, and W. The application is for final
design, permitting and construction, yet did not provide the feasibility study and conceptual design information required per section 4, criteria 7 of the Request for Applications.
The integration concept on p.15 of the application does not address curtailment of the solar output even though KEA currently curtails its wind output. If sufficient thermal loads are
planned to allow for use of all solar output this should be described so that the economics can be properly analyzed. This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance
past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
Central Environmental Incorporated (CEI), Inc. requested funding for reconnaissance, feasibility and conceptual design to determine the viability of a waste to energy project in Anchorage.
Construction and demolition debris currently being landfilled would be used as fuel for the plant. The plant would utilize Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) technology to generate electricity
to sell to a local utility or the Alaska Railroad Corporation. The application states that the ORC system will deliver an electrical efficiency of 18% - 20%.The review team had a number
of concerns with the technical feasibility of the project: 1. The application states that there are up 2,000 tons per year of combustible materials that could be diverted from the Anchorage
landfill. However, the economics were based on 4,525 tons per year of fuel. There is concern about the actual availability of the waste resource in a radius that is economically feasible.
2. Because this is an incineration project (construction & demolition debris, tires), permitting could be contentious in the Anchorage area. 3. The proposed site is an EPA brownfield
site and the permitting implications are unknown. 4. The State of Alaska has supported the installation of four Organic Rankine Cycle systems, and all of the systems have performed
at an efficiency significantly less than the manufacturer’s claims. No actual operating data on a system achieving 18% - 20% electrical efficiency was found. 5. The review team had
concerns that the technical partner, Supercritical Technologies, did not have experience in a sub-arctic environment. The company is a small start-up, with limited operational experience.
The project scored low for economic viability demonstrating a benefit/cost ratio of 0.42.This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation
process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The State of Alaska Department of Corrections applied for a $140,000 grant to fund all phases (reconnaissance, feasibility, design and construction) of a 100kW solar photovoltaic project
at the Point McKenzie Correctional Farm. The Alaska Energy Authority has reviewed the application and determined that it does not meet the minimum requirements for funding. The initial
application lacked sufficient information to pass stage 1 review. In a 9/23/15 e-mail, AEA gave the applicant until 9/28/15 to complete the application. A revised application was
submitted, but still does not meet minimum standards. The applicant did not respond to AEA's 10/8/15 e-mail requesting additional information by 10/13/15, did not provide information
regarding electric utility interconnection standards and rates, and did not provide information on projected operations and maintenance costs. The lack of utility standards and rates
information is described as a common pitfall in the AEA Solar Program Best Practices Checklist. The requirement to respond in a timely manner to information requests is described in
Section 4.0 of the Request for Applications. AEA also heard from the applicant's electric utility, Matanuska Electric Association (MEA), that the applicant has not contacted the utility
about the proposed project. According to MEA, the project is above the 25kW threshold of a net metering project, so would require a separate contract with MEA if it is under 100kW.
If it is over 100kW, it would require approval from the Regulatory Commission of Alaska. The applicant has not provided any indication that these requirements have been addressed.
This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section
4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The City of Hoonah is proposing the feasibility, final design, and construction of a waste-to-energy facility that will use anaerobic digestion to generate methane from waste water biosolids
and other biomass feedstocks. The methane would be burned to generate electricity for City of Hoonah buildings. The project includes the design and construction of the anaerobic digestion
facility, a transmission line to convey electricity to the City of Hoonah, and ancillary facilities to dispose of digestate by-products. The bio-solids would be sourced from the City
and Borough of Juneau, where CBJ is currently spending up to $2MM annually to transport waste water treatment biosolids to the Lower 48. The project schedule states that feasibility
work funded by the applicant will be complete by December 2015. There is not enough information in the application without the feasibility study to make an informed technical analysis
or economic evaluation of the proposal. Per Section 2 and further detailed in sub-sections 2.2 through 2.4, AEA requires the applicant to “include sufficient information to allow
for the evaluation and ranking of the application.†There are many significant questions that need to be addressed in a completed feasibility study before AEA would recommend REF
funding for design and construction. The proposed content of the feasibility study is comprehensive, and we look forward to evaluating this project in a future application of the Renewable
Energy Fund. The following information is critical for the proper evaluation of the project: 1. Information from the RCA stating that electricity can be directly provided to the target
buildings and the local utility does not need to be involved in the project. 2. Detailed analysis of the cost of generation and its impact to the community energy rates. 3. A letter
of support/interest from the City and Borough of Juneau stating that they will consider this proposal for the disposal of their sewage waste. 4. Proposed disposal method and costs for
the digestate. 5. Estimated capital and O&M costs for the anaerobic digestion technology, including the gas cleaning process. 6. The assumptions that resulted in the projected energy
generations of 750,000 kWh/year. 7. Assessment of the impact to the local electric grid and the current generation sources of hydro and diesel, including impacts to the heat recovery
system. 8. A permitting evaluation. This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045,
3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
Past evaluation found low economic benefit and incomplete phases as factors for not recommending additional funding. Project revisions include preparing a design build contract to overcome
insufficient development funding and performing value engineering such as eliminating the intake gate and changes in the pipeline concept. In conjunction with AEA's inclusion of O&M
savings from diesel off projects the economics have improved significantly and the design build approach is expected to result in a net savings and faster implementation. Recommended
for full funding.
Last year the project was initially not recommended for design and permitting due a lack of a complete feasibility study. Major deficiencies included not having project concept designs
and economic analysis completed sufficiently. The applicant requested and received reconsideration of AEA's initial decision. AEA accepted the appeal and the project was recommended
contingent on completion of the feasibility and concept design work. However, the project was not funded due to its ranking on the recommendations list. The application this year shows
significant progress on the project with concept designs (Exhibit F) and economic analysis (Exhibit D) submitted as part of the Draft License Application.The Exhibit D analysis includes
avoided cost rates that are calculated by the applicant (seller), a wholly owned subsidiary of the utility (buyer), which has the sole authority to provide electric service and set
tariffs for power and energy paid by the public and approved by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA). The RCA would be expected to review the proposed rate analysis and is the
entity that issues approval of rates.AEA finds that the ability to contract for the sale of power at the proposed rates significant enough that funding was not recommended until Kenai
Hydro obtain RCA approval of a power sales agreement and interconnection agreement or, if not necessary, demonstrate concurrence from the RCA that such agreements are unnecessary. Kenai
Hydro requested reconsideration explaining that a contract was not necessary, that the project was not subject to RCA review because it was a wholly owned subsidiary of HEA, and that
rates charged to HEA would fall under the existing AEECI contract with HEA or the project would merged with AEECI assets creating a blended rate. The appeal was accepted by the AEA
Executive Director and staff were directed to complete project evaluation and scoring. ADNR comments regarding the Kenai River Special Management Area appear to primarily pertain to
the location of the Iditarod National Historic Trail and are being addressed through the FERC licensing and NEPA process. The INHT trail and trail corridor is to have a conveyance of
a 1,000-foot-wide easement to include a visual and sound buffer between the recreation corridor and adjacent uses. No permanent structures or equipment are to be placed within the trail
corridor. In keeping with the management plan, the Project has provided an alternate route for the INHT easement, keeping the 1,000-foot-wide corridor away from any permanent structures
and adjacent uses.Recommended for full funding contingent on providing a means for transmission of power from outside HEA service terriority demonstrated by a wheeling arrangement or
RCA approval to build redundant transmission infrastructure and contingent on concurrence from easement holders and management plan authorities that the proposed project is consistent
with the KRSMA.
The proposed project makes better use of the funding already approved for the REF 8 wind energy project. 65% design is complete on the intertie. The wind turbine proposed has a solid
track record in Alaska as does the applicant as an owner and operator. AEA reduced the expected energy production due to observed icing events during the wind resource study. Recommend
full funding with the special provision that the final wind turbine selection not lower the economic score.
The project is proposed in a Class 4 to 5 wind regime. The applicant, AVEC, has a long track record of operating wind projects in remote Alaska. The project scope is consistent with
other wind projects and the economics are expected to improve once site-specific wind data is available. AEA recommends full funding with the provision that a US Fish & Wildlife consultation
be completed before proceeding with the project.
Bethel has ample waste heat available for recovery and numerous significant loads within a one mile radius to the powerhouse. The existing system is near the end of its useful life
and an analysis of alternatives including a complete rebuild is in progress with funding through Round 8 of the Renewable Energy Fund.
This project application is the second phase of the rehabilitation of the Bethel Heat Recovery System. In this phase, the equipment to capture the heat from the cooling system of the
generators will be replaced with a properly designed modular system. No additional recovered heat will be utilized as a result of this phase, but this phase is critical to the future
expansion of the heat recovery system.
The economic analysis is based on the capital estimate provided by the applicant and an estimate of fuel displacement for the expansion of the heat recovery system to 10 buildings. Because
this project is still in the evaluation stage, these capital and fuel displacement estimates must be refined.
Recommend full funding with the provision that the economic evaluation be rerun at the completion of the design phase. This evaluation must include total capital costs including building
integration and displaced fuel for each additional building serviced by the heat recovery system. Construction funding will be released only if the benefit/cost ratio remains strong.
Comments from the previous round reviews centered on licensing, site control, and budget (for design and geotech). Review of the project in its current state finds that licensing risk
is now low with FERC issuing a FEA in partnership with USFWS. Also, the site control issues appear on track to resolution with a complete Exhibit G and apparent willingness by all parties,
including the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, to issue authorization for land use. It is noted that AVEC should pay particular attention to the lease requirements of FERC in
drafting leases for this project.
Previous reviews also found that the budget for the design appears excessive particularly with regard to the geotech work. This project is economically challenged and AVEC should endeavor
to develop this project with potential for cost savings a priority. AEA believes remote sensing geotech investigations would be a much lower cost investigation and are likely to provide
the necessary data to proceed with full design.
Recommend funding full design and partial geotech funding with the recommendation that GPR and/or seismic surveys be done prior to investing in costly helicopter supported drilling.
Also, as a condition of award, AVEC will be required to provide proposed staff for AEA approval of the design and geotech work or provide an RFP and award process approved by AEA for
the selection of proposed staff.
The Waterfall Creek project will allow the community to generate power with diesels off for a portion of the year and will lower the amount of new debt for the community to complete
the project. Using grant funds, the project remains economical to the community with the increased expenditure despite AEA assumed bypass flow requirements.A Renewable Energy Fund (REF)
Round 6 grant (#7060929) in the amount of $2,600,000 was provided by AEA to fund the construction phase of the proposed project through completion. The grant application was evaluated
using the grantee's expected total project cost provided at the time. The project is currently expecting higher construction costs and is seeking additional funding to complete the
construction phase. AEA recommends full funding with special provisions. The applicant shall satisfy the following special provisions prior to the issuance of a subsequent grant. 1.
Demonstrate site control 2. Become current on financial and progress reports 3. Amend existing grants to reflect proposed milestone and deliverables 4. Provide a work scope and budget
for staff, consultants, and/or vendors to commission the integration of the new hydro with existing hydro and diesel plant. Scope shall include head to spill to energy relationship
development and integration based on operational constraints and maximizing hydro generation.
The City's recent reconnaissance report on Unga Man Creek, prepared by Polarconsult, shows potential for a small run of river hydroelectric project that could potentially provide economically
positive benefits.
The City has completed prior phase work and is actively pursuing further development. Additionally, the proposed consultant has extensive experience in this type of work. The proposed
schedule is reasonable and the recommendations to begin focused study on the hydrology and aquatic biology is appropriate.
The City has started off well with this development although it is noted that the southwest sub-basin to Unga Man Creek was overlooked. AEA previously found that development to have
comparable economics to Unga Creek (as opposed to Waterfall Creek) with the possible advantage of not having fisheries issues.
Recommended for full funding for feasibility work that should include alternative analysis of projects such as the combined sub-basin and Unga Man project.
Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority (THRHA), applying as a Housing Authority, requests funding in the amount of $296,038 for the design and construction of an air-source heat pump
system to offset the use of heating oil at the Saxman Low-Rent Multifamily complex for the communities of Saxman and Ketchican. The proposed project cost is $509,231 with THRHA supplying
$164,053 in cash match and $62,410 in efficiency upgrade match. The applicant invested $28,890 into the efficiency upgrade match over the past five years and completed a feasibility
study that will provide the foundation for the proposed project.
Full funding is recommended.
A 65% design must be accepted by AEA prior to release of funds for items requiring long lead times. A 95% design must be accepted by AEA prior to release of funds for construction. All
deliverables must be accepted by AEA prior to the release of the final 10% of funds.
The Klawock City School District proposes the design and construction of a chip fueled boiler to heat two school buildings in the City of Klawock. Wood chips would be provided by the
local lumber mill in Klawock that currently provides chips to the City of Craig biomass heating system. This project could replace approximately 16,200 gallons of heating fuel a year
with a local fuel source.
While the economics of this project are good, the engineering will be challenging due to the site constraints. The project could benefit from a more in-depth analysis of the project
and fuel storage siting, equipment layout, and equipment specifications.
Recommend partial funding of $111,986 for the development of final design and a business/operating plan.
AEA believes that it is too early in the conceptual design process to lock in the EWT-52m/500kW wind turbine option, as presented by the applicant. Without an intertie to Ambler, the
combined load for Shungnak and Kobuk are not large enough to support more than 400kW of wind power without designing very complex controls. The Shungnak power plant is not currently
scheduled for upgrades that would facilitate variable wind energy. The most significant factor influencing the developability of this project is the recent low river levels and resultant
unpredictable barge deliveries that have not happened in the past few years. The project would need to incorporate turbines, materials and construction equipment that could be mobilized
through alternate methods - likely by air cargo. This might eliminate larger turbines that offer better economies of scale and would add costs that are well above existing benchmarks.
In addition to the standard deliverables in AEA's wind Guidelines for Conceptual Design Reports (CDR), the applicant should address the logistical challenges that are unique to this
location in the CDR. The CDR should also focus heavily on the existing diesel generation and intertie system constraints. While AEA will want to take a cautious approach to this project,
the funding is to examine the feasibility of a potential wind project in a community with very high energy costs. Per the May 2015 REFAC meeting and the Round 9 request for applications,
the REF program is seeking to fund a greater percentage of early project development to help communities determine if projects are feasible and economically beneficial.
AEA recommends full funding for phase 2 conceptual design phase with special provisions that the conceptual design adequately address all the factors listed above to determine the feasibility
of the project prior to advancing to future phases (final design and construction). If a grant is issued, AEA will set milestones for the grantee to achieve--in order--prior to advancing
to next milestones to ensure productive use of state funding should any of the challenges prove unfeasible. In the event that a go/no-go point stops the project, remaining funds will
be returned to the Renewable Energy Fund, per program regulations.
ANTHC and the City of Huslia proposed the Final Design and Construction of a manually fed cordwood heating system to serve the Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plant in Huslia,
Alaska. The project is estimated to save the Clinic and Water Treatment Plant 8,474 gallons of heating oil per year.
The economics of this project are challenging, but there has been significant community involvement in the initial planning of the fuel supply. The community champion has attended biomass
workshops and is knowledgeable of the proposed system.
Recommend partial funding of $53,116 to complete the design phase only and work to improve the economics of the project.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a significant amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project demonstrates marginal economic value. AEA believes
that cost saving measures can be identified during the final design phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
AEA recommends funding only the design phase to allow for improved construction cost estimates prior to funding the construction phase. Requested design cost of $68,262 (21% of total
project cost) is higher than expected based on the complexity of the project. Partial funding of $50,000 is recommended for final design phase only.
ANTHC and the City of Ambler propose the final design and construction of a cordwood fueled biomass heating system to serve the Washeteria and City Office building in Ambler. The proposed
biomass heating system would be manually fed and housed in a prefabricated building. The system is anticipated to displace 3,516 gallons of heating fuel per year. The request is a continuation
of a Round 2 grant, "Upper Kobuk River Biomass".
The economics of this project are marginal but there is opportunity to reduce the overall cost of the project. The design phase should focus on a lowering the cost of installation. The
community must also develop an acceptable operations and maintenance plan for this project, including contingencies for staffing and wood supply.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that no construction funding be released until the final design and business/operating plan is approved.
This proposed hydro project may provide significant benefits but at a very high cost. Additional review of the feasibility study and conceptual design, with additional focus on the Kogoluktuk
development, should be performed as part of the next step in development.
The project is recommended for full funding with the condition NANA and its subsidiaries hire an industry recognized consultant with relevant hydroelectric project experience to perform
the development work.
The proposal to use wastewater effluent as a source for a heat pump system is a compelling use of an otherwise unused heat source, and could serve as a model for similar systems in other
parts of the state. The high temperature and availability of effluent would result in a higher heat pump coefficient of performance (COP) than seen in other heat pump installations
in the state. This project has been recommended for funding in the past two years.
Full funding recommended.
Chugach Electric's application for a 500kW solar garden project is recommended for funding at 50% of the requested level. The applicant requested a $100,000 grant to match $100,000 in
a cash contribution from Chugach Electric. However, AEA has determined that the applicant should be able to complete the proposed feasibility study, conceptual design and cost estimate
for $100,000. If the grant is awarded, the scope will reference the phase 2 Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design Requirements described in Section 2.2.4 of the Round 9 Request
For Applications.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough requests funding for the feasibility and design of a pellet fueled biomass heating system for five buildings: Schoenbar Middle School, Valley Park School,
the Gateway Recreation/Aquatic Centers (two buildings) and the School District Maintenance Facility. The project is estimated to displace up to 95% of their current annual heating fuels
- 75,000 gallons of fuel oil and 4,542,000 kWh.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough received funding through the US Forest Service to complete the design of the Ketchikan High School and have requested construction funding. They have demonstrated
their capability with the installation, operation, and maintenance of pellet systems through their library installation. The Borough is completing the construction of a pellet boiler
for the airport complex with funding through the Renewable Energy Fund – Round 7. Ketchikan is an example of the effective use of pellet heating to stem the conversions to resistance
heating that are occurring due to the low cost of hydroelectric generation.
Although the economics of this project are challenging, there are opportunities in the feasibility phase to identify an economically viable option. The project scores low in the REF
economics evaluation because there is no value assigned to displacing hydro power so 95 percent of displacement at the aquatic center is not counted in the calculation of economics
score.
Recommend partial funding of $40,000 for a feasibility study.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough requests funding for the construction of a pellet fueled biomass heating system for the Ketchikan High School. The project is estimated to displace 89,146
gallons of fuel/year. The Ketchikan Gateway Borough received funding through the US Forest Service to complete the design of this system. They have demonstrated their capability with
the installation, operation, and maintenance of pellet systems through their library installation. = The Borough is completing the construction of a pellet boiler for the airport complex,
with funding through the Renewable Energy Fund – Round 7. = Ketchikan is an example of the effective use of pellet heating to stem the conversions to resistance heating that are occurring
due to the low cost of hydroelectric generation.
Recommend full funding for construction with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design and the final business/operational plan.
UTE applied for grant funding in round 8 and was recommended for funding after reconsideration. AEAs concern in round 8 primarily related to an incomplete design and limited hydrology
data. AEA still has the same concerns with the round 9 application but is recommending the project for award due in large part to the expectation that outstanding deficiencies will
be addressed in the near future (AEA performed a detailed evaluation using more conservative hydrology information and found that the project is still economically viable).
In the last year UTE was awarded a USDA grant that will provide the matching funds allowing them to use the outstanding round 7 award and APT has advanced the project further by extending
transmission lines from Tok to Tanacross and conducting additional hydrology work with the installation of stage recorders at 3 locations on Yerrick Creek.
As a condition of award, UTE is still required to address the deficiencies noted in round 8 and it is expected the round 7 award will be utilized for this purpose. The outstanding deficiencies
include providing complete design drawings (the current drawings are not complete) including addressing the intake geotechnical conditions, hydraulic design, and winter operation and
also performing additional stream and hydrology analysis to verify the economic feasibility of the project and optimize hydraulic capacity and turbine selection.
UTEs application is recommended for full funding conditioned on UTE completing the work above and providing a complete design and permit package generally conforming with AEAs best practices
and including a one line electrical drawing of existing and proposed electric system, property boundary drawing for existing and proposed with a proposed boundary description and generally
conforming with FERC Exhibit G requirements, project engineering drawings generally conforming with industry standards and FERC Exhibit F requirements, and a design report with calculations
and other information pertinent to the project design generally in conformance with industry standards and FERC requirements.
AEA is currently considering a change to an existing Renewable Energy Fund grant to ORPC allowing a requested location move of the round 4 REF award for Cook Inlet TidGen Project to
False Pass for feasibility, conceptual design, final design, permitting and construction of a TidGen tidal hydrokinetic device. The scope of work for the existing grant overlaps with
this REF round 9 requested funding for the feasibility phase, and is therefore not recommended.
A round 9 application was also received and recommended by AEA to conduct a hydroelectric feasibility study and conceptual design for a run-of-river hydroelectric for Unga Man Creek,
which has the potential to meet most of the electric needs of False Pass. The REF process allows for simultaneous funding of feasibility studies for competing projects, but will ultimately
not fund two construction-phase projects that serve the same need (RFA 16012, Section 4, Stage 3, Criteria 8).
AEA recommends allowing for controlled development of both the hydro and hydrokinetic projects through the feasibility stage to determine which project or combination of projects is
most cost effective and provides the greatest public benefit for the community. This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process
per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
AP&T's reconnaissance study indicates this project may be economical despite the very low population and energy demand in Whale Pass. The application indicates that demand is expected
to increase because several residents in Whale Pass lack connection to the local utility.
AEA recommends feasibility analysis to include assessment of project size and economics for offsetting heat demand and the growth potential for the community followed by design and permitting
if warranted.
The primary concerns for this project relate to the need for power and the timing and quantity of hydroelectric resources including the Yerrick Creek project. At this stage quantifying
the resource potential and understanding the Yerrick Creek resource better through stream flow measurements is recommended before undertaking environmental resource studies on Clearwater
Creek.
AEA performed an analysis of the combined Yerrick Creek and Clearwater Creek projects with dispatch priority given to Yerrick and load growth considered. The results indicated that about
1.7 GWh (in 2021) could be utilized to offset diesel generation because of the limits of demand.
Overall, the project may be viable but improved reconnaissance analysis should be included in future applications with technical and conceptual development followed by focused environmental
studies.
AEA scored this project assuming a recommendation for partial funding for stream gauging (tasks 2 and 3, $69k total cost), however the project did not pass minimum stage 2 score of 40
points. The primary reason for not passing stage 2 is the low benefit cost ratio of 0.74.
This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF statutes and regulations (AS 42.45.045, 3 AAC 107.600-695), and per Section
4 of the Request for Applications #16012.
The Prince of Wales Island is an isolated grid with existing and planned hydroelectric resources. The construction of the Hiilangaay (Reynolds) Hydro is expected to be complete in the
next few years. The total hydroelectric generation capacity on Prince of Wales Island will exceed the demand for many years in the future negating the need for the energy from this
project. While this project's energy could be used for building heating, the energy production is low, AEA estimates it would cost approximately the same as heating fuels (benefit/cost
ratio 1.07), and the projects complexities increase risk to the water system operations. Due to these reasons, this project is not recommended for funding.
Additional concerns with this project include the long pipeline, potentially damaging transient pressures, and maintaining water system operation. If the applicant pursues the project
with other funds, AEA recommends conducting a feasibility study first with particular focus on the operational modeling including transient pressure analysis from the combined water/power
generation system operation.
This project is not recommended for funding and will not advance past Stage 2 of the evaluation process per REF regulation 3 AAC 107.645(b), and per Section 4 of the Request for Applications
#16012.
This project is expected to significantly increase the average annual hydroelectric energy generation at the existing Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project at a relatively low cost because
the project addition is for construction of access and diversion works only (the existing generation infrastructure remains unchanged). The geotechnical investigation is required to
advance the project through the FERC permitting and the final design phase of project development. Kodiak Electric currently meets all of their electrical demand with existing renewable
energy resources. Demand growth is expected to reach the point where the additional energy from this proposed project addition would be fully utilized in about 10 years. The basis for
recommending award is primarily the significant benefits if demand growth occurs. It is noted that if load growth does not materialize the project increases the cost of power. Other
options for meeting minor demand would be to invest in energy efficiency measures.
A condition of award is to provide AEA for review an updated feasibility study addressing need for power, alternatives (including energy efficiency), demand projections by type/industry
(including electric heat and transportation conversion), fuel costs, hydrology, diversion operation reliability, and other factors necessary to evaluate the project economics. As a
condition of award the scope of work shall include a project management plan, evidence of permit acquisition, health and safety plans, work plan covering execution on site (with contingencies)
and data collection and reporting, hazard analysis and spill prevention plans, environmental compliance and onsite safety/health monitoring, quality control and assurance plan, and
weekly reporting during onsite activity. The above requirements shall flow down to consultants and contractors as well.
Unalaska proposes to modify its water supply system to incorporate a power recovery turbine in lieu of a pressure reducing valve. AEA received similar proposals from 2 other REF applicants
this year. Unalaska's application was the most advanced with a study dedicated to such a proposal.
The preliminary economics for these types of projects looks positive but there are technical challenges that must be addressed. A turbines hydraulic behavior is significantly different
than a pressure reducing valve. Understanding how the turbine will interact with the combined water supply and power generation system (particularly under load rejection) is a difficult
task and will require specialized analysis.
AEA recommends partially funding the feasibility and final design phases of this project to better understand operation of power recovery turbine and PRV under varying flow conditions
and events such as load rejection. The study should include evaluation of traditional hydroelectric alternatives utilizing the same resource. AEA also recommends Unalaska evaluate other
potential hydroelectric resources in the region.
AEA finds that this project, while creative in its attempt to leverage federal incentives, is not a good fit within the Renewable Energy Fund. The project did not pass Stage 1 review.Under
the Stage 1 eligibility review, and in accordance with 3 AAC 107.610, an applicant must be an eligible applicant defined in AS 42.45.045(l) and will own the renewable energy project.
While Homer Electric Association is an eligible applicant, the owners identified in the application will be a group of 34 member shareholders. The Authority may authorize the conveyance
of an ownership interest to an eligible applicant if the Authority determines that the conveyance protects the public interest and benefit provided by the grant. Individual shareholders
are not eligible applicants and the public benefit would not serve the public, rather a small set of individual owners.
The City of Chignik using the services of CE2 Engineers and Hatch produced a feasibility study for a hydro project on Indian Creek. The $207,500 in funding for the feasibility study
came from previous REF. As required by the previous grants the City received control and ownership of the hydro resource from NorQuest Seafoods owned by Trident Sea Foods. Water rights
for up to 18 cfs will need to be requested above the existing 2.7 cfs. The existing dam and penstock have historical significance. They will require studies and documentation before
they can be considered for removal. Easements will be required for new facilities from the City. LIDAR mapping, stream gauging and geotechnical investigations will be needed. Potential
issues with FERC, SHPO and DNR must be resolved as early as possible. Include upgrades at the existing diesel powerhouse to integrate the hydro power and their associated construction
costs. The design must maximize the use of the excess hydro by additional sales to the local processor or by heating fuel displacement and include any additional construction cost.
Recommend for full funding with the special provision of receiving a detailed design budget and a list of the proposed consultants prior to grant execution.
This application was submitted for construction funding. However, permits, land use authorization, construction ready design and specifications, final design cost estimate and an updated
business plan need to be completed prior to consideration for construction funding, per the AEA Request for Applications 15003 section 2.2 to 2.6.
No funding recommended.
The Port Graham Village Council proposes the construction of a cordwood fired biomass boiler system to supply a small district heating system consisting of four buildings: community
hall; the clinic/police; an office; and a shop. The system would displace 5,365 gallons of fuel oil per year. The design and business/operating plan were funded in Round IV of the Renewable
Energy Fund for $75,000. The project also received $127,640 from the US Department of Energy for design and permitting activities. The economics of this project are very challenging
due mostly to the small amount of fuel that will be displaced and resulting in a benefit/cost ratio of 0.36. The applicant submitted additional heat loads that could be added to the
system at the time they appealed AEA's decision to not fund the project. The integration costs associated with these loads was not included. The project B/C ratio would still be less
than 1.0 with the additional loads, and even lower with the additional integration costs. This proposed change did not elevate the stage 2 score above the minimum threshold.
No funding recommended. Did not pass stage 2.
This project shows a very good economic payback and much of the design work is already complete. The wind turbines have been operating for more than two years and there is an established
performance baseline on which to model and design the secondary load system. Applicant has submitted a year (2012) of electrical load data along with wind turbine speed, a HOMER modeling
file and hourly modeling of excess electricity. Additional high-resolution data (1-second interval) has been made available to study power quality with the existing system to identify
if other factors need to be addressed in the final design. An earlier power sales agreement between the utility and the city is no longer in place. A new power sales agreement will
be needed with the city and with the school/borough prior to allocation of construction funds. A 65% design has been completed for a 100KW electric boiler at the Sand Point health center
and 500KW electric boiler at the school. AEA will need to accept the final design prior to release of any construction funds. Recommend full funding.
AEA recommends continued feasibility work consistent with the reconnaissance study. TDX’s application is focused on the smaller of the two hydroelectric options identified. In order
to fully address the feasibility of hydro development in Adak it is recommended that the scope of work and budget be increased to examine all recommendations in the reconnaissance report.
Specific recommendations include performing feasibility level studies to further evaluate future load growth (or decline) along with fish processor loads, perform hydrology data collection
and analysis, develop more detailed project cost estimates, and provide project capacity and storage recommendations with concept designs. Additional requirements for this phase include
aquatic investigations and review of environmental flow restrictions, agency consultation, appropriate permitting investigations, and coordination with other community rehabilitation
efforts particularly related to water and energy use. AEA recommends funding of $390,000 to complete a larger scope of work to include stream gauging, mapping, additional aquatic investigations,
data collection as necessary, energy and economic modeling, concept designs, preliminary design criteria, initial agency consultation, and final recommendations for design and permitting.
Recommended for funding with the special provision that additional funding be used to expand the scope of the feasibility study as described above.
The Hoonah Indian Association proposes feasibility and conceptual design for a district heating loop for Hoonah School/pool, autoshop/carving shed, Boys and Girls Club, HIA Cookhouse,
Headstart, city hall, and a large privately owned commercial building (apartments, laundry, and store). This heating loop would be operated as a heat utility by HIA and could displace
up to 32,000 of heating fuel annually.The community of Hoonah has developed a collaborative for energy planning and biomass development and is demonstrating initiative to understand
potential biomass solutions to their high heating costs.
Recommend full funding.
A REF Round 6 grant (#7060978) in the amount of $3,300,000 funded complete construction of the proposed hydro facility. The grantee is seeking an additional grant of $977,000.
The proposed project did not pass the stage 2 minimum score and is not recommended for funding. The primary reason for the low score was the economic feasibility of the project scored
in criteria 4 a, b and c, which comprise 40 percent of the score. With the additional $977,000 of costs requested in this grant, the benefit/cost ratio dropped from 1.57 when the project
was reviewed in fall 2012 to 0.96 in the fall 2014 economic evaluation. This resulted in earning only 1 point out of 10 for criteria 4a. Additionally it is noted that the applicant
has encountered significant delays in the submission of required deliverables associated with project milestones.
AEA's Community Assistance program provides help with identification of funding for energy projects; the applicant is encouraged to contact this program for assistance moving the project
forward. Additionally, the applicant may be eligible for a loan from AEA's Power Project Fund (PPF) loan program.
Not recommended for funding; did not meet stage 2 minimum score.
While the proposed project appears to be technically feasible using an available local hydro resource, which if paid for by REF grant funds could reduce the cost of electricity for Elfin
Cove, the project did not pass the stage 2 (technical and economic evaluation) minimum score.
The primary contributing factor to the low stage 2 score is a relatively low benefit/cost ratio of 0.99. This coupled with high technical complexity associated with operating a two-stage
hydro project, and increasing construction costs (22% higher) over those presented in earlier grant applications, and late deliverables for the applicant's current grant for the same
project, all contributed to the stage 2 score.
Not recommended for funding; did not pass stage 2.
A Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Round 6 grant (#7060929) in the amount of $2,600,000 was provided by AEA to fund the construction phase of the proposed project through completion. The
grant application was evaluated at the time using the grantee’s expected total project cost provided at the time. The project is currently expecting higher construction costs and
is seeking additional funding of $1,800,000 from REF in the current Round 8 evaluations to initiate the construction phase. It is noted that the applicant has encountered significant
delays in the submission of required deliverables, and the applicant has not yet demonstrated site control.
AEA recommends full funding with special provisions.
The applicant shall satisfy the following special provisions prior to the issuance of a R8 grant or expenditure of any existing project grant funds. Any obligation of project funds
prior to the acceptance by AEA of the special provisions shall be at the applicants risk.
1. Demonstrate site control
2. Become current on financial and progress reports
3. Amend existing grants to reflect proposed milestone and deliverables
4. Provide detailed project management plan addressing project controls, reporting, and change management
The proposed heat recovery project would make excellent use of wasted heat. The project could serve as a demonstration of Organic Rankine Cycle generators operating in arctic conditions
and may prove economical even if performance were lower than expected. However, as described in Section 1.6 of the Request for Applications (RFA AEA 15003):
"During the economic evaluation and scoring of applications, only the economic benefits to the public, direct and/or indirect will be included in the benefit/cost analysis. For example,
if 50 percent of the energy produced is for the purpose of providing power to one private industry user, that portion of the energy will not count as a public benefit in the economic
evaluation."
TDX North Slope Generating, Inc. exists to serve Prudhoe Bay oil service companies. AEA has concluded that the project does not provide an economic public benefit consistent with the
above description that could be used in an economic evaluation. Per program regulations 3 AAC107.645(b):
"The authority will reject applications that it determines under (a) of this section not to be technically and economically feasible, or not to provide sufficient public benefit, and
will notify each applicant whose application is rejected of the reasons for rejection."
No funding recommended.
The applicant was not able to demonstrate in their application, and through follow-up questions, that they are an eligible applicant for the Renewable Energy Fund (REF) as outlined in
the Request for Applications and in statute.
Additionally, the proposed project is already covered under the scope of an REF Round 1 grant to the Northwest Arctic Borough entitled "Buckland Deering and Noorvik Wind Construction"
(grant number 2195377). These funds should be used first to study the new location on Hotham Peak and further investigate possible benefits of an intertie beyond what was done in the
existing conceptual design report. The applicant should consider approaching the grantee for 2195377, Northwest Arctic Borough, to team up on that project. AEA’s community assistance
staff and technical staff can assist as needed.
No funding recommended.
The City of Noorvik applied for $164,000 in grant funding for construction of a $165,000 20kW fixed-tilt solar photovoltaic project in Noorvik. 10kW of panels would be installed on a
City building and 10kW would be installed on a Council building. This application is not associated with previous REF grant funding.
The AVEC tariff regarding “qualified co-generators and small power producers†states an 18.2 kW cap for the community of Noorvik. There is an existing solar installation of 12 kW
at the water treatment plant, leaving only 6.2 kW available, less than the proposed project. AEA requested a letter of support, MOA or copy of applicable utility rates and standards
from the applicant but did not receive the requested information. AEA confirmed with the utility that even though the applicant does not intend to sell power back to the grid, if they
are connected to the grid, the tariff applies.
No funding recommended.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a moderate amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project demonstrates marginal economic value. AEA believes that
cost saving measures can be identified during the design phase that can significantly improve the project economics. Partial funding of $50,000 recommended for final design.
Unalakleet Village Electric Cooperative (UVEC) has applied for a $295,775 grant, with $29,650 in matching funds, to collect and analyze high-resolution electric power data from the hybrid
diesel-wind project in Unalakleet. The results of the data collection and analysis would be used to model the system and as the basis for a conceptual design report describing system
improvements to optimize its performance in terms of power quality, electric grid stability, and fuel savings.
The UVEC wind farm is performing nearly as expected in a class four wind resource and UVEC's recent improvements to the controls will result in further performance improvements. There
is limited potential for improving the production performance of the UVEC diesel-wind hybrid project. At a proposed cost of over $300,000 for the data collection and analysis, the potential
incremental performance improvements do not support these high costs. AEA does support continued improvements to the wind-diesel system performance and recommends continuing to work
with AEA's wind and powerhouse programs and staff to identify specific areas to improve grid stability and efficiency in a more cost-effective manner.
No funding recommended.
The Lake and Pen Borough proposes the construction of cordwood boilers for the communities of Port Alsworth (Improvement Center and Fire Hall), Nondalton (single structure or multiple
units), and Pedro Bay (Smokehouse Bay Annex). This project would displace approximately 9,104 gallons of heating fuel. This application is based on a feasibility study that was completed
in June of 2010 that recommends different technology from what is proposed in this application. There is no discussion of the engineering design or the business/operational plan of
the proposed system. Wood inventory work has only been completed on Native Allotments in this area. While the volume of wood required for this project is very small, the applicant has
not adequately demonstrated the sustainability of this project without a business/operating plan. AEA recommends no funding at this time, but encourages the Lake and Pen Borough to
apply for updated feasibility studies through the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group and to further develop the business and operational plan for the biomass systems.
No funding recommended.
TDX Power, is applying for a $202,696 grant, and offering $50,673 in match, to perform a community energy baseline study in St. Paul.
The application did not demonstrate that the proposed work is eligible under the Renewable Energy Fund (REF) as defined in section 1.5 of the request for applications. Specifically,
the applicant stated in question 4.1 regarding the proposed energy resource:
“The proposed Community Energy Baseline Study does not include identification of renewable energy resources. Previous studies conducted by TDX Power and others have shown that St.
Paul is in a location where sufficient wind is available for abundant electrical power generation. In addition, 15 years of continued operation of the wind farms on St. Paul have validated
the resource. This study defines energy use, transportation and efficiency.â€
While AEA supports the general “baseline study†approach outlined in the application to better understanding energy efficiency opportunities and energy generation and distribution
needs in a community, the application as presented does not fit within the scope of the Renewable Energy Fund. The proposed work is in alignment with the Aleut Regional Energy Plan,
currently underway with AEA funding. AEA recommends that the applicant incorporate this proposal into the regional energy plan for further development and prioritization. AEA staff
will work with the applicant and other regional planners to incorporate aspects of the proposed baseline study.
No funding recommended.
Adak Generating LLC, a subsidiary of TDX Power, is applying for an $85,000 grant, and offering $17,000 in match, to perform a community energy baseline study in Adak.
The application did not demonstrate that the proposed work is eligible under the Renewable Energy Fund (REF) as defined in section 1.5 of the request for applications. Specifically,
the applicant stated in question 4.1 regarding the proposed energy resource:
“The proposed Community Energy Baseline Study does not include identification of renewable energy resources. Previous studies conducted by TDX Power and others have shown that Adak
is in a location where sufficient hydro is available for abundant electrical power generation. This study defines energy use, transportation and efficiency.â€
A Round 2 REF grant used to study potential hydro, geothermal and wind resources, used a portion of the funding to determine the community load. This and other existing research was
not cited in the application. Finally, key sections of the application form were marked “N/Aâ€.
While AEA supports the general “baseline study†approach outlined in the application to better understanding energy efficiency opportunities and energy generation and distribution
needs in a community, the application as presented does not fit within the scope of the Renewable Energy Fund. The proposed work is in alignment with the Aleut Regional Energy Plan,
currently underway with AEA funding. AEA recommends that the applicant incorporate this proposal into the regional energy plan for further development and prioritization. AEA staff
will work with the applicant and other regional planners to incorporate aspects of the proposed baseline study.
No funding recommended.
A reconnaissance study can be completed for the suggested projects without performing stream gauging. There are years of data compiled on Ship Creek stream flow available through the
USGS and agencies holding water rights. There are also enough gauges in the Seward area to support a reconnaissance level analysis to assess potential hydroelectric generation. Without
the stream gauging component, the applicant has committed sufficient match to perform reconnaissance level studies. No funding recommended.
ANTHC requested funding on behalf of Scammon Bay for a feasibility and conceptual design; plus 2 to 3 years of stream gauging. Scammon Bay's application was based on a feasibility study
completed by Hatch in mid-September 2014. Stream gauging is typically done during reconnaissance. AEA recommends the project be partially funded to complete stream gauging. AEA and
the applicant discussed and agreed to AEA management of this phase of the project.
AEA has concerns with the lack of stream gauging information; the fact that earlier hydro studies questioned the feasibility; the fact that Hatch recommended additional 2 to 3 years
of stream gauging; and concerns that the feasibility tended to be optimistic considering other concerns noted above.
AEA recommends partial funding of $90,000 for stream gauging/reconnaissance phase only.
The Southeast Island School District currently operates cordwood fueled heating systems at their Coffman Cove and Thorne Bay Schools. The Thorne Bay system is undersized, so the school
district is proposing the relocation of the Thorne Bay boilers to the schools in Hollis and Whale Pass. The application also includes the design and construction of replacement boilers
for Thorne Bay and the design and construction of a heating system for the Naukati School to replace the heat recovery system that is being eliminated by the decommissioning of the
Naukati power plant. The Southeast Island School District has proven the successful operation of cordwood boiler systems and has integrated the operation and maintenance of these systems
into their culture. Greenhouses heated by the biomass systems have been installed on Thorne Bay and Coffman Cove, and more are planned in conjunction with this project. SEISD is a success
story for the State of Alaska Biomass Program.
Recommend full funding.
The Applicant made an appeal to the AEA Executive Director contesting the original recommendation of no funding due to incomplete prior phases and incomplete information sufficient to
perform an economic and technical evaluation. The AEA executive director accepted the appeal for reconsideration.
AEA staff performed the stage 2 scoring of the application as required by the appeal process and performed a subsequent review in order to establish a recommended funding amount and
any special provisions. AEA staff anticipate that Kenai Hydro may be able to perform the geotechnical component of design related activity in FY2016. AEA estimates geotechnical investigations
will cost $394,000 with Kenai Hydro providing $36,000 (9%) as match. Recommended grant funding under Kenai Hydro’s application is $358,000.
In order to receive design funding, Kenai Hydro will be required to complete the feasibility and concept design report to include, among typical feasibility work, analysis of alternative
schemes including the no action alternative, alternative tunnel and powerhouse locations, a bored intake gate shaft with multilevel lake taps in lieu of a concrete intake structure,
assess need for upper grant lake channel dredging, perform detailed energy modeling with reservoir levels, prepare quantity based cost estimates of alternatives, and provide economic
analysis of benefits using tariff/contract/market based projected savings. The study shall include consideration of Falls Creek diversion using HDPE conveyance and recommendations for
Grant Lake power house and turbine sizing if Falls Creek diversion may be constructed at a later date. Report shall be prepared under the direction of a qualified PE and shall be subject
to AEA approval.
Kenai Hydro LLC did not include proposed staff or resumes for qualified Alaska PE’s to perform the proposed design work. Kenai Hydro will be required to publicly solicit qualifications
based proposals for performing the design work funded through this grant. Contract and award shall be subject to AEA approval.
AEA recommends partial funding with the special provisions listed above.
Interior Regional Housing Authority is proposing a biomass feasibility study in order to examine to potential is using woody biomass to heat three IRHA facilities - the IRHA office building
in Fairbanks, the IRHA warehouse in Fairbanks and the Meda Lord Center which is a 15 unit senior housing complex in Nenana. All three facilities currently are using heating oil, and
have been weatherized. AEA strongly supports this project and the use of high efficiency, low emissions biomass heating in the Fairbanks and Nenana areas. AEA recommends full funding
and recommends considering a natural gas option in the feasibility report for the Fairbanks buildings.
The applicant did not sufficiently demonstrate that the proposed solar photovoltaic system would perform technically or economically. Specifically missing from the application were battery
specifications, hourly load data, hourly solar production data, interconnection specifications, compliance with utility cogeneration policy, and other technical information. The project
economics appear weak with an estimated benefit/cost ratio of 0.42.
No funding recommended.
Extremely high fuel costs and accessible heating loads make powerhouse heat recovery particularly attractive in Scammon Bay. Unfortunately, numerous issues in the supporting feasibility
study and application raise concerns regarding the thoroughness of effort made to accurately estimate project costs. A more deliberate approach is warranted; AEA recommends standalone
funding for project design prior to committing funding for the construction phase.
Partial funding of $60,000 is recommended to advance the project through final design.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough requests funding for the construction of a pellet fueled biomass heating system for the Ketchikan High School. The project is estimated to displace 108,715
gallons of fuel/year. The Ketchikan Gateway Borough received funding through the US Forest Service to complete the design of the Ketchikan High School and have requested construction
funding. They have demonstrated their capability with the installation, operation, and maintenance of pellet systems through their library installation. The Borough is completing the
design of a pellet boiler for the airport complex, and has received construction funding through the Renewable Energy Fund – Round 7. Ketchikan is an example of the effective use
of pellet heating to stem the conversions to resistance heating that are occurring due to the low cost of hydroelectric generation.
Recommend full funding for feasibility update and design.
The proposal to insulate existing heat recovery pipes in Selawik does not demonstrate favorable economics based upon the proposed high cost and relatively small amount of heating fuel
that would be offset. The economics of the project may improve if significant cost reductions could be identified. AEA recommends that BTU meter data from the existing system should
be collected and analyzed to support assumptions regarding the performance of the existing system.
No funding recommended.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough requests funding for the construction of a pellet fueled biomass heating system for the Ketchikan High School. The project is estimated to displace 108,715
gallons of fuel/year. The Ketchikan Gateway Borough received funding through the US Forest Service to complete the design of this system. They have demonstrated their capability with
the installation, operation, and maintenance of pellet systems through their library installation. The Borough is completing the design of a pellet boiler for the airport complex, and
has received construction funding through the Renewable Energy Fund – Round 7. Ketchikan is an example of the effective use of pellet heating to stem the conversions to resistance
heating that are occurring due to the low cost of hydroelectric generation.
Recommend full funding for construction with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design and the final business/operational plan.
The City of Chefornak, applying as a local government, and working with Intelligent Energy Systems, proposes to complete a final design of and permitting of: a 475 kW wind farm; distribution
repairs and upgrades; a secondary load at the power plant in the form of an electric boiler to control grid frequency and for the capture of excess wind power for use as heat; and 40
secondary loads to be installed in residential homes in the form of electric thermal storage (ETS) units that would capture excess wind power for use as heat. The proposed system would
serve the community of Chefornak, Alaska. The final design would be based on a feasibility study and CDR (Conceptual Design Report) performed under a Round 4 Renewable Energy Fund (REF)
grant #7040056. A feasibility study and CDR have been submitted for review.
This project did not score high enough to pass the stage 2 technical and economic evaluation minimum score of 40. The primary contributing factor for the low score was the economic feasibility
scores in criteria 4a which comprises 25 percent of the score. AEA's calculated benefit/cost ratio is 0.71. This score reflects a reduction in predicted annual energy production due
to the underperformance of comparable projects. A score below 0.9 earns 0 points for criteria 4a. Other significant contributing factors to the low score are the tardiness of deliverables
and reports and the underperformance of comparable systems in Kongiganak, Tuntutuliak, and Kwigillingok.
The current CDR does not validate the selection of the proposed project. AEA recognizes that the wind resource in Chefornak is good and that a CDR that compared various turbine types
and quantities and various secondary heat loads could identify an economical project for the community. AEA has met with Intelligent Energy Systems to discuss the project potential
and improving the project economics.
In addition to the low economic score, AEA has the following concerns that also influenced the stage 2 score: tardiness of project deliverables, progress reports and financial reports
on the existing Chefornak wind feasibility grant, the underperformance of comparable high penetration systems, and the CDR not addressing the causes of the existing similar systems'
low performance and recommending remedies in the proposed new conceptual design.
Additionally, the application identifies upgrades and repairs to the distribution line that are required to proceed with the project as planned. Repairs are not eligible for funding
and the upgrades required will need to be as a direct result of the proposed wind-diesel system to be eligible for funding. Any required, ineligible, upgrades or repairs necessary for
the proposed project will need to be addressed prior to funding. AEA will continue to work with the applicant and their contractor towards completion of their CDR.
No funding recommended. Did not pass stage 2 minimum score.
The City of Ouzinkie partnering with ANTHC has recently replaced their previously condemned wooded dam with a new rock and concrete dam with $2,087,000, of which the majority, $1,800,000,
came from a 2013 Alaska Legislature appropriation. The existing penstock and turbine started producing hydro power again with water from the new dam in mid November 2014. This proposed
new replacement penstock and turbine is an addition to the existing hydro project. As such only the projected incremental increase in hydro power production is allowable in the economic
analysis. The incremental increase of hydro power produced is projected to be about 141,218 kWh per year saving and additional 11,100 gallons of diesel generator fuel. Adding a new
load bank and a new dispatchable electric boiler could increase the public economic benefits and reduce fuel consumption for both the diesel generators and heating fuel.
AEA recommends partial funding for completion of the conceptual design and permitting. Once the design is complete with the maximum hydro benefit to the community considered the applicant
may consider applying for construction funds in a future funding round.
This current application is for final design and permitting for the “Barrow to Atqasuk Transmission Line and Home Conversions to Electric Space Heatingâ€.
This project was funded in rounds 2 and 4 of the Renewable Energy Fund for feasibility study and conceptual/preliminary design. The North Slope Borough also applied for but did not receive
funding in round 7 as the preliminary design from round 4 was not yet complete.
AEA recommends full funding for the final design and permitting of this project.
North Slope Borough, applying as a utility, proposes to complete a final design of and permitting for a wind-diesel power system in the community of Kaktovik, Alaska. The final design
will be based on a feasibility study and conceptual design report performed under a Round 4 RE Fund Grant #7040025. The feasibility study and conceptual design report have been reviewed
and accepted by AEA.
AEA recommends full funding with the special provision that a 65% design, that includes all necessary permits, be accepted by AEA prior to the release of funds for final design work.
It is recommended that during the 65% design process the applicant re-evaluate the installation of a single wind turbine capable of meeting the project goals in order to increase the
economic viability of the project.
The high cost of heating fuel, low cost of electricity, and moderate climate make Metlakatla well suited for heat pump systems. Although little data is available documenting the performance
of commercial scale ground source heat pump systems in southeast Alaska, the large discrepancy in heating oil and electrical costs result in project economics that appear favorable
even if the system performance is well below what is anticipated.
The proposed project can take advantage of excess hydropower and offset a significant amount of heating fuel. The fuel savings from the project will result in additional income to the
local public utility and reduced operational costs for a community facility.
Full funding recommended.
Kwigillingok received Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Round 1 and direct legislative appropriation funding to install five Windmatic 17S 95-kilowatt wind turbines, completing that project
in 2012. This proposal would make use of excess electricity by diverting surplus kilowatt-hours to residential heat loads. The current performance of the wind system is only 27% of
the goal according to FY2014 PCE data - well below the level that could be explained by curtailing of wind turbines due to a lack of additional ETS heaters. The average benefits seen
for the existing 27 ETS installations would be significantly lower if the number of heaters were increased to 50 as proposed in the application. The applicant has not been timely in
submitting required quarterly operations and maintenance reports on the existing wind energy project and has not provided as-built drawings and an operations and maintenance plan required
to close out the REF Round 1 grant. There is a pending grant to upgrade the Kwigillingok power distribution system. When the REF Round 1 deliverables have been met, the distribution
system upgrade is underway and wind system performance increases significantly, and economic viability can be demonstrated, the applicant could consider reapplying in a future funding
round.
No funding recommended.
The City of Kotzebue is proposing the design and construction of a refuse derived fuel (RDF) fired boiler system to heat two city owned buildings. This project is estimated to displace
a total 98,000 of gallons per year of fuel oil, using cardboard, paper, and construction debris supplemented with wood pellets. Feasibility was completed with Round 4 funding through
the Renewable Energy Fund. This project has the opportunity to provide key direction for rural communities struggling with municipal solid waste disposal. AEA recommends partial funding
of $200,000 for the final resource inventory/operations plan, final design, and permitting. The City of Kotzebue should first assess the waste fuel availability and develop an operating
plan to confirm the economics of this project. Final design and permitting must select appropriate technology to meet EPA’s new emissions standards for incinerators.
Recommend partial funding.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a significant amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project appears uneconomical. AEA believes that cost saving
measures can be identified during the design phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
Partial funding of $50,000 recommended for final design phase only.
The Hydaburg City Schools in Hydaburg, AK on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska has proposed the design and construction of a cordwood fired boiler system to heat the school
buildings. The project will be a district heating system for the school buildings, four teachers housing units, and a greenhouse. The system is anticipated to displace approximately
25,500 gallons of heating fuel annually. The Hydaburg City Schools is under the same leadership as the Southeast Island School District (SEISD). SEISD has proven the successful operation
of cordwood boiler systems and has integrated the operation and maintenance of these systems into their culture. Greenhouses heated by the biomass systems have been installed on Thorne
Bay and Coffman Cove, and more are planned in conjunction with this project. SEISD is a success story for the State of Alaska Biomass Program.
Recommend full funding.
The applicant did not demonstrate an economical project with clear public benefits. The long distances to the heating loads from the power plant and the potential to offset only moderate
amounts of heating fuel make the economics of a heat recovery system at Holy Cross challenging. Additionally, there were numerous discrepancies between the 2013 and 2014 feasibility
studies for a heat recovery system that should be clarified.
No funding recommended.
ANTHC and the City of Nikolai propose to complete the final design and construction of a biomass heating system to serve the community building, school, city lodge, and city shop. This
system would be a manually-fed cordwood system and is anticipated to displace 9,630 gallons of heating fuel annually. The applicant did not demonstrate an economical project nor strong
community involvement that is crucial to the successful implementation of a manually stoked cordwood system. AEA recommends no funding at this time, but encourages the City of Nikolai
to work with AEA staff and the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group to identify potential operators and wood fuel suppliers.
No funding recommended.
The proposal from the Igiugig Village Council to complete final design and construction of a river hydrokinetic power project follows years of work starting in 2008 with resource assessment
and continuing with site characterization through device demonstration. It also builds on experience and information gained from an Emerging Energy Technology Fund (EETF) award and
other significant state and federal investments in hydrokinetics. The community has actively pursued a hydrokinetic installation and the project team has been on the forefront of hydrokinetic
development, including design and permitting.
The proposed location in the Kvichak River is widely considered the most promising for a hydrokinetic device in the state with clear water, consistent current velocities, and lack of
river ice formation. Significant salmon runs will play a central role in project permitting and require extensive biological monitoring. While the site and river characteristics are
unique in Alaska, many aspects of the project could result in information transferrable to other sites and other device types and could contribute to lowering costs for similar projects
in the future.
The project proposes to use a second generation device that has not yet been constructed and would still need to overcome numerous hurdles to be successful. As a first-of-a-kind project,
costs are expected to be high. Costly device retrieval and redeployment would need to occur annually, at a minimum.
Given the state of development of the technology, the proposed project does not compete favorably in the Renewable Energy Fund (REF) process on economic or technical terms with more
mature technologies. However, a successful project would represent a major step forward and could help pave the way for other projects to better compete on equal terms.
AEA recognizes that the quality of the resource, the commitment of the community and project team, and the investment in site characterization and preparation combine to make this a
compelling river hydrokinetic project. However, the substantial technical risk associated with deployment of a device that is still under development and the related economic uncertainty
do not make this a suitable Renewable Energy Fund (REF) project. Therefore AEA does not recommend funding this project at this time.
AEA and the REF Advisory Committee have identified a potential gap that exists between the EETF and REF programs in which technologies that have demonstrated some level of technical
feasibility through an EETF award may still be unable to compete successfully for an REF award; this proposal appears to fall into that gap. AEA will be requesting the advice of the
REF Advisory Committee regarding the appropriateness of funding projects that fall in the gap between the programs.
No funding recommended.
The City of False Pass proposed to conduct a feasibility study for a tidal power project in Isanotski Strait, building on previous reconnaissance efforts. The proposal, which calls
for additional field measurements, modeling, site selection, and preparation for permitting, was submitted on behalf of a strong project team actively involved in pioneering hydrokinetic
development in the state.
It is difficult to predict how rapidly the installed costs of tidal power generation plants will decline as the technology matures. The applicant has reasoned that deployment and retrieval
costs will decline dramatically as operators gain experience and equipment is improved. Although numerous challenges may remain before economic deployments can be realized in Alaska,
the potential for such deployments does exist.
The project does not compete economically with other renewable energy projects using mature technology types, and therefore is not recommended for funding.
ANTHC and the City of Huslia proposed the Final Design and Construction of a manually-fed cordwood heating system to serve the Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plant in Huslia,
Alaska. The project is estimated to save the Clinic and Water Treatment Plant 8,474 gallons of heating oil per year. The economics of this project are challenging, but there has been
significant community involvement in the initial planning of the fuel supply. The community champion has attended biomass workshops and is knowledgeable of the proposed system.
Recommend partial funding of $58,000 to complete the design phase only and work to improve the economics of the project.
ANTHC and the City of Ambler propose the final design and construction of a cordwood-fueled biomass heating system to serve the Washeteria and City Office building in Ambler, Alaska.
The proposed biomass heating system would be manually-fed and housed in a pre-fabricated building. The system is anticipated to displace 3,516 gallons of heating fuel per year. The
request is a continuation of a Round 2 grant, "Upper Kobuk River Biomass".
The economics of this project are marginal and there is opportunity to reduce the overall cost of the project. The design phase should focus on a lower cost installation. The community
must also develop an acceptable operations and maintenance plan for this project, including contingencies for staffing and wood supply.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that no construction funding be released until the final design and business/operating plan is approved.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a significant amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project is marginally economical. AEA believes that cost
saving measures can be identified during the design phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
Partial funding of $50,000 recommended for the final design phase only.
AEA does not recommend funding the requested phase of this project at this time due to incomplete prior phases, per the AEA Request for Applications 15003 section 2.2 to 2.6. The project
appears to have marginal economic benefit and the final design and cost estimates may impact the economic viability.
No funding recommended.
The proposed heat recovery system has the potential to offset a significant amount of heating oil. As proposed, however, the project demonstrates marginal economic value. AEA believes
that cost saving measures can be identified during the design phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
AEA recommends partial funding of $50,000 to complete the final design phase only.
This project did not pass stage 1 eligibility requirements.
AEA REF review staff originally concluded that this application did not demonstrate a verifiable technically and economically feasible project for the following reasons:
• Insufficient information was provided on the intake geotechnical conditions, hydraulic design, and design documents with sufficient information to evaluate the technical feasibility
and cost of the project.
• Insufficient information was provided on the stream gauging data and hydrology analysis to verify the economic feasibility of the project.
AEA’s review staff performed a more detailed evaluation and found that the technical feasibility can be expected to be resolved in a timely manner, that the project is still economically
viable even when the project operation and cost is adjusted to alleviate economic concerns.
AEA recommends full funding with the special provision that the design be finalized and approved by AEA prior to issuing a grant for the construction phase.
Because a full conceptual design has not yet been completed, several key technical considerations remain unknown. Without an intertie to Ambler, the combined load for Shungnak and Kobuk
are not large enough to support more than 400kW of wind power without designing very complex controls. The Shungnak power plant is not currently scheduled for upgrades that would facilitate
variable wind energy. The most significant factor influencing the developability of this project is the recent low river levels and resultant unpredictable barge deliveries. The project
would need to incorporate turbines, materials and construction equipment that could be mobilized through alternate methods - likely by air cargo. This might eliminate larger turbines
that offer better economies of scale and would add costs that are well above existing benchmarks. The applicant should work to finish the conceptual design report (CDR) that has been
self-funded to date. In addition to the standard deliverables in AEA's wind Guidelines for Conceptual Design Reports, the applicant should address the logistical challenges that are
unique to this location in the CDR.
Recommend partial funding to complete the CDR.
Bethel has ample waste heat available for recovery and numerous significant heat loads within a one mile radius of the powerhouse. The existing heat recovery system is near the end of
its useful life and will require both immediate and ongoing repairs and modifications to prolong operation for an additional 20 years. Construction costs associated with repairs to
the existing system are not eligible for Renewable Energy Fund funding, however, expansion of the existing system is eligible.
Estimates of the cost of new connections to the heat recovery system were not provided although expansion does appear to be economical under a broad range of scenarios. The addition
of exhaust gas heat exchangers contemplated in the proposal appears to increase the amount of heat available for recovery beyond the demand projected for the potential heat loads identified
in the application; AVEC believes that additional loads may be identified that could increase demand to the point where additional heat capture could be beneficial.
AEA is concerned with the high cost of ultrasonic testing of the existing main pipeline proposed in the application and believes that alternate methods may prove more cost effective.
Such methods could include an assessment of maintenance history of the distribution pipes to identify common failure points, and physical removal and inspection of sections of the pipe.
However, AVEC may choose to complete ultrasonic testing as a part of its operation and maintenance plan for the system.
Partial funding in the amount of $325,000 is recommended to complete conceptual design of expansion of the heat recovery system.
AVEC (Alaska Village Electric Cooperative), applying as a utility, proposes feasibility and conceptual design work to determine the advisability of installing wind turbines in Goodnews
Bay. AVEC is working with AEA, through the wind program's Anemometer Loan Program, to install a meteorological tower and study the wind for a minimum of 12 months. AVEC would perform
geotechnical work and investigate multiple turbine types and quantities in the process of preparing a conceptual design report.
Recommend full funding.
The project received grants in Round 1 (#73) for $225,000 and Round 4 (#644) for $237,500 to complete a feasibility study, FERC licensing, and preliminary design. Additionally, the City
of Old Harbor received a Community Development Block Grant in support of the project for $250,000 to complete the FERC License Application and permitting. FERC license application processing
could cause delay. Significant site control issues could arise since the project lands include Kodiak NWR and a conservation easement by Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council. Turbine
and penstock are oversized anticipating future growth. Requested funds for this portion of work are excessive. AEA recommends partial funding to advance final design work, excluding
geotechnical work, with the special provisions that 1) the grantee maximize the use of excess hydro or reduce hydro size to maximize the public benefit and project economics, and 2)
provide a detailed design budget a list of the proposed consultants prior to grant execution.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, applying as a utility, proposes the construction of a wind farm along the St. Mary's/Pitka's Point intertie along with components necessary for the
integration of wind power into the diesel power plant. The wind-diesel system would serve the communities of St. Mary's and Pitka's Point. The basis for the proposed wind-diesel system
is a design funded through Round 4 RE Fund grant #7040017. Permitting for the project is completed, site control has been established and a 65% design has been submitted to the Authority.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that the 95% design be accepted by the Authority prior to allocation of construction funds.
THRHA have demonstrated that pellet and cordwood heating systems can significantly reduce the heating costs in their buildings. They are successfully operating and maintaining the systems
and helping to develop the pellet supply infrastructure in Southeast. There are few details for the engineering design in this proposal and AEA is concerned that it might be difficult
to complete the design within the budget allocations.
Recommend full funding for design and construction with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design and the final business/operational plan.
Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority proposes a biomass district heat system to serve eight multiplex residential buildings and one community center in Angoon, Alaska. This project
is expected to displace 11,400 gallons of heating fuel annually.
THRHA have demonstrated that pellet and cordwood heating systems can significantly reduce the heating costs in their buildings. They are successfully operating and maintaining the systems
and helping to develop the pellet supply infrastructure in Southeast. The engineering complexity of this project is a concern and AEA recommends careful integration and budget planning.
Recommend full funding for design and construction with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design and the final business/operational plan.
The application as proposed and additional information received did not fully address the feasibility and conceptual design-level issues expected to be complete prior to providing REF
funding for final design and construction. AEA recommends partial funding of $20,000 to complete a feasibility study for solar PV development in Kotzebue. The study should consider
fixed, single and dual tracking systems.
The proposed budget for the feasibility analysis appears insufficient for the project scope that should include stream gauging, operational modeling, sensitivity analysis and capacity
recommendations, conceptual designs, cost estimating and economic analysis for the hydro, water supply system, and spinning reserve alternative analysis.
Recommended for funding with the special provision that the prior phase of feasibility is included in the grant scope followed by design and permitting contingent on results and AEA
acceptance of feasibility report.
The reconnaissance assessment through the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group indicates a viable project. The buildings to be heated by this project are in need of energy efficiency
upgrades, and the amount of fuel displaced would be significantly less after the energy efficiency work. The Copper Valley Region has embraced biomass as an alternative fuel source
and has operating systems in Kenny Lake, Gulkana, and Glennallen. The Native Village of Tazlina has shown commitment to a successful wood heating project through persistence in their
applications to the RE Fund. There is a sufficient wood supply through a BLM wildfire mitigation contract. The Alaska demonstration of the boiler technology proposed for this project
is in the start-up phase in Mentasta Lake, and AEA is monitoring the performance.
AEA recommends full funding for a cordwood boiler system. The applicant has requested that AEA manage the project. The project will examine energy efficiency within the served buildings.
The Craig High School District in Craig, AK requests funding for engineering design and construction of a chip fueled biomass heating system for the Craig High School. The project is
estimated to displace 18,485 gallons of fuel/year. The Craig City School District has over 6 years of experience in operating and maintaining a chip system at their middle school, elementary
school, and pool complex. The chips will be supplied by a local sawmill and will be dried by dryer funded through the Renewable Energy Fund. Energy efficiency improvements are underway
or completed at the high school to maximize the efficiency of the heating system.
Recommend funding for design and construction with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design and the final business/operational plan prior to starting
the construction phase.
AP&T's reconnaissance study indicates this project may be economical despite the very low population and energy demand in Whale Pass. The application indicates that demand is expected
to increase because several residents in Whale Pass lack connection to the local utility.
AEA recommends feasibility analysis to include assessment of project size and economics for offsetting heat demand and the growth potential for the community followed by design and permitting
if warranted.
AEA does not recommend the requested phase of this project be funded at this time due to unsupported feasibility claims and incomplete prior phases. For a design/construction project
the applicant must provide sufficient information to complete an economic and/or technical evaluation. This application did not provide sufficient information on the amount and cost
of diesel generation (the alternative to the proposed project) and a clear, verifiable demonstration of how much diesel generation is expected to be offset by the proposed project.
Additionally, the application did not demonstrate the fulfillment of all requirements of earlier phases. This application indicates that that the final design and permitting tasks are
not yet complete.A Southeast Alaska hydro needs assessment has been funded by the State to identify the next most economical hydro needs in the region. This work is underway but not
yet complete.No funding recommended.
The applicant did not adequately demonstrate feasibility. For a design/construction project the applicant must provide sufficient information to complete an economic and technical evaluation.
This application did not provide sufficient information on the amount and cost of diesel generation (the alternative to the proposed project) and a clear, verifiable demonstration of
how much diesel generation is expected to be offset by the proposed project.
A Southeast Alaska hydro needs assessment has been funded by the State to identify the next most economical hydro needs in the region. This work is underway but not yet complete, and
when complete may help the applicant better demonstrate the feasibility of this project.
No funding recommended.
The applicant requested funding in the amount of $413,600 with match and in-kind support of $103,400 for complete feasibility and conceptual design phases. There is limited supporting
data in terms of potential hydro energy production, that if available, could increase AEA's confidence of the project economics. A number of conditions should be met before undertaking
this secondary hydro development in the Tok region including additional assurance with regard to energy availability and project operability and subsequent economics. Stream gauging
is recommended to evaluate the energy resource prior to undertaking more extensive studies. The gauging will improve confidence in energy availability for nearby Yerrick Creek as well.
Demonstration of cost and operability of Yerrick Creek is also recommended before proceeding with Clearwater Creek development.
AEA's funding recommendation is therefore limited to the proposed stream gauging work in the application consisting of $40k of REF grant, $10k grantee matching funds, and $3k other funds.
SEAPA submitted similar proposals in Rounds 5 and 7 and was recommended by AEA, but never funded due to the project's rank and funding availability those years. SEAPA has been given
a 34-meter met tower from AEA's met tower loan program. Whether funded or not in Round 8, the applicant is encouraged to coordinate with the AEA wind program, which can assist in site
assessment, site selection and permitting. If future REF funding will be applied for, the applicant should attempt to start collecting data as early as possible in order to complete
either one or two full years of wind data collection prior to applying for the next phases of project development, which are typically due in September. The project schedule is thorough
and achievable. The staff at SEAPA has experience with large energy projects. Due to the size of the electrical load and infrastructure in the region, a multi-megawatt scale wind project
would be appropriate and allow for the best economies of scale. AEA recommends full funding.
The proposal to use wastewater effluent as a source for a heat pump system is a compelling use of an otherwise unused heat source, and could serve as a model for similar systems in other
parts of the state. The high temperature and availability of effluent would result in a higher heat pump COP than seen in other heat pump installations in the state. Cost savings identified
by the applicant since a Round 7 Renewable Energy Fund submission have dramatically improved the project’s economics.
Full funding recommended.
The design phase request is not recommended at this time. For design funding the prior phase of feasibility shall be complete so that the project viability and the future funding needs
can be determined per the AEA Request for Applications 15003 section 2.2 to 2.6.
No funding recommended.
AEA's primary concern with this project is the current condition of the power generation and distribution system. The utility needs to develop a plan to get their four original gensets
in good working order and follow a maintenance schedule that ensures long-term operation before the addition of a wind energy project can be pursued. AEA has programs available to provide
technical assistance to the utility to help with this.
A preliminary wind study has been conducted in the Manokotak vicinity in 2008/9. That data was used to feed economic and technical assumptions into a wind-diesel model, which indicated
that there may be an economic wind resource in the community. The next steps, once the current power generation system is prepared to accept wind energy, is to identify the specific
location of the best local wind resource through the installation of meteorological tower(s), as requested in this application. At that time, AEA wind staff should be consulted prior
to selecting the met tower locations.
This project did not pass the Stage 2 (economic and technical evaluation) minimum score.
No funding recommended.
The Organized Village of Kake is proposing final design and permitting for a low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party tested district wood-fired heating loop for a tribal government
office building, Kake City School District, Tlingit and Haida Senior Center, the City of Kake?s Bingo Hall, and a lodge owned by the Organized Village of Kake (OVK), a federally recognized
tribe. This project is estimated to displace approximately 35,000 gallons per year of fuel oil. The application includes substantial support from the community and endorsement from
the Kake Community Energy Committee. AEA recommends partial funding of design and permitting to allow the Organized Village of Kake to make an informed decision about pursing biomass
as a heating option.
AEA recommends partial funding for the final design and permitting includes business/operations plan; biomass storage; biomass resource inventory assessment; harvest plan, $175,000.
Ineligible for further review because the applicant did not provide a conceptual design report 30 days prior to the application deadline as required and identified in Sections 1.12,
2.5 and Section 4 of the Request for Grant Applications dated July 2, 2013.
Section 4 of RFA, page 26
7. Wind applications requesting Phase III (Final Design and Permitting) or Phase IV (Construction, Commissioning, Operation and Reporting) funding will submit documentation necessary
to demonstrate the fulfillment of all requirements for earlier phases of the project identified in Section 2 of the RFA [i.e. Phase II (Feasibility Analysis, Conceptual Design) or Phase
III (Final Design and Permitting)] 30 days prior to the application deadline.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the Native Village of Tuntutliak are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing power plant planned to
the Water Treatment Plant and Washeteria.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
The utility has funding for an electric heater for excess wind. The design should take into account the integration of wind-to-heat.
Recommend full funding.
Ram Valley LLC requests funds for reconnaissance study of a hydroelectric project on Juniper Creek.
The run-of-river project is located in high alpine terrain near Mile 10 of the Eagle River valley. Ram Valley LLC would sell Juniper Creek Hydroelectric power to Matanuska Electric Assoc.
as an IPP. Several different development options are proposed for the project from 250 to 1,300 kW, some of which involve private landowners not currently committed to the project.
The project would generate seasonally as proposed.
AEA recommends funds for a reconnaissance study.
Special conditions: In the course of conducting the reconnaissance study, explore and define the project scheme and obtain commitments from involved landowners.
City of King Cove requests an additional $800,000 to construct the 1 MW run-or-river Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project. The City was awarded a $200,000 grant (#887) in Round 5 to
complete permitting and final design for Waterfall Creek and $2,600,000 (#929) in Round 6 for construction. Permitting, final design, site control, and bidding all remain incomplete.
AEA supports this request though notes that permitting, final design, construction cost estimate, and bidding are not complete at this time.
Special conditions include completion of all grant requirements for #887 and demonstration of site control.
Chugach Electric Association requests $3,453,920 to complete construction of the Stetson Creek Diversion to Cooper Lake Hydroelectric Project. Project will add 6,020,000 kWh annually.
It will also provide environmental benefits for increase in 1) water temperature and 2) increase flows at upper reaches of Cooper Creek to enhance fish habitat.
Bids were opened on 9/28/12 and construction is underway. Project cost is $21,772,523. CEA received funds in Round 4 (#674) for $576,080 for design and permitting and a State appropriation
for $5,825,000 in FY13 for construction. The project applied for funding in Round 6 but failed to score within the funding limit. CEA will continue to seek grant funding and finance
any cost in excess of grant amounts.
Construction of this project satisfies the Settlement Agreement established in support of the FERC re-license of Cooper Lake Hydroelectric Project, which, along with this diversion,
has annual energy of 48,000,000 kWh.
The Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) on 1/7/14 advised AEA to recommend to the Legislature partial funding this project if funding is kept within the Governor?s budget
of $20M. REFAC further advised AEA to include the initial recommendation of full funding should the Legislature make available additional funds this year. One other hydro project,
Allison Creek, was also recommended for partial funding. The primary reason was to allow the funding of six additional projects in higher cost areas of the state.
AEA recommends partial funding of $1,760,019 if the Renewable Energy Fund Round 7 budget is limited to $20M, and recommends this project first in line for any additional funding beyond
$20M, up to the requested grant amount of $3,453,920.
Chugach Electric Association (CEA), Inc. request funding for a reconnaissance study to provide a preliminary assessment of the viability of a waste to energy project in Anchorage.
A portion of the municipal solid waste minus recyclables that currently goes to the Anchorage landfill would be used as fuel for the plant.
AEA supports the concept of utilizing municipal solid waste as an energy source. The first step in clearly understanding the viability of a waste to energy project is a comprehensive
assessment of the fuel resource availability. CEA has provided a match of $100,000 toward this effort. AEA recommends partial funding of design and permitting to allow Chugach Electric
Association (CEA) to make an informed decision about pursing a waste to energy project in Anchorage.
AEA recommends partial funding of $50,000.
The City of False Pass Electric Utility, applying as a local government, proposes feasibility and conceptual design work to determine the advisability of installing wind turbines on
the False Pass electrical grid. This work will augment feasibility and conceptual design work already performed under a Round 4 Renewable Energy Fund Grant #7040051. The results of
the Round 4 grant demonstrated that the False Pass wind regime contains enough energy to create a feasible wind project but, due to complex terrain, has high turbulence. The applicant
proposes to continue wind and electrical data collection to investigate other locations in False Pass for a less turbulent wind regime and better understanding of community loads.
The applicant proposes to then revise the existing Conceptual Design Report based on the aggregate findings.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that Wind Resource Assessment(s) and Feasibility Study be accepted by AEA prior to the allocation of Conceptual Design funds.
The New Koliganek Village Council, applying as a governmental entity, proposes to complete a final design of and permitting for a wind-diesel power system in the community of Koliganek
Alaska. The final design will be based on a feasibility study and conceptual design report performed under a Round 4 RE Fund Grant #7040011. The feasibility study has been completed
and a draft conceptual design report has been reviewed by the AEA Wind Program. A final conceptual design report will be completed in early 2014 in conjunction with an AEA Rural Power
System Upgrade Program power plant conceptual design report.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that a final wind-diesel conceptual design report be accepted by the Authority prior to the allocation of final design and permitting
funds.
The Chickaloon Native Village proposes construction of a pellet and solar heating system to supply heat for both a 3,200 sq. ft. shop/office and a 1,160 sq. ft. administrative building.
Included in the project is construction of a building addition to house the boiler system, purchase and installation of solar thermal panels and pellet boiler, and focused monitoring
and evaluation.
AEA recommends partial funding for Chickaloon Native Village pellet system installation only because the thermal only capital cost is less than the solar/thermal capital cost; the benefits
and savings are the same when comparing solar/thermal and thermal technology.
Before any funding is released to the grantee, AEA must review and accept the final design for the pellet system, the business/operations plan, and a biomass fuel supply plan. The system
must meet AEA?s biomass program requirements of low emissions, high efficiency, third party tested, and UL listed.
AEA recommends partial funding of $97,000.
Native Village of Tanacross requests $6,000,000 for construction of a seasonal 1.5 MW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Yerrick Creek to serve Tanacross, Tok, Tetlin and Dot Lake,
located 20 miles west of Tok. Total project cost is $19,000,000 and depends upon many other sources of funds that are not in hand (USDA RUS, New Markets Tax Credits, BIA loan). The
project is to be jointly owned by NVT and Tanacross Inc., which will form an IPP to sell power to AP&T. The project will require 15,000 ft of penstock and 10 miles of transmission line
upgrade from single phase to three phase.
AP&T will be hired to prepare final construction plans and specs.
The project was partially funded by AEA several years ago through a series of RE Fund grants when AP&T was the sole developer but ran into problems with lack of cooperation by landowner
Tanacross Inc. Funds were made available in what is called Round 0 for reconnaissance study and Round 3 (#438) for construction.
AEA has the following concerns: All funds for construction are not available, MOA not signed, IPP not formed, land ROW not in hand, permits not in place, design not complete, cost estimate
is vague, exact siting of intake and powerhouse is unclear.
Recommend partial funding of $75,000 to finalize permits, final design and specs, cost estimate, IPP arrangements, MOA, power sales agreement, bid documents, etc.
The Northwest Arctic Borough School District (NWABSD) applied for a grant to fund the construction of solar thermal water heating systems at eleven schools. Grant funds of $456,252
were requested with a match of $11,000 for a total project cost of $467,252. The project is intended to allow the boilers at the eleven schools to be turned off during summer months.
It would also offset water heating fuel use during other periods of the year.
AEA does not recommend this project for funding. The applicant made an error in reading solar panel output on p.39 of the application. 3.1 kWh/m^2/day is the solar insolation on the
panel. The panel thermal output is 3.2 kWh/panel/day. A confusion between the energy output expressed in units of ?per panel? and the insolation expressed in terms of energy per square
meter resulted in an over-estimation of energy that would be generated. Also, the application did not include enough detail regarding school occupancy during school days, summer months
and on weekends, and associated water heating requirements, to calculate the related fuel use and potential savings.
AEA recommends that NWABSD investigate advanced controls, alternative sources of water heating, and energy efficiency measures to reduce water heating fuel use at these facilities.
AEA encourages NWABSD to work directly with AEA staff to address the community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy planning staff for direct assistance.
This project is not recommended for funding.
Blue Hole Properties, LLC requests $170,000 in grant funds to complete feasibility and conceptual design of 200 kW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Cascade Creek, located at milepost
35 of the Richardson Highway and adjacent to the Tsaina Lodge.
The project is estimated to cost $2.25 million to construct and would require a 14-mi transmission to interconnect to the CVEA transmission system. It does not appear the cost of interconnection
has been included in the cost estimate. It would provide 1,040,000 kWh annually. How much would be purchased by the CVEA system is unknown due to the Allison Creek project currently
under construction and already operational Solomon Gulch.
Recommend full funding.
Tuntutuliak received REF Round 2 and direct legislative appropriation funding to install five Windmatic 17S 95-kilowatt wind turbines, completing that project in 2012. This proposal
would make use of excess electricity by diverting surplus kilowatts to residential heat loads. Unlike the other two project proposed for Kongiganak and Kwigillingok, the economics of
this project suffer from the lower residual energy available having already installed 30 stoves instead of just 20 stoves in Kong and Kwig, plus Tuntutuliak\'s ~10% lower wind regime,
plus their lower cost of diesel fuel. Applicant and contractor have prior experience installing ETS units. Average benefits seen for existing 30 installations will be somewhat lower
when aggregated among 50 homes. Residents see full benefits of heat savings. Final determination and survey of homes for install (community designation) must be accepted by AEA prior
to release of additional funds. Project needs to integrate with a separate project to upgrade the village distribution system as a condition of funding. Applicant has not been timely
in submitting required quarterly operations and maintenance reports on the existing wind energy project. Applicant needs to meet reporting requirements on existing project from this
point forward to receive funding. Recommend full funding.
Kongiganak received REF Round 1 and direct legislative appropriation funding to install five Windmatic 17S 95-kilowatt wind turbines, completing that project in 2012. This proposal would
make use of excess electricity by diverting surplus kilowatts to residential heat loads. Applicant and contractor have prior experience installing ETS units. Average benefits seen for
existing 20 installations will be somewhat lower when aggregated among 50 homes. Residents see full benefits of heat savings. Final determination and survey of homes for install (community
designation) must be accepted by AEA prior to release of additional funds. Project needs to integrate with a separate project to upgrade the village distribution system as a condition
of funding. Recommend full funding.
Igiugig Village Council, applying as a governmental entity, proposes to complete a feasibility study and conceptual design report to study the advisability of installing wind turbines
in Igiugig, Alaska. The applicant has finished a meteorological tower study and has submitted a Wind Resource Report with the application.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that the Wind Resource Analysis and Feasibility Study be accepted by AEA prior to allocation of Conceptual Design funds.
Kwigillingok received REF Round 1 and direct legislative appropriation funding to install five Windmatic 17S 95-kilowatt wind turbines, completing that project in 2012. This proposal
would make use of excess electricity by diverting surplus kilowatts to residential heat loads. Applicant and contractor have prior experience installing ETS units. Average benefits
seen for existing 27 installations will be somewhat lower when aggregated among 50 homes. Residents see full benefits of heat savings. Final determination and survey of homes for install
(community designation) must be accepted by AEA prior to release of additional funds. Project needs to integrate with a separate project to upgrade the village distribution system as
a condition of funding. Applicant has not been timely in submitting required quarterly operations and maintenance reports on the existing wind energy project. Applicant needs to meet
reporting requirements on existing project from this point forward to receive funding. Recommend full funding.
TDX Power intends to build on a successful wind?diesel power system at Sand Point, Alaska, by adding an energy storage component to its Sand Point Generating power plant. The inverter
and battery bank would allow the utility to purchase more wind power from the existing turbines and shut off the diesel engines for approximately 30% of the year. The project includes
the final design, procurement, installation and commissioning of an inverter and battery bank and integration with the existing wind-diesel power system in Sand Point, Alaska.
AEA recommends partial funding of $200,000 for a feasibility study and final design to provide additional detail on the proposed project as well as alternative savings options. additionally,
AEA recommends that the applicant consult with AEA?s powerhouse design team regarding the latest innovations in diesel efficiency, marine manifolds, heat recovery design, and dispatchable
boilers for frequency control. The feasibility study should investigate the economics of expanding the heat recovery loop to the clinic, school and/or city buildings, adding marine
manifolds to one or more of the gensets, adding interruptible electric heating to commercial customers, and/or adding a dispatchable electric boiler to the heat recovery loop. The
study should consider repairing or replacing the smallest genset to improve system diesel generation efficiency and the potential for paralleling effectively with the wind turbines.
The lessons learned from other battery installations in Alaska (Kodiak, Kotzebue, Kokhanok, etc.) will provide a valuable framework.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, applying as a utility, proposes the construction of a wind farm along the St. Mary\'s/Pitka\'s Point inter tie along with components necessary for
the integration of wind power into the diesel power plant. The wind-diesel system would serve the communities of St. Mary\'s and Pitka\'s Point. The basis for the proposed wind-diesel
system would be a design funded through Round 4 RE Fund grant #7040017. Permitting for the project is completed, site control has been established and a final design has been submitted
to the Authority.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that the 95% design be accepted by the Authority prior to allocation of construction funds.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, applying as a Utility, proposes to complete a final design of and permitting for a wind-diesel power system in the community of Stebbins, Alaska.
The wind-diesel system would service the communities of Stebbins and Saint Michael, Alaska. The final design will be based on a feasibility study and conceptual design report performed
under a Round 4 RE Fund Grant #7040008. The feasibility study and conceptual design report have been reviewed and accepted by the AEA Wind Program.
Recommend full funding.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, applying as a utility, proposes to complete a wind feasibility study and conceptual design report to study the advisability of installing wind turbines
in Mountain Village, Alaska. The applicant performed a meteorological tower study from November 2009 to August 2011. A Wind Resource Analysis based on this study was submitted with
the application and demonstrates a class five wind resource. Class four through seven wind regimes typically support viable wind-diesel projects in Western Alaska.
A best case scenario is often used by AEA Project Managers when evaluating the merits of a feasibility project and, in regards to this proposal, resulted in higher production estimates
than the applicant. The proposed project and future design work would refine production estimates prior to construction.
Recommend full funding.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, applying as a Utility, proposes to complete a final design of and permitting for a wind-diesel power system in the community of Marshall, Alaska.
The final design would be based on a feasibility study and conceptual design report performed under a Round 4 RE Fund Grant #7040021. The draft conceptual design report was submitted
and reviewed by AEA prior to the Round 7 RE Fund application deadline. A final conceptual design report has been submitted.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that the final conceptual design report be accepted by AEA prior to allocation of design and permitting funds.
AVEC requests $1,092,500 to complete final design for a 262 kW hydroelectric project on East Fork Mountain Creek and Lagoon Creek at Old Harbor.
The project received grants in Round 1 (#73) for $225,000 and Round 4 (#644) for $237,500 to complete a feasibility study, FERC licensing, and preliminary design. Additionally, the City
of Old Harbor received a Community Development Block Grant in support of the project for $250,000 to complete the FERC License Application and permitting.
AEA has the following concerns: The FERC License Application was submitted October 2013 and it will take 18-24 months for the application to be reviewed and granted. Site control, including
an easement within the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge, and changes to the conservation easement with the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, remains to be established. Additionally,
project economics are marginal and the requested funds for this phase of work are extremely high and unsupported.
Recommend partial funding to complete final design.
It is suggested AVEC make every effort to keep as much of the costs down to keep this project moving ahead.
Native Village of Chenega requests $1,400,000 to construct the 64 kW hydroelectric project on Anderson Creek. The project is estimated to reduce diesel consumption for electrical generation
by half.
The project received grants in Round 0 for reconnaissance study and Round 3 for final design and permitting (#455).
AEA has the following concerns: Permits and site control have not been received, the Declaration of Intent has not been submitted and it is unknown if the project is exempt from FERC
licensing. Draft plans titled as 95% design were submitted with the application but did not include technical specifications, and cannot be finalized until permitting is complete. The
estimated cost for construction is $1,650,000 and it is unclear where the additional funding will come from.
For these reasons we believe it is premature to grant further funding. Not recommended.
The Iliamna Village Council has applied for an $800,000 grant with a $120,000 match for reconnaissance, feasibility and conceptual design of a ground-mounted solar photovoltaic system.
The system would offset heating and electrical costs at its Village Council office and possibly adjacent buildings.
Since 2009, AEA has assisted the Iliamna-Nondalton-Newhalen Electric Cooperative (INNEC) with a series of utility upgrades to repair the hydro tailrace, rebuild hydro turbines and generators,
improve the intake system, upgrade controls, and install interruptible electric boilers at the schools in Newhalen and Nondalton. These projects are intended to benefit all three communities
by improving the reliability and reducing the cost of hydropower. AEA has recently funded a feasibility study to determine if the existing capacity at the Tazimina Hydro project should
be increased.
AEA does not recommend this application for funding because of its high cost, minimal proposed fossil fuel savings, the lack of a utility net metering policy and procedures or endorsement
of the project, and the alternative opportunity to heat with interruptible hydropower from INNEC.
AEA recommends that the applicant contact the INNEC board regarding electricity rates and the possibility of heating the applicant building with excess hydropower. Also consider energy
efficiency measures in public buildings for cost-effective energy savings. The applicant may also be able to participate in the projections of future heating and power use that will
be part of the Tazimina Hydro capacity increase study.
The City of False Pass proposed to conduct a feasibility study for a tidal power project in Isanotski Strait, building on previous reconnaissance efforts. The proposal was submitted
in response to language in the Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Round 7 Request for Applications (RFA) that specifically identified reconnaissance and feasibility stage hydrokinetic projects
as eligible for REF funding; this language was included in an effort to address a perceived eligibility gap between the Emerging Energy Technology Fund (EETF) and REF. This language
was included at the recommendation of the REF Advisory Committee.
The proposal, which calls for additional field measurements, modeling, site selection, and preparation for permitting, was submitted on behalf of a strong project team actively involved
in pioneering hydrokinetic development in the state.
As required by the review protocol described in the RFA, the proposal was evaluated by the same criteria used for all REF applications, and was disadvantaged by the high costs and uncertainty
associated with a nascent technology. The proposal is recommended for funding. As described in the RFA, the proposal could be recommended for funding ahead of its rank, if it demonstrated
both the importance of the proposed resource area relative to other potential resource areas and evidence that tidal power shows potential for economic deployments in Alaska in the
future.
While other strong and potential promising tidal resources exist in Alaska, the project team has made a convincing case that the proposed resource site is exceptional because it boasts
the strongest tidal currents identified in the state being considered for power generation and is located nearby an electrical load.
With only a single grid-connected tidal installation operating in the country, it is difficult to predict how rapidly the installed costs of tidal power generation plants will decline
as the technology matures. The applicant has reasoned that deployment and retrieval costs will decline dramatically as operators gain experience and equipment is improved. Although
numerous challenges may remain before economic deployments can be realized in Alaska, the potential for such deployments does exist.
AEA requested the advice of the REF Advisory Committee regarding the advancement of the proposal ahead of higher ranking projects as permitted by the RFA; however, the committee did
not recommend elevating the proposal beyond its scoring rank.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Emmonak are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the AVEC power plant planned for 2015 to the Water
Treatment Plant, Boys and Girls Club, and the City Office/Hotel.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
The design should consider the opportunity for marine jacketed engines supplying heat to additional community buildings.
Recommend full funding.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Holy Cross are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing power plant to the Water Treatment
Plant and Washeteria
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
The uninsulated AVEC power plant modules should be insulated to maximize available heat.
Recommend full funding.
AVEC requests $2,922,000 in grant funds for permitting and 65% design for a 690 kW run-of-river hydroelectric project on the Kogoluktuk River. The project would serve the communities
of Ambler, Shungnak and Kobuk. Shungnak and Kobuk are interconnected at present, while Ambler is not interconnected. Ambler is 29 miles from Shungnak.
The project received a Round 1 Renewable Energy Fund grant (#74) for $1,025,000 to complete a feasibility study. A draft feasibility study was included with the application but has not
been finalized and accepted by AEA.
According to the draft feasibility study, it is still unknown if the project would require FERC licensing and the project description mentions fish ladders may be required. FERC licensing
adds additional costs to a project and fish ladders also create higher costs and a technical barrier for development. It is unknown if a fish ladder can be permitted and operate successfully
in an Arctic environment. A feasibility study generally would be more definitive with these matters.
The requested funds of $2.9M for the design phase of work are high and unsupported. The proposal does not indicate the design team members. Additionally, small hydropower engineering
and operation with long, above-ground penstocks have not been proven north of the Arctic Circle, and a major concern is system freeze-up during sustained temperatures approaching -40
to -50 deg. F. Therefore, practical successful operation of potential projects remain speculative and risky.
The project is estimated to provide 1,669,835 kWh of the electrical demand and displace approximately 45,000 gallons of diesel used for heat. The proposal estimated a total capital cost
of $38.66 million; however, the cost estimate did not include the cost of a transmission line to Ambler nor the cost to implement hydro generation to be used for space heating. Although
the project appears to have fairly significant benefits, the costs are more substantial and the benefit/cost ratio of 0.38 reflects this.
Considering the concerns listed above and the challenging economics, the project was not recommended for funding. The applicant appealed AEA's decision. Staff reconsidered based upon
new information and scored the project which did not meet the minimum Stage 2 score.
The Northwest Arctic Borough (NWAB) proposes a 52.5kW solar photovoltaic system adjacent to the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) powerhouse in Noatak. The NWAB intends to
transfer ownership and operation of this project to AVEC. The project would generate approximately 49,500 kWh the first year with a capacity factor of 11%.
This proposal contains a number of technical deficiencies:
- There is no design, which is typically required for a project of this size
- There is no site control in place, which is required for construction projects
- The feasibility study provided, which is the basis for the application, was performed without a site visit.
- The proposed site is between the powerhouse, which is in the floodplain, and the river
- The cost estimate did not provide cost details
- The NWAB resolution authorizing the grant application was not signed
- The Noatak powerhouse needs work: the smallest genset is in poor condition, the three phase is unbalanced, and the heat recovery system is not working.
AEA does not recommend this project for funding. The AEA powerhouse program offers technical assistance to the community and utility in planning for improvement of the diesel powerhouse
and heat recovery system, and AEA?s energy planning staff is also available for assistance.
The community of Newtok, AK is relocating due to erosion. The new community site of Mertarvik, Alaska is Southeast of the current location and the State wind model projects a possible
class four to six wind resource in the area.
Ungusraq Power Company (UPC) / Newtok Traditional Council (NTC), applying as an Independent Power Producer (IPP), proposes feasibility and conceptual design work for a diesel power plant
and distribution system and to determine the advisability of installing wind turbines, solar pv, biomass and/or heat recovery in Mertarvik, Alaska.
Design work for the power plant and distribution system is ineligible for funding under the RE Fund. Conceptual design work for a wind or solar farm or heat recovery loop should be
done concurrently with or after the power plant and distribution system has been addressed. A biomass feasibility study should be performed concurrently with or after a determination
of which buildings could be served by a heat recovery loop.
Currently, there are two groups claiming legitimacy as the Newtok Traditional Council with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) making the determination. An initial decision was made
by BIA and is being appealed. It is anticipated that a final decision from BIA will be made in the second half of 2014. Securing site control and obtaining a proper Waiver of Sovereign
Immunity may be an issue until this situation is resolved.
Recommend partial funding of $75,000 to collect wind data at Mertarvik and electrical and thermal load data at Newtok, both for a minimum of one year, and to write a wind/solar resource
assessment.
The City of Adak is proposing to conduct a feasibility analysis of including wind energy in their local energy grid. The wind resource model predicts a Class 6 wind resource at the
proposed met tower site, indicating a very good wind resource. AEA is concerned that the existing community power generation and distribution system is not currently ready to incorporate
wind energy, but we also recognize that Adak is addressing the energy system and is likely to be working with AEA through the Rural Power System Upgrade program in coming years. The
amount of wind energy proposed for this community is much higher than AEA is comfortable pursuing. AEA believes that a 0.9 to 1.0 megawatt system would be more appropriate for this
community. The cost estimate to install the met towers is twice the highest AEA has ever seen.
Weekly monitoring of the met tower site is warranted given the extreme winds possible in Adak. Electrical load data must be collected with dataloggers at the power plant and in parallel
from the fish processing plant and other self-generating users not presently connected to the grid to develop a properly sized power generation system.
AEA encourages Adak to continue to work with AEA staff to address the community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy planning staff for direct assistance.
The project did not pass the minimum Stage 2 score criteria.
The City of Seward proposes to install a run around heat recovery loop in the Alaska SeaLife Center to recover wasted heat from exhaust fans, appliances, and overheated rooms and deliver
it into the building?s sea water source heat pump system, resulting in improved heat pump performance.
The calculated benefit derived from improved heat pump performance expected with the addition of the recovered heat into the system appears to be marginal, even assuming a dramatically
increased heat pump output than is currently used. However, the additional benefit of avoiding the costs of a dedicated split cooling system for the overheated rooms is substantial.
Even using more conservative assumptions regarding performance increase, the project appears to be economic.
Full funding recommended.
Ineligible for further review because the applicant did not provide a conceptual design report 30 days prior to the application deadline as required and identified in Sections 1.12,
2.5 and Section 4 of the Request for Grant Applications dated July 2, 2013.
Section 4 of RFA, page 26
7. Wind applications requesting Phase III (Final Design and Permitting) or Phase IV (Construction, Commissioning, Operation and Reporting) funding will submit documentation necessary
to demonstrate the fulfillment of all requirements for earlier phases of the project identified in Section 2 of the RFA [i.e. Phase II (Feasibility Analysis, Conceptual Design) or Phase
III (Final Design and Permitting)] 30 days prior to the application deadline.
The City and Borough of Yakutat is proposing final design and installation of low emissions; high efficiency; 3rd party tested cordwood boiler systems to heat three City/Borough-owned
buildings: City Hall Building; Court House Building; Yakutat Community Center . This project is estimated to displace a total of 7,238 gallons per year of fuel oil, using 38 cords of
wood per year. The project has completed a feasibility study.
This project is an example of good collaboration efforts among community organizations in an effort to provide low cost heating to the entire community of Yakutat. Also the local community
appears to be supportive of a district biomass heating project. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
AEA recommends partial funding of design and permitting to allow the City and Borough of Yakutat to make an informed decision about pursing biomass as a heating option.
Recommend partial funding with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design; biomass storage; business/operational plan; harvest plan; inventory plan,
$103,000.
The Community of Nunam Iqua is proposing the design and construction of a recovered heat system from the new power plant to the washeteria/water treatment plant for building heat; the
water treatment plant for process heat; and to the Clinic, Community Hall and Corporation Store for building heat. This project is proposed to be managed by AEA in conjunction with
the design and construction of the new power plant.
The preliminary heat recovery assessment performed in September 2013 showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
Recommend full funding.
Alaska Gateway School District proposes adding on a heat loop off the newly-completed wood-fired heating system at the Tok School to provide heat to two school buildings ? the multipurpose
building housing the ice rink and shooting range and the Zamboni building . The project team would complete a final design phase and construction documents prior to construction.
This application is similar to the Round 6 submittal #926 that was recommended for funding, but below the $25MM allotment. This Round 7 application significantly decreases the number
of buildings and the size of the proposed in the heat loop.
Recommend full funding with the provision that AEA approve the final design before construction funds are released.
The applicant proposes a 52kW solar photovoltaic system at the Bristol Bay Borough School in Naknek. This system would offset approximately 42,367 kWh of electricity in the first year.
The applicant did not provide details regarding electric load (weekday average, weekend average, summer average, etc.) or an agreement with the utility regarding interconnection.
Naknek Electric Association provided a 10/30/13 e-mail stating that it does not offer net metering. Both the application and the utility director indicated that the applicant had not
discussed the project with the electric utility to request permission to interconnect.
AEA does not recommend this project for funding due to the lack of electric load detail and the lack of an agreement with the utility that would allow the proposed system to be connected
to the local grid.
AEA encourages BBB School District to work directly with AEA staff to address the community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy planning staff for direct assistance.
This grant request is to fund the subject Project for final design and permitting. There is a current grant to the North Slope Borough for Feasibility and Concept Design in the amount
of $210,000.
As of this current grant application review there have been $0 expended on the grant currently in place although much work has taken place.
Recommend funding of this Project commensurate with substantial completion and acceptance of the previous grant documents.
Kaktovik has received REf Round 4 funding to complete a wind resource analysis, feasibility study and conceptual design. The existing power plant is easily adaptable to integration of
wind energy. Power plant description in section 3.5 and 4.2.2 of this application is one of the most detailed we\'ve seen. Good summary of permitting and environmental concerns. NSB
has a long history of maintaining village power systems at a high level of reliability and functionality. Budget is higher than standard wind project designs due to increased environmental
assessment and permitting. Good wind resource. Recommend full funding.
The City of Galena is proposing installation and commissioning of a low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party tested chip-fired boiler system to heat its school district and the Galena
Interior Learning Academy School (GILA). This project is estimated to displace a total 203,850 gallons per year of fuel oil, using 2,300 tons of chips per year. The technical feasibility
phase of this project is complete, but the final design and harvest/fuel inventory work is still in process.
The application includes substantial support from the community, the Louden Tribal Council, Galena City School District, and Gana?A-Yoo Limited. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure
that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project. Also, AEA must review and approve Phase III ? Final Design.
Recommend full funding with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design funded in Round 6, including the decreased load resulting from end-use efficiency
measures; business/operational plan with heat sales agreement; harvest plan; biomass storage; inventory plan prior to the release of construction funds.
The Tanalian Electric Cooperative requests funds to assess hydroelectric and hydrokinetic resource potential and economics of the Tanalian River for electrical generation for Port Alsworth.
The Tanalian River is located in Lake Clark National Park and Preserve and any hydroelectric development would require specific authorization by Congress, indicating significant permitting
challenges. The application included a support letter from the National Park Service (NPS) for investigation of a potential hydrokinetic project; however, the letter was dated October
29, 2008 and was in support of a previous Round 3 grant application and applicant (#436), and did not indicate any support for a conventional hydroelectric project. It is unknown if
the NPS supports hydroelectric studies in the Tanalian River. Additionally, the river is a known salmon stream and is listed as anadromous by Alaska Department of Fish & Game.
In Round 4, Alaska Green Energy submitted and was funded for a similar proposal (#436) to conduct a reconnaissance study of hydroelectric potential for Port Alsworth. However, the grant
was canceled before expending any grant funds due to inactivity and inability of applicant to obtain support letters for the project and to hold community and agency meetings.
Although assessment of the hydrokinetic potential of the river was mentioned in the application, no detail was provided regarding the work to be performed, the amount budgeted for the
work, or the location of interest. Even if NPS support for a hydrokinetic project had been renewed, insufficient detail was provided for consideration of this component of the proposal.
Additionally, hydrokinetics is a developing technology and economics are unlikely to be positive at this time.
Until the applicant can demonstrate that a project has a reasonable chance to be developed and permitted at the location, funding is not recommended.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Grayling are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing power plant to the Water Treatment
Plant.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
The uninsulated AVEC power plant modules should be insulated to maximize available heat.
Recommend full funding.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the Village of Venetie are proposing to extend the use of recovered heat from the existing Venetie power plant for heating the newly constructed
clinic. Recovered heat is already being used to heat the Washeteria and Water Treatment Plant.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
Recommend full funding.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Saint Mary?s are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing AVEC power plant to City Shop,
Water Circulation Loop, Cold Storage/Hotel, and City Office Building.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
Recommend full funding.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Eek are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing AVEC power plant to the circulating water
distribution loop and the water storage tank.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
AVEC is investigating the feasibility of wind power in the City of Eek. The design should take into account the integration of wind-to-heat.
Recommend full funding.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Chevak are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing power plant to the Water Treatment Plant
and Vacuum Sewer System.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
ANTHC has funding for an electric heater for excess wind. The design should take into account the integration of wind-to-heat. The design should also consider the opportunity for marine
jacketed engines supplying heat to additional community buildings.
Recommend full funding.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Brevig Mission are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing power plant to the Water Treatment
Plant and the Washeteria/City Office. The Heat Recovery System will require the installation of a marine manifold on one of the existing generators.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project.
The intertie to Teller was damaged and AVEC is working with FEMA on repairs. Significant more recoverable heat will be available when the intertie is repaired, and the heat recovery
system should be designed to handle this heat load.
The uninsulated AVEC power plant modules should be insulated to maximize available heat.
Recommend full funding.
Ineligible for further review because the applicant is not an eligible party as defined in Section 1.4 of the Request for Grant Applications dated July 2, 2013.
The transmission project proposed does not ?link an eligible renewable energy project or eligible natural gas project to other transmission or distribution infrastructures? as required
in Section 1.5.
The City of Kotzebue is proposing installation and commissioning of a refuse derived fuel (RDF) and low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party tested biomass fired boilers in two city
owned buildings.
This project is estimated to displace a total 98,000 of gallons per year of fuel oil, using 2,300 tons of chips per year. The technical feasibility phase of this project is complete,
but the final design and harvest/fuel inventory work is still in process.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency and air quality is addressed in conjunction with this project. AEA recommends partial funding of design and
permitting to allow the City of Kotzebue to make an informed decision about pursing biomass as a heating option.
Recommend partial funding with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design; business/operational plan; biomass storage; biomass inventory assessment,
$270,000.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough requests funding for construction to build two biomass heating system for the Ketchikan Airport and Ketchikan High School. The project is estimated to
displace 111,033 gallons of fuel/year and has the potential to save the Ketchikan Gateway Borough fuel costs in excess of $ 8.0 million over 20 years.
Due to the differing economics of the two proposed projects, AEA recommends partial funding for the Ketchikan Airport pellet system installation only.
Before any funding is released to the grantee, AEA must review and accept the final design for the pellet system, the business/operations plan, and a biomass fuel supply plan. The system
must meet AEA?s biomass program requirements of low emissions, high efficiency, third party tested, and UL listed (the product meets public safety requirements as designated by the
Underwriters Laboratories).
Ketchikan Gateway Borough should reevaluate the potential for a biomass system at the high school after the final design has been completed. AEA encourages Ketchikan to work directly
with AEA staff in the coming year to continue to examine the implementation of biomass at the school.
AEA recommends partial funding of $620,000.
Chignik Lagoon Village Council requests an additional $2,352,653 to complete construction of the 167 kW Packers Creek Hydroelectric Project. The project will displace 97% of diesel fuel
(521,000 kWh) used to generate power today and will also displace additional heat energy through dispatchable electrical heat to the school.
The project received grants in Round 1 for permitting and design (#14) and Round 5 for construction (#836). The project was bid and all bids received were well above the engineer?s estimate.
Phase I under the Round 5 grant includes construction of access roads and bridge, powerhouse, and purchase and installation of turbine, generator, and switchgear. Phase I is anticipated
to be complete by August 2014. Phase II will complete the remainder of the project.
Despite the increase in cost the project still appears favorable and is expected to result in a decrease in electric costs from 75 cents to 33 cents per kWh.
The applicant calculation of their B/C ratio differed from AEA analysis in a few substantial ways. The applicant calculated using base system generation efficiency of 10 gallons/kwh;
AEA analysis uses 13 gallons/kwh. Applicant analysis assumed 10,000 gallons of displaced heat load; AEA analysis assumes that no additional heat beyond that going into existing heat
recovery system is used. Applicant analysis assumes generation level that is greater than current community demand; AEA analysis uses current community demand.
Recommend full funding.
With a Round 4 Renewable Energy Fund grant, IPEC completed a reconnaissance study to investigate the Tenakee Inlet geothermal resource. The study indicated some encouraging early signs
regarding the potential resource, but also confirmed that the significant transmission line and access road costs make the project very expensive and economically unfavorable, with
a benefit/cost ratio below 1.
While there does not appear to be demand for electricity produced by the project in either Pelican or Tenakee Springs, many residents of Hoonah demonstrated their support for the project.
Construction of a road to the geothermal site and the addition of other large electrical loads in the area could change the economic picture for a geothermal plant, but at this point
both prospects are speculative.
Without exploration wells?proposed in this application?key characteristics of the geothermal resource and the viability of a geothermal power plant will remain unknown. But absent a
clear economic justification for the power plant itself (a community energy demand and an apparent cost-effective manner to generate the energy), costly geothermal exploration is inappropriate.
No funding recommended.
Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC) proposes construction of an intertie that connects Metlakatla to Ketchikan. AEA is providing $2 million in Renewable Energy Fund rounds 1 and 4 (applications
#20 and #656). Additionally another $2 million in grant funds from the state have been awarded.
The RE Fund round 4 grant was negotiated this year (2013). Conditions of the grant support a step-wise approach to determine feasibility; conceptual design; and completion of all preconstruction
activities (including final design documents, final construction cost estimate, demonstration of site control, bathymetry, NEPA, and permitting) prior to construction funding being
awarded.
AEA is assisting MIC in complying with these conditions; however this work remains in process. The review team believes it is premature to allocate construction funds.
$4M has previously been provided to the requesting entity and previous grants suggest a step-wise approach. Funding for this round is not recommended until such time as the previous
grant?s milestones have been met as described above.
Not recommended for funding.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes to install a sea water source heat pump system at the Sitka Sound Science Center.
Because the Science Center is already equipped with a sea water intake to supply its aquarium and hatchery, the proposed project represents a lower cost opportunity to install a sea
water source heat pump system relative to other buildings.
According to AEA?s review, given the anticipated capital costs of the proposed system, the size of the building and existing heat loads would not result in the displacement of a sufficient
quantity of diesel for system payback. However, the possibility of expansion of the system to provide heat to additional nearby buildings could make the project more economically compelling.
AEA recommends funding for the design portion of the project with the requirement that incorporation of additional loads be considered in order to improve overall project economics.
Partial funding recommended.
Village of Minto proposes final design and construction of a biomass boiler system that is low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party tested to supply heat to the Minto Multi-Purpose
Building/Lodge and the Health Clinic. The system would consume approximately 99 cords per year and displace 11,400 gallons of fuel oil per year.
Reconnaissance assessment through the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group indicates a viable project. Village of Minto is supplying a building to house the boiler (s) as a match.
AEA is concerned by the lack of a harvest /operations plan for the project, but it is a deliverable. However, we recognize the existing fuel wood market in the interior Region. AEA
will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding for final design, permitting, and construction with requirement that Minto provide a harvest plan; business/operations plan; biomass storage; final design that
must be reviewed and approved by AEA before construction funds are disbursed.
The Cook Inlet Housing Authority proposes to install a ground source heat pump system in the Seldovia House housing complex in order to reduce the building?s heating oil consumption.
Despite some unknowns regarding ground source heat pump performance on the Kenai Peninsula, the economics of the proposed installation appear to hold up to a range of conservative assumptions.
The project could provide useful GSHP performance data for the Kenai Peninsula in addition to demonstrating the effectiveness of a hybrid heat pump/fuel oil system. The high cost
of fuel oil in Seldovia makes the potential savings of a ground source heat pump attractive despite higher local electricity costs.
Full funding recommended.
Kodiak Electric Association (KEA) presents a compelling proposal for the incorporation of a flywheel into their grid with numerous potential benefits including accommodation of a new
electric crane at Pier III, extension of the life of the utility?s battery energy storage system, and facilitated integration of future wind turbine installations. KEA is well-suited
to demonstrate how flywheel systems can be used for integration of variable renewable energy sources and provide grid stability.
However, because the electric crane would serve a private entity, the offset diesel fuel by the flywheel is not included as a public benefit in AEA?s economic evaluation, dramatically
reducing the application?s Benefit/Cost ratio and overall score.
The application also proposed construction of a new tie line to relieve several overloaded feeders; although this tie line could help the integration of the flywheel, its construction
will be required regardless and was therefore removed from the recommended award amount. This had the effect of increasing the Benefit/Cost ratio and overall score.
Partial funding recommended, excluding construction of the proposed tie line.
The Native Village of Cantwell requests funds for feasibility assessment of a 3 MW storage hydroelectric project on Jack River.
The Village received grant funds in Round 4 (#606) for reconnaissance assessment of the project and has installed a stream gauge. The results of the funded reconnaissance report were
that a hydroelectric project on Jack River is technically possible with a range of installed capacities from 1.7 to 7.3 MW. The proposed project reconnaissance report had a cost estimate
of $31.5-$50.3 million. AEA used a mid-range estimate, or $40.9 million, to arrive at the benefit/cost ratio of 0.79, indicating the project is likely to have poor economics and would
likely be costlier than the existing energy system.
The project was scored but did not pass minimum Stage 2 scoring.
Native Village of Cantwell requests funds for a reconnaissance study of a 1-2 MW run-of-river project on Carlo Creek to sell power to GVEA through the AK Intertie. This is similar to
the Jack River hydro site recently studied in reconnaissance through Round 4 (#606).
The Village applied for funding in Round 6 (#977) but did not score within the funding level.
Partial funding recommended for reconnaissance study.
The applicant has studied the wind resource in other locations south and southwest of Tok. AP&T has a very experienced staff working in Port Townsend as well as the Tok facility. APC
already has a 50-meter tower staged in Tok ready for deployment to the Chisana Mtn site. Access to the proposed site is relatively easy. Met tower site is adjacent to a 15kV buried
transmission line. Permitting is relatively straightforward for this project. A class 4 wind regime has been found elsewhere in the region. The electrical load allows for a fair amount
of wind energy on the system. Construction costs for this project would be among the lowest for wind projects in the state do to the location on the road system. Recommend full funding.
City of Atka requests $114,965 in grant funds to install dispatchable electrical heating systems in public buildings to utilize excess hydroelectric generation from the Chuniisax Creek
Hydroelectric Project. The project is expected to displace 8,300 gallons of diesel fuel annually.
The City completed permitting and design under a Round 3 REF grant (#7030001) for $80,000.
AEA has the following concerns: The environmental report did not investigate the potential for encountering lead based paint and asbestos containing materials in the installation of
the new heating equipment in the older buildings to be served. This oversight may add risk to the project, since, if found, these would require specialty subcontractors to remediate.
Also, it appears the powerhouse load bank will still be in use for frequency regulation, which will continue to ?waste? electricity.
AEA recommends making energy efficiency improvements to the buildings that will receive hydro heat, further enhancing the benefit of the hydro energy.
Recommend full funding.
IPEC requests funds to perform feasibility study of a hydroelectric project on Gunnuk Creek near Kake.
AEA has the following concerns: The principle study attached to the application appears to draw unsupported conclusions upon which to base award of grant funds. Because of this, AEA
recommends a new reconnaissance report be prepared using a professional engineer, qualified to perform such a study.
Recommend partial funding for a reconnaissance study.
The application did not have an estimated project cost. AEA estimated a cost of $7.5 million, from which the B/C ratio of 4.44 is derived. Once the reconnaissance study is complete a
new project cost should be available, and thus a new B/C ratio. Additionally, Kake?s powerhouse and bulk fuel facilities are being upgraded through AEA?s RPSU program. The reconnaissance
study should help determine the next course of action for Kake in regard to power generation.
Special Provisions: All available basin records be collected and meeting transcripts between USACE, ANTHC and IPEC to provide backstop for the new study. Field collection and analysis
of data shall be conducted. Study will also consider other potential renewable energy sources to serve Kake, and in comparison to the proposed Kake-Petersburg intertie. Elements of
the study are to be as listed in the RFA.
THREA requests $700,000 in grant funds to perform a reconnaissance and feasibility study of a 1 MW storage or run-of-river hydro project at Walker Lake. The primary purpose of the project
would be to supply IPEC?s Chilkat Valley and Klukwan system with hydropower. THREA would be an IPP selling to IPEC.
IPEC applied for funding to study Walker Lake in Round 5 (#829) and Round 6 (#920) but did not score within the funding limit in either case. In October 2011 IPEC acquired the 600 kW
Ten-Mile hydro project, which provides about 60% of the energy needed for the IPEC?s service area. The balance of their power needs (700,000 kWh) is purchased from AP&T?s Upper Lynn
Canal grid. That grid is 97% powered by hydropower, so the amount of diesel to be saved by building Walker Lake is very limited (1,500 gallons per year).
Alaska Power Authority prepared a reconnaissance assessment for Walker Lake in 1988 with an estimated capital cost of $10.5M. Sealaska Corporation updated the assessment in 2005. Both
studies concluded that the project feasibility was marginal to poor. The current application did not include an estimated project capital cost.
AEA has the following concerns with this project:
1. AEA has already funded reconnaissance and feasibility assessments for possible hydro projects in the region including Connelly Lake, Schubee Lake, West Creek, and Burro Creek. These
projects were found not to be economically feasible, mainly from a lack of a market to justify the capital costs.
2. The demand for the project power will be a fraction of the potential annual energy available from Walker Lake; given that, the project will spill nearly year round.
3. While the application states that THREA will sell its power to IPEC below the APC rate, it is highly likely the cost of power from Walker Lake would exceed that purchased from APC
unless the project was fully funded with grants, given the rising costs of FERC licensing and construction for new hydro projects.
4. This project would displace very little diesel generation (approx. 1,500 gallons per year). 97% of the power purchased from APC (the load Walker Lake would satisfy) is generated
from the following hydropower projects: Lutak, Kasidaya, Dewey, and Goat Lake.
5. The amount requested for the reconnaissance study exceeds that which can be justified. If funded, partial funding is recommended.
The project did not pass the minimum Stage 2 score criteria.
SEAPA requests funding to perform final design and construction to raise the Swan Lake reservoir by 15 feet. This will increase the firm energy available to the SEAPA system and provide
for an additional 7500 MWh of hydroelectric generation in an average water year.
SEAPA anticipates submitting the non-capacity license amendment to FERC in April 2014, begin design in May 2015, complete design in March 2015, bid construction in spring 2015 and award
construction contract in summer 2015.
Given the anticipated project schedule, AEA believes it would be premature to award grant funds for construction in this round. Also, a 50% cost share will allow SEAPA to match on an
equal basis through final design.
Partial funding of $560,488 is recommended to complete the final design phase.
Special Provision: Issuance of FERC non-capacity amendment and resolution of land issues before any Round 7 funds are expended.
SEAPA submitted a similar proposal in Round 5 and has already been given a 34-meter met tower from AEA\'s met tower loan program. Applicant should work with AEA\'s anemometer loan program
to get the existing met tower installed in Spring of 2014. Site assessment and selection should begin in 2013 with the assistance of the AEA met tower loan program. A permitting plan
can be developed at that time. Most met towers require an FAA permit which takes a shsort time to complete, a preliminary meeting with US Fish & Wildlife Service and request for site
access from the land owner. US Forest Service permission can be requested in 2013 at very low cost to applicant. The staff at SEAPA has experience with large energy projects. Due to
size of electrical load and infrastructure in the region, a multi-megawatt scale wind project would be appropriate and allow for the best economies of scale. Recommend full funding.
The Haines Borough is proposing final design and installation of low emissions; high efficiency; 3rd party tested pellet-fired boiler systems to heat Borough-owned buildings; Haines
School and Pool, Chilkat Center, Sewer Treatment Plant, Water Treatment Plant, Vocational Education Building, The Library, old City Shop, new City Shop, The Public Safety Building and
The Sheldon Museum. This project is estimated to displace a total of 80,000 gallons per year of fuel oil, using 695 tons of pellets per year. The project has completed feasibility/conceptual
design phase work.
The application includes substantial support from the community and Borough. Haines Borough has already purchased and installed a pellet system at the Borough Senior Center. This project
will develop an anchor tenant for pellet supply in the Southeast Alaska region and will potentially support the development of pellet manufacturing infrastructure.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding for design, permitting, and construction with requirements of AEA acceptance of final design, fuel supply plan, biomass storage, and business/operational plan
before construction funds are released.
The Haines Borough requests funds for a feasibility assessment of two hydroelectric projects totaling 3 MW, and 1.5 miles of transmission to connect to the Ocean Beauty\'s fish processing
facility and residences in the non-organized community of Excursion Inlet. The processor and most residences are seasonal. There is no community power system, which would be necessary
to distribute the power to the community.
The project received a Round 4 grant (#625) to perform a two-step reconnaissance study. The first step to determine the reach of the anadromous fish habitat is now complete. Work
continues on the second half of the study.
The currently funded second half of the reconnaissance study is to address: the fish habitat; electrical service and estimated load for the Borough subdivision; establishment of community
utility; business arrangement for selling power to the fish processor Ocean Beaut;, site control and land ownership, and FERC jurisdiction. It will include consideration of fish habitat
issues as it affects the cost, capacity, and energy output of the project and environmental licensing concerns. While the fish habitat study has been completed, the final reconnaissance
study has not been reviewed or accepted by the Authority. Because this study is not complete it provides no support for this application.
The applicant should also be aware that the Renewable Energy Fund has a strong public benefit purpose. An estimated 2 percent of the energy generated would serve the public, while 98%
would serve a private company. AEA encourages Haines Borough and Excursion Inlet to work directly with AEA staff to address the community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy
planning staff for direct assistance.
The application is not recommended due to incomplete prior phases of the project.
Edna Bay Community proposes reconnaissance of a 35-70 kW hydroelectric project on Survey Creek.
Edna Bay has no existing electric utility system and depends on individual privately owned generators for its local power needs. The proposal also requests funding to study the feasibility
of constructing a utility system power plant and distribution system.
AEA has the following concerns: the applicant suggests an Archimedes Screw hydroelectric technology may work, but this technology has not been constructed in the U.S. and limited access
to this remote site seems to make it a poor candidate to resolve application problems from an unproven technology; Survey Creek is listed as anadromous fish habitat by ADF&G; the proposed
site is in the Tongass National Forest and is subject to the Roadless Rule restrictions; and it is outside the scope of the Renewable Energy Fund to evaluate the need for a conventional
power plant and distribution.
AEA encourages Edna Bay to work directly with AEA staff to address the community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy planning staff for direct assistance.
The project did not pass the minimum Stage 2 score criteria.
The City of Chignik requests funding for permitting and final design of a hydroelectric project on Indian Lake and River to replace an existing 60 kW plant which is at the end of its
useful life.
The City received a Renewable Energy Fund Round 1 grant (#2195388) for $207,500 to perform a feasibility study, conceptual design, and cost estimate for a replacement hydroelectric plant.
Additionally, it was funded to enter into a MOU with Trident Seafoods to transfer the FERC license for the existing hydro to the City. The license has been transferred but the study
is incomplete.
AEA has the following concerns: The already funded feasibility study remains incomplete as of the date of application, with less than 45% of the grant funds expended. A preliminary 13
page report was submitted with the application but significant questions of project feasibility remain unanswered, including size of plant, project cost, project impacts to resident
and anadromous fish, economy of project, etc. The requested grant funding is very high and no information has been provided to support this large amount. Therefore, AEA recommends partial
funding of $500,000 to complete design and permitting.
Special provision: AEA must receive and approve the feasibility study before any grant funds for this phase be expended.
Southeast Island School District on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska requests funding for engineering design to build a low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party tested
cordwood heating systems for the following school buildings; gym, elementary, high schools, four teacher?s housing units, and a greenhouse. Plus the following plans; harvest/ forest
inventory, business and operation, monitoring and reporting.
Recommended funding:
1. Thorne Bay School ? Full Funding for Final Design and construction.
2. Naukati School ? Full Funding for Final Design and construction.
3. Whales Pass School ? Full Funding for Final Design and construction.
4. Hollis School ? Full Funding for Final Design and construction.
Recommend full funding for final design, permitting, and construction with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design, business/operational plant,
harvest plan, biomass storage, and inventory plan prior to the release of construction funds.
The Hydaburg City Schools in Hydaburg, AK on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska requests funding for engineering design to build a low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party
tested cord wood heating system for the school buildings: gym; elementary school; high school. The project has the potential to save the Hydaburg School District in excess of $500,000
over the life of the project.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project. AEA recommends partial funding of design and permitting to allow
the Hydaburg City Schools to make an informed decision about pursing biomass as a heating option.
Recommend partial funding for final design and permitting with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design and business/operational plan; biomass storage;
harvest/inventory plan, $125,000 .
CVEA requests $5,914,491 to construct a 6.5 MW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Allison Creek. The funds would be used to complete construction of the project. The project is expected
to offset up to 1.4 million gallons of diesel fuel annually.
AEA has the following concerns: A portion of the land the project will use will be purchased in the future from Alyeska Pipeline, however an agreement is in place to allow construction;
and a FERC license amendment is being sought to allow penstock to be installed below grade and a portion to be within a tunnel.
Despite these concerns substantial progress has been made over the last year to advance the project including: issuance of FERC license, completion of final design, Maximum Allowable
Construction Cost contract has been awarded, PM contract awarded, turbine-generator owner equipment has been awarded, and owner CM contract awarded.
AEA requires that the grantee obtain the FERC amendment prior to expending Round 7 grant funds.
The Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) on 1/7/14 advised AEA to recommend to the Legislature partial funding this project if funding is kept within the Governor?s budget
of $20M. REFAC further advised AEA to include the initial recommendation of full funding should the Legislature make available additional funds this year. One other hydro project,
Statson Creek Diverson, was also recommended for partial funding. The primary reason was to allow the funding of six additional projects in higher cost areas of the state.
AEA recommends partial funding of $4,764,652 (80% of request) if the Renewable Energy Fund Round 7 budget is limited to $20M, and recommends this project second in line for any additional
funding beyond $20M, up to the requested grant amount of $5,941,491.
Native Village of Tazlina (NTV) proposes final design and construction of a biomass boiler system to supply a small district heating system consisting of four buildings: Community Hall,
Clinic, Office and Shop. The system would consume approximately 116 cords per year and displace 8,078 gallons of fuel oil per year. Reconnaissance assessment through the Alaska Wood
Energy Development Task Group indicates a viable project. NVT selected the best biomass system for the existing structures as chips or cordwood.
AEA is concerned by the lack of a specific fuel supply plan and formal land usage agreement for the project. However, we recognize the existing fuel wood market in the Tazlina and Cooper
Valley area. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project. AEA recommends partial funding of design and
permitting to allow the Community of Tazlina to make an informed decision about pursing biomass as a heating option.
Recommend partial funding for final design and permitting with requirements that AEA must review and approve the final design, fuel supply plan, business/operation plan, biomass storage,
harvest/inventory plan, $125,000.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes to install an air source heat pump system as a part of a renovation of the Kettleson Library.
Although air source heat pump performance in southeast Alaska is not well documented, the planned renovation offers a good opportunity to replace the existing fuel oil boilers with an
air source heat pump system and could provide valuable data of the performance of newer air source heat pump models in southeast Alaska. While there is little doubt regarding the technical
feasibility of the proposed system, full project payback appears highly dependent on fuel oil prices.
Full funding recommended.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes to install an effluent source heat pump system in the waste water treatment facility to decrease reliance on the fuel oil boiler.
The proposal to use waste water effluent as a source for a heat pump system is a compelling use of an otherwise unused heat source, and could serve as a model for similar systems in
other parts of the state. The high temperature and availability of effluent would result in a higher heat pump COP than seen in ground or sea water source installations. Unfortunately,
a combination of high anticipated capital costs and low overall annual heat demand make the economics of the project less beneficial than in a location with year round heating needs.
If possible, AEA suggests incorporating other heating loads into the system in order to take full advantage of the proposed system?s capacity which would improve the project economics.
Full funding recommended.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes to install an air source heat pump system as a part of an extensive renovation of Centennial Hall.
Although air source heat pump performance in southeast Alaska is not well documented, the economics of the project appear favorable under a range of different conservative assumptions.
The planned renovation offers a good opportunity to replace the existing fuel oil boilers with an air source heat pump system and could provide valuable data of the performance of
newer air source heat pump models in southeast Alaska.
Full funding recommended.
The Craig High School District in Craig, AK requests funding for engineering design and construction to build a low emission, high efficiency, and 3rd party tested biomass heating system
for the Craig High School. The project is estimated to displace 19,459 gallons of fuel/year and has the potential to save the Craig School District in excess fuel cost savings of $2.1
million - $2.6 million over 20 years.
This project is an example of good collaboration efforts among community organizations in an effort to provide low cost heating to the entire community of Craig and surrounding communities.
Also, the local community appears to be supportive of a district biomass heating project. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction
with this project.
AEA recommends partial funding of design and permitting to allow the Craig High School to make an informed decision about pursing biomass as a heating option.
Recommend partial funding for design and permitting with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design; biomass storage; business/operational plan with
heat sales agreement; harvest plan; inventory plan, $125,000.
The Nenana City School District in Nenana, AK (Interior Alaska) requests funding for engineering design to build a district wide heating system for the following buildings: Nenana City
School; Administration Building; Warehouse; Nenana Student Living Center; Nenana Native Council Day Care; City Water Plant; City Fire Department. The project is estimated to displace
87,800 gallons of fuel/year and has the potential to save the Nenana City School District in excess of $3,516,725 over the life of the project.
This project is an example of good collaboration efforts among community organizations in an effort to provide low cost heating to the entire community of Nenana. Also the local community
appears to be supportive of a district biomass heating project. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding for design and permitting with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design; business/operational plan with heat sales agreement;
biomass storage; harvest plan; inventory plan.
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the City of Chuathbaluk are proposing to design and construct a recovered heat system from the existing power plant for heating the water
system. Existing unused heat trace piping will be used to transfer the heat from the power plant to the water treatment plant.
Although the Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment was completed in September of 2013 and showed sufficient excess heat to support this project, it did not address the energy required
to pump the water through relatively small diameter pipes and for long distances.
We are concerned that the energy required to pump the heated water from the power plant to the water treatment plant through the unused heat trace piping will consume more energy than
that of the estimated savings of the project, creating an additional financial burden on the community. Additional information was requested on pumping costs but was never received.
The City and Borough of Juneau proposes to install a ground source heat pump system to heat the new Mendenhall Library.
While Juneau offers a favorable climate for ground source heat pump systems, the significant cost of vertical well loop field construction has a high impact on project economics. As
proposed, the Mendenhall Library heat pump system would incur high construction costs but use well below 20% of the system?s total capacity on an annual basis. Because of this, the
proposed system for the Mendenhall Library does not compare favorably on an economic basis to the fuel oil system used as a base case.
A similar system was proposed in Renewable Energy Fund Round 6; after consultation with the applicant, AEA recommended funding for a smaller GSHP system that relied on a supplemental
oil fuel boiler for peak demand. The project did not ultimately receive funding. This suggested design was not pursued in the current application; although the proposed design is
less economically attractive than it might have been, it remains technically feasible.
Full funding recommended.
The Naknek Electrical Association is proposing the feasibility, design, and construction of two Echogen stack heat recovery engines to power systems on the utility?s diesel generators.
The estimated power generation is 2.3MM kWh annually.
Echogen is proposing a modified Organic Rankine Cycle engine with supercritical carbon dioxide as the working fluid. The stated thermal efficiency is approximately 20%.
While AEA is interested in this concept, the modified Organic Rankine Cycle is still an emerging technology. This application would be better suited for the Emerging Energy Technology
Program.
AEA recommends the Naknek Electrical Association power systems be evaluated and included in AEA?s priority ranking list for Rural Power Systems Upgrade program assistance. Additionally,
AEA encourages NEA to work directly with AEA staff to address the community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy planning staff for direct assistance.
No funding recommended.
This application is a duplicate of 1085. Only 1085 will be scored.
Karluk Tribal Council submitted this proposal in Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 and again this year. The community of 37 people sits on the western coast of Kodiak Island along Karluk
Anchorage and Karluk Lagoon. The wind regime ranges from relatively calm winds in town to fierce and damaging winds on the ridge 1,100 feet above and along the coast toward Cape Karluk.
This project is challenging because the community electric load is so small when compared with available options for diesel generators and wind turbines. Finding an efficient diesel
generator that can handle wind energy penetration will be difficult. The high wind regime up on the ridge south of town is costly to develop given the size of the overall energy system.
In addition to measuring the wind resource up on the ridge, a second 10-meter tower should be installed closer to town to validate or modify the wind resource model at that location.
A class 4 or 5 wind resource next to town could be easier and cheaper to develop. The feasibility schedule looks aggressive, but doable. Wind resource studies and electrical/heat load
analysis should be complete and accepted by AEA prior to allocating money for the conceptual design review.
Karluk is encouraged to work directly with AEA staff to explore the possibility of integrating wind or other energy systems into their community energy needs. Please contact AEA?s energy
planning staff for direct assistance.
Did not pass minimum stage 2 scoring.
City of Saxman requests funds for the Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Project to provide for the following: revise final design and specifications, obtain permits for construction, review
ways to increase storage potential of project, update cost estimate, begin power sales negotiations and prepare a business and operational plan based upon power sales agreement. Additionally,
they request construction funding with no explanation of the source of the remaining $39 M in capital project costs.
AEA has the following concerns: the market for the power is uncertain, given it would be the last to be used in the SEAPA system, including the proposed additions of energy from Whitman
Lake Hydroelectric Project and the proposed Metlakatla - Ketchikan Intertie. Additionally, potential issues could result if the FERC license is reopened to reengineer the project.
The Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 application (#909) was recommended for partial funding of $500,000 but did not score within the funding limit. The project did receive a $200,000 FY14
legislative grant for pre-construction activities, but that work has only recently been initiated. Work to be completed under the legislative grant includes: a hydrology update, license,
market, operational, site, and financial reviews, design analysis, and an update of construction cost.
Given the current FY14 funding from the legislature, the project is moving forward to answer key questions; therefore, the project is not recommended for funding from the RE Fund at
this time.
Whitestone Power and Communications propose prototype construction and demonstration of a surface-mounted River In-Stream Energy Conversion (RISEC) device in the Tanana River. The proposed
technology is a compelling alternative to other competing RISEC designs and the project team has taken a deliberate approach to the design of the project. Significantly, the project
has also garnered the support of permitting agencies and holds key permits required for deployment. As can be expected with a demonstration project, the economics of initial deployment
do not appear to be favorable, but may improve with subsequent deployments in areas with a higher cost of energy.
The project applied for funding in the first round of Emerging Energy Technology Fund (EETF) but was not awarded funding. A proposal was not submitted to EETF Round 2.
Although reviewers see potential benefits of demonstrating the technology, the Renewable Energy Fund proposal was evaluated by criteria used for all applications, but did not score high
enough to pass Stage 2. Until the technology is proven, this type of demonstration and technology-advancing application is more appropriate for the EETF program than the Renewable
Energy Fund.
The Northwest Arctic Borough (NWAB) is requesting funds for project construction and commissioning of a 10kW array of photovoltaic (PV) modules in Kotzebue, Alaska. The array, located
on the roof of the NWAB building, would provide electricity for the building. Kotzebue Electric Association, the local electric utility, does not have a net metering policy but wrote
a 10/22/12 letter of support for the project that does not specify project capacity, integration details, or how KEA will view excess solar power on its grid (i.e. whether NWAB would
be compensated for it or whether it would be curtailed).
The applicant did not address how it would deal with excess solar power that occurs during periods that the office is closed, for example on weekends. The application did not provide
enough information to adequately analyze this project, and in response to AEA?s request for one year of utility bills the applicant provided one month?s utility bill. AEA recommends
this project for full funding with special provisions that the applicant provide detail regarding how the solar power will be used on weekends, holidays, and other periods of low demand.
$181,000 is a large amount of money to spend in an area with no validated wind resource. Both airport data and the statewide wind resource model suggest that class 1 winds are in the
region.
Not recommended for funding.
The Organized Village of Kake is proposing a feasibility assessment and conceptual design for a wood heating system and district heating loop for an office building and lodge owned by
the Organized Village of Kake (OVK), a federally recognized tribe. This project is estimated to displace a total 4,800 gallons per year of fuel oil; the fuel source will be determined
in the study. The application includes substantial support from the community and the endorsement from the Kake Community Energy Committee.
Recommend full funding for feasibility study/conceptual design.
Mentasta Village Council proposes final design and construction of a cordwood boiler system to supply a small district heating system consisting of the school, teen center, council building,
post office, and clinic. The system would consume approximately 220 cords per year and displace 22,000 gallons of fuel oil per year.
Reconnaissance assessment through the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group indicates a viable project. MVC is supplying a building to house the boiler (s) as a match.
AEA is concerned by the lack of a specific fuel supply plan for the project. However, we recognize the existing fuel wood market in the Tok area. AEA will work with the grantee to
ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with requirement that Mentasta provide a fuel supply plan and final design acceptable to AEA before construction funds are disbursed.
Technically, the project is feasible. This project does not degrade the economic benefit of the biomass project. Schedule and overall budget look reasonable. Contractor has experience
in this scope of work. AEA must accept design prior to construction funding.
Recommend full funding.
Technically, this solar photovoltaic (PV) project is simple to install and integrate within the Naknek power system. The key questions surround the accuracy of cost estimates for an
installed 50kW system along with how the power is valued for economic benefit. The standard maximum net metered system is 25 kilowatts of nameplate capacity. If Naknek Electric will
allow net metering for 50kW, then the benefit can be calculated using retail electrical savings. We would need a letter from Naknek Electric in support of this approach.
Other solar PV projects and heat recovery projects recommended for funding had provided initial drawings, calculations and cost estimates from a qualified contractor. The applicant
has not provided that level of detail. Without more information, it is risky to recommend for funding.
Not recommended for funding.
Chugach Electric Association, Inc. proposes to fund a feasibility study and conceptual design to assess the viability of a waste to energy plant. A portion of the municipal solid waste
that currently goes to the Anchorage landfill would fuel the plant.
AEA supports the concept of utilizing municipal solid waste as an energy source. The first step in accessing the viability of waste to energy is a thorough understanding of the resource
availability through a waste stream characterization study.
AEA recommends partial funding of $40,000 for a waste characterization study/resource inventory.
A 180 kW run-of-river hydroelectric project to offset 90% diesel generated electricity for Tenakee Springs; Will have excess hydro energy available to offset some heating needs. Prior
REF grants funded feasibility (#16) and permitting and final design (#895).
Special condition: No funds from this request are to be used for activities already funded from prior grants. No funds are authorized until all prior funded R4 grant activities have
been submitted and accepted by AEA.
The Native Village of Cantwell proposes a reconnaissance study of a 1.5 MW run-of-river project on Carlo Creek to sell power to GVEA through the AK Intertie. This is similar to the
Jack River hydro site now being studied in reconnaissance by NVC through the Renewable Energy Fund.
Partial funding recommended for reconnaissance study.
A recon study was completed in 2009 for the Knutson River Hydroelectric Project in Pedro Bay. Since then the school and clinic have closed and the village population decreased to 44.
A feasibility study has been drafted. Neither of these studies were funded by the Renewable Energy Fund. The proposed 150 kW r-o-r hydro project appears to be oversized for community
needs, especially since village is losing residents. Additionally, there is > 1 mile of Knutson Creek with anadromous and resident fish habitat which will be affected by the proposed
project leading to substantial licensing challenges. It is unknown if the project will be found jurisdictional by FERC.
Recommend special provisions as follows: (1) AEA to receive feasibility study and must review and approve its findings before any REF funds committed; and (2) project size to be re-evaluated
based upon current village population reduction.
The r-o-r project is located in high alpine terrain near Mi. 10 of the Eagle River valley. Ram Creek Valley LLC would sell Juniper Creek Hydroelectric power to MEA as an IPP. Several
different development options are proposed for the project from 250 to 1,300 kW, some of which involve private landowners not currently committed to the project. The project would
generate seasonally as proposed.
Given that no prior formal reconnaissance report has been prepared for this site, AEA recommends this report be prepared and the project scheme be explored before requesting funds to
advance into feasibility study.
Special conditions: In the course of conducting the recon study, explore and define the project scheme and obtain commitments from involved landowners.
AP&T proposes to perform a feasibility study, permitting and final design for a 124 kW run-of-river hydroelectric facility on Neck Lake to serve Whale Pass. The proposed plant would
be co-located adjacent to the SSRAA aquaculture facility on State lands. The project received funding in round 2 of the Renewable Energy Fund (#223) to perform reconnaissance study
and again in round 3 (#440) to perform feasibility study. AP&T later returned most of the round 3 grant after FERC jurisdiction was declared, however they now plan to utilize FERC?s
expedited small hydro licensing approach and have once again requested feasibility funds. SSRAA has a lease for the site and has expressed reservations about impacts to their operations
from the proposed project. The population in Whale Pass has declined from 58 in year 2000 to 31 today.
The application fails to pass Stage 2 due to low scores. In particular the benefit/cost ratio of 0.74 indicates that the project would cost more than the accrued benefits.
The reconnaissance-level geothermal exploration proposed is well-planned and reasonable and would contribute to the understanding of the region?s geology and geothermal potential. Use
of the area?s geothermal resources for power and/or heating for Elim has been the subject of considerable speculation due to the presence of numerous hot springs; a better understanding
of the potential capacity of the resource and a more detailed assessment of the costs to develop it could assist the community in its energy planning.
However, the estimated cost of transmission from the resource to the community, the small size of the community energy demand, and the distance to other possible communities makes the
economics of a geothermal project look poor under every scenario.
Not recommended for funding.
The wind resource is likely poor-to-marginal in the Akiak region. The initial data coming in from the Kwethluk and Akiachak met towers support the wind resource model estimates, which
show a poor wind resource, and the wind regime continues to drop off the further upriver one goes on the Kuskokwim. The economics look poor for developing either a class 2 wind site
near town or a class 3 wind site 4 miles east of town. The latter would involve a 4-mile transmission line across poor soils and involve an approximate half-mile span across the Kuskokwim
which would be very costly.
Not recommended for funding.
A reconnaissance-level investigation of the geothermal potential of the area could be a valuable addition to the work done to date based on recommendations from previous studies and
anecdotal reports of high surface temperatures. However, the likelihood of identifying a geothermal resource capable of powering a 250 MW plant is remote.
No work plan detailing the survey methods that would be used in the reconnaissance is identified in the application and no justification for the proposed budget is provided. The applicant
does not present supporting evidence indicating that a geothermal plant of any size could be economically favorable; without such evidence, funding exploration work is not justified.
Not recommended for funding.
The review team\'s concerns remain virtually unchanged from feedback in Renewable Energy Fund rounds 4 and 5. 1) A meteorological tower study and wind resource assessment have not been
completed at the proposed turbine location. 2) An acceptable conceptual design report that covers the planned diesel and wind generation and distribution systems has not been prepared
(see AEA CDR guidelines at http://www.akenergyauthority.org/programwindanalysisdata.html)
3) a more accurate electrical and heat load model is needed for the community 4) Final design and permitting need to be completed prior to approving construction funds. AEA offered
the community a met tower in 2012 through the state anemometer loan program.
AEA expects the funds from the 2009 Legislative appropriation to be spent on a met tower study, a wind resource analysis, a conceptual design report and final design and permitting activities
prior to requests for construction funds.
Not recommended for funding.
The lack of an accepted conceptual design prohibits awarding funds for design activity as AEA is unable to properly assess the viability of the wind resource, the powerhouse, the electrical
distribution system, community heat loads and the various wind turbine and integration options evaluated. The applicant should proceed with the feasibility and conceptual design work
already funded through round 4 of the Renewable Energy Fund.
Not recommended for funding.
A similar application was received and reviewed in round 4 of the Renewable Energy Fund. AEA?s comments at the time were as follows: "False Pass may need to do extensive feasibility
work to find the right solution given the wind resource, terrain, small population, avian and FAA issues. Alternatives from residential systems to high penetration should be considered.
Community may need additional funding to complete this work. B/C is difficult to calculate due to the variables. Estimating actual construction costs on a very hypothetical configuration
is difficult. Wind resources in the region warrant a feasibility and CDR and the budget looks reasonable."
AEA does not have a conceptual design to review prior to the submission of this REF round 6 request and thus we do not have enough information to decide whether to move the project forward
to the design phase. US F&WS requires more detailed study but the scope has not been quantified, and actual site selection (which may include additional met tower data collection if
the proposed turbine site is moved considerably relative to the terrain that is causing high turbulence) is still undetermined.
Not enough research has been conducted in the feasibility phase for this application to be reviewed for final design. Guidance on this step can be found at AEA?s web site under the
wind program: http://www.akenergyauthority.org/programwindanalysisdata.html
Not recommended for funding.
G&K Electric Utility proposes a Feasibility/Conceptual Design study for the implementation of diesel heat recovery at their existing power plant. The grant will be managed by the Aleutians
East Borough.
This Cold Bay utility is a good candidate for a heat recovery system as identified in the Alaska Energy Pathway. AEA has worked extensively with heat recovery feasibility studies in
the past few years. A feasibility study with sufficient information to qualify for Design and Construction funding through the Renewable Energy Fund should not cost more than $30,000.
Recommend partial funding of $30,000.
The Kokhanok wind project has been running in curtailment mode for more than a year. The equipment has all been installed. Wind turbines are functioning. Applicant is seeking funding
to complete the hybrid supervisory controller development. Applicant has not requested REF for this project in the past. If successful, Alaska turns a curtailed project into a successful
one. This project is gating other proposed high-penetraion wind systems. Until we have success and learning on the Kokhanok system, AEA is holding off funding for other proposed high-penetration
systems. Wind resource is very good.
Recommend full funding.
The Haines Borough is proposing final design and installation of pellet-fired boiler systems to heat Borough-owned buildings: sewage treatment plant; human resources/pre-school building;
Haines Borough School District vocational education building; swimming pool; Borough administrative offices; and visitor center. This project is estimated to displace a total of 30,745
gallons per year of fuel oil, using 263 tons of pellets per year. The project has completed feasibility/conceptual design phase work.
The application includes substantial support from the community and Borough. Haines Borough has already purchased and installed a pellet system at the Borough Senior Center. This project
will develop an anchor tenant for pellet supply in the Southeast Alaska region and will potentially support the development of pellet manufacturing infrastructure.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding, with requirement of AEA acceptance of final design, logistics plan, and operational plan.
The Haines Borough proposes feasibility assessment of two run-of-river hydro projects totaling 3 MW and 1.5 miles of transmission to connect to Ocean Beauty\'s fish processing facility
and residences in the non-organized community of Excursion Inlet. The processor and most residences are seasonal; population is 14. There is no community power system.
The project received a round 4 Renewable Energy Fund grant (#625) to perform a two-step reconnaissance study. The first step to determine the reach of anadromous habitat has been completed
and work on the second half of that study has begun. As the proposal notes "barriers to project development will include anadromous fish concerns.... Major concerns with protection
of these species include minimum flows below a diversion facility and the potential need for fish passage at the intake structures". The balance of that grant-funded work remains incomplete.
The reconnaissance study will address fish habitat, electrical service and estimated load for the Borough subdivision, establishment of community utility, business arrangement for selling
power to the fish processor Ocean Beauty, site control and land ownership, and FERC jurisdiction. It will include consideration of fish habitat issues as affects the cost, capacity,
and energy output of the project and environmental licensing concerns.
This application did not score high enough to pass Stage 2 review. Not recommended for funding.
The geothermal resource on Mount Makushin at the USGS ST-1 Test Well has been demonstrated to exist at a high temperature and high pressure. Significant access and transmission challenges
are posed by the remoteness of the location and the rugged terrain; these challenges complicate the economics of the project, particularly for the development of a smaller plant sized
to meet only the City?s load.
Successful development of the Makushin geothermal resource will require, at a minimum, agreement and participation between land owners, subsurface rights holders, and the City of Unalaska.
Failed negotiations over the past five years between the City, the applicant, and the land owners have prevented additional exploration and development; a 2008 legislative appropriation
of $1.5 million for additional geothermal exploration remains unspent due to failed negotiations.
Without the support of all parties or a clear indication of a forthcoming agreement, no additional funding is warranted.
Not recommended for funding.
The proposed budget is 30% larger than comparable wind feasibility studies. Recommended funding is capped at $143,000 in line with similar projects elsewhere in the state.
There may be an economic wind resource in the community if a developable wind resource is found. One 10-meter met tower should be placed at the same site as the original 30-meter met
tower. 10-meter met towers may need to be equipped with NRG dataloggers and sensors in order to quantify turbulence. Electrical load data should be collected at the powerhouse simultaneous
with the new met towers. A new wind resource study (that may include WAsP analysis) should be completed and accepted by AEA prior to allocation of funds for later-stage activities.
Conceptual design report should follow AEA guidelines for CDRs posted on the wind program Web page.
Recommend partial funding of $143,000.
The City of Atka has recently completed a hydroelectric project under the Renewable Energy Fund. A detailed understanding of the new electrical load demand and diesel demand is not
presently known. Work needs to be done to quantify the electrical load profile for Atka Pride Seafood (APS). Aleutian Pribilof Island Community Development Association (APICDA) has
already agreed to purchase and install a met tower near the community.
City of Atka is not current with Power Cost Equalization (PCE) reporting and this raises concerns.
Not recommended for funding. Wind program managers will work with APICDA to analyze met tower data using Windographer(TM) software and hourly electrical load data collected for the
city and for APS using HOMER(TM) software.
ORPC has demonstrated a commitment to a sustained presence in Alaska and has been a pioneer in hydrokinetic development in Alaska and in the country, and has a track record of hiring
local contractors. Significant work has gone into resource evaluation and permitting for what will be the first tidal installation in Alaska. ORPC has garnered significant local support,
including that of Homer Electric Association.
Initial costs are high and projected to drop for subsequent installations. The benefit/cost ratio increases as the project expands (roughly $4M for the first unit, and $4M for the next
3 units). However, according to AEA?s analysis, the B/C ratio remains below 1 even for a 100 MW plant.
Given the high risk associated with the installation of a new technology in Cook Inlet and the uncertainty surrounding costs, it is logical to wait for the results of the installation
of the first turbine before committing funds to expand the project.
Not recommended for funding.
The FNSB is proposing Phase II for the installation of pellet-fired boiler systems to heat Ticasuk Brown Elementary School. Phase I: Design and heat module procurement was funded through
State of Alaska Legislature Appropriation. This project is estimated to displace a total of 20,000 gallons per year of fuel oil.
The application includes substantial support from the community and the Borough. This project will develop an anchor tenant for pellet supply in the Interior Alaska region and will
potentially support the development of pellet manufacturing infrastructure.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project. Grantee requested AEA continue to manage the project. AEA concurs.
Recommend partial funding.
A class 5 wind resource is assumed and supported by the 30-meter wind resource model developed by AEA/NREL/AWSTruepower. This feasibility will provide data to confirm or revise that
assumption. Permitting plan, budget and schedule look reasonable, except that $23,750 is probably high for a geotech reconnaissance study. AVEC should collect village electric load
data simultaneously with wind met tower study.
AEA believes that this site is a class 5 wind regime as opposed to a class 6 proposed. AEA projects 31,298 gallons of diesel displaced and 1,268 gallons of heating fuel. The challenge
in the CDR phase will be to address concerns over possible village relocation.
Recommend funding with the caveat that the wind resource analysis and electrical load analysis be completed before allocation of remaining funds.
A class 5 wind resource is assumed and supported by the 30-meter wind resource model developed by AEA/NREL/AWSTruepower. This feasibility will provide data to confirm or revise that
assumption. Permitting plan, budget and schedule look reasonable, except that $23,750 is probably high for a geotech reconnaissance study. AVEC should collect village electric load
data simultaneously with wind met tower study. Later stage funding will remain unallocated until a met tower study and wind resource analysis have been accepted by AEA.
AEA agrees closely with power assumptions, although not all power in a 47% penetration system will be used to offset electricity. Some will need to be diverted to a heat load at a lower
economic benefit. AEA projects 26,216 gallons of diesel displaced and 760 gallons of heating fuel. The challenge in the CDR phase will be to find a turbine solution with good economic
payback.
Recommend full funding.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative is proposing the construction of an intertie between the communities of St. Mary?s and Pilot Station to connect to the renewable energy source of
the proposed St. Mary?s wind farm. AVEC has also filed applications for a wind project in St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point (#945-construction), and an intertie to Mountain Village (#954-design).
The size of the proposed turbine could serve two or all four communities.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that the St. Mary?s (#945) project be funded or constructed prior to the allocation of funds for this project.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative is proposing the final design and permitting of an intertie between the communities of Mountain Village and St. Mary?s. AVEC has also filed applications
for a wind project in St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point (#945-construction), and an intertie to Pilot Station (#955-construction). The size of the proposed turbine could serve two or all four
communities.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that a 35% design, including construction cost estimates, be accepted by AEA prior to the allocation of the remaining funds.
This proposal has the potential to conflict with two other REF projects that have already been awarded funds. The first, grant agreement 2195377 from REF 1 totaling $10.8 million, was
awarded to the Northwest Arctic Borough allowing up to $4 million in design and construction funds for Noorvik along with similar funding guidelines for Buckland and Deering. The second,
grant agreement #7040030 awarded $85,000 to AVEC in Round 5, provides for a feasibility study to evaluate the potential to upgrade/replace the existing AOC wind turbines in Selawik.
A draft conceptual design report has already been completed for Noorvik under the NWAB grant.
The economics on this project are difficult to pin down at this phase with many unknowns for the actual cost of interties and the wind energy potential at the proposed site. Presently,
there is a lot of value in the learning from this feasibility study, so a B/C ratio of less than 1.0 isn\'t a large negative at this phase of the project. These communities have few
options for renewable energy nearby, so wind from a centralized location with transmission lines may be their best option.
Recommend funding, but with the provision that the proposed site must complete a wind resource study prior to allocating the remainder of funds. The NWAB and key stakeholders in Noorvik
will need to be consulted to gain buy-in and consensus on this proposal since it creates a delay/change in the 2195377 project.
$233,000 is a lot of money to spend for an area with no validated wind resource. The ridge tops of the Cosmos Hills likely have strong winds, but the 1,500 to 2,500-ft elevation change
and steep terrain make these sites difficult to develop. Significant wind reconnaissance should be performed to find suitable project sites prior to expending more money. The communities
have great need due to their very high costs of power, but the high costs to intertie all communities represents a significant barrier.
Recommend partial funding of $40,000 to purchase, ship and install one 34-meter met tower and up to three 10-meter met towers to collect data for one year or longer (longer is advised
due to data from the wind model and airport) and write a wind resource analysis report. Hourly electrical load data should be collected in all three communities simultaneous with wind
data collection.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative proposes the design of a Wind-Diesel system in the community of Stebbins. The Stebbins Wind-Diesel system would supply power to St. Michaels via
a proposed intertie expected to be constructed in 2013. The design would be based on Conceptual Design work funded through RE Fund Grant #7040008.
The review team has the following concerns:
1) The applicant has not completed the minimum 12 month long meteorological "met" tower study at the proposed wind turbine site.
2) A complete Wind Resource Assessment has not been accepted by AEA.
3) A complete Conceptual Design Report has not been accepted by AEA.
Completion of RE Fund Grant #7040008 will address these concerns.
Not recommended for funding.
The review team is concerned that there is no developable wind site near Russian Mission. Our best estimate for in/near town is only a class 2 which would not result in an economically
viable project. In addition, the presence of tall trees around Russian Mission prevents the possible use of a low-cost 10-meter met tower. The closest potentially viable wind regime
is approximately 5 miles southwest. The cost of a transmission line would likely make the project economically infeasible. Since both the wind resource model and the airport data
reflect class 1 wind speeds, this project is deemed high risk and unlikely to produce an economically feasible project.
Not recommended for funding.
A class 4 wind resource is possible according to the wind resource model and is assumed for this analysis. This feasibility will provide data to confirm or revise that assumption. AEA
believes that the wind resource study and electrical load data collection should be completed prior to additional money being spent due to the presence of lower wind regimes in the
vicinity.
Permitting plan, budget and schedule look reasonable although $23,750 appears to be high for a geotech recon study. AVEC should collect village electric load data simultaneously with
wind met tower study. Applicant should ensure that the conceptual design report addresses all the factors listed in the Alaska Wind Program Guidelines for Conceptual Design Reports
http://www.akenergyauthority.org/Useful%20documents/Alaska%20Wind%20Program%20Guidelines%20for%20Conceptual%20Design%20Reports%20-%20Rev%202.docx
AEA agrees closely with power assumptions, although not all power in a 31% penetration system will be used to offset electricity. Some (~11%) will need to be diverted to a heat load
at a lower economic benefit. AEA projects 39,761 gallons of diesel displaced and 1,849 gallons of heating fuel.
Recommend funding with the caveat that the wind resource analysis and electrical load analysis be completed before allocation of remaining funds.
Even though Wales was known to have strong winds, which was the prime motivator for development of the original project, there are many aspects of a wind regime that must be quantified
- such as turbulence, severe winds, Weibull K distribution, and other factors - before an optimum wind-diesel system can be constructed. Further, study of the existing power system
and electric loads is needed to design a proper solution. The original intent of the Wales pilot project was to demonstrate the capability of running in diesel-off mode. To that extent,
the project was a success, but long term operation proved complex and some components were difficult to maintain. The system produced a modest amount of power in 2005/6 and only 1,198
kWh in 2009. The old system is in need of major repairs, plus at least one turbine foundation is compromised due to settling or frost jacking.
AEA supports the applicant\'s willingness to start over and pursue a new course in Wales with a wind resource analysis and conceptual design. Later stage funding will remain unallocated
until a met tower study and wind resource analysis have been accepted by AEA. AEA recommends funding of this feasibility project to the amount that the remaining Denali Commission funds
will not cover. Applicant requested $190,000; there is approximately $120,000 of Denali Commission funding remaining. AEA recommends $75,000 REF grant with a $7,500 match from the
applicant.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative proposes the design of a Wind-Diesel system in the community of Marshall. The design would be based on Conceptual Design work funded through a round
4 Renewable Energy Fund Grant (#7040021).
The review team has the following concerns:
1) The applicant has not completed the minimum 12 month long meteorological "met" tower study.
2) The Wind Resource Assessment submitted with the application is based on an incomplete met tower study.
3) The Conceptual Design Report submitted with the application is based on an incomplete Wind Resource Assessment and does not address a variety of wind turbine models and quantity
configurations as required by Grant #7040021.
Completion of RE Fund Grant #7040021 will address these concerns.
Recommend full funding with the following stipulation. A final Conceptual Design Report, which addresses all criteria laid out in the ?Alaska Wind Program Guidelines for Conceptual
Design Reports?, must be accepted by AEA prior to negotiating the proposed grant.
Even with the high fuel costs in Shungnak and Kobuk, the economics of this project as proposed are poor. A similar project in Ambler was cancelled due to poor economics driven in part
by the high cost of a triodetic mounting structure. Nationwide and worldwide, solar PV panels, inverters and mounting systems costs have dropped by more than half. Similarly, balance
of plant costs have dropped as installers adopt mounting systems that require less time to install.
While remote Alaska will always be more expensive to install energy systems, the significant drop in component costs should be seen in Alaska even when labor costs do not change. This
project proposed a cost of $13 per watt. Other solar PV projects have been proposed this year with costs in the $4 to $7.50 per watt range for top tier PV and inverter suppliers.
Those price ranges begin to make solar PV cost effective in areas of Alaska with the highest cost of fuel. AVEC\'s Kaltag (previously funded) and Upper Kalskag (not funded) proposals
came in at $10 per watt over the past two years.
While the proposal is feasible from a technical perspective, a less expensive approach is needed to improve the economics of this project.
Not recommended for funding.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) is proposing the construction of a Wind-Diesel system to serve the interconnected communities of St. Mary?s and Pitka?s Point. AVEC has also
filed applications for interties from this St. Mary?s/Pitka?s Point wind project to Mountain Village (#954-design) and to Pilot Station (#955-construction). The size of the proposed
turbine could serve two or all four communities.
AVEC is currently working on a 95% design for the proposed Wind-Diesel system under RE Fund Grant #7040017.
Recommend full funding with the special provision that the 95% design under grant #7040017 be accepted by AEA prior to allocation of construction funds.
The Alaska Village Electrical Cooperative and the Southwest Region School District are proposing to provide recovered heat from the existing New Stuyahok power plant for heating the
adjacent New Stuyahok High School, built in 2007.
The Preliminary Heat Recovery Assessment for the AVEC Power Plant and New Stuyahok School project was completed in 9/19/12.
Recommend full funding contingent on a heat sales agreement and accepted final design.
AEA will partially fund the completion of the final design, permitting, business plan, and power sales agreement.
The proposed energy recovery project is promising as it would be an addition to an operating waste incineration facility near Fairbanks, AK. Applicant proposes to generate electric power
(via a steam generator) for both on-site use and for resale to GVEA. Proposer indicates the upgrade will allow the business to operated year-round vs. present half-year. Project costs
(including construction) are estimated to be $3,258,000: funded half by an AEA grant and half through OIT (cash, revenue, and bank loans). Proposer indicates that reconnaissance, feasibility,
and conceptual design have been completed.
Prior to evaluating for funding of construction in future rounds, proposer will be requested to provide copies of:
? The feasibility study
? Conceptual design
? A loan approval letter from a bank (mentioned pg 16)
? A copy of OIT?s business plan
The business plan should address OIT?s operational history, long term contracts, a financial pro forma, SWOT discussion, and written confirmation from GVEA regarding the power purchase
rate and terms.
The Native Village of Tuntutuliak in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the design and construction a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the community power
plant to the water treatment plant and washeteria. This project is estimated to displace 6000 gallons of fuel oil.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2012. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding. Construction funding is contingent on AEA accepting the final design and the business/operating plan.
City of Noorvik in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the design and construction of a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the AVEC power plant to the water
treatment plant. This project is estimated to displace 87% or 18,600 gallons of the current fuel oil usage per year.
The heat recovery system will be operated and maintained through the Alaska Rural Utility Collaborative (ARUC) program.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2012. The fuel displacement is based on converting the existing diesels to marine jacketed configurations. A project is currently
underway to prove the viability of marine jackets on Detroit Diesel Series 60 generators. Without this conversion, the financial benefit of this project will be significantly less.
Recommend full funding contingent on the success of proving the viability of marine jacketed Detroit Diesel Series 60 generators. Construction funding is contingent on AEA accepting
the final design and the business/operating plan with heat sales agreements. AEA will also work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction
with this project.
The City of Marshal in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the design and construction a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the AVEC power plant to the Water
treatment plant and Community Store. This project is estimated to displace 100% or 7,700 gallons of the current fuel oil usage per year.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2012. The fuel displacement is based on converting the existing diesels to marine jacketed configurations. A project is currently
underway to prove the viability of marine jackets on Detroit Diesel Series 60 generators. Without this conversion, the financial benefit of this project will be significantly less.
Recommend full funding contingent on the success of proving the viability of marine jacketed Detroit Diesel Series 60 generators. Construction funding is contingent on AEA accepting
the final design and the business/operating plan with heat sales agreements. AEA will also work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction
with this project.
The Alaska Village Electrical Cooperative in collaboration with ANTHC and the community of Stebbins is proposing the design and construction a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered
heat from the community power plant to the new Water treatment plant, existing water treatment plant, washeteria, head start building, clinic, and school. This project is estimated
to displace 57,000 gallons of fuel oil out of an annual usage of 69,000 gallons.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2012. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding. Construction funding is contingent on AEA accepting the final design and the business/operating plan with heat sales agreements.
A reconnaissance study was funded in Round 4 of the Renewable Energy Fund. The conceptual model and economic analysis from the reconnaissance study are due after this review was conducted;
the final report from the applicant is due in June 2013.
As a low-temperature geothermal resource, Tenakee Inlet remains potentially promising and continued exploration would contribute to a greater understanding of geothermal resources in
Southeast AK. Development of a small-scale ORC (organic Rankine cycle) geothermal plant would help determine the viability of additional and possibly larger scale geothermal plants
in the region and in other parts of the state.
Tenakee Springs is currently pursuing construction funding for a run-of-river hydroelectric project which would supply 90% of the existing load. That project scored well in this Round
6 REF recommendation program and will be a recommended project. Pelican is in the midst of an AEA-managed upgrade of its hydro plant to cover 100% of its current load.
Transmission line costs, potential access routes, and SeaAlaska?s involvement/the development of tourism facilities are large unknowns which could significantly impact the economics
of the project; however, there is no clear indication that any of these factors will bring down project costs in the near future. Funding for the second phase of a project should be
justified by the results of the first phase. Because the first phase has not been completed?in particular the economic component?additional funding would be premature.
Not recommended for funding.
The Native Village of Quinhagak in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the design and construction a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the AVEC power plant
to the water treatment plant/combined utility and washeteria. This project is estimated to displace 62% or 14,200 gallons of the current fuel oil usage per year.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2012. The fuel displacement is based on converting the existing diesels to marine jacketed configurations. A project is currently
underway to prove the viability of marine jackets on Detroit Diesel Series 60 generators. Without this conversion, the financial benefit of this project will be significantly less.
Recommend full funding contingent on the success of proving the viability of marine jacketed Detroit Diesel Series 60 generators. Construction funding is contingent on AEA accepting
the final design and the business/operating plan with heat sales agreements. AEA will also work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction
with this project.
The City of Chuathbaluk in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the design and construction of a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the community power plant
to the water treatment water loop and water storage tank. This project is estimated to displace 1400 of the current fuel oil usage of 1834 gallons.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2012.
AEA is concerned that there is no preliminary heat sales agreement and there is no mention of the operations and maintenance plans for the new system.
Recommend full funding contingent of a heat sales agreement and an O&M plan. Construction funding is contingent on acceptance of the final design. AEA will work with the grantee to
ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
The Native Village of Atmautlaulk in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the construction of a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the community power plant to
the washeteria. This project is estimated to displace 4395 gallons of the annual fuel oil usage of 4800 gallons.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2011 and the design was completed in 2012. The project is ready to purchase long lead items and to proceed into construction.
Recommend full funding contingent on the successful negotiation of a heat sales agreement. AEA encourages the grantee to accelerate the installation so that the system can be operational
for the 2013 heating season.
The City of Savoonga in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the construction a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the AVEC power plant and an excess wind electric
boiler to the water treatment plant, water loop, and water storage tank. This project is estimated to displace 100% of the current fuel oil usage of 8800 gallons.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2011 and the heat recovery design was completed in 2012. The wind design of this project must be completed.
The heat recovery system will be operated and maintained through the Alaska Rural Utility Collaborative program.
Recommend full funding contingent on a heat sales agreement and accepted final design. AEA will also work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in
conjunction with this project.
The Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) requests funding for feasibility assessments and forest inventories in 7 communities to evaluate the potential use of biomass systems for
heating. This is the 3rd application for feasibility assessments. A project for 8 communities was funded through Round 4, and a project for 7 communities was recommended for funding
through Round 5, but was not funded. The proposed communities for this round are: Grayling, Northway, Beaver, Shageluk, Allakaket, Alatna, and Stevens Village.
IRHA has assembled a strong team with biomass energy and resource experience. AEA believes that the proposed approach is well-conceived.
Recommend full funding of $168,959 for feasibility and biomass energy resource assessment.
The Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) requests funding for the design and construction of wood biomass heating systems for three communities to be identified in the future from
feasibility studies that were conducted with funding from the Renewable Energy Fund Round 4.
Interior Regional Housing Authority was funded for the construction of three communities in Round 5. IRHA is currently selecting these communities.
AEA is supportive of small scale biomass heating systems in Interior Alaska that are economically viable within sustainable communities. The review team considered this application
premature and the applicant should wait for the completion of the next round of feasibility studies to assure that the proposed projects are economically viable and sustainable.
Not recommended for funding.
The Nenana City School District in Nenana, AK (Interior Alaska) requests funding for engineering design phase to build a district wide heating system for following buildings: Nenana
City School; Administration Building; Warehouse; Nenana Student Living Center; Nenana Native Council Day Care; City Water Plant; City Fire Department . The project has the potential
save the Nenana City School District in excess $3,516,725 over the life of the project.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design; business plan with heat sales agreement; harvest plan; inventory plan.
CVEA requests $6,114,000 to construct a 6.5 MW r-o-r hydroelectric power plant on Allison Creek. The funds would be used to purchase owner-furnished long lead items for the project.
The project is expected to defer (annually) over 4 million gallons of diesel fuel now used for power generation.
AEA has the following reservations with this request: the FERC license application is being processed but has yet to be issued; the final design documents and a final construction
estimate are not complete; the items to be purchased are not identified; CVEA already has $10M in state capital funds to purchase long lead items needed; the project development
schedule provided is quite aggressive;
Despite these shortcomings, it is a valid renewable energy project.
Special provision: Complete prior grant funded activities and acceptance by AEA for: final design documents, construction cost estimates, construction schedule and plan of finance
City was awarded a $200,000 grant (#887) in round 5 to complete permitting and final design for Waterfall Creek. These activities are underway at this time.
The City now requests construction funding to build the 1 MW run-of-river Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric project. AEA supports this request though notes that the final design and construction
cost estimate are not complete at this time and the City continues further discussion with ADF&G about the amount of stream flow reserved for resident fish.
Special conditions include completion of all grant requirements of Grant 887, resolution of amount of instream flow reservation, demonstrate site control, etc. before any round 6 grant
funds are disbursed.
This phase of the project is to complete a bathymetric survey and marine geological study to refine cable route needed to extend Kodiak Electric Associations feeder line to the City
of Ouzinkie. The extension will tie Kodiak Electric Association?s current electrical grid to Ouzinkie. The intertie ultimately will include a sub-marine cable of 1 to 1.4 miles in
length dependent upon the results of the survey and geological study.
AEA recommends full funding for this project conditional upon a letter of support from Kodiak Electric Association.
The City of Galena is proposing final design and installation of chip-fired boiler systems to heat its school district and the Galena Interior Learning Academy School (GILA). This project
is estimated to displace a total 230,000 of gallons per year of fuel oil, using tons 2,950 tons of chips per year. The technical feasibility phase of this project is complete, but the
harvest/fuel inventory work is still in process.
The application includes substantial support from the community, the Louden Tribal Council, Galena City School District, and Gana?A-Yoo Limited. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure
that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend partial funding for final design and permitting and business/operational plan to allow the project team time to successful complete this stage of the project.
Alaska Gateway School District proposes adding on a heat loop off the newly-completed wood-fired heating system at the Tok School to provide heat to ten (10) State-owned and Community
building-clusters. The project team would complete a final design phase and construction documents prior to construction.
This application is similar to the Round 5 submittal #866 that was recommended for funding, but below the $25MM allotment. This Round 6 application significantly increases the number
of buildings and the size of the proposed in the heat loop.
AEA is supportive of this project and continues to encourage the collaboration between the Alaska Gateway School District and the Alaska Power and Telephone biomass projects.
Recommend full funding with the provision that AEA approve the final design before construction funds are released.
The feasibility study for this application was received in December of 2012. A brief review of the study has identified the following concerns:
? Running various economic scenarios results in B/C ratios ranging from .66 to 1.49.
? The feasibility study assumes 100% displacement of electrical loads. Load following capabilities for biomass systems are a technical concern.
? There is no plan to utilize the waste heat. Without use of the waste heat, the plant will operate between 17.7% and 19.4% efficient.
While AEA supports this project, there are technical and economic questions that need to be answered before full funding for design and permitted is recommended. AEA will perform a
comprehensive review of the study in the following month and provide additional feedback to AP&T to address technical and economic questions.
Recommend partial funding of $400,000 to complete the conceptual design (35%) report, including identifying a use for the recoverable heat, further development of the capital estimate
and economic analysis, and selecting a technology that will meet the specifications of the project objectives. A detailed scope for this funding will be developed after the feasibility
study has been reviewed and accepted.
The Kenai Peninsula Borough School District is proposing final design and installation of pellet-fired boiler systems to heat three Seward schools ? the elementary, middle, and high
school. This project is estimated to displace a total of 120,600 gallons per year of fuel oil, using 1121 tons of pellets per year. The project has completed feasibility phase work.
The application includes substantial support from the community, USFS, and the local tribal council. This project will develop an anchor tenant for pellet supply in the Southcentral
Alaska region and will potentially support the development of pellet manufacturing infrastructure.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding, with requirement of AEA acceptance of final design prior to release of construction funding.
The Native Village of Afognak proposes to conduct reconnaissance, feasibility and conceptual design on the opportunity of installing a biofuel system at the Kodiak High School. The
system would provide fuel/heat to the school building utilizing waste from the Kodiak landfill and other biomass resources. The system would also provide a biofuel education service
through the Kodiak High School Career and Technical Program.
In the application, the Native Village of Afognak recommends pursuing gasification technology from Community Power Corporation (CPC) and hiring CPC to perform the technical analysis.
CPC is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Afognak Native Corporation.
AEA supports the project proposal for a reconnaissance, feasibility and conceptual design study for a biofuel system using municipal solid waste and other biomass resources, but requires
that the study be conducted by an independent consultant experienced in biofuel systems. The proposed study would have to consider all potential biofuels technologies and not focus
only on CPC technology.
Recommend full funding with the provision that AEA approve the selected consulting firm.
IPEC requests construction funds for Gartina Falls Hydro project. The project was previously funded for permitting and final design in round 3 (#462).
Schedule proposed is aggressive and adds to the project risk of construction cost overruns.
Special provisions: AEA must approve the deliverables from the prior grant #462 before any construction funds will be reimbursed:
1) Proof of site control, 2) FERC license and all permits, 3) site adapted final design plans and specs, 4) construction cost estimate, 5) project budget, 6) renegotiation to lower
management/PM fees and 7) schedule.
AVCP Housing requests funding to design and construct a Wood Biomass Heating System within its campus to reduce high energy costs. This project will heat 12 buildings including a 16
unit assisted living home, 3 large housing complexes, 2 warehouses, a dormitory, a maintenance facility, and office buildings. The fuel source will be pellets.
This project has the potential to positively impact Bethel and the surrounding communities by providing a logistical supply of pellets to the region.
A pellet distribution plan and the final design must be accepted by AEA prior to construction funding being released. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency
is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding.
THREA requests grant funds to assess feasibility study of a 1 MW storage or run-of-river hydro project at Walker Lake. The primary purpose of the project would be to supply IPEC?s Chilkat
Valley and Klukwan system with hydropower. THREA would be an independent power producer (IPP) selling to IPEC. IPEC applied for funding to study Walker Lake in Roundd 5 of the Renewable
Energy Fund (#829) but was not recommended. Since Round 5 application, in October 2011 IPEC has acquired the 600 kW Ten-Mile hydro project, which provides about 60% of the energy needed
for the IPEC?s service area. The balance of their power needs (700,000 kWh) is purchased from AP&T?s Upper Lynn Canal grid. That grid is 97% powered by hydropower, so the amount of
diesel to be saved by building Walker Lake is very limited (1,500 gallons per year).
Alaska Power Authority prepared a reconnaissance assessment for Walker Lake in 1988 with an estimated capital cost of $10.5M. Sealaska Corporation updated the assessment in 2005. Both
studies concluded that the project feasibility was marginal to poor. The project capital cost is not shown in this application.
The review team has the following concerns with this project:
1. The demand for the project power will be a fraction of the potential annual energy available from Walker Lake; given that the project will spill nearly year round.
2. While the application states that THREA will sell its power to IPEC for 7 cents/kWh, it is highly likely the cost of power from Walker Lake would exceed that purchased from AP&T.
3. There is no updated reconnaissance report available to ascertain if the project can be economically justified.
4. This project would displace very little diesel generation (approx. 1,300 gallons per year). 97% of the power purchased from APC (the load Walker Lake would satisfy) is generated
from the Lutak, Kasidaya, Dewey, and Goat Lake hydropower projects.
5. AEA has already committed funding for Connelly Lake, Schubee Lake, West Creek, and Burro Creek reconnaissance and feasibility assessment. These projects would compete to meet the
same loads as the proposed project.
Project fails to pass the minimum Stage 2 score and is not recommended.
Metlakatla Indian Community proposes construction of an intertie that connects Metlakatla to Ketchikan. AEA is providing $2 million in RE Fund rounds 1 and 4 (applications #20 and #656).
Additionally another $2 million in grant funds from the state have been awarded.
Currently the RE Fund round 4 grant is being negotiated. Conditions of the grant will support a step-wise approach to determine feasibility; conceptual design; and completion of all
preconstruction activities (including final design documents, final construction cost estimate, demonstration of site control, bathymetry, NEPA, and permitting) prior to construction
funding being awarded
AEA is assisting MIC in complying with these conditions; however this work remains in process. The review team believes it is premature to allocate construction funds.
Not recommended for funding.
The Borough and Municipality of Skagway (BMS) proposes feasibility and conceptual design of a 10-25 MW hydro project at West Creek to be connected to the Upper Lynn Canal (Haines-Skagway)
grid. West Creek is located near Dyea, 7 miles west of Skagway. The estimated cost of this project +$140 million. One most costly scheme would propose a 200? dam on West Lake with
a 2.5 mile power tunnel to a powerhouse on the Taiya River. The primary purpose of the project is to offset diesel generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway in the summer.
The secondary purpose is to supply power to the local grid during periods of shortfall in the winter. BMS applied for a similar project in rounds 2 (#262) and 5 (#800). AEA recommended
the project for partial funding but due to low scores and limited funding availability the project did not receive funding.
The AEA review team has the following concerns about this project:
1. BMS states that a major benefit of the project is the reduced air emissions from diesel generation by the cruise ships. However, when the EPA mandated change in cruise ship fuel
from bunker oil to ultra low sulfur diesel is implemented, the air quality issues associated with docking of cruise ships will decrease substantially. This, in turn, reduces the public
benefit of this project.
2. AEA has previously committed funding for Connelly Lake, Schubee Lake, and Burro Creek reconnaissance and feasibility assessment. These projects would compete to meet the same loads
as the proposed project.
3. Given that the chief aim of the project is to supply the shore-based cruise ship load, AEA questions the amount of public benefit to be received versus the high capital cost and high
technical, business, and regulatory risks of the proposed project.
4. Since the project would potentially affect the viewscapes and upstream waters of the Klondike Gold Rush National Park, there is significant permitting risk.
City and Borough of Sitka request funds for construction of an expansion to the Blue Lake dam. Construction elements include 83 feet raise of existing reinforced concrete arch dam,
new powerhouse with three new turbine-generator units totaling 15.9 MW capacity, a new intake and connection tunnel, and a new surge chamber.
The project construction bids came in higher than expected so the CBS is seeking additional state funding and planning to sell more revenue bonds to cover the new estimated project cost
of $145M.
Special provision: AEA will require finalized financial plan before any new grants will be put in place.
AEA recommends full funding.
The Hydaburg City Schools in Hydaburg, AK on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska requests funding for engineering design phase to build two cord wood heating system to the school
buildings: gym; elementary school; high school. The project has the potential to save the Hydaburg School District in excess of $500,000 over the life of the project.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding for design and permitting with the requirements that AEA must review and accept the final engineering design.
Project is simple, low-cost and straightforward. It takes advantage of the worldwide drop in PV module prices and cost of installation. Technology is proven and Tier 1 suppliers are
selected.
The applicant may be underestimating the power output from the PV system as low temperature and ground bounce can increase the output along with improved inverter power-curve optimization
technology. Likewise, the applicant may be overestimating power output if snow is not removed in a timely fashion. The utility must ensure that snow is removed from the panels to
ensure the desired benefits.
Final design must be submitted to and accepted by AEA prior to allocation of construction funds. Post-construction, AEA requires the grantee to report the minimum loading of the diesel
gensets at maximum solar output.
Full funding recommended.
APC proposes additional three new environmental studies (feasibility), final design and permitting activities for a potential 12+ MW storage hydro project at Connelly Lake. AEA and
APC entered into a grant agreement for $585,000 to support feasibility and conceptual design for the project under round 4 application (#627).
Current funded work includes concept optimization, preliminary FERC notice of intent and preliminary application document, FERC scoping activities (documents and study plans), field
studies (stream gauge installation; seismic refraction surveys; fish, wildlife, botanical, wetland, and heritage surveys; water quality testing); and the final feasibility report.
This work was scheduled for completion in December 2012, but some snags in the licensing process have occurred and more studies are required.
APC has challenges with site control with access through the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve, Haines State Forest and across several private parcels. FERC has requested they demonstrate
this access to perform studies before FERC will devote any staff time on licensing for Connelly Lake. Environmental opposition to the project has been received in the past from some
Haines residents.
AEA believes additional grant funding for the 3 new environmental studies is warranted, but the request to fund final design and permitting is premature, given that several additional
years of data collection may be necessary and project feasibility is uncertain. AEA also finds the amount requested for the three studies is excessive and therefore recommends grant
funding be limited with a 20% cash match by applicant.
Recommend partial funding.
Project will add 5,500,000 kWh annually to Cooper Lake Hydroelectric project; project also provides environmental benefits for increase in : (1) water temperature and (2) increase
flows at upper reaches of Cooper Creek to enhance fish habitat.
Project bids were opened on 9/28/12; bid results to AEA are pending receipt, so bidding risk is low.
Construction of this project satisfies Settlement Agreement established in support of FERC re-license of the Cooper Cooper Lake Hydroelectric Power Project which, along with this diversion,
has annual energy of 47,500,000 kWh.
Recommend full funding
Hill east of the old airport appears to be the best place to start measuring wind. Budget is high for a reconnaissance study - especially $45,000 for cost of energy and market analysis.
The applicant only needs money to hire a contractor to purchase and install a met tower and power house monitoring and to analyze and write a wind resource report. The report should
include HOMER analysis of wind, diesel and solar against the seasonal load profile of Egegik. An RFP should be put out to see who can do this in the most cost-effective manner. Recommend
partial funding of $60,000 to collect wind, solar and electrical load data for a minimum of one year, write a wind/solar assessment report and perform some basic HOMER modeling.
While the existing wind resource model predicts only class 2 winds in Levelock, class 4 winds exist further south at the coast. There is no current wind data. The applicant proposes
a low-cost method to collect valid, usable wind data. A larger met tower would be needed for any future feasibility study, but the 10-meter configuration proposed will work well for
reconnaissance so long is the tower is placed in an area of minimal surrounding vegetation and away from buildings that might block the wind.
Even if only a class 3 wind site is discovered, the high cost of fuel in this community might allow for an economic medium-penetration project using a remanufactured turbine.
ull funding recommended.
F
Because a wind study has not yet been completed and a conceptual design has not been submitted for AEA to review and accepted prior to the review period for this application, it is premature
to award funding for design. Too many factors are currently unknown to assess the viability of the project. In addition, the class 2 wind regime indicated by the statewide wind model
would not provide enough benefit to produce an economic project.
Not recommended for funding.
The City of Saxman has requested funding to study the Mahoney Lake Hydroelectric Project and provide for the following: revise final design and specifications, obtain permits for construction,
review ways to increase storage potential of project, update cost estimate, begin power sales negotiations and prepare a business and operational plan based upon power sales agreement.
The primary developers are a public/private partnership called Ketchikan Electric Company, whose partners are Cape Fox Corp., AP&T and City of Saxman.
The review team has the following concerns with this project: the market for the power is uncertain, given it is the last to be used in the SEAPA system, including after the proposed
additions of energy from Whitman Lake Hydro project and the proposed Metlakatla - Ketchikan Intertie, and proposed issues raised if the FERC license is re-opened to re-engineer the
project scheme.
The project appears to exhibit a high benefit/cost ratio if it can find a market for its hydropower. Partial funding for feasibility/conceptual design is recommended to reconfigure
the project to meet potential needs of SEAPA proposed call for power and accomplish the following: (1) perform field studies to support re-opening FERC license; (2) negotiate new license
terms; (3) revise engineering drawings in support of license changes; (4) negotiate power sales agreement, (5) prepare business, operational and finance plan; and (6) update cost of
power, construction cost and potential available power by month.
Partial funding recommended.
INNEC requests grant funding to study expansion of the Tazimina Hydroelectric Project thru replacement of the turbine-generators and controls from 824 kW (existing) up to 1.5 MW total.
The FERC license was issued for the larger units and the plant throughput was built with this in mind, but the smaller Francis turbine/generators were installed when the project was
built in 1996. Annual energy is expected to increase up to 2,600,000 kWh. New markets for this increase in energy may include new dispatchable heating systems in private businesses
and city governments at Newhalen, Illiamna and Nondalton.
If the study shows the project is feasible, procurement documents will be prepared from this phase grant funding for the replacement turbine-generators and control systems.
AEA recommends full funding.
This study will compare heating alternatives but the applicant states that they are leaning toward heat pumps (ground and air source). Smaller GSHP projects have been rejected due to
poor economics; the lower capital cost of air source heat pumps would likely make them more favorable for retrofits; AEA is currently funding a study of (residential) ASHP use in SE
AK.
A feasibility study that clearly considers the benefits of biomass, heat pumps, and oil-fired boilers is a logical step.
AEA recommends full funding.
City of Coffman Cove requests $175K in grant funds for permitting and final design, and construction of a 1.75 mile single phase line extension along existing roads within the City
to serve 91 privately-owned lots with renewable energy. The RE sources are from Black Bear Lake Hydro and South Fork Hydro.
Project design, permitting and construction to be by Alaska Power Company.
Special provision: Provide evidence of site control with stamped plans and recorded easement for the line extension.
A successful demonstration of hydrogen production, storage, and subsequent electricity generation could have widespread applicability if proved economically viable. However, no data
from existing hydrogen storage projects were provided by the applicant or found by AEA that indicate that the proposed project would have a breakeven B/C ratio. Furthermore, the seasonal
nature of the utility?s generation and load profiles appear to prevent full utilization of the benefits of a storage system; the hydrogen tanks would only likely be filled and emptied
once annually but require the same capital costs of a system that would have multiple charge/discharge cycles in a year.
Not recommended for funding.
The applicant has performed a life-cycle economic assessment of the proposed GSHP and a baseline diesel boiler (city policy prohibits installation of an electric boiler) which indicates
economics that are barely favorable; however, this analysis includes health benefits not included in AEA?s analysis.
The project benefits from other successful GSHP installations in Juneau, both REF projects and other projects. This application could be strengthened by supporting performance data
from the other GSHP projects (both are functioning successfully but have not produced a COP).
The proposed system would use approximately 12% of its capacity on an annual basis. A smaller heat pump system used in combination with an oil boiler could greatly reduce the capital
costs while still offsetting 80% of diesel use relative to a baseline oil-only system. AEA estimates such a system would cost roughly $500,000, an incremental cost increase of $179,000
above the baseline system.
Recommend partial funding of $300,000 to fund a smaller heat pump system with the following special provisions.
Special provisions:
1. Data from the Dimond Aquatic Center heat pump system must be provided to AEA before grant funded work can begin.
2. AEA must approve final system design prior to construction.
Project is technically feasible. Schedule and budget look reasonable. Recommend full funding.
The Village received a grant funded in round 4 (#606 ) for reconnaissance assessment of the project and has installed a stream gauge. The grant reconnaissance report is not available
at the date of this R6 application review.
Very little new information is provided in the application to support this request. A large number of questions are raised for this project, including the configuration of this project,
licensing jurisdiction, scale and cost, economics, power sales, utility organization, financing, etc. Even the need for the project can be questioned given the pending completion of
the 24 MW Eva Creek Wind Farm, re-start of 50 MW Healy Clean Coal Plant and the future 600 MW Susitna Watana project.
Despite the outstanding questions AEA supports this request for full funding.
Special provisions: AEA requires: 1) the completion and AEA acceptance of the reconnaissance study, and 2) results of the study indicate that the project should advance prior to award
of any new grant funding.
Given that the existing diesel gensets are not modifiable for electronic fuel injection which is needed for integration of wind power, there is much modeling to be done for both wind
and heat considerations. A new diesel generator must be chosen based on the results of the wind resource study and analysis of the electrical load (hourly data collection). The wind
challenge for this project may be finding a turbine that can survive the potential harsh environment of the ridge south of town, while still being sized appropriately for the electric
loads.
Due to the complexity of this system, the $81,300 requested would not be enough to complete both the feasibility and final design phases. Recommend partial funding of $70,000 for feasibility,
but not final design and permitting. Wind resource study and electrical load analysis should be complete and accepted by AEA prior to allocating money for the CDR.
Combined with proposal #839.
The Port Graham Village Council proposes construction of a wood-fired boiler to supply heat to the health and dental clinics. Currently the RE Fund is supporting final design and permitting
for the project with a grant of $75,000 matched by $25,000 in local.
AEA supports the initiative for developing a wood boiler project in Port Graham. However, given the high cost of the project as currently configured and the relatively low fuel displacement,
project economics are poor. Under the current grant-funded work, AEA believes that it is reasonable to assess options to lower the costs of the project, increase amount of fuel displaced
by supplying more loads, or do both.
No funding recommended.
9/21/2011 application withdrawn
Independence Power LLC proposes for permitting and final design for a 5.4 MW run-of-river hydro facility on Fourth of July Creek near Seward. This request builds on previously funded
grants in Round II (#86) for reconnaissance and in Round IV (#693) for feasibility. The grant award document indicates work began on the funded feasibility study in September 2011
and is expected to be completed in September 2012.
This round 5 request is contingent upon findings of a favorable outcome from this feasibility study with AEA review and approval of those results. However, those results will not be
available until late 2012. There is also a significant issue regarding how the project, estimated at $16.7-27M will be financed.
No funding recommended.
The City of Alakanuk proposes the reconnaissance, feasibility study, conceptual design, design, permitting, construction and commissioning of a stand-alone wind turbine to provide electricity
to the waste water treatment facility.
The City of Alakanuk is requesting funds for reconnaissance, feasibility study, conceptual design, design, permitting. The City of Alakanuk is requesting $14,650 for reconnaissance
and feasibility and $16,700 for design and permitting for a total of $31,350 from the RE fund. A non-monetary in-kind contribution of lodging and personnel assistance as required has
been offered. The total project cost is not provided.
Alakanuk is intertied with Emmonak and AVEC provides power to both communities via an existing wind-diesel system. The proposed Alakanuk wind turbine would be offsetting electricity
from AVEC?s wind diesel system at a cost of $.31/kWh to the City of Alakanuk.
AEA has the following concerns:
1) Alakanuk is situated between Nunam Iqua and Emmonak which have established wind regimes of low class 3 and class 2 respectively. There is no evidence that Alakanuk would have a
more productive wind resource.
2) The project is not coordinated with AVEC?s wind farm in Emmonak, or more generally the community power system.
3) The applicant?s budget is insufficient for the proposed scope of work.
AEA recommends that the City use a comprehensive approach for identifying cost-reduction options through the regional energy plan for the Yukon-Kuskokwim region, currently underway.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Angoon requests funds for reconnaissance study of two potential hydro sites located near Petersburg in Thomas Bay--Scenery Lake and Ruth Lake. The application indicates
that the projects would provide energy to Kake, Angoon, and Hoonah but does not address specifics of how the energy would be delivered to the communities. The City submitted separate
applications for reconnaissance assessment for these projects in RE Fund round 3 (#430,485).
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. The City of Petersburg has already prepared a reconnaissance assessment for a hydro project at Ruth Lake (#38) with funding from RE Fund round 1.
2. The RE Fund has already funded projects that would supply hydro energy to Kake, Angoon, and Hoonah that have higher likelihood of development and appear more economic.
3. At $2.4 million the project budget requested is excessive in relation to the likelihood of the project advancing.
In response to AEA\'s initial recommendation for no funding, the City of Angoon submitted a letter requesting reconsideration. Angoon asks that if AEA finds the City of Petersburg reconnaissance
study of Ruth Lake sufficient, then AEA should reduce the current request to a level that AEA believes is appropriate to support a reconnaisance study of Scenery Lake. AEA has reviewed
the round 1 funding allocated for the completed study of Ruth Lake, and on this basis believes that partial funding of $205,000 to support basic reconnaissance assessment of a hydro
project at Scenery Lake is reasonable.
As directed by the AEA executive director, staff continued Stage 2 technical review on the proposed project. The following describes rationale for the staff Stage 2 scores:
1. Project Management, Development and Operation
a. The proposed schedule is unrealistic in that it purports to accomplish $2.4M worth of field work and other activities in twelve months.
b. The cost savings estimated include 100% electric heating conversions for all in Wrangell, Petersburg and Ketchikan when the project is brought online. Staff believes this assumption
is unrealistic.
c. The application is silent on the team?s method of communication, monitoring and reporting development progress.
2. Qualifications and Experience
a. The applicant and partner have little or no experience and training in hydro development, utility business, and utility operations. The contractor to perform the studies is unnamed.
b. The project team does not appear to have staffing, time and other resources adequate to successfully complete the scope.
c. The project team has little technical or environmental expertise and the project has significant technical, economic and environmental barriers to contend with.
d. No local labor is proposed for the project.
3. Technical Feasibility
a. The reviewers believe the hydro resources at Scenery Lake and Ruth Lake are sustainable, but that project licenses, permits and other authorizations will require extraordinary
efforts to obtain.
b. The sites are not readily available, and suitability for hydro development is uncertain.
c. Project technical and environmental risks are high.
d. It is expected the two hydro sites could reliably produce energy as planned. It is doubtful the intertie system can be economically developed to serve the named communities.
e. This is not a demonstration project.
4. Economic Feasibility
a. The contracted economist estimates that the AEA benefit/cost ratio ranges from 0.87 to 1.37 and the applicant benefit/cost ranges from 8.17 to 9.09, indicating a wide disparity
of economic assumptions.
b. Analysis performed by Black and Veatch for the Southeast Integrated Resource Plan concludes that the life cycle costs of none of the nine transmission interconnections assessed
in the plan are lower than continued diesel generation in the load centers to be connected. Black and Veatch?s assessment excludes the cost of new hydropower generation.
c. Based on these factors AEA believes that a benefit/cost ratio cannot be reasonably estimated for this proposal.
Stage 2 review resulted in a score of 28.33--less than the minimum of 35 required for the project to be scored in stage 3. Funding not recommended. AEA will work with the proposer
through the AEA hydro program to address issues associated with the proposal.
The Iguigig Village Electric Company proposes a reconnaissance final design and construction to install hydrokinetic turbines on the Kvichak River.
The application would follow up feasibility and conceptual design work supported by RE Fund Round 2 (#265) funding of $707,250.
A reconnaissance report by EPRI in 2008, indicated that the Kvichak River near Iguigig was promising for hydrokinetic power due to suitable sites near the village and that the Kvichak
River is generally ice- and debris-free.
The application proposes to test multiple hydrokinetic devices (including ORPC and Whitestone device) in mid-2012 and 2013. The project proposes to continue development through FERC?s
pilot project stage, leaving commercial licensing until 2018.
A field study performed by Terrasond in 2011 under the Round 2 grant, located an area of interest that had depths of 2-3-meter depth, peak velocities near 2.5 m/s, and a highest average
velocity across one transect at 2.3 m/s. Terrasond also performed geotechnical studies on the areas of interest. These characteristics make it likely that the area would have a suitable
resource for hydrokinetic development.
The application includes in-kind contributions from ORPC, which will test a 150 kW unit near Nikiski with support of a RE Fund grant (#660). The application also proposes to fund the
completion, construction, and testing of the Whitestone Poncelet device, an undershot waterwheel under development by the Whitestone Community through assistance of a DOE grant.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. Assuming a $9.4 million project cost and $100,000/yr in fuel savings, economics are poor.
2. Given that the chief goal of this project is technology development and demonstration, the site is remote from logistical and technical support.
Since the application aims to fund completion of an experimental device with no working prototype and test several other devices, it appears the Emerging Energy Technology Fund would
be a more appropriate funding mechanism.
No funding recommended.
TDX Power requests funds to perform a feasibility study and conceptual design for hydroelectric development on Adak. This request builds on the reconnaissance study funded in Round
II (#315) which found several recommended hydro options. The most favorable scheme is a storage project on Lake Bonnie Rose with a penstock discharging to a powerhouse on Mitt Lake.
This option would offset much of the diesel generation for this community. A substantial consideration in this request is to review options on how to potentially integrate any new
renewable energy source with the existing diesel generation equipment which was designed for 30x the present population when the Navy ran the base.
AEA is moving forward with a statewide inventory of rural power systems expected to be completed February 2012. Adak appears to be a strong candidate for upgrade under the AEA-funded
Rural Power System Upgrade (RPSU) program.
The work scope proposed will need further adjustment to reflect need for stream gauging, analysis of existing dam, final report, etc. No REF funds can be spent on conventional diesel
system and electrical distribution issues.
Recommend full funding with the requirements that 1) TDX will work with AEA staff to revise the scope and budget before the grant award, and 2) work needs to be coordinated with RPSU
program-supported work.
Did not pass Stage 1
The Native Village of Nikolski requests funding to complete construction and commissioning of a 65-kW wind-diesel system.
In May 2006 AEA constructed a power plant with a total capacity of 180 kW. The community purchased a refurbished Vestas V15 wind turbine generator with a grant from USDA RUS and cost
share from APICDA in July 2007 ($474,475). In 2009, Nikolski received an RE Fund round 1 grant (#89) for $409,430 to integrate the wind turbine generator with a heat-recovery system
by installing boilers and thermal nodes. Most of the work was done by the community?s contractor TDX Power. Currently the wind system remains inoperable.
Given our experience with the project, AEA has the following concerns:
1. Proposed budget seems too high.
2. The wind turbine generator may need repair due to extended non-operation in a marine environment.
3. The power output from the wind turbine generator is too high for the village load and diesel power system.
4. The proposed solution has not been demonstrated to be functional in other Alaska wind systems and is thus not guaranteed to provide a working system.
Recommend full funding of $331,240 with a special provision that AEA will be directly involved in the management of this project. AEA staff will work directly with the community and
its contractors to establish a scope, design and budget for a functioning power system. The design portion of this project will not exceed $50,000. Construction funds will be unallocated
until the design, budget and schedule has been accepted by AEA. AEA notes that the round 1 grant recommendation requires a 5-year O&M agreement with an entity acceptable to AEA.
The Kodiak Island Borough proposes to construct a hybrid fuel oil-fired and ground-source heat pump system for the new Kodiak High School currently under construction. The hybrid system
would consist of 198 wells 316? deep and a 3,000 MBH (250-ton) heat pump.
The application provides a preliminary feasibility report including a detailed breakdown of project costs.
Since Kodiak is powered by hydroelectric and wind power, the GSHP would displace a significant amount of fuel oil (77,000 gal/yr). However the proposed GSHP uses a substantial amount
of electrical energy to run the system (1.9 million kWh/yr). Since savings are low compared to the high capital cost ($6.5 million) AEA is concerned that economics are poor.
No funding recommended.
The City applied for funding in a pre-RE Fund solicitation (?Round zero?) in 2008. AEA recommended against funding this proposal due to lack of demonstrated ability to sell the excess
hydro power. In the current application the City includes a MOU from Peter Pan Seafoods stating the company?s interest in purchasing a minimum of 800,000 kWh per year which will generate
extra revenue for the City over the life of the project. The Waterfall Creek project can reduce construction costs by expanding the existing powerhouse at Delta Creek and making use
of existing transmission lines from that project.
The City completed a preminary design for the Waterfall Creek project in 2007-9 as part of a rural power system upgrade.
The City is in negotiations with ADF&G over instream flows required to maintain Dolly Varden habitat. Flow issues may affect project economics. However the project economics are very
favorable and can offset some project cost increases.
Preconstruction activities, including permitting, site control, final design plans and specs, and final construction cost estimate, are expected to be complete in February 2013. Given
the significant preconstruction activities that remain, AEA is believes that it premature to allocate funds for construction at this time.
Recommend partial funding of $200,000 for final design and permitting.
Chitina Electric Inc. requests construction funding to build a high head, 300 kW run-of-river hydroelectric project on Fivemile Creek near Chitina. Two prior REF grants have been awarded
to CEI to date including $303,000 for feasibility study in Round II (#236) and $277,000 for permitting and final design in Round IV (#682). The site appears to be promising as a source
of hydroelectric power which can displace much of the current diesel generation of electricity. AEA constructed a new diesel powerhouse in 2008 near the proposed hydro power house
site near the airport about 5 miles from Chitina. This proximity will allow hydro/diesel integration issues to be minimal. AEA\'s Rural Energy Group is managing the preconstruction
phase of this project and is expected to manage the future hydro project construction phase as well.
However, progress on the preconstruction phases of the project has been limited to a feasibility study. Although permitting, site control, final design and construction cost estimate
were funded in round 2 and 4, they are not yet complete. Construction challenges for this project include a deeply incised stream at the proposed intake site, a highly erratic stream
flow, and shallow bedrock along the proposed penstock route. Because of these challenges AEA believes that the project construction risk is high and the project cost may be underestimated.
Further final design and permitting work will help identify current construction unknowns and reduce potential project risks.
Recommend no construction funding at this time.
Kipnuk Light Plant proposes the design, permitting, construction and commissioning of a high penetration wind-diesel system in Kipnuk. The project would include three Northern 100 turbines,
a five pole transmission line, secondary loads and a control module containing switchgear, metering and controls. The secondary loads would supply heat to the community center and
the new washeteria/water plant.
The proposed project is located in a possible class 5-6 wind regime and follows a community wide approach at addressing rising energy demands.
AEA notes that the power system will not support integration of wind turbines in its current state. Recently, in order to address reliability issues, AEA has provided two diesel gensets
and repaired the foundation of the powerhouse. Generation efficiency appears poor?11 kWh/gal in FY09 and 6 kWh/gal in FY10. AEA plans a statewide condition assessment of rural power
systems in early 2012 and expects that Kipnuk will rank high in priority for upgrade.
Kipnuk has received a $1.2 million in a legislative grant that is available for the proposed work, including conceptual design.
AEA has the following concerns:
1) A meteorological tower study and wind resource assessment has not been completed at the proposed turbine location.
2) An acceptable conceptual design report that covers the diesel and wind generation and distribution systems has not been prepared prior to the proposed final design and permitting.
3) While some upgrades to the existing power plant are progressing, a new power plant is needed and has been proposed by the community. This new power plant and any other required
system upgrades should be included in the system design through the conceptual design report process.
AEA will offer the community a met tower in 2012 through the state anemometer loan program.
No funding recommended.
Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council proposes to integrate a large solar hot water array with Heliodyne flat-plate solar collectors and related components to help offset about
20% of the current heating costs for the student dormitory. The applicant is requesting $300,000 from Round V funding. The total cost of the project is estimated at $340,000, $300,000
of which is capital costs. In-kind resources total $40,000.
Following initial review of this application AEA requested additional information regarding 1) solar energy availability and heating load that supports the estimate that the project
would displace 5,841 gallons of fuel oil per year, 2) performance data from the existing solar thermal panels, and 3) timing of design work to justify eligible match amount.
In response YRITWC submitted information indicating that 1) they assume that 100% of the heat available from the panels could be used to heat the building since the project would include
thermal storage and 2) data from the existing project is unreliable and contractor ABS was not able to get access to other data.
Since feasibility and conceptual design are not yet complete AEA believes that there is insufficient information available to conclude that the system is economically feasible. YRITWC
is not able to provide information on the operation of the existing solar thermal panels. AEA notes that a separate solar thermal project in McKinley Village funded in round 1 (#108)
that was substantially complete in 2009 has not provided data that confirms expected savings.
No funding recommended.
Chugach Electric proposes funding for construction of dual 34.5 kV transmission from the International Substation in Anchorage to Fire Island to transmit the power generated by the 17.6
MW Fire Island Wind Farm to the Chugach Electric system.
A special-purpose entity, Fire Island Wind LLC, a subsidiary of CIRI, will design and build the transmission line. Following completion and commissioning line ownership of the line
will be transferred to Chugach.
In processing the $25 million legislative grant for the project, AEA has reviewed the power sales agreement and approved the construction work plan for the project. The project appears
to be technically and economically viable.
Recommend full funding.
Mentasta Village Council proposes final design and construction of a three-Garn wood boiler system to supply a small district heating system consisting of the multi-use facility, council
building and post office, fire station, clinic and the community hall. The system would consume approximately 110 cords per year and displace 10,800 gallons of fuel oil per year?90%
of the facility loads.
Reconnaissance assessment through the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group indicates a viable project. MVC is not supplying a match.
AEA is concerned by the lack of a specific fuel supply plan for the project. However, we recognize the existing fuelwood market in the Tok area. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure
that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with requirement that Mentasta provide a fuel supply plan and final design acceptable to AEA before construction funds are disbursed.
Tanacross Village Council proposes final design and construction of a three-Garn wood boiler system to supply a small district heating system consisting of the multi-use facility, water/sewer
heating loop, fire station, and the community hall. The system would consume approximately 260 cords per year and displace 25,300 gallons of fuel oil per year?90% of the facility loads.
Reconnaissance assessment through the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group indicates a viable project. TVC is supplying match including materials for a boiler building and arctic
pipe system.
AEA is concerned by the lack of a specific fuel supply plan for the project. However, we recognize the existing fuelwood market in the Tok area. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure
that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with requirement that Tanacross provide a fuel supply plan and final design acceptable to AEA before construction funds are disbursed.
City of Tanana proposes funding for adding solar thermal to the existing wood-fired systems that supply the washeteria, tribal complex, and teacher housing buildings. The combined solar
and wood projects will meet most of the heating requirements of four public facilities.
The project includes $79,000 for system performance monitoring for demonstration purposes.
Although the project appears technically feasible, economics are poor to marginal with AEA?s standard assumption of a 20-year project life, even if the $79,000 cost is removed.
Recommend no funding.
AVEC proposes final design and permitting for four wind turbines that would supplement existing power systems in St. Michael and Stebbins. The grant also includes designing controls
for the power system in Stebbins. Additionally, AVEC has completed design and permitting for an intertie between St. Michael and Stebbins. If this grant is approved, AVEC will seek
funding for construction of the turbines and the intertie. Currently AVEC is working on feasibility and conceptual design of the St. Michael/Stebbins wind system with an expected completion
of December 2012.
The wind resource completed in Aug. 2011 shows class 5 winds. Turbulence is low at this site. Average system penetration would be 29%.
Given the very good wind resource, AEA believes that it is reasonable to allocate funding for the next phase of project development.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA accept feasibility and conceptual design before finalizing the round 5 grant agreement.
AVEC proposes to add two NW100 turbines to their 400 kW Emmonak wind farm, boosting capacity to 600 kW.
Although the first project was awarded in Round 1, a wind resource analysis report was not published until August 2010. This wind resource report estimates a capacity factor of only
18.7% for a NW100B at 80% turbine availability. This is substantially less than AVEC?s estimate (23.8% capacity factor corresponding to a total of 1,250,000kWh). Neither AEA nor AVEC
were aware at the time of the Round 1 proposal and award that the wind resource would result in the low capacity factors and wind power densities actually seen at this site.
Depending on energy production assumptions, the benefit/cost ranges from 0.61 to 0.69, thus appearing to be marginal at this point. A more accurate assessment of production will be
available after a year or so of operation of the existing 400kW wind system.
No funding recommended.
AVEC proposes to install a 10 kW solar array on the side of the existing power plant in Upper Kalskag. AVEC estimates an annual savings of 9,096kWh and 673 gallons of diesel fuel per
year to offset operating costs and station service. This equates to a capacity factor of 12.5%.
The proposed project is similar to the Kaltag Solar project that is funded from REF 4 (#877). That project scope mounts the PV array on a CONEX container instead of the AVEC building.
The CONEX model allows for lower costs through construction in Fairbanks with only minor assembly in Upper Kalskag. The Conex can be optimally oriented to capture the most solar gain
as opposed to the powerhouse orientation.
Economics appear marginal. AEA believes that the Kaltag project, which was funded as a demonstration project, should be on line long enough to assess performance and economics before
further funds are allocated to similar projects.
Recommend no funding.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to install a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy created by Gambell?s
existing 300 kW wind system. The recovered energy would be used for the water treatment plant space heating, drinking water loop circulation heating, and water storage tank heating.
AVEC is requesting funding for design and construction of the proposed project. This phase is expected to cost $252,905, of which $12,645 (5%) would come as an in-kind match provided
by ANTHC, provided through project labor and rest of the amount, $240,260, is requested from the RE Fund.
The project would result in a substantial amount of fuel displaced at the water treatment plant. The proposal represents a solid partnership between AVEC and ANTHC.
The highest benefit for wind power is to displace diesel generator fuel before heating oil. Based on HOMER modeling, AEA is concerned that, under the current system configuration, only
55% of the wind turbine output can be used to offset generator fuel, while 45% of the output is excess power and available for offsetting heating fuel. Including a smaller genset in
the diesel system will result in significantly greater amount of generator fuel being saved according to AEA?s modeling. Although the proposed project will result in economic payback,
additional savings could be achieved by optimizing the diesel generator configuration.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to install a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy created by Chevak?s
existing 400kW wind system. The recovered energy would be used for the water treatment plant space heating, drinking water loop circulation heating, and water storage tank heating.
AVEC is requesting funding for design and construction of the proposed project. This phase is expected to cost $252,905, of which $12,645 (5%) would come as an in-kind match provided
by ANTHC, provided through project labor and rest of the amount, $240,260, is requested from the RE Fund.
The project would result in a substantial amount of fuel displaced at the water treatment plant. The proposal represents a solid partnership between AVEC and ANTHC.
The highest benefit for wind power is to displace diesel generator fuel before heating oil. Based on HOMER modeling, AEA is concerned that, under the current system configuration, only
61% of the wind turbine output can be used to offset generator fuel, while 39% of the output is excess power and available for offsetting heating fuel. Including a smaller genset in
the diesel system will result in significantly greater amount of generator fuel being saved according to AEA?s modeling. Although the proposed project will result in economic payback,
additional savings could be achieved by optimizing the diesel generator configuration.
Full funding recommended.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Goodnews Bay. Wind resource is estimate as a class 4 based on the high-resolution wind map. AEA notes an area of class
5 resource near Goodnews.
The City of Goodnews Bay, in cooperation with ANTHC, has proposed generating wind power to heat the water treatment plant and the washeteria (#859). Although AEA is recommending against
funding the City\'s project, the current proposal provides a way of addressing the City\'s proposed assessment.
This application is one of two wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 5. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2-4 for feasibility assessment in 10 other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, 1) AVEC will prepare budgets for both round 5 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs, and 2) work with the City and ANTHC to include scope of work that addresses feasibility of heating the water treatment plant and washeteria.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Shishmaref. Wind resource is estimated as a class 5 based on the high-resolution wind map.
This application is one of two wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 5. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2-4 for feasibility assessment in 10 other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Due to severe coastal erosion the community of Shishmaref is considering moving.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for both round 5 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes final design and construction of a 200 kW wind farm to serve the community of Mt. Village. The project would include 5-7 miles of transmission between the turbine site
and the Mountain Village system.
The completion of this project would benefit the community through stabilized energy costs. AVEC would also improve the switch gear and add remote control to the system. The wind resource
appears to be very good, a class 5.
AVEC?s proposal included a HOMER model that assumed 100% turbine availability and 100% utilization of turbine generation at 35% capacity factor. Excess wind energy is not addressed.
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. AVEC?s assumptions on wind generation and utilization appear overly optimistic.
2. Given a high project cost of $4.2 million ($21,000/kW), which includes the transmission, economics are poor (B/C = 0.6 to 0.9). Benefit/cost may improve if the system is tied to
the St. Mary?s grid.)
3. AVEC does not provide a feasibility analysis and conceptual design with the proposal.
No funding recommended.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to install a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy created by Shaktoolik?s
existing 200 kW wind system funded in RE Fund round 2 (#303). The recovered energy would be used for the water treatment plant space heating, drinking water loop circulation heating,
and water storage tank heating.
The round 2 grant included a 260 kW electric boiler as a secondary load to be installed in the power plant.
AVEC is requesting funding for design and construction of the proposed project. This phase is expected to cost $252,905, of which $12,645 (5%) would come as an in-kind match provided
by ANTHC, provided through project labor and rest of the amount, $240,260, is requested from the RE Fund.
The project would result in a substantial amount of fuel displaced at the water treatment plant. The proposal represents a solid partnership between AVEC and ANTHC.
The highest benefit for wind power is to displace diesel generator fuel before heating oil. Based on HOMER modeling, AEA is concerned that, under the current system configuration, only
44% of the wind turbine output can be used to offset generator fuel, while 56% of the output is excess power and available for offsetting heating fuel. Including a smaller genset in
the diesel system will result in significantly greater amount of generator fuel being saved according to AEA?s modeling. Although the proposed project will result in economic payback,
additional savings could be achieved by optimizing the diesel generator configuration.
Recommend full funding.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to install a secondary load installation to capture the excess energy created by Mekoryuk?s
existing 200 kW wind system funded in RE Fund round12 (#72). The recovered energy would be used for the water treatment plant space heating, drinking water loop circulation heating,
and water storage tank heating.
AVEC is requesting funding for design and construction of the proposed project. This phase is expected to cost $278,378, of which $123,919 (5%) would come as a match provided by ANTHC,
provided through project labor and rest of the amount, $264,459, is requested from the RE Fund.
The project would result in a substantial amount of fuel displaced at the water treatment plant. The proposal represents a solid partnership between AVEC and ANTHC.
The highest benefit for wind power is to displace diesel generator fuel before heating oil. Based on HOMER modeling, AEA is concerned that, under the current system configuration, only
49% of the wind turbine output can be used to offset generator fuel, while 51% of the output is excess power and available for offsetting heating fuel. Including a smaller genset in
the diesel system will result in significantly greater amount of generator fuel being saved according to AEA?s modeling. Although the proposed project will result in economic payback,
additional savings could be achieved by optimizing the diesel generator configuration.
Recommend full funding.
AVEC proposes construction of a 300 kW wind farm to supply the St. Marys-Pitkas Point grid. The work would also upgrade the existing power line to the wind farm site from single to
three-phase. The wind resource appears to be class 6.
AVEC received $275,554 in round 4 of the REF for completing feasibility and final design and permitting (#645). Currently AEA is working with AVEC to put the grant in place. The current
application only includes the foundation design and electrical drawings for the turbine interconnect and transmission line. There is no geotech final report (only preliminary). A special
provision of the round 4 grant is that ?before final design funds are disbursed AEA accepts the feasibility and conceptual design report?.
In round 3 AVEC proposed final design, permitting, and construction of a 900 kW wind project and intertie to serve the communities of St. Marys, Mountain Village, Pitkas Point, and Pilot
Station (#516). In round 2 AVEC requested funding for feasibility assessment for this project (#298). AEA recommended both proposals for funding; however there was not sufficient funding
for either.
AVEC noted presence of icing during the met tower studies resulting in tower collapse in two locations.
Based on the work to date it appears that a wind farm to serve the St. Marys grid is viable. AEA believes that it is reasonable for AVEC to consider its original concept of tying in
Mountain Village and Pilot Station and upsizing the wind generation capacity.
Recommend full funding with requirement that round 4 work needs to be completed and accepted by AEA. Round 4 work should address the potential for tying the communities together.
ORPC Alaska 2, LLC, proposes the installation of three additional 150-kW TidGen power systems for the TidGen Array project at East Foreland, near Nikiski in June 2014. The proposal
is to fund the second stage of the tidal energy project that was funded under Round 4 of the RE Fund. ORPC received $2 million for the deployment of the first 150 kW TidGen power system
at the site. The four devices are expected to have a peak capacity of 600 kW.
ORPC has been active in Alaska for several years working on reconnaissance and feasibility projects at several sites around the state, including Cook Inlet. ORPC has received several
Department of Energy grants to perform research vital for their Alaska projects, including on Beluga whales and bearings that will survive the inlet?s high sediment load. The Round
4 project is expected to begin in January 2013, with installation of the first tidal turbine in June 2013. The technology is still under development. The first full-scale deployment
of the 150 kW unit is expected in summer 2012 in Maine with support of a USDOE grant.
The East Foreland site is estimated to have very fast tidal currents (12 knots, or 6 m/s maximum velocities), making it highly energetic and technically challenging. If the initial
deployment is successful in 2013, the next stage, proposed in this application, is expected to begin in January 2014, with the installation of the next three turbines expected in June
2014.
ORPC?s proposal includes letters of support from the university, Homer Electric Association, contractors, Kenai Peninsula Borough, Homer Electric Association and others. The application
makes a strong case that development of the project in Alaska will have significant employment, economic, and technology impacts in the state. HEA has signed a letter of intent with
ORPC to participate in the project.
However, given the State?s previous investment of $2 million through the Round 4 RE Fund and the pre-commercial nature of the technology, AEA believes that it is too early for the State
to invest further funds until more information is gained from the installation in Maine and the first turbine funded under Round 4 grant.
No funding recommended.
The Ivanof Bay Tribal Council proposes to perform a reconnaissance study to explore the geothermal potential of the Ivanof Bay region.
The plan proposes a stepwise approach: geological field work (geological mapping, geochemical sampling, Geophysical surveys, sampling of the Big River) to determine if there are any
developable geothermal resources in the Ivanof Bay region. The known geothermal resources referenced in the application?Port Moller, Kupreanof, and Aniakchak?are all at great distances
from the communities of Perryville, Chignik, Chignik Lagoon, and Chignik Lake (between 28 and >70 miles).
HDL provided cost estimates geothermal development at a number of known geothermal sites in Alaska. HDL?s Port Moller estimate ranged between $47 and $92 million for a 1 MW plant.
Total electricity generation of the communities of Perryville, Chignik, Chignik Lake, and Chignik Lagoon equals approximately 1.6 million kWh per year. Using this as the yearly energy
consumption, the levelized cost of energy would be $2 to $3.50/kWh assuming no operation and maintenance cost, a 25-year life, and a 3% real discount rate.
The project is expected to begin in August 2012 and be completed by December 2013.
DGGS comments are as follows: ?The proposal seeks to investigate the geothermal potential of the Ivanof Bay area and is based on fumaroles fields related to Kupreanof Volcano and a deep
oil and gas exploration well drilled in 1976-1977, the Big River A-01. The proposal will gather literature and thermal satellite images, and proposes to test geothermal prospecting
and exploration techniques including geochemical sampling, shallow temperature surveys using thermal probes, gravity and/or magnetotelluric surveys in select locations and evaluate
the Big River A-01 core. The proposal could be improved by providing a map showing the locations of the communities, fumarole fields, oil and gas well and be more specific in delineating
the areas where geothermal exploration will be conducted. The resource proposed for study is distant from the Chignik communities (~90 km, with at least some FWS Refuge land in between).
Although the Big River well encountered geothermally interesting temperatures (~190F) the depth was great (~12,000\') and the drilling log mentions significant hydrothermal mineralization
which would presumably have a large negative impact on reservoir characteristics. Significant spring systems suggestive of a shallower, more accessible, hydrothermal system do not
exist.?
AEA?s is concerned that
1. Due to the great distances to the known geothermal resources and the low likelihood of finding an unknown geothermal resource, the proposal carries significant risks for finding
a suitable resource.
2. Were a resource identified, the cost of developing it would be prohibitively high.
No funding recommended.
Alaska Gateway School District proposes adding on a heat loop off the newly-completed wood-fired heating system at the Tok School to provide heat to the detached multipurpose buildings
that house a hockey rink, shooting range and Zamboni garage. The project team would revise the existing design and construction documents prior to construction.
The application is largely the same as a round 4 submittal (#617) that was not recommended due to poor economics. Since last year the project team has reduced the capital cost from
$754,651 to $629,000 by decreasing mobilization and construction costs. At the same time the projected cost of fuel over the life of the project has increased. These changes have
improved the projected benefit/cost ratio from 0.47 to 0.85.
Recommend full funding.
The City of Elim proposes a reconnaissance and feasibility study of the geothermal resources near the city. The UAF?s Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) would be contracted to
perform the reconnaissance and feasibility work.
The nearest hot springs to Elim are Kwiniuk Hot Springs (41?C, 22gpm) and Clear Hot Springs (65?C, 230gpm). Kwiniuk can be accessed by a 16-mile road (estimated to take 1.5 hours),
but is 8 miles straight distance from Elim. Clear Hot Springs is not currently road accessible and is located 16 miles via a straight path.
No previous work has been performed on this project by ACEP or the City of Elim. The project is expected to begin in August 2012 and be completed by July 2013. Funded by AEA?s geothermal
program in 2009, HDL assessed the cost of a potential project installed in Elim at $38 to 52 million. However, the current proposal makes the case that the resource is more similar
to that at Manley Hot Springs and estimates an installed cost of $15 to 37 million.
DNR notes that the reconnaissance study approach is reasonable: Thermal imaging (utilizing techniques being used by ACEP at the Pilgrim Hot Springs project site), ground-based reconnaissance
(geological mapping, soil & water sampling), the creation of a conceptual reservoir model, and development of a preliminary design and cost.
AEA is concerned that, even if a geothermal resource were located, economics appear poor. Assuming a mid-point cost of the system at $26 million and O&M costs of $312,000/yr the benefit/cost
ratio is 0.14. Assuming a cost of $15 million and no O&M, the benefit/cost ratio is only 0.54.
No funding recommended.
The City of False Pass Electrical Utility proposes to perform a reconnaissance and feasibility Tidal Energy Study to determine the viability of installing and operating a 150 kW ORPC
TidGen hydrokinetic device. The Aleutians East Borough will manage the project for the city utility.
No previous work has been done on this project. The project would perform a resource assessment of the strait off Unimak Island by creating a circulation model and deploying acoustic
Doppler current profilers (ADCP). Using the resource data and acquired economic information about the system and the local community, a decision would be made to determine if the project
was economically viable.
The project is expected to begin in September 2012 and be completed by the end of March 2014.
AEA recognizes that a number of strong entities with experience in Alaska have agreed to partner on the reconnaissance and feasibility project.
AEA?s concern is that tidal power technology is still in a very early stage of development. The most recent cost estimates through 2030 for tidal energy by the UK?s Carbon Trust range
from $0.24-0.80/kWh in UK waters. Projects in remote parts of Alaska would be expected to have significantly higher costs. Results of ORPC?s demonstration in Cook Inlet should be
examined before further project development work is pursued in more remote areas. AEA will consider further extensive resource assessment similar to work being supported with NOAA
in Cook Inlet through the hydrokinetic program.
Not recommended for funding.
The City of Angoon, in partnership with ANTHC, proposes feasibility assessment of windpower supplying the water treatment plant.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance-level information, such as rough capital cost, installed capacity, wind resource, or fuel savings.
2. The high-resolution map indicates a class 1 (poor) wind resource.
No funding recommended.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance-level information, such as rough capital cost.
2. The proposal assumes a class 5 resource, while the proposed location is a class 3.
3. AVEC is proposing a feasibility study (#874) for a larger-scale project that could also assess viability of providing heat to the water treatment plant.
4. Economics appear poor based on AEA modeling for heat only.
A larger combined heat and power wind-diesel system would appear to be a better option for a cost-effective solution. AEA has recommended funding for AVEC?s feasibility study with
the requirement that AVEC work with the City and ANTHC to assess feasibility of providing heat to the water treatment plant. It is recommended that the City use a comprehensive approach
for identifying cost-reduction options through the regional energy plan for the Yukon-Kuskokwim region, currently underway.
No funding recommended.
City of Togiak, in collaboration with ANTHC, proposes to construct a waste heat recovery system to connect waste heat from AVEC?s generating station to the water treatment plant, clinic,
police station, City Office, and the ?Old School? Community Activity Building.
The project will displace approximately 13,700 gallons of diesel per year according to a 2010 Heat Recovery Analysis.
A feasibility and conceptual design has been completed. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding.
City of Savoonga in collaboration with ANTHC, proposes construction of a diesel heat recovery system that would supply the water storage, treatment and distribution systems. The system
would displace approximately 8,800 gallons of diesel per year.
The application includes a conceptual design and feasibility assessment for the project. A design is in progress.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal.
1. The study was done only considering the 499 kW Cummins unit instead of the Detroit Diesel, which is more efficient and the generator of choice with the wind system.
2. According to PCE figures, the existing wind farm has a capacity factor of 21%--less than the assumed 30% capacity factor from the wind report.
The final design should address these issues. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA accept final design before construction funds are disbursed.
The City of Shishmaref, in collaboration with ANTHC, proposes to construct a waste heat recovery system to connect waste heat from the AVEC generating station to the clinic, city office,
and the water treatment plant.
The project will displace approximately 7,900 gallons of diesel per year.
A feasibility and conceptual design has been completed. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency are addressed in conjunction with this project.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance-level information, such as rough capital cost or installed wind capacity.
2. There is a diesel and wind waste heat recovery system in use with lines stubbed out at the new water treatment facility. This was not addressed in the application.
3. AVEC operates a 300 kW wind system in Kasigluk. The application make no reference to the AVEC system or the possibility of increasing the size of that system to produce both heat
and power.
4. Economics appear poor based on AEA modeling for heat only. Assuming a class 6 wind resource, offsetting 4800 gallons/yr of diesel, $4.30/gal fuel cost and the lowest possible cost
of a remanufactured 65 kW, a wind system benefit/cost was 0.4. This reflects that the value of replacing heat is much less than the value of displacing electrical energy.
A combined heat and power wind-diesel system would appear to be a better option for a cost-effective solution. AEA recommends that the City use a comprehensive approach for identifying
cost-reduction options through the regional energy plan for the Yukon-Kuskokwim region, currently underway.
No funding recommended.
The City of Klawock, in cooperation, with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to assess feasibility of using biomass to heat the water and wastewater treatment plants.
While AEA believes that biomass projects have potential merit, we are concerned that the proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance level information, including biomass resource
availability and cost, estimated fuel displacement, a rough capital cost, and presence of other heat users, such as the school or other community buildings for AEA to review the application.
AEA believes that a systematic, uniform approach for identifying and assessing potential biomass projects for water and sewer systems will be more effective and less expensive. AEA
will work with ANTHC and other stakeholders to develop a process to support this work through the statewide heat recovery program and regional energy plans.
No funding recommended.
The City of White Mountain, in cooperation with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to assess feasibility of recovering heat from the community power system to supply the
water treatment, storage and distribution system.
While AEA believes that heat recovery projects have much merit, we are concerned that
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance level information, including estimated fuel displacement, a rough capital cost, and other heat users, such as the school or
other community buildings for AEA to review the application.
2. Based on AEA?s experience the grant request is high in relation to the amount of work that is required.
AEA believes that a systematic, uniform approach for identifying and assessing potential heat recovery projects for water and sewer systems will be more effective and less expensive.
AEA will work with ANTHC and other stakeholders to develop a process to support this work through the statewide heat recovery program and regional energy plans.
No funding recommended.
The City of New Stuyahok, in cooperation with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to assess feasibility of recovering heat from the community power system to supply the
water treatment, storage and distribution system.
While AEA believes that heat recovery projects have much merit, we are concerned that
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance level information, including estimated fuel displacement, a rough capital cost, and other heat users, such as the school or
other community buildings for AEA to review the application.
2. Based on AEA?s experience the grant request is high in relation to the amount of work that is required.
AEA believes that a systematic, uniform approach for identifying and assessing potential heat recovery projects for water and sewer systems will be more effective and less expensive.
AEA will work with ANTHC and other stakeholders to develop a process to support this work through the statewide heat recovery program and regional energy plans.
No funding recommended.
The City of Toksook Bay, in cooperation with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to assess feasibility of recovering heat from the community power system to supply the water
treatment, storage and distribution system.
While AEA believes that heat recovery projects have much merit, we are concerned that
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance level information, including estimated fuel displacement, a rough capital cost, and other heat users, such as the school or
other community buildings for AEA to review the application.
2. Based on AEA?s experience the grant request is high in relation to the amount of work that is required.
AEA believes that a systematic, uniform approach for identifying and assessing potential heat recovery projects for water and sewer systems will be more effective and less expensive.
AEA will work with ANTHC and other stakeholders to develop a process to support this work through the statewide heat recovery program and regional energy plans.
No funding recommended.
The City of Lower Kalskag, in cooperation, with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to assess feasibility of using biomass to heat the water treatment plant.
While AEA believes that biomass projects have potential merit, we are concerned that the proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance level information, including biomass resource
availability and cost, estimated fuel displacement, a rough capital cost, and presence of other heat users, such as the school or other community buildings for AEA to review the application.
AEA believes that a systematic, uniform approach for identifying and assessing potential biomass projects for water and sewer systems will be more effective and less expensive. AEA
will work with ANTHC and other stakeholders to develop a process to support this work through the statewide heat recovery program and regional energy plans.
No funding recommended.
Applicant proposes wind study to assess feasibility of wind-powered heating for the community sanitation facility.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. AVEC is funded in round 4 (#647) to assess feasibility of replacing the existing four AOC 65 kW turbines. Heat production from new turbines can be considered through this work.
2. Performance of the existing system indicates a class 2 wind resource.
3. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance-level information, such as rough capital cost, fuel displacement or revenue streams. The proposal did not address whether
or not there was an existing diesel heat recovery system to tie into.
4. With class 2 winds in the region, economics of a wind-for-heat project will be poor.
The proposal mentions that the dampers on the oil-fired system are missing or not operating correctly. These problems should be fixed before adding wind to the system. AEA recommends
that the City use a comprehensive approach for identifying cost-reduction options through a regional energy plan for the Northwest region.
No funding recommended.
Sleetmute Traditional Council, in collaboration with ANTHC, proposes to construct a waste heat recovery system to connect waste heat from the Middle Kuskokwim Electric generating station
to the water treatment plant.
The project will displace approximately 1,779 gallons of diesel per year according to a 2010 Heat Recovery Analysis.
A feasibility and conceptual design has been completed. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding.
The City of Scammon Bay requests funding for feasibility, permitting and final design of a hydroelectric project at Scammon Bay. AVEC participated in two reconnaissance and two feasibility
studies were completed in the 1980s for a river in Scammon Bay that also serves as the domestic water supply for the village. That site was found to be infeasible.
This application is based upon a 2003 feasibility study by Polarconsult of a 331 kW run-of-river hydro plant on Ekashluak Creek. This creek originates in the Askinuk Mountains and is
located 11 miles west of Scammon Bay and is inaccessible except by boat or snowmachine. AVEC commissioned that study and concluded the long distance to the village made the site unattractive.
The City proposes partner with ANTHC for project management; Hatch will be retained for the design of the hydro plant. The power system at Scammon Bay is owned and run by AVEC. AVEC
would eventually own the plant and AVEC has submitted a letter of support for the project.
There is limited discussion of the issues associated with integration of a new hydro plant in the existing diesel system. The application mentions new wind in several places; a Rd
IV grant will study wind generation at SB. There is mention of significant undersea cable required to connect an alternate hydro source on Ekashluak Creek, and the project appears
be located in a wildlife refuge. There is no mention of associated fish issues in this creek in the application or in the attached 2003 feasibility study, but there appears to be the
potential for fish habitat impact. The licensing jurisdiction is not identified, whether federal (FERC) or state. Given the uncertainty associated with these issues, AEA believes
it is premature to allocate funds for final design and permitting.
Recommend partial funding of $80,723 for feasibility and conceptual design (tasks 1-3) with requirement that grantee and AEA will revise scope and budget before grant is issued.
The City of Kotlik proposes feasibility assessment of wind-powered heat and power for the city water and wastewater facility.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance-level information, such as rough capital cost, fuel displacement or revenue streams. The proposal did not address whether
or not there was an existing diesel heat recovery system to tie into.
2. The class 4-5 wind resource is not indicated on the latest high-resolution wind map.
3. Economics of the project appear marginal even though the economist report assumes no boiler cost. Estimated cost of the feasibility work is half of the estimated construction cost.
A combined heat and electric system would appear to be a better option for a cost-effective solution. AEA recommends that the City use a comprehensive approach for identifying cost-reduction
options through the regional energy plan for the Yukon-Kuskokwim region, currently underway.
No funding recommended.
The City of Noorvik, in cooperation, with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes to assess feasibility of recovering heat from the community power system to supply the water
treatment, storage and distribution system.
While AEA believes that heat recovery projects have much merit, we are concerned that
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance level information, including estimated fuel displacement, a rough capital cost, and other heat users, such as the school or
other community buildings for AEA to review the application.
2. Based on AEA?s experience the grant request is high in relation to the amount of work that is required.
AEA believes that a systematic, uniform approach for identifying and assessing potential heat recovery projects for water and sewer systems will be more effective and less expensive.
AEA will work with ANTHC and other stakeholders to develop a process to support this work through the statewide heat recovery program and regional energy plans.
No funding recommended.
City of Russian Mission, in cooperation with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, proposes final design and construction of a heat recovery system that will supply the school and
teacher housing. The project will include a marine jacket retrofit on the prime genset, thus doubling available recoverable heat..
The project will displace approximately 12,000 gallons of diesel per year.
A feasibility and conceptual design has been completed. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding.
The Atmautluak Traditional Council in collaboration with ANTHC is proposing the design and construction a waste heat recovery system to connect recovered heat from the community power
plant to the refurbished washeteria. This project is estimated to displace 4395 gallons of fuel oil.
The AEA-managed power plant replacement for the community is in the conceptual design phase with funding targeted for 2012. The power plant replacement is not required for this project
to be successful, but it could enhance the availability of recovered heat.
The feasibility study for this project was completed in 2011. AEA notes that the application narrative states that final design funding is requested for 2011, although funding would
not be available until July 2012. The budget form gives a later timeframe.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding.
The City of Golovin, in partnership with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium proposes to assess feasibility of utilizing wind turbines to generate power to provide heat for the existing
water treatment plant, water storage and water distribution system. AEA followed up with questions regarding the efficiency of the boilers, fuel consumption, heating season, and amount
of water that needed to be heated.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. The proposal does not include sufficient reconnaissance-level information, such as rough capital cost, wind resource from high-resolution map, fuel displacement or revenue streams.
Data provided were not sufficient to perform even a very rough economic analysis. The proposal did not address whether or not there was an existing diesel heat recovery system to
tie into.
2. Economics appear poor based on AEA modeling for heat only. Assuming a class 4 wind resource, offsetting 4000 gallons/yr of diesel, $5.00/gal fuel cost and the lowest possible cost
of a remanufactured 65 kW wind system benefit/cost was 0.5 to 0.6. This reflects that the value of replacing heat is much less than the value of displacing electrical energy.
A combined heat and electric system would appear to be a better option for a cost-effective solution. AEA recommends that the City use a comprehensive approach for identifying cost-reduction
options through a regional energy plan for the Bering Straits region.
No funding recommended.
City of Kake is requesting funding for feasibility and conceptual design to evaluate various hydro resource alternatives at Kake dam and Cathedral Falls. The dam in Kake provides for
the city\'s water supply and supplies the fish hatchery. The City would use ANTHC for study lead with assistance from the firm Hatch.
AEA has the following concerns:
1. The City has not prepared a reconnaissance assessment that identifies a single alternative for the feasibility and conceptual design funding request.
2. Several previous studies have reviewed hydro resources near Kake and recommended no further pursuit of this type of resource. Kake receives roughly 1/4 of Ketchikan\'s annual precipitation,
so its hydro prospects are not compelling.
3. Funds are being requested by SEAPA for an engineering study of transmission to Kake in Rd V app # 811.
No funding recommended.
Applicant proposes final design and construction of a cordwood ?fired heating system to supply the water treatment plant facilities. Assessment for wood heating in Ambler, Shungnak,
and Kobuk was funded under two earlier projects: 1) Feasibility in round 1 (# 59) and 2) final design in round 4 to NW Inupiat Housing Authority (NWIHA) (#668). Work includes fuel
supply plan, business plan, and technology assessment.
The project would consume 35 cords of year harvested from NANA lands. A letter from NANA states its support. The system would operated through the Alaska Rural Utility Collaborative
and represents their first wood-fired system.
AEA is concerned that the economics appear marginal. They could be improved by identifying ways of reducing capital cost and/or increasing diesel displacement during the design phase.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
AEA is also concerned that the Kobuk Valley Electric is not participating regularly in the PCE program.
Recommend full funding with requirements that 1) The City must coordinate with NWIHA and their consultant in developing the project, 2) AEA must accept final design before construction
funding is disbursed and 3) wood supply contracts for 5 years must be in place before construction funding is disbursed.
Nome Joint Utility System proposes the design, permitting, construction and commissioning of a second EWT 900 turbine at the Banner Wind Farm.
In a second proposal (#898) NJUS requests funding to integrate existing 1875 kW and 3660 kW units into Nome?s Power Plant and reconfigure plant controls to reduce operating costs, provide
greater stability, and improve efficiency. The second proposal scope includes relocating the 1875 kW unit from a different building. AEA believes that this work is not consistent
with the intent of the RE Fund, therefore not eligible. Only the integration of a secondary load controller and resistive dump boiler, estimated to cost $325,000, are consistent with
the objectives of the RE Fund and eligible for funding.
For the purposes of review AEA will consider proposal #839 and the eligible portion of #898 as one application.
NJUSs? original proposal (#52) was for the construction of a 3 MW wind farm at a project cost of $13.5 million. The project was partially funded at $4 million and the scope reduced
to the installation of a single EWT 900 turbine. Of this cost, $69,000 is for conceptual design and feasibility, while $3,931,000 is for final design and construction. A RE Fund round
1 grant is in place for the design, permitting, construction and commissioning of a single EWT 900 turbine. A conceptual design report, which includes analysis of a wind-diesel system
with both one and two EWT 900 turbines, has been accepted by AEA.
NJUS is requesting funds for the design, permitting, construction and commissioning of the proposed project. The project is expected to cost $4,115,000, of which $411,500 would come
as matching funds provided by NJUS. NJUS is requesting $3,703,500 from the RE Fund in proposal #839.
The combined proposed project (#52, 839, 898) has a relatively low price per installed kilowatt and can lead to a significant drop in diesel usage for electricity in the community.
AEA is concerned that the current diesel configuration is oversized for the community and especially so for the installation of significant wind power. Integrating the smaller generators
will help to address this situation.
Recommend funding of $4,069,000 ($8,000,000 cap - $3,931,000 from the round 1 grant) with the requirement that 1) AEA accept final design and permitting, and 2) NJUS reconfigures the
existing diesel generators, (including the non-RE Fund eligible work) before construction funds are released.
The Chickaloon Village Traditional Council proposes construction of a pellet and solar heating system to supply heat to the shop and administrative building. The system would include
a solar thermal panel, a 200 MBH wood pellet-fired boiler, and an 8 x 12? addition to one of the buildings.
The applicant is requesting construction; however, a detailed final design has not been completed. Upon AEA request the applicant provided a rough conceptual design. Chickaloon?s submittal
did not include a final layout of the system, a detailed heating load assessment, a schematic of the control system, or other site-specific detail.
AEA supports the initiative for developing a heating project for Chickaloon Village Traditional Council. However, AEA is concerned about the high cost of the project as currently configured,
the relatively low fuel displacement, and marginal project economics.
Despite the lack of an acceptable final design, AEA recognizes that the proposed system is relatively simple. Before any state funds are disbursed, AEA believes that it is reasonable
to for Chickaloon to assess options to lower the cost of the project, increase amount of fuel displaced by supplying more loads, or do both.
Recommend full funding with requirement that Chickaloon provide a final design that is acceptable to AEA before any funds are disbursed.
9/21/2011 application withdrawn
Chignik Lagoon Village Council requests funds to construct a 177 kV hydroelectric project on Packers Creek. The project would displace 89% of the community?s electrical energy. An
RE Fund round 1 grant was made for permitting and final design (#14) for $150,000. The project would consist of a 9\' concrete dam penstock and powerhouse on Packer Creek and a 1,800
feet transmission line to connect to community power system.
AEA has reviewed the final design documents and has identified some additional work to be completed, including flood elevations and bridge foundations. Additionally site control has
not been obtained as of date of this review, although a letter from the village corporation indicates this will be provided. Water rights from ADNR, the Borough development permit,
and the ADF&G fish habitat permit remain to be issued. Integration of hydro with existing diesel power plant is not discussed in application. Discussion of interruptible power to
heat the school is mentioned but not designed or budgeted for in the project estimate. The construction manager is not identified. Given all these unresolved issues, AEA believes
the cost estimate for this construction project is low.
Despite these shortcomings, technical and economic feasibility of this project appear favorable, and the project has high potential for meeting most of community electrical needs. The
community?s distribution system was upgraded in 2003, while the power system was upgraded in the mid-1990s.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA must approve final design, permitting, financing plan, and construction manager before construction cost reimbursement.
The City of Ouzinkie proposes feasibility study and conceptual design to replace the existing timber buttress dam at Ouzinkie with a new facility that can impound 50% more water, thus
enabling the diesel generators to be shut off. The existing dam serves as a source for hydroelectric generation and for the community\'s water supply.
For the proposed project (which does not include repair of the existing project), the City proposes permitting and environmental review, geotechnical investigations and surveying, and
engineering evaluations of access road, penstock saddle dike and powerhouse with a final report.
In the near term, the City has stated it will spend $410k for repairing the old dam. This includes a DNR Periodic Dam Inspection, permitting and design for dam repairs, performing the
dam and access road repairs. As part of the project review, AEA requested information on the status of the repair. The City replied that they are working on improving the road to
the project, but to date they have not obtained funding for the repair.
AEA is concerned that the proposal does not address the tradeoff between repairing the existing timber buttress dam and building a new, expanded project. It is not clear that a new,
expanded project is justified if the existing project is repaired.
The economic review indicates marginal economics given limited market for energy from the expanded project. AEA is concerned that the cost of the proposed feasibility work is high.
The feasibility work may indicate that it makes more sense to repair the existing project instead of replacing and upgrading the dam.
Recommend full funding with requirement that the City prepare a preliminary report acceptable to AEA on the outcome of tasks 1-3 that addresses the issues of repair versus replacement
and sizing before proceeding to geotech field investigations and conceptual design.
The Kenai Peninsula Borough School District is proposing to feasibility, final design and installation of pellet-fired boiler systems to heat three Seward schools ? the elementary, middle,
and high school. This project is estimated to displace a total of 120,600 gallons per year of fuel oil.
The project has completed reconnaissance phase work. Given proximity of the three buildings the feasibility analysis will consider a district heating system to supply all three buildings.
The application includes substantial support from the community, USFS, and the local tribal council. This project will develop an anchor tenant for pellet supply in the Southcentral
Alaska region and will potentially support the development of pellet manufacturing infrastructure.
Given the proven performance of pellet systems and commercial availability of pellet fuel AEA is comfortable with recommending full funding with required approval of development phases.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding, with requirement of AEA acceptance of feasibility and final design phases.
Kenai Hydro LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Homer Electric Association, proposes final design and construction of a 4.5 MW hydro facility at Grant Lake. Recognizing that this project
would provide a significant amount of renewable energy to the Railbelt grid, AEA has previously granted Kenai Hydro $100,000 for reconnaissance assessment in the alternative energy
RFP and $816,000 in RE Fund round 1 (#34) and $1,184,000 in round 4(#635). The balance of the estimated $35,000,000 project would be financed and possibly include some public funds.
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. Final design funding would not be needed until March 2014 at the point anticipated for FERC licensing. For this reason it appears that final design funding is premature.
2. There is significant public opposition to the project.
3. It will likely cost more to mitigate impacts of features not yet anticipated in the cost estimate, such as i) relocation of the roadway and transmission line due to presence of Iditarod
Commemorative trail (currently permitted and under development), and ii) the cost of constructing a new tailrace pond.
4. We expect that in the FERC licensing process, there will be constraints on the operation of the project that will significantly impact the amount of energy that can be produced.
For instance, energy output will be reduced in order to maintain environmental stream flows and lake levels necessary to mitigate impact on fisheries.
5. KHL does not demonstrate site control at this time.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Kake is proposing to replace one of the existing boilers at the Kake School with a pellet boiler system, including an outdoor pellet storage silo. It is estimated that the
project will displace 42,495 gallons of fuel oil. The project team is in discussion with Sealaska to supply the pellets for this system.
The Kake School completed a reconnaissance assessment with the AEA and USFS-supported Alaska Wood Energy Task Group that showed viability of wood heat. The pellet system has been chosen
and it is a simple, low maintenance unit. The project would provide a pellet boiler and infrastructure demonstration in a rural Southeast community.
AEA is concerned that the application does not allocate sufficient resources for design and contingency. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is
addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with requirement that the applicant submit a final design and cost estimate acceptable to AEA before construction funding is disbursed.
Copper River Native Association requests funding for studying feasibility of wood-fired heating or combined heat and power to supply a planned ?multi-disciplinary combined facility?
(MDCF) to be funded by the BIA.
AEA and economics contractors were unclear on a number of issues including:
1. Status of the MDCF
2. Source, cost, and volume of biomass
3. The scale of the envisioned project?facility or grid-connected power system.
4. Clarification of the estimated project cost.
5. How the project fit with the Copper Valley Electric Association?s goals for renewable power generation and the Glennallen school?s proposed heating project.
These issues should have been addressed in a reconnaissance-level assessment that has not been done to AEA?s knowledge. The information was requested in two separate email messages,
but there was no response from the applicant.
In response to AEA\'s initial recommendation for no funding due to lack of response, CRNA requested reconsideration. Based on CRNA\'s recent clarification that the proposed project
is feasibility of a wood pellet-fired thermal system, AEA has concluded that it is reasonable to recommend the project for funding.
From the application, the equipment cost for the pellet boilers is estimated at $200,000. Based on previous projects, a feasibility study of this magnitude should cost approximately
$30,000.
Recommend partial funding of $30,000, with the requirement that AEA will work with CRNA to developed the revised scope.
IPEC requests grant funds to assess feasibility study of a 1 MW storage or run-of-river hydro project at Walker Lake. The primary purpose of the project would be to supply IPEC?s Chilkat
Valley system with hydropower. IPEC is in the process of purchasing the 600 kW Ten-Mile hydro project. IPEC currently purchases hydropower from AP&T?s Upper Lynn Canal grid. Thus,
currently all of Chilkat Valley?s power is from hydro sources.
The economic analysis performed for this project assumes that that the project will displace diesel generation of 1,950 to 2,800 MWh per year. Based on this assumption it estimates
a B/C ratio of 2.7 to 3.9. However, AEA believes that little to no diesel will be displaced by this project.
Alaska Power Authority prepared a reconnaissance assessment for Walker Lake in 1988 and Sealaska Corporation updated the assessment in 2005. Both studies concluded that the project
feasibility was marginal to poor.
AEA has the following concerns with this project:
1. AEA has already committed funding for Connelly Lk, Schubee Lk, and Burro Cr reconnaissance and feasibility assessment. These projects would compete to meet the same loads as the
proposed project.
2. Permitting conditions are adverse. The project would require a 6-8 mile transmission line to interconnect to Upper Lynn Canal grid passing through the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve.
The site has geotechnical issues. FERC would likely have jurisdiction due to salmon issues.
3. This project would not displace diesel generation.
No funding recommended.
Metlakatla Indian Community proposes construction of an intertie that connects Metlakatla to Ketchikan. AEA is providing $2 million in RE Fund rounds 1 and 4 (#20 and 656). Additionally
there is another $2 million in grant funds from the state.
Currently the RE Fund round 4 grant is not in place. Conditions of the grant will include the following as per the round 4 AEA comments: (1) Before any grant funds can be disbursed,
MIC is to submit to AEA for its review and approval, a power sales agreement between MIC and KPU which clarifies the terms, conditions, rates and amount of power for this intertie;
(2) MIC must demonstrate completion of all preconstruction activities including final design documents and final construction cost estimate; and (3) MIC must demonstrate project site
control, including required easements and Rights-of-way, NEPA requirements and all permits needed to construct have been issued.
AEA is assisting MIC in complying with these conditions; however this work remains in process.
AEA believes it is premature to allocate additional construction funds.
No funding recommended.
Combined with #825
Wrangell Light & Power requests funding for design and construction of a capacitor bank to correct voltage delivery issues in Wrangell.
The applicant asserts that the project would result in improved power quality and greater system stability, there is no indication in the proposal that renewable energy production is
increased. Instead the proposal appears to add system components to address operational issues.
No funding recommended.
Kootznoowoo Inc. proposes construction of a 1+ MW run-of-river hydroelectric project and 6.7 mi transmission project to supply the community of Angoon. Kootznoowoo has supplied separate
applications for each of the projects (#825 and 827). AEA is combining the two project proposals together for the purposes of evaluation.
AEA has a Round 4 (#670) grant to Kootznoowoo in the amount of $1,060,500 for permitting and final design with equal match from DOE. Although the application indicates that design and
permitting will be complete by September 2012, AEA believes this schedule is overly optimistic and that it is premature to allocate construction funds to this project.
AEA initially recommended against funding this project due to concerns that Kootznoowoo would not be able to complete design and permitting by September 2012. Kootznoowoo requested
reconsideration of this recommendation on the basis that ten months is sufficient time for them to complete design and permitting. In response AEA is willing to recommend funding for
construction, with the requirement that no construction funds will be granted until AEA accepts final design, Kootznoowoo completes current grant activities, and the project team demonstrates
that all permits have been issued and that project financing and power sales agreements are in place.
Full funding recommended with the above special provisions.
The North Slope Borough proposes to conduct a feasibility study to explore the possibility of using ground-source heat pumps (GSHP) and waste heat from the Anaktuvuk Pass?s diesel gensets
for district heating. The applications basic design for the GSHP is a 4,000 foot long trench, 3-4 feet wide, and 12-15 feet deep.
No previous work has been done on the GSHP side of the project. Waste heat recovery is currently being used to heat the Public Works building and fire station. The proposed project
would begin in August 2012 and be completed by the end of 2013.
AEA has the following concerns with this project:
1. We question the likelihood of achieving the expected coefficient of performance (COP) of 3 due to the very cold ground expected at Anaktuvuk Pass.
2. The electricity to power the GSHP would come from diesel gensets that are generating at around 30% efficiency. This indicates that little if any diesel would be offset by the project.
3. The cost of the feasibility assessment (~$187,000) is very high.
AEA believes that a more systematic, statewide approach for GSHP feasibility would be more efficient and less costly. This work was started by AEA, UAF and CCHRC and should be continued.
No funding recommended.
The Tatitlek Tribal Council proposes updating a 2006 mechanical design plan and construction of a diesel heat recovery system that will supply the Tatitlek Community Center, which houses
the Village IRA Council administrative offices, from the power plant, 50 feet away. The generating station and admin building were designed to accommodate this application when the
power plant was refurbished in 2006, and the only phase remaining for this project is construction and installation. The original designer would manage design and construction.
The cost estimate was developed based on an AEA field visit in July 2011. The project is estimated to displace 6,000 gallons of fuel oil. The technology is proven and the construction
complexity will be low. The operation and maintenance of the system will be performed by the current operator.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA accept the final design cost estimate prior to releasing funds for construction.
The Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) in collaboration with ANTHC requests funding for feasibility assessments and forest inventories in 7 communities to evaluate the potential
use of biomass systems for heating. This is the 2nd application for feasibility assessments. A project for 8 communities was funded through Round 4. The proposed communities for
this round are: Northway, Tanacross, Nenana, Circle, Eagle, Stevens Village, and Minto.
IRHA has assembled a strong team with a biomass energy and resource experience. AEA believes that the proposed approach is well-conceived.
AEA requested further information regarding why this project cost significantly more than a similar round 4 project (#637) that cost $154,477. IRHA replied that 1) they are hiring ANTHC
to conduct water and sewer energy efficiency and biomass feasibility analyses at a cost of approximately $88,000, and 2) they under-budgeted cost of resource analysis by Tanana Chiefs
last time. However end use energy efficiency work is not an eligible activity under the Renewable Energy Fund and has other sources of support. For the purposes of our recommendation
AEA will assume that 50% of the ANTHC work can be supported by the RE Fund ($44,172). AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction
with this project.
Recommend partial funding of $279,525 (requested amount $323,696 - $44,172) for feasibility and biomass energy resource assessment.
The Huslia Traditional Council in collaboration with ANTHC and IHRA is proposing the design and construction of a biomass heating system for the water treatment facility and the clinic.
The project is estimated to replace 21,736 gallons of fuel oil. The water treatment plant operator will be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the wood heating system.
The project will use approximately 254 cords per year
AEA has the following concerns about the proposal:
1. The application mentions that current residents supply cordwood for $350 per cord, but there is no mention of letters of intent to supply the wood resource.
2. There is no mention of a wood inventory analysis to guarantee a sustainable wood supply. State Forestry notes that land availability for harvest is not established.
3. Although a reconnaissance assessment has been prepared, there is not a comprehensive feasibility assessment of fuel availability and project alternatives.
Despite these concerns, economics appear favorable and AEA believes that partial funding is warranted to advance the project through final design.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend partial funding of $50,000 for completion of feasibility and final design, including fuelwood inventory and supply plan with the requirement that AEA accept the feasibility
report before funding is made available for final design.
The Interior Regional Housing Authority (IRHA) requests funding to build three community wood heating systems to serve community facilities. Through funding from Round 4 of the Renewable
Energy Fund, IRHA is currently conducting a feasibility assessment of eight villages: Hughes, Ruby, Koyukuk, Nulato, Kaltag, Nikolai, Anvik, and Holy Cross. All of these communities
were identified for wood heating in the Alaska Energy Pathway. Following the assessments, three candidates will be selected.
For this analysis, a surrogate project, based on the Village of Huslia, was developed to model potential costs, savings, and biomass requirement. Actual capital costs will vary with
any of the three final candidate villages.
The project has the potential to benefit 3 remote communities with some of the highest cost of energy in the state while utilizing a wood supply from wildfire mitigation activities.
IHRA has assembled a team with a strong background in biomass projects. The project may use a modular wood-fired boiler, thus providing demonstration benefits.
AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding with the requirements that 1) A wood resource analysis must be completed and reviewed by AEA and Alaska Division of Forestry to assure the sustainable supply of
wood for each chosen community; 2) AEA must accept the recommendations from the feasibility analyses of the three communities that will advance to design and construction, and 3) the
economic analysis B/C ratios of the chosen communities should average greater than 1.25 (the ratio that was assumed for the purpose of analysis.
Chugach Electric requests funding to complete final design and construction of a project to divert water from Stetson Creek into the Cooper Lake Reservoir and a related structure to
release environmental flows into Cooper Creek as a part of the FERC re-licensing of Cooper Lake hydro project in 2007. CEA agreed to spend up to $12.5 million (2009$) to construct
this project in order to enhance fish habitat in Cooper Creek by raising the stream water temperature. CEA received funding from the RE Fund (#674) for feasibility and permitting/final
design in Round 4. The cost of final design has increased, and the current proposal requests half of the funding for the increase.
In support of the relicensing effort CEA has funded a substantial amount of feasibility-level work. In 2007 the project was estimated to cost about $11 million. However, following
a 2009 constructability review, the capital cost estimate increased to $24 million due to requirements for tunneling and control structures for the diverted water and for the environmental
flows.
The main benefit of the proposed project would be the continued operation of the 19.4 MW Cooper Lake project. In addition the diversion adds water to Cooper Lake, resulting in a net
increase in hydropower. For the purposes of the economic analysis prepared for evaluating this application, only the additional costs of the diversion and benefits of the incremental
hydropower are considered.
By formal notice, CEA has to have design drawings completed and forwarded to FERC by August 2012. A schedule submitted with the application shows final design and permitting to be
completed by end of September 2012, with FERC approval by October 2012. Construction is to be bid by December 2012 and the construction contract award by May 2013.
An August 2010 CEA board resolution caps the CEA commitment to construciton at $12.5 million. CEA would need to offset the balance with grant funds.
Before RE Fund funding is allocated to construction, it is reasonable for CEA to 1) complete feasibility, permitting, and final design and 2) identify remaining project financing.
Recommend partial funding of $49,781 to complete final design.
Did not pass Stage 1
Copper Valley Electric proposes funding for construction of the 6.5 MW run-of-river hydro project on Allison Creek, estimated to cost $38,804,000. Specifically CVEA requests funds to
purchase long lead items. To date CVEA has been awarded $13,288,000 in various state grants. By SB 46 language, CVEA is limited in the amount of state funds to 50% of the project
costs.
CVEA submitted a license application to FERC in August 2011. Currently the project is in the final design and permitting stage. Final design and permitting is scheduled for completion
in early 2013.
Based on the work to date, the project appears to offer significant benefits, including
1. Substantial displacement of diesel generation--approximately 1.1 million gallons per year in fuel savings. CVEA?s hydro generation would increase from 52 to 68% hydro.
2. Substantial monetary savings in relation to the installed cost (high benefit/cost ratio).
3. Ability to supply hydro generation to seasonal industrial loads, such as the new expansion of the PetroStar refinery.
However, since final design and permitting will not be completed until 2013 at the earliest, AEA believes that it is premature to allocate additional construction funds to this project.
Currently CVEA has $10 million of fy12 state capital funds that may be made available for long lead time items.
No funding recommended.
The Copper River School District in collaboration with the Copper River Development Association proposes conceptual design, final design, and construction of a biomass boiler system
that will heat the Glennallen High School, the Elementary School, the Vocational Training Buildings, the District Office, and both Distance Learning and Rural Cap. The system will
displace approximately 63,350 gallons of fuel oil each year. The system would use approximately 1000 green tons of chips per year.
The project has begun conceptual design, and the application includes a conceptual cost estimate.
This project proposes to utilize the same boiler system as the Tok School and Delta Greely School, projects funded through the Renewable Energy Fund. Forest inventories have been completed
for the Glennallen area, and the required timber volumes for this project appears within the sustainable harvest limits. The local sawmill operator has signed a letter of commitment
for the chip supply for this project.
The project team includes engineers with experience developing the Tok and Delta projects with the intent of standardizing the design. The proposal shows excellent community support.
However the proposal does not include a match.
Given the standardized approach AEA is comfortable with recommending full funding with required approval of development phases.
AEA is concerned that long-term fuel supply for this 20-year project needs to be better established. As part of the completion of the feasibility and conceptual design AEA will require
preparation of a fuel supply plan. The final design phase should include a long-term fuel supply contract with a contingency plan. AEA will work with the grantee to ensure that building
energy efficiency is addressed in conjunction with this project.
Recommend full funding, with requirement of AEA acceptance of feasibility and final design phases.
Ketchikan Public Utilities requests funding for contruction of the 4.6 MW Whitman Hydro project. The project would benefit the local fish hatchery owned by the SSRAA by providing a
new water supply. Prior grants include a RE Fund round 1 (#37) for final design and permitting of $1.3M and a round 4 grant for construction (#620) of $700,000. The Legislature
provided $1 million in 2010, and $8.025 million in 2011. Total state funding available for construction is $8.73 million. KPU has obtained authority to issue a $15 million revenue
bond for construction.
Recently the cost estimate for the project was adjusted upwards from $16.5 million to $26.5 million due to FERC licensing conditions and escalation of costs over time.
AEA has recently learned that KPU must obtain an amendment to its power purchase agreement with SEAPA, without which KPU will be legally unable to use energy from the Whitman Lake project
for its ratepayers. At the time of this evaluation, this matter remains unresolved.
At a SEAPA board meeting in November SEAPA staff presented an analysis showing that under the latest load forecast (the SEIRP reference case) a substantial amount of energy from the
combined hydro systems would be spilled, thus significantly limiting public benefit.
AEA believes that additional funding for this project is unwarranted at this time.
No funding recommended.
AVTEC proposes to renovate, refurbish and upgrade the City\'s existing Marathon Hydro plant, currently unused. The application is largely the same as #657 in round 4. For that application
AEA recommended partial funding of $67,000 for final design and permitting. AEA and AVTEC entered into a grant agreement in July 2011 for this work, but little work has been completed
to date.
Since the design and permitting work is not yet completed, the scope of work, cost estimate, and schedule cannot be verified, and there is not sufficient basis to recommend funding at
this time.
Recommend no funding.
Southeast Alaska Power Authority proposes feasibility and conceptual design to assess impacts of delivering SEAPA power to Kake.
Currently there are three sources of funding for the 50-mile Kake-Petersburg Intertie focused on completing final design and permitting: 1) $2.99 million from RE Fund Round 1 (#29),
2) $500,000 grant from a 2008 legislative appropriation, and 3) $2 million grant from an additional legislative appropriation. Currently work under the KWETICO (Kwaan) grant has consisted
of conceptual design and environmental field studies for the two primary routes under consideration. An MOU between SEAPA, KWETICO, IPEC and AEA establishes ownership, maintenance,
and operation responsibilities for the project. AEA, the grantees, and SEAPA will enter into a project management agreement.
AEA believes that the work proposed under this grant will advance the Kake-Petersburg Intertie. However, AEA believes that the current work proposed can be accomplished using current
project funding. Existing grants require a project management agreement. AEA will require that SEAPA take the lead on this work under that agreement. AEA will work with its partners
to ensure that the proposed scope of work is accomplished as proposed.
No funding recommended.
SEAPA proposes feasibility of wind development in the Ketchikan area, including a meteorological tower on Gravina Island and permitting and environmental analysis. SEAPA is also requesting
funding for a more general reconnaissance study of wind development along the Ketchikan-Petersburg transmission corridor (#809).
Wind development may be attractive on this grid since it can be used to displace valuable dispatchable storage generation.
However AEA is concerned that site selection is not based on a systematic, reconnaissance-level approach. This work is proposed under application #809 and should preceed the work proposed
in this application.
Recommend no funding.
SEAPA proposes reconnaissance of wind development along the Ketchikan-Petersburg transmission corridor (#809).
Wind development may be attractive on this grid since it can be used to displace valuable, dispatchable, storage hydro generation.
Wind energy is planned to be part of the Southeast Integrated Resosurce Plan, identified as a resource that needs reconnaissance work.
Recommend full funding for reconnaissance assessment along the Ketchikan-Petersburg intertie corridor. Before grant is issued, the proposed scope needs to be revised to better match
wind reconnaissance standards.
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power and Telephone (AP&T) proposes funding for the transmission portion of the 5 MW Reynolds Creek hydropower project. Haida Energy,
a joint venture of AP&T and Haida Corp, would own the project and sell power on a wholesale basis to APC, the certificated utility on Prince of Wales (PoW) Island. The project is a
component of Reynolds Creek Hydro Project, which received $2M (App #104) in grant funding already. In Round 3, an application (#439) was submitted for transmission line construction
for Reynolds Creek. Although AEA recommended the project for funding there was insufficient funding appropriated to fund this project.
The following grant allocations totaling $6.1 million have been made for the Reynolds Creek project:
1) $100,000 of Denali Comm funds to Haida Corp through the Denali Commission / AEA alternative energy RFP
2) $1 million in RE fund round 1 funds to Haida Corp (#104)
3) $1 million in RE fund round 1 funds to Haida Power, a joint venture between APC and Haida Corp
4) $2 million in legislative appropriation to Southeast Conference
5) $2 million in RE Fund round 4 to APC (#629)
The project will be dispatched in conjunction with AP&T\'s existing Black Bear Lk and South Fork hydro projects. Previous applications state that Reynolds Creek hydro will only be used
after the existing hydro projects are fully dispatched. An extension of PoW transmission to the northern portion of island to serve Coffman Cove and Naukati has been funded by the
Denali Commission and RE Fund round 1.
AEA has the following concerns about this application:
1. The application provides a cost estimate of $18.6 million for the hydro project, including transmission. However the most recent budget information available to AEA indicates a
total project cost of $27.6 million.
2. While AEA agreed to reimburse up to $2 million in order to begin construction and preserve the FERC license, it was with the condition that Haida Energy provide an acceptable power
sales agreement and finance plan prior to additional reimbursement. Haida Energy submitted a finance plan with a Power Project Loan Fund (PPLF) application to AEA for $20 million,
at the limit authorized by the Legislature. However, AEA has rejected the proposed loan terms and asked Haida Energy to revise and resubmit with terms that conform to the PPLF statutes.
Because of these unresolved issues, AEA believes additional funding is not warranted at this time.
No funding recommended.
APC proposes final design and permitting activities for a potential 12 MW storage hydro project at Connelly Lake. AEA and APC entered into a grant agreement for $585,000 to support
feasibility and conceptual design for the project under round 4 application (#627).
Current funded work includes concept optimization, preliminary FERC notice of intent and preliminary application document, FERC scoping activities (documents and study plans), field
studies (stream gauge installation; seismic refraction surveys; fish, wildlife, botanical, wetland, and heritage surveys; water quality testing); and the final feasibility report.
This work is currently scheduled for completion in December 2012.
AEA believes that this schedule is optimistic and that funding for final design and permitting is premature.
AP&T has requested reconsideration of AEA\'s initial recommendation of no funding. AP&T states that "we agree with AEA that funding of the final design activities (i.e., the last three
of ... [the proposed] ...tasks) is premature. However, the other five tasks are basically continuation of our current work." AEA agrees with this observation and recommends partial
funding to cover the following feasibility phase tasks: additional environmental studies, permit preparation and processing, post-license activities, and additional stream gauging
data collection.
Recommend partial funding of $448,000.
AP&T proposes design and construction of transmission to link the hub community of Tok to Slana, Chistochina, Mentasta, Northway, Northway Junction, and Northway Village. Currently
AP&T is funded through RE Fund round 4 to assess feasibility of a 2 MW wood-fired combined heat and power system in Tok (#665). AP&T had partial funding through RE Fund round 3 (#438)
to construct the 1.5 MW Yerrick Creek hydro project, but decided not to proceed.
AEA recognizes the benefits of tying these communities together in a grid.
However AEA has the following concerns with this proposal:
1. The Tok wood-fired CHP is beginning the feasibility phase, while the Yerrick Creek Hydro project is on hold. Thus no renewable energy production is pending. Transmission of renewable
energy is required for this project to be considered eligible for funding under the RE Fund.
2. Economics of this project appear marginal given the distances and low loads to be tied in.
No funding recommended.
Alaska Power Company requests funding to complete reconnaissance assessment, feasibility analysis, and permitting and final design to construct a 17\' high x 100\' long rockfill dam
and spillway at the outlet of Black Bear Lake to raise the lake by 12\' and increase active storage from 2870 to 5290 acre-ft. APC asserts that the project would add 1.26 GWh per year
in annual generation by reducing spillage from BBL from 26 to 24%. The project will require a FERC amendment. The total development and construction cost is estimated at $3,040,000.
AEA is concerned that there may not be adequate market for hydropower on Prince of Wales after the 5 MW Reynolds Cr Hydro project is constructed. APC is one of the three partners of
Haida Energy that is developing the Reynolds Cr project. In its application, APC stated it would provide a study in fall of 2011 to determine how much additional firm generation will
be available from Reynolds Creek and whether the BBL storage increase is justifiable when Reynolds Creek is constructed. AEA requested a copy of the study and was informed it was not
available due to other APC staff commitments. Thus there is no confirmation of the need for power from this project.
No funding recommended.
Chugach Electric proposes final design, surveying, geotechnical assessment, and permitting of substations and switchyards associated with the transmission for the potential Mt. Spurr
geothermal project. AEA has budgeted funding for RE Fund round 4 feasibility and route selection for the transmission project (#615). That work is underway at the time of this review.
Currently Mt. Spurr geothermal developer Ormat remains in the resource assessment phase and AEA expects a report of the results of 2011 field work by the end of 2011.
Since the resource at Mt. Spurr is not yet proven and the Rd 4 feasibility and route selection remains to be completed, AEA believes that it is premature to support final design and
permitting work for the transmission line.
No funding recommended.
Kodiak Electric Association requests $8 million for 1) installation of three additional GE 1.5 MW SLE turbines and 2) addition of a 1 MWh energy storage system.
KEA is requesting funding for construction and commissioning of the proposed project. The project is expected to cost $23,150,000, of which $8,000,000 would come as matching funds provided
by KEA. An additional $7,150,000 will be spent by KEA but will be ineligible for match as the money will be spent prior to July 1, 2012. KEA received $4 million from a RE Fund round
1 grant (#103) for the construction and commissioning of three GE 1.5 MW SLE turbines.
KEA?s wind turbines have been the highest wind energy producers in the State. The proposed system changes will boost wind and hydro penetration to almost 100% and displace approximately
780,000 gallons of diesel per year.
Under the round 5 solicitation KEA is eligible for a total of $8 million in cumulative funding for the wind project.
The proposed battery system, estimated to cost $3.8 million, will provide system stability and a bridge between the more variable wind generation and KEA?s Terror Lake Hydro project.
The proposed battery system will increase the renewable output of the wind-hydro system. Although the battery system is proposed in the current application, AEA believes that the
battery system is not solely a component of the wind system, and is therefore not subject to the $8 million wind system funding cap. AEA notes that KEA has received $4 million in RE
Fund grants for upgrades to the hydro system (#401 and 653). In round 5 the total allocation of the wind and hydro system, including the battery system, should not exceed $16 million.
Recommend partial funding of $7.8 million ($4 million for the wind system and $3.8 million for the battery system).
The City of Petersburg proposes to construct a hybrid ground-source heat pump (GSHP) at the new public library that is being designed and constructed. The closed loop GSHP would consist
of six 315? deep wells and have a 10-ton capacity. The expected coefficient of performance (COP) is 3.
The new public library Construction for the GSHP is expected to begin in Fall 2012 and be completed and commissioned in June 2013. Since Petersburg is powered by hydroelectric, the
GSHP would be a very efficient use of electricity. The project team stated that it was committed to the project and would likely seek other funding to complete the project if not supported
by the RE Fund
The application provides a life-cycle economic assessment of a conventional electric boiler, ground source heat pump, and air source heat pump. The assessment does not include a comparison
of what AEA regards as the baseline alternative?a conventional fuel oil system. Given only approximately 3,100 gallons of fuel that would be displaced and the high capital costs of
the heat pump alternatives, the economics of heat pumps appears poor in this case (benefit/cost is less than 0.6) when compared against a conventional oil-fired system.
The RE Fund has provided grants to two larger GSHPs in Southeast (the Juneau Airport and Dimond Aquatic Center). Economics appear more favorable due to the larger amount of fuel displacement.
No funding recommended.
The Village of Cantwell proses feasibility and conceptual design of a storage hydro project in excess of 1 MW, with a power tunnel on the Jack River.
The Village and AEA have recently executed a grant funded in round 4 (#606 ) for reconnaissance assessment of the project and has installed a stream gauge. Recon work is scheduled to
be completed in June 2013. Therefore AEA believes that further funding for feasibility and conceptual design is premature.
No funding recommended.
The Borough and Municipality of Skagway proposes feasibility and conceptual design of a 6-26 MW hydro project at West Creek to be connected to the Upper Lynn Canal (Haines-Skagway) grid.
The estimated cost of this project $140 million. The primary purpose of the project is to offset diesel generation by cruise ships that dock in Skagway from May to September. The
secondary purpose is to supply power to the local grid during periods of shortfall and to the Yukon Territory grid in the winter. The BMS applied for a similar project in round 2 (#262).
AEA recommended the project for partial funding and stated that an integrated resource energy plan would be needed to assess the project in the context of other potential projects.
Due to limited funding, however, the project did not receive funding.
The economic analysis performed for this project is based solely on cruise ship load over a period of 50 years. It estimates a B/C ratio of 1.5 to 2.1 assuming an average electrical
consumption of 18,900 to 27,000 MWh/yr.
The BMS states that a major benefit of the project is the reduced air emissions from diesel generation by the cruise ships.
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. AEA has already committed funding for Connelly Lk, Schubee Lk, and Burro Cr reconnaissance and feasibility assessment. These projects would compete to meet the same loads as the
proposed project.
2. Given that the chief aim of the project is to supply the shore-based cruise ship load, AEA questions the amount of public benefit to be received versus the high capital cost and
high technical, business, and regulatory risks of the proposed project.
3. Since the project would affect the waters of the Klondike Gold Rush National Park, there is significant permitting risk.
Based on the additional information that BMS provided regarding potential benefits of the project, AEA has reconsidered its original recommendation against funding. The additional information
more thoroughly expalined the benefits the projects would accrue from reduced cruise ship emissions and a potential intertie to BC.
Recommend full funding.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes a reconnaissance through conceptual design for a seawater heat pump that would provide heating and cooling for Centennial Hall and the Kettleson
Memorial Library. The recon assessment would be complete in September 2011, and the feasibility assessment/conceptual design would be completed by October 2011.
Although the preliminary economic analysis prepared for the REF review indicates marginal economics, further design work and refinement of assumptions may improve project viability.
Recommend full funding.
The City and Borough of Sitka proposes a reconnaissance through conceptual design for an effluent heat pump to heat the city\'s wastewater treatment plant. Two 60-ton heat pumps would
transfer the heat in the effluent to heat the wastewater treatment plant. The expected coefficient of performance (the ratio of the heat output relative to the electrical energy inputted)
is 3-4. The project would also provide cooling by direct heat transfer. The current HVAC system has reached its useful life and needs to be replaced.
Although the preliminary economic analysis prepared for the REF review indicates marginal economics, further design work and refinement of assumptions may improve project viability.
Recommend full funding.
City and Borough of Sitka (CBS) proposes design and construction of a ground source heat pump for the historic Japonski Island boathouse, a 2500 sq ft building undergoing substantial
renovations. A capacity of 4-tons is expected for the GSHP system. The GSHP would be deployed horizontally within the tidal zone, with HDPE pipes buried four feet deep in 2000 sq.
ft. of Sitka Sound. The expected coefficient of performance (ratio of heat delivered to electrical energy input) is 3-4.
Design would be complete in October 2011. Construction would be completed by October 2012. The project is expected to cost approximately $90,000 more than a conventional oil-fired system.
AEA is concerned about the high project cost versus the relatively small amount of heating oil (2,700 gal/yr) that is being displaced. The applicant notes that that there may be permitting
delays due to staff shortage at DNR. DNR agrees with this point.
The project would provide a demonstration of a ground source heat pump in a prominent location. Given the small project size, AEA believes it is reasonable to fund both design and construction.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA accept final design and construction budget before any construction funds are disbursed.
Kwig Power proposes to install a 250-kW battery storage system as a component of their planned 450-kW wind-diesel system. The function of the proposed battery system is to maintain
power quality and stability by quickly supplying power to the system when load or wind energy supply changes quickly. This allows the system to run less diesel capacity to supply the
needed ?spinning reserve?.
The wind system in Kwig received a direct legislative appropriation of $1.6 million in July 2009 and RE Fund round 1 design and construction funding in March 2010 (#107). The system
is one of four projects under the auspices of the Chaninik Wind Group receiving state funding for wind construction:
1. Kongiganak ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
2. Kwigillingok ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
3. Tuntutuliak ($3.36 million of state funds allocated)
4. Kipnuk ($1.6 million of state funds allocated)
In addition to the total of $11.36 million in RE fund and direct legislative appropriation the projects are receiving $750,000 from the USDOE for residential thermal devices.
Construction is behind schedule on these projects chiefly due to integration and control issues. The concept of using distributed residential heating loads and smart meters for frequency
control has not been proven. Additionally the controllers for the Windmatic 17S turbines are under redesign and testing.
Since the wind-diesel system is currently under development and its operational characteristics are not yet fully understood, the economic evaluation of this application has a high degree
of uncertainty.
Until these projects are operational as currently scoped AEA does not support allocation of additional public funds for expanded scope.
Recommend no funding.
Tuntutuliak Community Services Association proposes to install a 250-kW battery storage system as a component of their planned 450-kW wind-diesel system. The function of the proposed
battery system is to maintain power quality and stability by quickly supplying power to the system when load or wind energy supply changes quickly. This allows the system to run less
diesel capacity to supply the needed ?spinning reserve?.
The wind system in Tuntutuliak received a direct legislative appropriation of $1.6 million in July 2009 and RE Fund round 2 design and construction funding in March 2010 (#273). The
system is one of four projects under the auspices of the Chaninik Wind Group receiving state funding for wind construction:
1. Kongiganak ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
2. Kwigillingok ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
3. Tuntutuliak ($3.36 million of state funds allocated)
4. Kipnuk ($1.6 million of state funds allocated)
In addition to the total of $11.36 million in RE fund and direct legislative appropriation the projects are receiving $750,000 from the USDOE for residential thermal devices.
Construction is behind schedule on these projects chiefly due to integration and control issues. The concept of using distributed residential heating loads and smart meters for frequency
control has not been proven. Additionally the controllers for the Windmatic 17S turbines are under redesign and testing.
Since the wind-diesel system is currently under development and its operational characteristics are not yet fully understood, the economic evaluation of this application has a high degree
of uncertainty.
Until these projects are operational as currently scoped AEA does not support allocation of additional public funds for expanded scope.
Recommend no funding.
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility was funded at $150,000 in round 1 of the RE fund for final design and permitting (app#14). The Utility submitted a proposal for construction in RE Fund
2 (#290). AEA recommended no funding since final design and permitting were not complete.
Final design and permitting are still not complete, although the Utility has made some progress. The Utility has completed a conceptual design and has submitted applications for water
rights, wetlands, and other coastal zone authorizations. The Utility has been in discussion with ADF&G for a fish habitat permit and with Chignik Lagoon Native Corp for obtaining
site control. Recently the Utility obtained a non-jurisdiction finding from FERC for the project.
AEA remains concerned that permits are not in place and final design and construction cost estimate are not yet complete. For this reason we cannot support funding for construction
at this time.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Palmer proposes final design and construction of a ground source heat pump to provide heating and cooling for the City?s ice arena. Construction would commence in spring
2012 and be completed fall 2012.
The current heating and refrigeration system is old, inefficient and needs to be replaced. In order to assess whether it is economically beneficial to support final design costing $120,000
the City would need to provide basic feasibility information comparing installed cost and O&M costs of a new conventional boiler and compressor system with costs of a ground source
heating pump system.
AEA requested this and other information from the City. The City provided only an electronic copy of the facility energy audit and indicated that the information was contained in the
report. The energy audit does not contain the information that AEA requested and does not serve the purpose of a feasibility phase report required in the request for applications.
AEA and its economic consultants are unable to assess viability of this project and whether it is reasonable to provide funding for final design.
No funding recommended.
Kipnuk Light Plant proposes final design and construction of 300 kW wind-diesel system, including a 250 kW battery storage system.
Kipnuk received a direct legislative appropriation of $1.6 million in July 2009. The system is one of four projects under the auspices of the Chaninik Wind Group receiving state funding
for wind construction:
1. Kongiganak ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
2. Kwigillingok ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
3. Tuntutuliak ($3.36 million of state funds allocated)
4. Kipnuk ($1.6 million of state funds allocated)
In addition to the total of $11.36 million in RE fund and direct legislative appropriation the projects are receiving $750,000 from the USDOE for residential thermal devices.
Unlike the other Chaninik projects, Kipnuk proposes to use Northwind 100 turbines. Similar to the other Chaninik projects, Kipnuk plans to use distributed residential heating loads
and smart meters for frequency control.
Kipnuk has not completed conceptual or final design. The existing legislative funding is available for these purposes.
Kongiganak, the first of the Chaninik projects, is behind schedule chiefly due to integration and control issues. The concept of using distributed residential heating loads and smart
meters for frequency control has not been proven.
Recommend no funding.
Akiak proposes
1. Community Energy surveys
2. Community Energy and resource monitoring
3. Wood Energy assessment
4. Wind and solar energy assessement
Following is text from Tanana (see #281) The work that the applicant proposes does indicate a particular type of project. While potentially valuable to Akiak, work is more effectively
accomplished using standard methods on a statewide and regionwide basis that builds on the work already done in the statewide energy report that was released after this application.
Failed Stage 1 review
Puvurnaq Power Company, owned by the Native Village of Kongiganak, proposes to install a 300-kW Powerstore flywheel as a component of their 450-kW wind-diesel system under development.
The function of the proposed flywheel is to maintain power quality and stability by quickly supplying power to the system when load or wind energy supply changes. This allows the
system to consume less diesel capacity to supply the needed ?spinning reserve?.
The wind system in Kongiganak has been under construction since spring 2009 and is funded, in part by RE fund round 1 (#110). The system is one of four projects under the auspices of
the Chaninik Wind Group receiving state funding for wind construction:
1. Kongiganak ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
2. Kwigillingok ($3.2 million of state funds allocated)
3. Tuntutuliak ($3.36 million of state funds allocated)
4. Kipnuk ($1.6 million of state funds allocated)
In addition to the total of $11.36 million in RE fund and direct legislative appropriation, the projects are receiving $750,000 from the USDOE for residential thermal devices.
Construction is behind schedule on these projects chiefly due to integration and control issues. The concept of using distributed residential heating loads and smart meters for frequency
control has not been proven. Additionally the controllers for the Windmatic 17S turbines are under redesign and testing.
Since the wind-diesel system is currently under development and its operational characteristics are not yet fully understood, the economic evaluation of this application has a high degree
of uncertainty.
Until these projects are operational as currently scoped, AEA does not support allocation of additional public funds for expanded scope.
Recommend no funding.
Napakiak Ircinraq Power Company proposes reconnaissance through and design/permitting for a wind energy project for the Bethel-Napakiak grid. In summer 2010 AEA provided a met tower
for onsite wind resource assessment in Napakiak. Data collection is ongoing.
There are other significant energy planning and project development activities taking place in Bethel. The City of Bethel has been funded through the RE Fund round 1 for a 400 kW wind
project. To date the City and utility have not reached an agreement for power purchase or interconnection. Additionally Village Wind Power is funded under round 0 to assess feasibility
of a large scale wind power project. AVCP has submitted an application for final design and construction in round 4 for a 200 kW wind project to serve Bethel (#600). TDX, who state
that are assuming ownership of the Bethel utility in summer 2011, has proposed feasibility through construction of a 1+ MW wind system on the Bethel grid. Finally AVCP Regional Housing
Authority is proposing study of hydro at the Kiseralik and Chikuminuk Rivers in Round 2 of the RE Fund. Therefore, there is a need for a regional integrated resource energy plan in
the Bethel area to coordinate when and where energy projects should be developed. This proposal should be considered in the context of an integrated plan to assure proper sizing, timing,
and integration of multiple energy projects. AEA believes that such an overall plan for the Bethel power system should be developed before proceeding with any additional wind development.
AEA has met with City of Bethel, AVCP Rural Housing Authority, Yukon Kuskokwim Health Corporation, Calista Corporation and TDX to discuss regional energy planning, including wind and
hydro development. The group has agreed to pursue coordinated energy planning for the region and the Bethel grid.
AEA believes that Bethel?s large load provides the opportunity for deploying megawatt scale turbines with better economics than smaller-scale wind installations. TDX, as the major power
generator for the Bethel system, is the logical entity to lead feasibility assessment of wind generation in Bethel.
Recommend no funding through the RE Fund. However AEA will provide direct assistance through its wind resource assessment program to Napakiak for completing the current wind assessment
work in the community.
Municipality of Anchorage Solid Waste Services proposes recovering remaining landfill gas from the Merrill Field collection system and piping it to the Muni-owned Anchorage Fire Training
Center. Landfill gas would fire a central boiler for the 4-building facility.
The concept of using landfill gas for heating is sound. However, given that project would displace only 81,000 million Btus over the 15-year lifespan of the project, the payback of
the project is over 50 years.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Tenakee Springs proposes final design and permitting of a 120 kW run-of-river hydro project at Indian River. The City submitted a similar application under RE Fund round
3 (#447), but there was insufficient funding available. Funded by the DC/AEA alternative energy grant program, the City has completed a feasibility assessment for this project. Over
the last year the City has submitted permit applications and obtained LIDAR topo mapping of the project site using remaining feasibility funds. In general, the City has carefully managed
funding for the project.
The project would be located on state and city land. The project received a non-jurisdiction finding from FERC in May 2010.
In round 1 AEA recommended against funding final design and permitting before a subregional energy plan that addressed systems in Tenakee, Hoonah, and Pelican was prepared. Hoonah is
pursuing hydro development in nearby projects, while Pelican is upgrading its existing hydro project. In AEA?s RE Fund round 3 review, given these circumstances and the long distances
between these communities, AEA saw no reason to delay consideration of a hydro project in Tenakee further.
Recommend full funding.
Failed Stage 1 review
Independence Power LLC proposes conceptual design and feasibility assessment of 5.4 MW project on Fourth of July Creek near the Seward Correctional Facility. Independence Power received
a grant for recon assessment from RE Fund round 1 (#86). A similar proposal was submitted and recommended for RE Fund round 3 (#494), but insufficient funding was available.
Independence Power completed a final recon report in early October 2010. Generally AEA agrees with the report\'s conclusions that further study is warranted. AEA is concerned about
impacts of potential Fourth of July Creek torrents on proposed infrastructure.
Recommend full funding.
The Elfin Cove Utility proposes final design and permitting of a 50 kW run-of-river hydro project at Crooked Creek and a 150 kW storage hydro project at Jim?s Lake. Feasibility study
was already funded by the Denali Commission/AEA alternative energy RFP (#17). Elfin Cove submitted a similar proposal in RE Fund round 3 (#446) that was recommended but was not funded
due to insufficient funds.
The proposed project is sited on USFS land, indicating FERC license will be required. AEA has constructed a power and bulk fuel system under the RUS energy program. Elfin Cove expects
to deliver the feasibility report in December 2010.
Recommend full funding for final design and permitting with requirement that AEA approve the feasibility study before any funds are disbursed.
Glacier Fork LLC proposes reconnaissance assessment of a 75 MW hydro storage on Glacier Fork of the Knik River. This project was recommended in RE Fund round 3 (#493) but insufficient
funds were available.
Since last year there have been two developments related to this project:
1. The Railbelt Energy Integrated Energy Resource Plan has been finalized by AEA. The plan identifies the Glacier Fork as a potential large hydro generation site.
2. The Alaska Legislature appropriated $10 million in FY11 to AEA for Railbelt large-scale hydro planning, design, and permitting. These funds were for Susitna, Chakachamna, and Glacier
Fork projects. AEA will be managing the funded activities for these projects.
Given that funding support is already in place to study Glacier Fork, AEA does not believe that additional RE Fund allocations are necessary.
No funding recommended.
Eklutna Inc proposes recon assessment of a 6.5+MW hydro project on Hunter Cr. The project would include an extremely long penstock (13,000 ft cross-basin pipeline plus an 8,000 ft penstock),
and 11 miles of transmission. This proposal is a resubmittal of a round 3 proposal (#475).
DNR DMLW questions that Eklutna owns the land as stated in the application. If BLM owns the land this project falls under FERC jurisdiction. DNR also notes this is popular recreation
area and the project may garner public opposition. DNR DGGS notes proximity to Castle Mt Fault and potential earthquakes.
Recommend full funding.
The Village Council of Port Graham proposes final design and construction of a 1.45 mmBtu/hr cordwood-fired district heating system that will supply community facilities and residences.
The Council submitted an application (#488) in round 3 for construction of a wood-fired power generation system that AEA recommended against funding. As the basis for the round 3 application
the Council provided an assessment of local available wood along with other combined heat and power feasibility information.
Currently the community uses approximately 53,100 gallons/year of diesel to heat community facilities, while the cannery may consume an additional 25,000 gallons/year if it resumes regular
operation. Given the plentiful wood resources in the area, biomass district heating appears to be an attractive alternative.
The project budget appears excessive. Of the total budget of $845,805 approximately 20% is for tribal and Chugachmiut project management and administration salaries. According to a
email sent to AEA on 9/14 the travel budget of $80,065 was overestimated by $29,250. The budget includes work in support of a power purchase agreement totals over $61,000. Since this
is not a power project this item is in question. The budget for design consultants totals $228,600, approximately 27% of the total and substantially higher than similar projects, which
are usually around 15%.
Given these concerns with the budget it is premature to allocate funds for construction. Given experience with other cordwood boiler installations AEA estimates final design and permitting
costs approximately $50,000.
Recommend partial funding of $75,000 for final design and permitting.
The City of Pelican proposes completing construction of a 650 kW run-of-river hydro project. Design and construction has been supported by the Denali Commission through an AEA-managed
rural power system upgrade project. Other energy-related projects completed recently in Pelican by AEA include a bulk fuel plant and a new diesel powerhouse. The hydro project is
a rebuild of the 1940s era hydro project that supplied the fish processing facility and the community. The project is now approximately 60% complete and is scheduled for start-up in
2012. The fish processing facility has had financial problems over the last few years.
Site control for the project is not finalized. While the Pelican Utility District (PUD), owned by Kake Tribal Corp, holds a DNR easement for the hydroelectric project from the intake
to the power house, the City holds an easement on this same tract only for water and sewer improvements. The City is in discussion with the PUD to establish an operating agreement
for the power system. The City will obtain site control in conjunction with this agreement.
Recommend full funding with requirements that before construction funding is disbursed the City must obtain and demonstrate to satisfaction of AEA 1) site control for the hydro project,
2) FERC approval of revised construction plans dated 10/11/10, 3) final design and specifications for all grant-funded project elements, 4) a finance plan for the entire project, and
5) an updated business plan.
IPEC proposes construction of a diesel heat recovery system in Hoonah that will consist of jacket water heat recovery equipment and a piping loop that will supply heat to the school
complex and community buildings. The heat recovery system is estimated to displace approximately 57,000 gallons of heating fuel per year.
AEA is managing this project on behalf of IPEC under the Denali Commission-funded rural power system upgrade program. The power system upgrade may also include hydro projects at Gartina
and Water Supply creeks with average output of 340 kW. In the event that the hydro resource is developed, amount of recoverable diesel heat is expected to decrease to approximately
46,000 gallons/year.
IPEC is requesting supplementary funds above the $530,000 available for the heat recovery project that the Denali Commission is contributing. The project is scheduled for completion
in August 2012.
Recommend full funding.
Lake and Pen Borough proposes final design and construction of a 330 kW wind project in Port Heiden through a design-build process.
Lake and Pen Borough has supplied a very thorough feasibility study. However the report does not include conceptual design drawings or a geotechnical study.
AEA has the following concerns about the project:
1. Economic feasibility appears to require a high penetration system. AEA believes the construction cost estimate is rather low for a high-penetration project.
2. Based on the expected 50-year extreme wind speed for the site, the feasibility report recommends an IEC class 1 turbine. The only turbine that meets this condition is the Enercon
turbine. The Enercon turbine may not be available in the U.S.
3. Port Heiden has not received PCE since December 2009 because they have neglected to file an annual report with RCA. This raises questions regarding the community?s ability to support
a relatively complex energy project.
Given these considerations AEA believes that it is premature to allocate construction funding to this project. The design budget is configured assuming the design-build process. Assuming
that design and construction are funded separately and the work includes a geotech study, AEA believes that $250,000 is sufficient to complete design and permitting.
Recommend $250,000 for design and permitting.
The City of Napaskiak requests funding for reconnaissance and feasibility assessment of wind generation and heat recovery for the City power system. The Energy Pathways document notes
a class 5 wind resource. However the newly-revised AEA wind high resolution wind map estimates Napaskiak is a class 3 wind resource.
The recon phase budget includes $52,250 for land use permitting and environmental analysis. AEA believes that it is not justified to spend this large amount of money before the overall
wind resource is understood and the concept is validated.
Recommend partial funding of $61,225 with a required match of $2,800 for reconnaissance assessment.
The New Koliganek Village Council requests funding for feasibility assessment of wind generation and heat recovery for the community power system. Based on an AEA met tower in Koliganek,
the wind resource is a class 3.
Given a high expected project cost and energy production from a fair wind resource, project economics are marginal.
Recommend full funding.
Baker Hughes (BHI) proposes to develop new technology that would modify existing Baker Hughes Centrilift H Series pumps currently used in Cook Inlet oil and gas platforms to convert
hydrokinetic flow to electrical power. This application is similar to a RE Fund round 3 submittal that was recommended but which did not receive funding due to insufficient funds.
The team proposes to first develop a bench scale unit at UAF then test a 50 kW unit in the Tanana River. BHI would then use their own funding and resources to test a 500 kW unit at
the King Salmon Platform in Cook Inlet.
For the purpose of round 4 technical review AEA requested the following information:
1. Design and specifications for the project including dimensions, data and calculations to determine power output at given different water velocities
2. Explain how the high speeds for the device are produced and why this will be beneficial to power production and lower impacts to marine life.
3. Will the Baker Hughes CentriLift pump be under warrantee for the modified application as a hydrokinetic turbine?
4. What effect will the ?built-in aquatic life diverters? have on power output?
5. Please provide further information on the anchoring design.
6. Explain how the device will be deployed.
BHI provided technical specifications for the Centrilift pump, but did not provided any diagrams that clarify how the pump would be integrated into a power system. BHI did not respond
to questions 2-6.
The application does not include a letter of support from Chevron, owner of the King Salmon platform.
AEA understands that BHI is proposing to develop hydrokinetic technology that could be a very attractive use of oil and gas platforms. Given the substantial project risk and unknowns,
however, we believe that the newly established Emerging Energy Technology Fund is a more appropriate program for considering state support.
Recommend no funding.
Chitina Electric proposes completing final design, permitting, and construction of a 300 kW run-of-river hydro project on Five Mile Creek. The project received a $303,000 grant under
round 2 of the RE Fund (#236). AEA is managing the project on Chitina Electric?s behalf. AEA and Chitina expect to complete the conceptual design and feasibility in July 2011. AEA
and Chitina completed a diesel power system upgrade for the community in 2009.
The project would be located on lands owned by the Chitina Native Corporation, who has agreed to donate lands to support the project. All indications to date suggest no significant
land or environmental issues, and likely no FERC jurisdiction. There is an existing road for access to the proposed intake site. The hydro powerhouse would be located next to the
diesel power plant. The project would supply most of the community electrical needs.
Since the design is not complete and a construction cost estimate is not available, AEA does not recommend construction funding at this time.
Recommend partial funding of $277,000 ($580,000 for total feasibility/final design/permitting minus existing grant of $303,000) for completing permitting and final design.
Lake and Pen Borough proposes construction of community wood heating systems in Igiugig, Port Alsworth, Iliamna, and Kokhanok. This proposal follows up earlier feasibility and final
design work funded under RE Fund round 1 (#63).
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. Outdoor wood boilers (OWB) are proposed for deployment. Alaska experience to date indicates relatively low efficiency and substantial smoke from these units. New models have been
developed that have achieved EPA emission certification. AEA has contracted with a Biomass Energy Resource Center to assess emission and efficiency for Alaska application.
2. The projects would use approximately 20-30 cords per year. Little information is provided to confirm availability of a sustained fuel supply over the 20 year life of the projects.
3. Given relatively low diesel displacement economics appear marginal.
Recommend full funding with the following requirements:
1. Before any funds are disbursed the Borough must demonstrate to AEA a sustainable long-term fuel supply in each burn location.
2. Before OWBs are specified and purchased the Borough must demonstrate to AEA that efficiency and performance are reasonable.
G&K Electric Utility proposes recon and feasibility assessment of wind energy and diesel heat recovery in Cold Bay. The proposal is consistent with the recommendations from a general
energy assessment of Cold Bay, False Pass and Nelson Lagoon sponsored by the 2008 Denali Commission/AEA Alternative Energy grant program and AEA?s Energy Pathway publication. Airport
data and the Pathway indicate a class 7 wind resource.
Aleutians East Borough would manage the project.
Diesel heat recovery potential appears excellent. The power system is adjacent to several public facilities and the power plant has a manifold on the diesel cooling system.
Recommend partial funding for reconnaissance assessment, including a met tower.
Nelson Lagoon Electric Cooperative proposes recon and feasibility assessment of wind energy and diesel heat recovery in Nelson Lagoon. The proposal is consistent with the recommendations
from a general energy assessment of Cold Bay, False Pass and Nelson Lagoon sponsored by the 2008 Denali Commission/AEA Alternative Energy grant program and AEA?s Energy Pathway publication.
Airport data and the Pathway indicate a class 6 wind resource.
Aleutians East Borough would manage the project.
Diesel heat recovery potential appears excellent. The power system is adjacent to a storage building and harbormaster office.
Recommend partial funding for reconnaissance assessment, including a met tower.
The City of False Pass proposes recon and feasibility assessment of wind energy and diesel heat recovery in False Pass. The proposal is consistent with the recommendations from a general
energy assessment of Cold Bay, False Pass and Nelson Lagoon sponsored by the 2008 Denali Commission/AEA Alternative Energy grant program and AEA?s Energy Pathway publication. Raw data
from AEA?s met tower in False pass suggests a class 4-5 wind resource.
Aleutians East Borough would manage the project.
Diesel heat recovery potential appears marginal. The system is already supplying city shop near the power plant with heat. The next closest facility is the school, 600? away.
Recommend partial funding for reconnaissance assessment.
Applicant proposes reconaissance study of a hydrokinetic project in Akiak costing $350,000. Due to lack of geographic relief in the vicinity of Akiak, a run-of-river hydro project is
not feasible. RE Fund round 1 has performed site-specific assessment of hydrokinetic resources in nearby Kuskokwim villages. Results are not yet available. The current application
provides insufficient description of the type of system that is proposed and is very expensive. AEA feels that the current statewide approach for hydrokinetic resource, technology
development, and environmental analysis is a more effective use of state resources.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes recon assessment of a 1.45 MW run-of-river hydropower project at Eska Creek near Sutton. The project would include a very long (13,000 ft) penstock. Environmental
issues are undefined. DNR notes potential conflicts with other uses and proximity of the project to Castle Mt Fault.
Recommend full funding.
Chugach Electric Association, on behalf of the Bradley Project Management Committee, proposes preliminary design of diversion of Middle Fork Battle Creek into Bradley Lake. The work
would also include permitting, environmental and fish studies and preparation of an application to amend the Bradley Lake hydro project FERC license. BPMC would also provide matching
funds on a 1:1 basis. AEA staff would manage the project.
Work completed to date includes reconnaissance and analysis of environmental and energy production impacts. Stream gauging is in progress.
Recommend full funding.
Chugach Electric requests funding for feasibility, permitting/final design, and construction of a project to divert water from Stetson Creek into the Cooper Lake Reservoir and a related
structure to release environmental flows into Cooper Creek as a part of the FERC re-licensing of Cooper Lake hydro project in 2007. CEA agreed to spend up to $12.5 million (2009$)
to construct this project in order to enhance fish habitat in Cooper Creek by raising the stream water temperature.
In support of the relicensing effort CEA has funded a substantial amount of feasibility-level work. In 2007 the project was estimated to cost about $11 million. However, following
a 2009 constructability review, the capital cost estimate increased to $24 million due to requirements for tunneling and control structures for the diverted water and for the environmental
flows.
The main benefit of the proposed project would be the continued operation of the 19.4 MW Cooper Lake project. In addition the diversion adds water to Cooper Lake, resulting in a net
increase in hydropower. For the purposes of the economic analysis prepared for evaluating this application, only the additional costs of the diversion and benefits of the incremental
hydropower are considered.
Before RE Fund funding is allocated to construction, it is reasonable for CEA to complete feasibility, permitting, and final design.
Recommend partial funding for feasibility, permitting, and final design.
The Village of Atmautluak proposes final design and permitting for a 200 kW wind?diesel project.
The community has already completed a $45,000 feasibility study funded by the Denali Commission. Although the feasibility study is valuable, it did not include geotechnical assessment
and AEA notes the following limitations in the HOMER system modeling:
1. The model assumes the old Northwind 100a power curve instead of the new 100b model
2. The spinning reserve requirement is set too low
3. The fuel curve on one of the existing diesel gensets indicates higher fuel economy than manufacturer specs
4. Modeling did not evaluate use of excess windpower for heat
5. Analysis assumes 25 year life instead of standard 20 year life.
6. The report notes need for ?more detailed design, permitting/environmental studies, and economic analysis is warranted to confirm economic feasibility before funding can be secured
or a decision is made to proceed with construction
AEA thinks that the cost of a full feasibility study and conceptual design for a wind-including geotechnical analysis ranges from roughly $80,000-180,000.
Recommend partial funding of $100,000 for completing feasibility and conceptual design.
Alaska Electric Light and Power proposes final design and construction of one tower replacement, two tower structural modifications, and addition of snow diversion structures to two
towers on the intertie that connects the Snettisham project to Juneau.
AEL&P proposes a two-phase design and construction schedule. Phase 1 begins in late 2010 and ends in fall 2011. Phase 2 begins in late 2011 and ends in fall 2012. Round 4 funds are
available only for activities that take place after July 1, 2011 (Phase 2 work).
The project is eligible for funding under the RE Fund because it will reduce the likelihood of the number of outages occurring due to avalanches that necessitate diesel generation (e.g.
the major outages in the winters of 2008 and 2009) in addition to improving reliability of Snettisham hydropower.
Recommend funding of up to $2 million for activities that take place after July 1, 2011.
See project #670
Kootznoowoo Inc. proposes a 1+ MW run-of-river hydroelectric project and 6.7 mi transmission project to supply the community of Angoon. Kootznoowoo has supplied separate applications
for each of the projects. AEA is lumping the two project proposals together for the purposes of evaluation. These proposals are similar to ones submitted in round 3 (#517, 523) that
were recommended but not funded due to insufficient funding.
The application includes a letter of support from local utility Inlet Passage Electrical Co-op (IPEC) and others. Kootznoowoo has received a grant $1,110,500 from USDOE for preconstruction
activities.
Project appears to be a promising source of renewable energy for the community of Angoon. Special legislation (ANILCA Section 506) has granted Kootznoowoo, Inc. certain rights for
development of a hydroelectric facility at Thayer Creek and has simplified the permitting for the project. The project is only six miles from Angoon and closely matches Angoon\'s
energy requirements.
Recommend partial funding of $1,060,500 for completion of all preconstruction activities, including final design and permitting (culminating in the issuance of the USFS Special Use Authorization
for the project) with the provisions that prior to releasing any AEA grant funds: 1) Kootznoowoo and IPEC must provide a written joint report acceptable to AEA that documents the integration
of project design and operation with the needs of the existing IPEC system, 2) Kootznoowoo and IPEC must finalize an MOU that defines a viable business arrangement and will include
intent to sign a cost-based power sales agreement, 3) scope be must consistent with the recommendations of the Southeast Alaska IRP.
Akiakchak Native Corporation proposes reconnaissance and feasibility of a wind-energy system in Akiakchak. Akiakchak was recommended in round 2 (#212) for feasibility assessment, however
there was insufficient funding. Akaikchak has a met tower on site, but it is not erected and operational.
The geotech portion of the budget ($75,000) appears rather high, while conceptual design appears low.
Recommend full funding.
Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority proposes to follow-up ongoing feasibility assessment for building heating in Ambler, Shungnak, and Kobu funded in round 1 (#59). Based on outcome
of the assessment NIHA would choose one of the communities for final design and permitting.
The grant for the round 1-funded work was executed in August 2009. AEA is concerned that the project has been progressing slowly. The project is being managed by WH Pacific, a subsidiary
of NANA.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before any funds are expended, the applicant provide and AEA accept the feasibility and conceptual design report.
The City of Kotzebue proposes to study feasibility of converting paper and wood from the city waste stream into heat for the municipal water system. The City estimates 1,825 to 2,920
tons per year of paper and wood are produced in Kotzebue per year that could displace approximately 100,000 gal/yr of heating fuel.
The City submitted a round 2 application (#284) for a $15,000 reconnaissance-level study of adapting US Dept. Defense waste-to-energy technology for use in Kotzebue which AEA recommended,
but which was not funded due to insufficient funds.
For the current proposal the City is requesting funding for feasibility level assessment without submitting a reconnaissance level report that concludes that the project concept is viable.
Recommend full funding with requirement that the City will complete tasks 1-4 (permitting, resource analysis, equipment analysis, and environmental analysis) and conclude that is justified
to proceed to conceptual design and further stages. AEA must agree with this conclusion before more than $25,000 of grant funds are disbursed.
Project failed Stage 1 - capped out.
Alaska Power Company proposes feasibility assessment and conceptual design of a 2MW wood gasification power generation system to serve the Tok area power system. The system includes
a 30 mmBtu/hr Nexterra gasification system and GE Jenbacher reciprocating generators. An important component of the proposed project is demonstration of an innovative gas clean up
system.
APC applied unsuccessfully for a $10 million grant from USDOE for this project in early 2010. APC proposed to use USDOE funds and its own resources to complete feasibility/concept design
and permitting/final design during the first half of 2010. In round 3 APC requested construction funds from AEA (#479), but AEA recommended against funding the project. The current
proposal focuses on feasibility and conceptual design.
AEA is strongly supportive of demonstrating the Nexterra/GE technology in Alaska. This proposal is particularly attractive because
1. APC has a good track record as a well-operated utility and a leader in renewable energy development in Alaska
2. Tok, located on the road system, is an excellent site for demonstration of a wood-fired biopower project
3. The upper Tanana Valley has a substantial wood resource and a number of sawmills in operation.
4. The proposed technology has strong potential for application in other parts of the state.
AEA has concerns about the viability of integrating a wood-fired heat and power system into the Tok grid since
1. There is a hydro resource available at Yerrick Creek to serve the Tok grid currently under development that is also being funded by the RE Fund is (#438)
2. The RE Fund has already supported a significant wood energy project in Tok to supply the school with heat (#49).
Recommend full funding with provision that APC coordinate its feasibility assessment with the school heating project and Yerrick Creek hydro project.
The Village of Kwethluk proposes feasibility assessment and conceptual design of a wind energy system to be located on the old runway owned by Alaska DOTPF.
AEA\'s high-resolution wind map indicates a class 4 resource. Despite the location on the runway, some level of geotechnical assessment will be required. Geotech is not listed in the
proposal. At the same time, tasks 4-7 basically consisting of cost analysis and conceptual design are budgeted $114,000. AEA thinks this figure is rather high.
Recommend full funding with requirement that grant scope needs to include geotechnical assessment.
Applicant (Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority) proposes to develop a wood fired and solar heating system for the Ionia Renenwable Energy Training Center. The Trust intends to act
as grantee/sponsor for this project and accepts responsibilities under RFA section 1.4 for ownership and control of the facilities. This project was recommended for funding in round
3 (#480), but did not receive funding due to insufficient funding.
Ionia has successfully developed a similar wood fired system that supplies heat and domestic hot water for the Community Long House. Ionia has a very progressive focus in producing
energy and food using their own local resources.
However, the project would only result in displacing 4,200 gallons of diesel per year. Given a proposed grant of over $240,000 and a match of $33,000, this results in poor economic
returns. AEA notes that the economic analysis in round 3 was incorrect; the current B/C corrects the error.
Recommend no funding.
Gulkana Village Council proposes funding for wood pelletizing equipment as part of a densified wood business under development by the Council. The Council is in the process of obtaining
a pellet mill and a hammermill and of constructing a building to house the equipment.
AEA has provided a RE Fund round 1 grant (#2) to the Council for developing a cordwood ?fired district heating system the community hall, two office buildings and four duplexes. The
system is under operation.
AEA requested reconnaissance, feasibility, and design information as part of the review of this application. Specifically AEA asked to ?provide copies of the business and operation
plans. Your business plan should address long term raw material supply and operation, maintenance and fuel supply costs.?
In response the council provided only a brief tentative business plan that does not address long-term feedstock supply contracts, specific markets, or detailed operating and maintenance
activities and costs. DNR review raises concerns about feedstock demand versus availability and costs.
The Council has demonstrated substantial initiative in developing a biofuel business for the community. AEA strongly supports the Council?s initiative but concludes that the Council
has not provided sufficient information required by the RE Fund request for applications to serve as a basis for public funding.
No funding recommended.
The Turnagain Arm Tidal Energy Company\'s application is for a feasibility study of creating a tidal barrage energy system across Turnagain Arm. The barrage would be 1-2 miles in length,
120 feet wide at its base, and extend 15 feet above the high water line in the area between Fire Island to the Kenai Peninsula. It would include 50 to 120 La Rance-style low-head tidal
generators, each with a 10 MW capacity. The proposed system would have a maximum output of 500-1200 MW. Project to be started in 2011 and finished in 2017.
AEA has the following concerns about this application:
1) The application does not provide a clear description of the operation of the proposed barrage system. There is no analysis of average power output or total resource availability.
2) In order for the project to function similar to the La Rance project, a dam (barrage) would need to be constructed across Turnagain Arm. AEA questions the practicality of such a
project given the high costs and geotechnical risks, as well as likely impacts on fish and marine mammals.
3) Although an investor from Singapore (Singa Mas) is reportedly willing to supply $500 million in financing for construction, the current application includes no cash match.
Recommend no funding.
Ocean Renewable Power Corporation proposes permitting, final design and construction of a 600 kW array of proprietary cross-flow tidal instream electric conversion units for potential
scale-up to 100 MW. The units would use a gravity foundation on the bottom of Cook Inlet near Fire Island. ORPC?s technology is currently being tested in Eastport, Maine. Undersea
cable would bring power to shore. The project siting depends on being intertied to the Railbelt grid through transmission developed in conjunction with the planned Fire Island wind
farm.
The proposer states that the most substantial challenges will be impacts on beluga, migrating fish, and sediment flow. ORPC has received $600,000 in funding from USDOE to assess impacts
on belugas and $240,000 to assess impacts of sediment on device components. ORPC has obtained a preliminary FERC permit and would prepare a request to FERC for pilot project license
in late 2011. Other permits will include ADFG fish habitat, DNR water and subsurface use, Army Corps title 10, Coastal Zone, and Coast Guard navigational assessment. ORPC has developed
a team of specialists that they state will address technical and habitat issues.
ORPC will complete conceptual design and feasibility analysis by December 2011.
ORPC proposes to pay for almost all of the design and permitting. RE Fund dollars would support construction. While AEA remains concerned about the risks associated with deploying
new technology, we note that the Alaska-based developers have assembled a credible project team and have invested substantially in developing the technology. Alaska has most of the
nation?s potential for tidal energy and it is logical for the state to support ocean energy technology development.
Recommend full funding with provision that before any funds are released 1) ORPC must demonstrate to AEA?s satisfaction that, based on the Maine deployment, the technology is viable,
and 2) AEA must accept the conceptual design and feasibility assessment.
The City of Homer proposes reconnaissance assessment and feasibility analysis/conceptual design of a 1.2 MW hydrokinetic device in Kachemak Bay. This is a modified resubmittal of round
3 application #500 that was recommended for funding, but that was not funded due to limited funding. Homer has assembled a strong project team that includes a number of entities with
experience in assessing tidal energy feasibility and resources?NOAA?s Coast Survey Development Laboratory (CSDL), Kasitsna Bay Laboratory and Center for Operational Oceanographic Products
and Services; Homer Electric Association; the ADF&G and NOAA-supported Kachemak Bay Research Reserve, Native Village of Port Graham; City of Seldovia; and the Seldovia Village Tribe.
The application appropriately addresses potential wildlife impacts and includes the involvement of ADFG. NOAA commits to $680,000 in in-kind project support.
The proposed work would take place in two stages: 1) Following initial kickoff meetings, CSDL would create a model of Cook Inlet tidal current velocity and direction based on input
of bathymetry, salinity, temperature, river flow inputs, and other parameters. Work would take place between July 2011 and January 2013. Based on results the project team would decide
whether or not to proceed to the next phase. 2) Conceptual design of a tidal power plant, to be completed in June 2013.
Cook Inlet is known to have the second largest tidal variation in North America. It is also adjacent to Alaska\'s largest connected electrical load. The first phase of this project
would provide valuable baseline data on not only tidal power density, but also information useful for oil spill response, fish and wildlife habitat, and recreational and commercial
boating safety. For these reasons AEA will allocate other non-RE Fund funding to support the first phase of the project. Based on the results of the first phase the project team can
decide whether or not to proceed to conceptual design.
No funding recommended.
ACEP in partnership with Tanana Chiefs Conference proposes to follow up lab testing of 50 kW Electrotherm ammonia cycle engine that converts recovered heat to power. It is part of an
overall program funded by EPA and AEA to develop and perform independent evaluation of organic rankine cycle and similar technology for use in rural Alaska. Following completion of
lab testing in summer 2011 the unit would be moved to a suitable community power plant in the TCC region.
This project represents applied research that can provide immediate benefits to communities. Because it is not fully commercialized there is significant technical risk.
Recommend full funding contingent upon AEA accepting report from lab testing that indicates the technology is potentially viable for rural Alaska.
AVTEC proposes final design and construction to renovate the existing Marathon Creek 250 kW hydro project. The project was constructed in the 1980s but ceased operation in the 1990s
after an electrical system failure. AVTEC intends to use the project as a hydro training facility and sell power to the City of Seward Electrical Utility.
The business arrangement and site control for this project remains to be established.
Recommend partial funding of $67,500 for final design and permitting with the provision that the MOA between the City and AVTEC for site control be finalized before any funds are disbursed.
Metlakatla Indian Community proposes funding for constructing an 18 mile intertie that connects the Metlakatla and Ketchikan power systems. Permitting and design were funded by RE Fund
round 1 (#20). MIC submitted a round 3 application (#449) that was recommended but not funded due to insufficient funding.
The project cost is now estimated at $12.73 million, up from the previous estimate of $7.65 million. The estimated annual surplus hydro energy has decreased from 8.5 GWh to 6.0 GWh.
The application provides no indication of a power sale agreement with Ketchikan Public Utility.
MIC is requesting over $9.4 million for financing the balance of the project. The proposal does not recognize the maximum funding cap of $2 million and provides no other indication
of how the balance of the project would be financed.
Because the project would connect to the SEAPA grid that has numerous existing and proposed alternatives for generation and transmission, AEA concludes that there is insufficient information
provided to estimate a benefit/cost ratio.
AEA recommends funding in the amount of $1,180,000 ($2 million cumulative cap minus the $820,000 the project received in round 1).
AEA recommends special provisions be associated with this grant as follows: (1) Before any grant funds can be disbursed, MIC is to submit to AEA for its review and approval, a power
sales agreement between MIC and KPU which clarifies the terms, conditions, rates and amount of power for this intertie; (2) MIC must demonstrate completion of all preconstruction activities
including final design documents and final construction cost estimate; (3) MIC must demonstrate project site control, including required easements and Rights-of-way, NEPA requirements
and all permits needed to construct have been issued; and (4) the scope of work is consistent with findings of the Southeast Alaska IRP.
Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC) proposes assessing feasibility of a 4 MW storage hydro project at Triangle Lk. Improved access to the proposed hydro site by recent road construction
to Walden Point makes hydro development more reasonable to consider at this site. Project would be located on federal trust land. Major issue remains a market for power, which should
be assessed in a regional IRP. This proposal is similar to a Round 3 proposal (#450) that was recommended for funding, but which did not receive a grant due to insufficient funds.
Because the project would connect to the SEAPA grid that has numerous existing and proposed alternatives for generation and transmission, AEA concludes that there is insufficient information
provided to assign a benefit to cost ratio.
Recommend full funding with requirement that scope of work is consistent with findings of the Southeast Alaska IRP.
UAF proposes to assess geothermal resources at Pilgrim Hot Springs through refurbishing existing shallow wells and drilling deep wells. This is a resubmittal of a RE Fund round 2 proposal
(#258) and a partial resubmittal of a round 3 proposal (#466) that was recommended for funding, but which received only partial funding of $613,174 due to limited RE Fund appropriation.
USDOE funding will fund up to $4,274,792 (~69% of the project cost).
Land above the resource is now owned by Unaatuq LLC, a consortium of seven Native organizations.
The Nome Energy Study identified development of the Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal resource as the least-cost option for long-term power supply. The applications includes letters of
support from Nome Joint Utilities and Mary\'s Igloo Native Council (the owner of the adjacent land). DGGS indicates support for the project (see above).
Recommend full funding with the provision that prior to the disbursement of funds, UAF confirm legal access to the resource with the new landowner.
Kodiak Electric proposes construction funding for an additional 11.25 MW hydro turbine for the existing Terror Lk project. There have been two prior RE Fund grants, a round 2 grant
of $500,000 (#215) for feasibility and a round 3 grant (#401) of $248,160 for final design and bid documents.
During feasibility analysis, KEA has concluded that there will be no adverse impacts to stream flow by adding an additional turbine. This will likely facilitate acceptance by the resource
agencies during the required FERC license amendment process.
In November 2010 AEA received a draft FERC capacity amendment application that indicates energy production drops from 12.4 GWh/yr to 2.9 GWh/yr and project cost drops from $15.9 million
to $10.6 million. Although the project economics are somewhat poorer given these new estimates, they remain highly attractive.
The current schedule indicates equipment procurement would begin in January 2012, while site work would begin a year later. The project is scheduled for completion in July 2013.
Recommend partial funding of $3,751,840 ($4,000,000 cap minus $248,160) with provision that KEA provides AEA, and AEA accepts, final design, final construction cost estimate and bid
documents.
Ormat proposes to drill the first full-sized geothermal production well at Mt. Spurr. Prior to the award of this grant Ormat will have completed its exploration program funded in round
3 (#477) which has or will include 1) geophysical exploration, 2) surface mapping, 3) four temperature gradient wells, and 4) two slim holes. Ormat proposes to begin the construction
phase of the project in the summer of 2012 based on a go/no-go decision if the current work indicates a high likelihood of the presence of a high quality geothermal resource. This
decision would be made in August 2011.
Ormat\'s preliminary estimate for the net capacity of the project between 50 and 100 MW at a cost of $5,000-6,000/kW.
Although the proposed drilling work would not take place until summer 2012, Ormat needs to select contractors for the work in fall 2011. Ormat would mobilize the drill rig in spring
2012 at their own expense. Ormat will match state dollars on a 2 to 1 basis for the proposed work.
Recommend funding with the requirement that AEA, in consultation with DGGS, must concur with Ormat\'s decision to proceed with the proposed work before any funds are disbursed.
Naknek Electric Association requests funding for a 12,000 foot well as part of planned 25 MW geothermal project that would provide power to SW Alaska communities.
DGGS has the following comments on the project:
?The current information provided in this proposal, as well as that provided in previous proposals, fails to establish the existence of a robust geothermal resource capable of generating
the amount of electricity described. In fact, the current data outlined in the press suggests the temperature and flow rates in the initial well are insufficient to maintain the level
of electrical production stated as the goal of the project. In order to correctly evaluate the current proposal, the state will need additional information. This information should
include:
- Sustained down hole temperature profile from well G1
- Sustained and long term effective flow rates from Well G1
- Any down-hole geophysical information to substantiate water flow, porosity, permeability, and cement bond to casing (to determine level of fluid influx into wellbore and from what
horizon).
- Any additional observational or deterministic information that could be used to quantitatively evaluate the potential operational capacity of the geothermal system identified.
We will be unable to evaluate the proposal further until this information is provided.?
AEA requested this information from Naknek Electric on Oct 7 requesting a response by Oct 21. Later, AEA contacted the utility again and verified that Naknek had received the request.
Naknek Electric did not provide the requested information.
AEA has no record that a viable geothermal resource exists.
No funding recommended.
City of Chefornak proposes feasibility, final design and permitting of a community wind-diesel system. The system would include three Northwind 100 kW turbines, a Powerstore flywheel,
and an electric boiler at the school as a dumpload. This proposal is similar to a round 3 proposal for final design and construction (#424) that was recommended for partial funding
for feasibility but did not receive funding due to insufficient funds.
AEA and the City completed a powerhouse upgrade in 2004. The City has an AEA met tower stored in Chefornak. The City has not completed a full feasibility assessment including: detailed
energy resource analysis; assessment of design alternatives; geotechnical analysis and a final report with recommendations.
Given that the City has not completed conceptual design, AEA questions the basis of the proposed configuration. The feasibility tasks identified in the application do not address assessment
of design alternatives as stated in the RFA (sec 2.4). Given that the met tower is already onsite, the $49,750 budget for installing the met tower is too high. AEA thinks that $25,000
is a more reasonable figure for installing and collecting data for wind resource assessment.
Given the relatively high cost of the project under the proposed configuration, project economics appear poor, with a benefit to cost ratio that is significantly less than 1.
Recommend partial funding of $136,750 to complete feasibility.
Copper River School District proposes to construct a 1.8 MMBtu/hr wood pellet-fired heating plant to supply the Kenny Lake School. RE Fund round 1 (#46) provided funding for final design.
Upon request of the grantee AEA is managing the project.
Pellets would be purchased from the new Superior Pellets fuel facitlity in Fairbanks. Other potential supply is from Canada. Project is scheduled for completion in December 2011.
The project would represent the first instituional-scale pellet heating plant in Interior.
Recommend full funding.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Scammon Bay. This is a resubmittal of a round 3 application (#511) that AEA recommended for funding, but which did not
receive funding due to insufficient funds. Wind resource is estimated as a class 4-5 based on the state\'s high-resolution wind map. AVEC has some data available from a met tower
that is collecting onsite wind resource data. AVEC plans a 10-mile intertie connecting Stebbins and St. Michael and has prepared a conceptual design for a bulk fuel storage facility
that provides a cost estimate for adding wind to the system. Following the connection, the St. Michael power plant will be put on standby status. AVEC notes that the wind turbines
will provide a local landmark for navigation.
This application is one of seven wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in three other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
AVEC eliminates the cost of wind resource assessment in this application, due to the presence of a met tower.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of replacing the existing four 65 kW AOC turbines in Selawik with 100 kW Northwind turbines, or equivalent. Since the wind farm was constructed in
2002, AVEC has had problems with turbine downtime due to tip break failures. Additionally, it appears that the wind resource is mediocre, based on low energy production when operating.
Despite the presence of turbines in Selawik, AVEC does not provide any empircal wind resource data.
This application is one of 7 wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in 3 other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Scammon Bay. This is a resubmittal of a round 3 application (#514) that AEA recommended for funding, but which did not
receive funding due to insufficient funds. Wind resource is estimated as a class 5 based on the state\'s high-resolution wind map. AVEC notes that the wind turbines will provide a
local landmark for navigation.
This application is one of seven wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in three other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
AVEC eliminates the cost of wind resource assessment in this application, due to the presence of a met tower.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes final design, permitting and construction of a 400 kW wind project to serve the St. Marys-Pitkas Point grid. In round 3 AVEC proposed final design, permitting, and construction
of a 900 kW wind project and intertie to serve the communities of St. Marys, Mountain Village, Pitkas Point, and Pilot Station (#516). In round 2 AVEC requested funding for feasibility
assessment for this project (#298). AEA recommended both proposals for funding; however there was not sufficient funding for either.
In 2009 to 2010 AVEC has continued with onsite wind resource monitoring. Met towers between Pitkas and St Marys indicate a class 6 wind resource but also a potential problem with icing.
AVEC proposes to complete final design and permitting in February 2012 and complete construction in summer 2012.
AVEC has not completed a conceptual design for this project.
Recommend partial funding of $275,554 for completing feasibility, final design, and permitting with the requirement that before final design funds are disbursed AEA accept the feasibility
and conceptual design report.
AVEC proposes final design and permitting of a 300 kW run-of-river hydro project on the east fork of Mountain Creek near Old Harbor. AVEC is currently working on project feasibility
under an RE Fund round 1 grant (#73) which is expected to be complete by next summer. AVEC studied a project nearby in the late 90s but put the project on hold due to adverse economics
and fish habitat study requirements.
Current work indicates a promising project. The proposal is supported by local city government and Native corporation.
AVEC does not identify the project engineer. Portions of the project are on USFWS refuge and on an Exxon Valdez conservation easement.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before funding is disbursed AVEC must submit a feasibility report acceptable to AEA.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Marshall. Wind resource is measured as a class 4 based on ten months of met tower data. AVEC notes that the wind turbines
will provide a local landmark for navigation.
This application is one of seven wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in three other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
AVEC eliminates the cost of wind resource assessment in this application, due to the presence of a met tower.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Koyuk. Wind resource is estimated from the state?s high resolution map as a class 3. AVEC notes that the wind turbines
would provide a landmark for navigation in the area.
This application is one of seven wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in three other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes installation of a 10 kW low penetration photovoltaic-diesel system to supply station service power to the Kaltag system. Panels would be located on the Kaltag power house.
Project economics are marginal (B/C=0.67) given the minimal amount of fuel that the system will displace. However AVEC states that the main value of the project is to demonstrate performance
of a solar-diesel system in a utility environment.
Full funding recommended.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Elim. Wind resource is estimated from the state?s high resolution map as a class 3-4. AVEC notes that wind towers would
provide a landmark for navigation in Norton Sound.
This application is one of 7 wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in 3 other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
AVEC proposes assessing feasibility of a wind-diesel system in Eek. Wind resource is estimated from the state?s high resolution map as a class 3. The applicant estimates wind resource
as a class 4 based on nearby Quinhagak?s measured resource. The community operates a single phase power system. The Northwind 100 turbines operates in three phase. AVEC has prepared
a recon- level wind power report for Eek based on regional wind data.
This application is one of 7 wind feasibility projects that AVEC is proposing in round 4. AVEC has received funding in rounds 2 and 3 for feasibility assessment in 3 other communities.
All of the proposals include standardized descriptions of feasibility tasks?including project development/scoping and contractor solicitation, detailed energy resource analysis (met
tower wind resource assessment), identification of land and regulatory issues, permitting and environmental analysis, detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets,
conceptual business and operations plans, assessment of alternatives, detailed economic and financial analyses, conceptual design analysis and cost estimate, and final report and recommendations.
Given the similar tasks among multiple projects, AEA thinks that it is reasonable that, if AVEC receives funding for multiple projects, the utility may be able to reduce costs through
coordinated procurement and management of these projects.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant is finalized, AVEC will prepare budgets for all round 4 wind feasibility projects with the goal of identifying opportunities
to reduce costs.
Alaska Power & Telephone proposes to study and develop mitigation measures for river debris that impacts hydrokinetic devices, specifically the 25 kW New Energy Corporation?s Encurrent
device at Eagle.
The impact of debris is an important issue for developing river hydrokinetic devices in Alaska. Debris has caused serious disruptions and lower availability of power production in demonstration
projects in Eagle and Ruby. Debris monitoring and/or mitigation is addressed in the scopes of work of at least two other projects in Alaska?1) AEA?s grant to UAF for work at ORPC\'s
Tanana River site and 2) the Denali Commission grant to ORPC Inc which includes a component for debris monitoring and mitigation. Denali Commission is providing substantial support
(~$3 million) to support demonstration of hydrokinetic technology in Eagle.
Given the amount of work that is already funded to address debris mitigation, AEA believes that a statewide approach is a more effective means of accomplishing the objectives of this
proposal. AEA will coordinate with the UAF Alaska Hydrokinetic Energy Research Center to do this.
No funding recommended.
IRHA proposes to team with Tanana Chiefs Conference and UAF to perform reconnnaissance assessment and fuelwood inventory for community cordwood systems for Nulato, Ruby, Holy Cross,
Koyukuk, Anvik, Nikolai, Hughes and Kaltag. Communities were chosen based on 1) biomass energy development was indicated as an objective in the Alaska Energy Pathway and 2) community
councils passed resolutions of interest.
The application includes a strong project team and indicates substantial community buy-in.
Recommend full funding.
The SE Island School District proposes to construct a cordwood -fired heating plant that will supply the Thorne Bay K-12 school and school district office. SEISD submitted a RE fund
Round 1 proposal for $178,179 with a $42,000 match . The project team concluded that this was insufficient funding for the project and ,have spent the last year pursuing additional
financing. Under an existing grant from AEA SEISD is currently in the final design stage for the the project.
The school district is installing a similar system in Coffman Cove expected to be in operation in 2011.
School enrollment has been variable, but has managed to stay above the minimum level. USFS facilities are located near the campus and represent potential additional heating loads.
Management capability is very good.
Recommend full funding.
Kenai Hydro LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Homer Electric Association, proposes field studies/environmental assessment, preliminary engineering/project scoping, cost analysis, and
FERC license application for developing a 4.5 MW hydro facility at Grant Lake. AEA has granted Kenai Hydro $100,000 for reconnaissance assessment in the alternative energy RFP and
$816,000 in RE Fund round 1 (#34). Kenai Hydro proposes to provide a 20% match.
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. There is significant public opposition to the project.
2. We think it?s going to cost more to mitigate impacts of features not yet anticipated in the cost estimate, such as i) relocation of the roadway and transmission line due to presence
of Iditarod Commemorative trail (currently permitted and under development), and ii) the cost of constructing a new tailrace pond.
3. We expect that in the FERC licensing process, there will be constraints on the operation of the project that will significantly impact the amount of energy that can be produced.
For instance, energy output will be reduced in order to maintain environmental stream flows and lake levels necessary to mitigate impact on fisheries.
However, recognizing that this project would provide a significant amount of renewable energy, AEA recommends funding for continued feasibility to assist the applicant in developing
a low-impact project configuration that is economic, able to be licensed by FERC, and is acceptable to project stakeholders.
Recommend partial funding of $1,184,000 ($2 million cap minus the existing grant of $816,000).
Alaska Electric Energy Cooperative (AEEC), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Homer Electric Association, proposes to convert the existing 42 MW single-cycle combustion turbine into a 60 MW
combined cycle system utilizing recovered heat from the combustion turbine exhaust.
This project was considered in the Alaska Energy Authority Railbelt Integrated Resource Plan (RIRP), as a ?committed unit?, that is, a power generation project an individual utility
was planning, designing or constructing while the integrated resource plan was being developed.
The RIRP included an analysis of the cost impacts these committed units would impose on the Railbelt, if built outside of the regional planning process. While the RIRP analysis does
not capture the full incremental cost of utilities acting independently over the 50-year planning horizon, it does give an indication of relative cost differential. Cumulatively, costs
over the 50 years increase 5.6% from the least cost scenario of regional power portfolio development, if utilities pursue independent project development. (RIRP, p. 1-31)
The RIRP concludes: ??there are significant cost savings associated with the Railbelt utilities implementing a plan that has been developed to minimize total regional costs, while ensuring
reliable service, as opposed to the individual utilities working separately to meet the needs of their customers.? (RIRP, p. 1-32)
While the project appears to be economic as a stand-alone project, it was not selected as a regional plan generation facility, and its construction appears to increase costs for the
ratepayer. For this reason AEA cannot recommend this project.
No funding recommended.
Nushagak Cooperative requests funding for final design and construction of a 450 kW wind project.
Currently Nushagak has received a $100,000 grant from the Denali Commission under the Alternative Energy Grant program for wind feasibility. Nushagak has a grant to study hydro feasibility
for project(s) at Lake Elva and Grant Lake north of Aleknagik.
Nushagak?s proposal demonstrates impressive level of community support for developing a utility-scale wind project in Dillingham. The utility has performed a substantial amount of work
in preparation for wind development, including a reconnaissance level assessment of energy alternatives prepared by the University.
AEA has the following concerns regarding this proposal:
1. The feasibility information submitted is not sufficient to provide a basis for final design and construction. Specifically, it does not include a conceptual design.
2. Alternatives assessed were limited to small turbines. There is no discussion of the risks associated with deploying a new turbine model in the state.
3. The economics of this project are marginal and may be improved by considering other sites, equipment, and project size.
4. Nushagak has not yet completed a substantial portion of or drawn any conclusions from the wind feasibility work underway.
5. The proposed scheduled begins in October 2010 with design and permitting completed in May 2011 before funding from the RE Fund would be available.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant IPEC proposes a staged assessment of geothermal resources of Tenakee Inlet Hot Springs consisting of field work in 2010 followed by exploratory drilling in the summer 2011.
This application is identical to a round 3 application (#501) that was recommended, but which did not receive funding due to limited funds.
DGGS notes that the hot spring is one of the hottest in Southeast Alaska suggesting a reasonable chance of power outputs up to a few megawatts. The hot springs is located in a remote
location on Tongass NF land and would require a special land use permit. The hot springs is approximately 20 miles from Hoonah with no road access. Hoonah has also submitted an application
to construct a hydro project at Gartina and Water Supply creeks. The hot springs is approximately 10 miles from Pelican, which has a hydro resource that supplies all of its power.
DGGS agrees with the proposed two-phase plan outlined in this proposal?1) geological and geophysical studies followed by 2) site test drilling. However, DGGS states concerns regarding
IPEC?s approach to identifying the exact location of the sub-surface resource prior to drilling. Further DGGS notes that ?Additional clarification and details of the work plan, and
how the information will be used to provide drilling locations and/or indication of reservoir should be provided to fully evaluate the proposal. Additionally, if chosen for funding,
it would seem reasonable to provide the funds in a phased manner that coincides with the phases of the work: drilling to occur only after geological and geophysical fieldwork and economic,
environmental, and permitting issues are resolved favorably.?
The project represents an option for displacing the 350,000 gpy diesel consumption for power in Hoonah. At an estimated installed cost of $27 million not including transmission to Hoonah
or other infrastructure, however, project economics do not appear to be attractive.
AEA recommends partial funding for the initial phase of field work with the requirement that prior to any funds being disbursed for the field investigation IPEC will prepare a workplan
and project team satisfactory to AEA and DGGS.
Already has a $4 M grant from Round III; which is to be used for construction / Therefore, not eligible for additional grant funding for construction.
AP&T proposes funding feasibility of developing a 6 MW storage hydro project at Schubee Lake. This proposal is almost identical to a round 3 proposal for this purpose (#441) that for
which AEA recommended partial funding. However, insufficient funds were available to provide a grant.
As before, AP&T has not prepared a formal reconnaissance assessment of the project that meets requirements of the RFA. AP&T is responding to a level of public opposition to developing
another hydro site at Connelly Lk. AEA is recommending feasibility funding for Connelly Lk (#627).
AEA has the following concerns with Schubee Lk: 1) it is located on USFS lands and would be subject to FERC licensing, 2) it has a higher relative cost with less energy output than
Connelly, 3) it would require an expensive connection to the existing submarine cable connecting Haines and Skagway.
AEA recognizes the importance for the Haines Borough citizens to make informed decisions regarding development of alternative hydro locations. However we believe that sufficient information
for determining the development path can be achieved by more limited analysis.
Recommend partial funding of $80,000 for reconnaissance assessment with the provisions that 1) AP&T must provide a revised scope of work for approval by AEA before funds are disbursed,
2) scope of work is consistent with findings of the Southeast Alaska IRP .
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power and Telephone (AP&T) proposes funding for the transmission portion of the 5 MW Reynolds Creek hydropower project. Haida Energy,
a joint venture of AP&T and Haida Corp, would own the project and sell power on a wholesale basis to APC, the certificated utility on Prince of Wales (PoW) Island. The project is a
component of Reynolds Creek Hydro Project, which received $2M (App #104) in grant funding already. In Round 3, an application (#439) was submitted for transmission line construction
for Reynolds Creek. Although AEA recommended the project for funding there was insufficient funding appropriated to fund this project.
The following grant allocations totaling $4.1 million have been made for the Reynolds Creek project:
1) $100,000 of Denali Comm funds to Haida Corp through the Denali Commission / AEA alternative energy RFP
2) $1 million in RE fund round 1 funds to Haida Corp
3) $1 million in RE fund round 1 funds to Haida Power, a joint venture between APC and Haida Corp
4) $2 million in legislative appropriation to Southeast Conference
The project will be dispatched in conjunction with AP&T\'s existing Black Bear Lk and South Fork hydro projects. Previous applications state that Reynolds Creek hydro will only be used
after the existing hydro projects are fully dispatched. An extension of PoW transmission to the northern portion of island has been funded by the Denali Commission and RE Fund round
1.
Haida Energy has recently informed AEA that the project budget may need to be increased and has agreed to direct its engineer of record to update the project cost estimate. Also, Haida
Energy has informed AEA that it has redesigned the project to relocate the power house and to make other changes to improve constructability.
Recommend full funding with the following grant conditions: Before any construction grant funds are disbursed: 1) Grantee must secure an amendment to the existing project management
agreement to include this grant in the agreement, and to become a signatory to the agreement, 2) all final design documents, permits, rights-of-way, and FERC license must be in place,
3) completion of a revised project cost estimate by the engineer of record that is satisfactory to AEA and a revised project finance plan that demonstrates that the applicant has raised
all funds necessary to complete the project, 4) the grantee must establish a power purchase agreement acceptable to AEA, based on cost-based rate methodology that demonstrates that
benefits of public funds flow to the ratepayers, 5) ownership of the transmission line must be with Haida Energy, or Grantee must provide a transmission maintenance and operations agreement
giving control of the project to Haida Energy or an alternative business arrangement acceptable to AEA.
AP&T proposes final design, permitting, and construction of a run-of-river 124 kW hydro project at Neck Lake. The project would result in displacing virtually all of the diesel used
for power generation in Whale Pass. RE Fund round 2 (#223) provided $108,000 for feasibility analysis, scheduled for completion in 2011-12. AEA has allocated $90,000 in round 3 funds
(App #440) for permitting and final design to be completed by Summer 2013. Construction would begin in Fall 2013.
In November 2010, FERC ruled it has jurisdiction for licensing at Neck Lake. When contacted by AEA, AP&T announced they have decided to stop any further activity to develop a hydroelectric
power plant at Neck Lake.
Recommend no funding since on 12/6/2010 AP&T indicated it won?t pursue this project.
Applicant proposes feasibility study and final design/permitting for a 12 MW storage hydro project. An IRP is desirable for the Skagway, Haines, Klukwan area before proceeding to final
design and construction for these projects. AP&T is also proposing recon and feasibility study of Schubee Lk hydro project (#441) in response to local input. AP&T submitted a similar
proposal in RE fund round 3 (#437) that was recommended for partial funding, but did not receive a grant due to insufficient funds.
Existing recon study proposes a substantially smaller 6 MW project which impounds less water than the current proposal. Project may require intertie and road access across the Chilkat
Bald Eagle Reserve if it is not feasible to route through the Haines State Forest. Application includes March 09 letter from BLM indicating land has been transferred to State of Alaska,
thus reducing likelihood of FERC jurisdiction. Power sales/benefits limited to offset of diesel costs and air pollution during summer cruise ship landings in Haines and Skagway. Seasonal
power production would limit year-round availability.
Recommend $468,000 partial funding for Phase 2 feasibility study with scope per application with provision that 1) land issues and licensing jurisdiction question be resolved with go/no-go
points established 2) scope of work is consistent with findings of the Southeast Alaska IRP.
APC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Alaska Power and Telephone) proposes feasibility assessment, permitting and final design for a 300 kW hydro project at Carlson Cr. that would serve
Slana and Chistochina.
This is a continuation of a project reconnaissance assessment funded in round 2 (#226), now projected to be complete in spring 2013. As part of the current work APC will request a project
jurisdictional determination by FERC.
APC submitted a similar proposal in round 3 (#443) that was recommended for funding. However insufficient funding was available.
Work under the current proposal would not begin until fall 2013. It is reasonable for APC to complete current work and resubmit an application for funding after determining project viability.
Recommend no funding.
The Haines Borough proposes reconnaissance and feasibility assessment of two hydro projects totalling 3 MW and 1.5 miles of transmission to connect to the Ocean Beauty\'s fish processing
facility and residences in the community of Excursion Inlet.
As the proposal notes "barriers to project development will include anadromous fish concerns...." Major concerns with protection of these species include minimum flows below a diversion
facility and the need for both upstream and downstream fish passage at the intake structures".
The applicant does not indicate who owns the land on the projects would be developed. The processor and most residences are seasonal.
Recon study should address fish habitat, electrical service and estimated load for the Borough subdivision, establishment of community utility, business arrangement for selling power
to the fish processor Ocean Beauty, site control and land ownership, and FERC jurisdiction. Specifically, the recon work shall include consideration of fish habitat issues as it affects
the cost, capacity, and energy output of the project and environmental licensing concerns.
Recommend partial funding for reconnaissance study.
The City and Borough of Wrangell proposes assessing feasibility of using electric vehicles utilizing excess hydro from the southern Southeast electric grid. Specifically, as an output
of the project the City proposes to purchase an electric car and develop a charging station in Wrangell.
AEA supports the concept of displacing transportation fuel using renewable energy resources where shown to be economically feasible. AEA notes the benefit/cost ratio is 0.39 assuming
5 cent per kWh power over a 15 year project life. We are concerned that power may not be available at this rate for the long-term.
Impacts of conventional power consumption, heating conversions, and electric transportation are being considered in the Southeast Alaska IRP project, expected to be complete by the end
of 2011. For this reason we feel it would be useful to the IRP project for portions of this work to be done. Specifically, work that would be useful includes studies on the impacts
of electric vehicles on the City distribution system, incremental impacts that electric vehicles will have on the future energy consumption and power demand for the Wrangell system,
and opportunities for deploying smart grid technology.
Recommend partial funding of $25,000 for reconnaissance study that will be useful to the Southeast IRP project with requirement that scope must be developed in coordination with the
AEA-led IRP.
The Matanuska-Susitna Borough proposes design and construction of a cordwood-fired heating system for the Susitna Valley High School. The project would displace approximately 22,000
gallons of heating oil per year using approximately 250 cords of wood per year with a delivered cost of $200/cord.
The proposal is based on a detailed feasibility analysis completed in 2009 with support from a grant under the Denali Commission/AEA alternative energy grant program. The analysis considered
conceptual design of the wood boiler systems as well wood fuel availability and cost.
The proposal to heat the school has many attractive features, including creating jobs and enhancing educational opportunities of the local students, providing a research forest, and
demonstrating biomass energy in a relatively accessible part of the state. Based on the feasibility report there is an ample, sustainable wood supply and the school would save $20,000-50,000
per year.
AEA has received a letter expressing concern about the project impacts on the nearby forest, air emissions from the facility, and economic benefit versus cost.
AEA is concerned about the relatively high project cost and marginal economics using the standard 20-year project life assumption. The feasibility report runs sensitivity analyses and
concludes that project economics are attractive using only the most optimistic assumptions for heating load, wood consumption and price, and project cost. During the final design and
permitting stage, AEA strongly encourages the Borough to consider alternate combustion systems and construction methods to improve the economics of the system
Recommend full funding with the requirement that before construction funds are released for the project, the Borough prepare a final design acceptable to AEA.
Applicant Native Village of Eyak proposes assessing feasibility of heating buildings in Cordova with local wood and waste cardboard. The applicant also proposes to develop a community
energy audit protocol. The applicant requested funding for this project last year (#408) and AEA recommended partial funding. However, the project was not funded due to insufficient
funding.
Based on prefeasibility reports provided upon AEA request, the community may need to utilize local wood in addition to the burn pile.
The budget provided in the application does provide justification for what appears to be a very expensive feasibility analysis. Based on experience with other biomass thermal projects
in Alaska, AEA recommends partial funding of $75,000.
The City of Akutan proposes to complete final design and permitting of a geothermal power plan serving the City and Trident Seafoods. The City of Akutan began this project under a RE
Fund Round 2 grant (#246) and continued with partial funding under a round 3 grant (#470). In the summer of 2009, the City performed surface exploration work, including field mapping,
CSAMT and remote sensing, to help choose drill sites. In summer 2010 two wells were drilled with good results. The first well hit several shallow, hot aquifers (up to 359F at 585
ft). The second well was evidently less permeable and did not encounter much fluid, although an elevated geothermal gradient was recorded.
The City is proceeding with feasibility stage activities, scheduled for completion in June 2011. Pending are finalization of the resource assessment, conceptual design and project cost,
financial analysis, preliminary power sales agreement, and a draft operational and business plan.
DGGS finds that "Drilling at Akutan during the summer of 2010 confirmed the presence of a high-temperature geothermal resource at Akutan. This resource is comparable to that at Makushin,
and is in the tens-of-megawatts class.." The substantial geothermal resource combined with the substantial energy load of the fish processing plant and the City of Akutan indicates
promise for this project.
Recommend full funding with provision that before funds are made available for final design and permitting, the City must provide to AEA and AEA must accept a feasibility assessment
that justifies continued project development.
Ketchikan Public Utilities proposes to construct a 4.5 MW storage hydro project on an existing dam at Whitman Lake. KPU was funded at $1.3 million for final design and permitting under
RE fund round 2 (#37) and expects to complete this work by December 2010. KPU has reached a settlement agreement with DNR, ADFG, and the USFS on the project.
KPU plans to finance the $14.5 million balance of the project using unspecified grants, municipal bonds, or other options.
With legislative funding, AEA is currently developing a regional integrated energy resource plan for Southeast Alaska. Whitman Lake hydro appears to be a viable energy resource that
could be valuable in satisfying future energy and capacity demands for the SEAPA network at large. However, this cannot be confirmed until the Southeast IRP (SEIRP) project is complete.
One specific output from this plan is a preferred generation resource plan. Currently there is not sufficient information to serve as a basis for an economic analysis. This analysis
will be done as a part of the SEIRP.
Partial funding of $700,000 ($2 million cumulative cap for final design/construction minus $1.3 million granted in round 2) recommended.
Special provisions are as follows: (1) Grantee to demonstrate that all preconstruction activities (including those previously funded under Round 1 RE Fund grant) have been completed
in a manner acceptable to AEA, including resolution of all land and site control issues; (2) Before any funds can be paid out under this grant, grantee will submit a project financing
plan acceptable to AEA which describes the source and financial cost of all committed funds required to complete the entire Whitman Lake project and allow it to produce and sell power;
(3) Provide FERC notice to proceed with construction activities; and (4) Consistent with AEA policy, energy and capacity from this project must be available to all ratepayers on the
SEAPA network on an equal, non-discriminatory Basis; and (5) Scope of work is consistent with findings of the Southeast Alaska IRP. .
The City of Coffman Cove proposes to construct 55 kW project that would capture hydro energy from the penstock that provides water supply to the City of Craig Water Treatment Plant and
the Port St. Nicholas fish hatchery near Craig.
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. The RE Fund has already allocated funding to the 5 MW Reynolds Creek (RC) project and the Northern Prince of Wales Intertie that provides all electrical needs for the island for the
foreseeable future. The RC hydro project is expected to spill water over much of the next decade.
2. The application provides little to no reconnaissance, feasibility or design information.
3. Business arrangements are not described.
Recommend no funding.
CVEA proposes studies to address fish, wildlife, water use, geology, soils, cultural, recreational and other potential impacts of a 20-40 MW hydro project at Silver Lake. CVEA applied
for reconnaissance assessment funding in round 3 (#452) and were recommended for funding, however there was insufficent funding for the project. Since then, CVEA has funded a recon
study using their own resources. This recon report is to be completed in December 2010. CVEA has applied to FERC for a preliminary permit for Silver Lake, which is anticipated to
be issued in the near future.
CVEA has received $2,288,000 in round 1 funding and $1,000,000 in legislative funds for feasibility analysis of Alison Lake hydro. Given the current load of the CVEA system it is likely
that either, but not both Allison Lake and Silver Lake hydroelectric projects can be economically developed.
A significant factor in the feasibility of Silver Lake is development of a 20-mile transmission line through mountainous terrain from the proposed power house to Valdez. Silver Lake
was studied in the 1980s and 90s and was not pursued further due to poor economics and fish habitat issues. The project, however, would provide substantial amounts of energy, significantly
greater than the output of Alison Lake.
Recommend full funding with special provision that a CVEA -funded reconnaissance report that addresses Silver Lake\'s project economics and potential fatal flaws is provided to AEA,
and AEA concurs with the recommendations to proceed to further study of Silver Lake. Also AEA will want to see a thorough analysis of the land ownership issues associated with this
project in the feasibility stage since that will affect licensing provisions. (See DMLW comments).
Alaska Gateway School District proposes adding on a heat loop off the newly-completed wood-fired heating system at the Tok School to provide heat to the detached multipurpose buildings
that house a hockey rink, shooting range and Zamboni garage.
The new wood heating system at the Tok School is very promising. However, given that the project would displace 9720 gallons of heating fuel per year at a cost of $754,651, economics
are not favorable.
Recommend no funding.
GVEA requests funding for ordering wind turbines for a 24 MW project in the Healy area. AEA has provided $2 million toward feasibility and permitting in round 1 (#109). Turbines are
scheduled for purchase in summer 2011 following consideration of bids from turbine suppliers and EPC contractors by the GVEA board. Site work and turbine erection would be completed
in summer 2012. The project would be commissioned in summer 2012.
GVEA has received federal approval for CREB bond financing.
Recommend full funding.
Chugach Electric Association proposes a multiphased approach toward developing electrical transmission on the west side of Cook Inlet to carry power from potential geothermal project
at Mt Spurr and a potential hydropower project at Lake Chakachamna. Phase 1 (feasibility) consists of preliminary design, route selection, and assessment of permit requirements. Phase
2 (final design) would consist of permits and rights-of-way, geotechnical and survey work, and final design.
Chugach Electric would complete feasibility activities in June 2012. Following feasibility, Chugach would complete final design activities in June 2013. The proposal provides only
a general description of project tasks and costs.
Ormat is test drilling on Mt. Spurr four 500-1000\' depth core holes and plans to drill additional deeper slim holes in 2011 as part of round 3 grant #477. Additionally, Ormat has
applied for a round 4 grant (#652) to construct a test well. Chakachamna would involve a lake tap from Lake Chakachamna, a 10 mile power tunnel leading to an underground power house
in the McArthur River Basin. The two power generation projects have not been proven to be technically and economically viable and also may have environmental permitting challenges.
Railbelt IRP findings are favorable for both Mt. Spurr and Chakachmna projects. Under direction from the Legislature, AEA is undertaking additional analyses to determine the feasibility
of Chakachamna in relation to other large hydro projects on the Railbelt. The results of that study are not available on the date of this review.
Since the two energy generation projects remain in the feasibility determination phase, AEA believes it is reasonable to provide funding for the proposed transmission project to completion
of the feasibility.
Recommend partial funding of $600,000 with the requirements that CEA prepares a more detailed scope and budget for AEA approval.
The NW Arctic Borough proposes installing a total of 7 kW of photovoltaic panels in 10 communities (700 W/community). The purpose of the application is for energy cost reduction and
local education. The solar panels would be installed by a Fairbanks supplier.
AEA has the following concerns about this application:
1. Given a cost of almost $150,000 for all ten systems and total annual fuel savings of only 800 gallons per year, project economics are poor (B/C = 0.54).
2. Since the panels would be installed, not by local community members but by a contractor, education value would be limited.
No funding recommended.
The North Slope Borough proposes final design and permitting for a 300 kW wind project to serve the Wainwright grid. The Borough is currently working on a round 3 grant for conceptual
design (#412) and has completed onsite wind resource assessment which indicates a class 4-5 resource.
The proposed budget includes $160,000 for final environmental assessment and mitigation plans. The current work includes $102,000 for similar activities. AEA believes that it is reasonable
to reduce the budget for this on the basis of the previous award.
Since conceptual design is not yet complete, construction cost estimates are very approximate; However, unless the construction cost can be reduced economics for constructing the project
will not be favorable,
Recommend partial funding of $298,000 with requirement that before final design funds are disbursed AEA accept the feasibility and conceptual design report.
The North Slope Borough proposes final design and permitting for a 300 kW wind project to serve the Point Lay grid. The Borough is currently working on a round 3 grant for conceptual
design (#421) and has completed onsite wind resource assessment which indicates a class 4-5 resource.
The proposed budget includes $160,000 for final environmental assessment and mitigation plans. The current work includes $102,000 for similar activities. AEA believes that it is reasonable
to reduce the budget for this on the basis of the previous award.
Since conceptual design is not yet complete, construction cost estimates are very approximate; However, unless the construction cost can be reduced economics for constructing the project
will not be favorable,
Recommend partial funding of $298,000 with requirement that before final design funds are disbursed AEA accept the feasibility and conceptual design report.
The North Slope Borough proposes final design and permitting for a 300 kW wind project to serve the Point Hope grid. The Borough is currently working on a round 3 grant for conceptual
design (#413) and has completed onsite wind resource assessment which indicates a class 6 resource.
The proposed budget includes $160,000 for final environmental assessment and mitigation plans. The current work includes $102,000 for similar activities. AEA believes that it is reasonable
to reduce the budget for this on the basis of the previous award.
Since conceptual design is not yet complete, construction cost estimates are very approximate; However, unless the construction cost can be reduced economics for constructing the project
will not be favorable,
Recommend partial funding of $298,000 with requirement that before final design funds are disbursed AEA accept the feasibility and conceptual design report.
North Slope Borough proposes feasibility assessment of developing a wind-diesel system in Kaktovik. Currently the North Slope Borough is conducting similar feasibility analyses in Pt.
Hope (#413), Pt. Lay (#421), and Wainwright (#412).
NSB has completed onsite wind resource assessment and provides the wind resource report in the application. The report documents a Class 5 wind resource.
Recommend full funding.
The North Slope Borough proposes following up earlier feasibility work funded under the RE Fund round 2(#245) on developing a 70-mile transmission line connecting Atqasuk to the natural
gas-fired power plant in Barrow. AEA recognizes that renewable energy resource development is not viable, thus the project is potentially eligible for RE fund support.
NSB\'s feasibility report is due this winter. Work to date has identified concerns with steller and spectacled eider habitat, raising concerns for increased costs due to possible requirements
for underground construction. Additionally right-of-way issues will need to be resolved, including those associated with Native allotments. The current feasibility analysis (#245)
does not include conceptual design.
Recommend full funding with provision that AEA accept the feasibility report for the work currently underway (#245) before any funds are disbursed for the proposed project.
Louden Tribal Council proposes assessing feasibility of a combined wood-fired heat and power system in Galena. The project under consideration involves formation of a partnership with
the biomass owner (Gana-a?Yoo Native Corporation), purchasing and installation of the harvesting equipment, appropriate generation and heat recovery systems, and providing heat for
the existing utilidor and buildings occupied by the Galena City School District.
Louden is seeking funding from USDA for assessment and management planning for the local biomass resources. These funds, although important to the effort, are not assured.
Louden has contracted with WH Pacific for a reconnaissance study scheduled for completion in December 2010.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA accept the reconnaissance study before any funds are disbursed.
AVCP proposes refurbishing the existing 12 kW photovoltaic-diesel hybrid system in Lime Village. The system was installed in 1999-2001 with donations by British Petroleum and Siemens
for the PV panels. Although the panels are reportedly operable, the charger-inverter and control system does not work. The status of the ~100 kWh lead acid battery system is unknown.
AEA notes that the efficiency of the Lime Village power system is very low (7.88 kWh/gal).
Given the remoteness and very high cost of fuel in Lime Village, it makes sense to determine if and how the system can be reactivated before allocating funds for the task. $25,000 is
a reasonable estimate for system evaluation.
Recommend partial funding for system evaluation.
The Native Village of Cantwell proposes a reconnaissance study for a 1+MW storage hydro project on the Jack River located near Cantwell. The project would connect to the Railbelt Energy
Grid served by GVEA. AEA recommended funding for this project in RE fund round 3 (#402) but insufficient funds were available.
The proposal includes letters of support from Ahtna Inc, Denali Borough, Denali National Park, Golden Valley Electric, and Usibelli Coal.
DNR comments note proximity to the Denali Fault and dam safety issues.
AEA staff accompanied NVC and their potential consultant Polarconsult on a site visit in 2008 and concluded that the project may have merit. However insufficient information has been
collected and provided to justify funding for full feasibility and conceptual design.
Recommend partial funding of $30,000 for reconnaissance assessment.
Applicant proposes to purchase a chip fuel dryer and lease it to the Viking Lumber Mill which currently provides chip fuel to the city of Craig for use in the biomass boiler to heat
the pool and school for the community. Fuel could also be made available to other facilities on Prince of Wales Island and other locations.
The new biomass boiler currently has a fuel dryer as part of its system. The moisture content of the fuel has consistently been higher than design parameters. The new dryer would
allow for the fuel to be pre-treated before delivery to the school, and could potentially allow for the development of other chip customers for Viking Lumber.
AEA recongizes that there is significant public benefit from this project, however, it believes that there must be reasonable economic return to the public from the allocation of the
grant fund, while at the same time assuring that Viking recieves reasonable return.
Recommend full funding with the following special provision: Before funds are made available, AEA must approve the lease/operate/maintain business agreement between Viking and Craig.
TDX Power proposes feasibility, design, and construction of 1-2 MW wind energy project for Bethel.
TDX owns and/or operates three wind-diesel power systems in St. Paul, Sand Point, and Tin City. TDX states in their application that they will be assuming operation of the Bethel power
utility by summer 2011. Given these circumstances, TDX is an attractive and logical entity to develop a large-scale wind project in Bethel.
However there are other significant energy planning and project development activities taking place in Bethel. The City of Bethel has been funded through the RE Fund round 1 for a 400
kW wind project. To date the City and utility have not reached an agreement for power purchase or interconnection. Additionally Village Wind Power is funded under round 0 to assess
feasibility of a large scale wind power project. AVCP has submitted an application for final design and construction in round 4 for a 200 kW wind project to serve Bethel (#600).
Napakiak is proposing feasibility and design of wind generation (#697) along its intertie with Bethel. Finally AVCP Regional Housing Authority is proposing study of hydro at the Kiseralik
and Chikuminuk Rivers in Round 2 of the RE Fund. Therefore, there is a need for a regional integrated resource energy plan in the Bethel area to coordinate when and where energy projects
should be developed. This proposal should be considered in the context of an integrated plan to assure proper sizing, timing, and integration of multiple energy projects. AEA believes
that such an overall plan for the Bethel power system should be developed before proceeding with any additional wind development.
AEA has met with the City of Bethel, AVCP Rural Housing Authority, Yukon Kuskokwim Health Corporation, Calista Corporation and TDX to discuss regional energy planning, including wind
and hydro development. The group has agreed to pursue coordinated energy planning for the region and the Bethel grid.
AEA believes that Bethel?s large load provides the opportunity for deploying megawatt scale turbines with better economics than smaller-scale wind installations. TDX proposes a logical,
stepwise approach for developing large scale wind generation in Bethel.
Recommend partial funding of $213,690 for feasibility analysis and conceptual design with the requirement that TDX work with the City, the Housing Authority, the Health Corp, Calista,
Napakiak Ircinraq Power Company, and other entities in regional and community energy planning.
CB of Sitka requests additional funding for assessing feasibility of the potential 28 MW Takatz Lake hydro project. To date RE Fund round 1 has awarded partial funding of $1,152,134
to the project for this purpose. For this application CBS is requesting an additional $2 million.
Project is consistent with findings of the 2008 Sitka Power Supply Plan and would follow less expensive alternatives, including increasing capacity of the existing Blue Lk Hydro project,
in order to avoid more costly diesel generation. There is potential for developing road and marine facilities associated with the project that would provide access to the eastern Baranof
Island. FERC has issued a preliminary permit to Sitka to assess feasibility of Takatz. Given the widespread interest in linking major electric generation and loads in Southeast, development
of Takatz should be coordinated with the SE Alaska Regional Energy Plan.
AEA has recently determined that additional funding is available from round 1 funds to support funding this project at the original Rd 1 application amount of $2 million. This is also
the cap amount for feasibility for this project. The existing grant will be amended to increase its funding level to $2 million. No additional funding recommended due to the cap.
TDX proposes conceptual design and feasibility assessment of a hybrid renewable (wind, geothermal and/or hydro)-diesel system for Adak. TDX proposes to follow-up on an existing grant
for $85,835 matched by $6,470 to perform a reconnaissance report, monitoring, wind resource report, feasibility study, and conceptual design.
AEA has the following concerns about this application:
1. The existing grant was put in place in May 2010. TDX has made little progress on the existing grant and has not requested reimbursement or submitted any progress reports.
2.The proposed work is for feasibility and conceptual design. This work is already included in the scope of the current grant.
Recommend no funding.
Valdez Fisheries Development Association is requesting funding for permitting and final design of a system to convert recovered heat from the Petrostar Refinery to 630 kW of power to
the CVEA grid, refrigeration to a cold storage and fish processing facility, and tempered water to the Solomon Gulch Hatchery. VFDA submitted a related application in RE Fund round
2 (#207) that was not recommended for funding because it was for the entire cold storage facility, not the energy system. The VFDA submitted a second application in round 3 (#434)
identical to the current application, which limits the scope to the energy system design.
The project has substantial value for demonstrating a system that would aid development of fish processing and cold storage in coastal communities with access to recoverable heat.
However, AEA has the following concerns with this application:
1. VFDA has still not secured financing for the cold storage facility that justifies the absorption system.
2. During round 3 review AEA requested the feasibility analysis for the ORC (power generation) component of the system, but VFDA was unable to provide it. The current application still
does not include this analysis.
3. In round 3 AEA requested a breakdown of the $1 million design budget, but VFDA was unable to provide any detail. The current application still does not include this detail. Without
this detail that justifies this cost, AEA must regard this amount as excessive.
4. Similar to the last application there remains no indication they will purchase power from the project, a requirement of the IPP status that make the grantee eligible.
Recommend no funding.
AVCP Regional Housing Authority proposes to construct a 200 kW wind energy project to serve their campus in Bethel. AVCP would first purchase land from the City of Bethel for $670,000
in late 2011, and begin equipment purchase and construction in spring 2012.
There are other significant energy planning and project development activities taking place in Bethel. The City of Bethel has been funded through the RE Fund round 1 for a 400 kW wind
project. To date the City and utility have not reached an agreement for power purchase or interconnection. Additionally, Village Wind Power is funded under round 0 to assess feasibility
of a large scale wind power project. Napakiak Incinraq Power Company is proposing reconnaissance through design of a wind project. TDX, who state they are assuming ownership of the
Bethel utility in summer 2011, has proposed feasibility through construction of a 1+ MW wind system on the Bethel grid. Finally AVCP Regional Housing Authority is proposing study of
hydro at the Kiseralik and Chikuminuk Rivers in Round 2 of the RE Fund. Therefore, there is a need for a regional integrated resource energy plan in the Bethel area to coordinate when
and where energy projects should be developed. This proposal should be considered in the context of an integrated plan to assure proper sizing, timing, and integration of multiple
energy projects. AEA believes that such an overall plan for the Bethel power system should be developed before proceeding with any additional wind development.
AEA has met with City of Bethel, AVCP Rural Housing Authority, Yukon Kuskokwim Health Corporation, Calista Corporation and TDX to discuss regional energy planning, including wind and
hydro development. The group has agreed to pursue coordinated energy planning for the region and the Bethel grid.
AEA believes that Bethel?s large load provides the opportunity for deploying megawatt scale turbines with better economics than smaller-scale wind installations. TDX, as the major power
generator for the Bethel system, is the logical entity to lead feasibility assessment of wind generation in Bethel.
Recommend no funding.
Kootznoowoo Inc proposes a 1+ MW run-of-river hydroelectric project and 6.7 mi transmission project to supply the community of Angoon. Kootznoowoo has supplied seperate applications
for each of the projects. AEA is lumping the two project proposals together for the purposes of evaluation.
The application includes a letter of support from local utility Inland Passage Electrical Coop (IPEC). Kootznoowoo has received a grant $1,110,500 from USDOE for preconstruction activities.
Project appears to be a promising source of renewable energy for the community of Angoon. Special legislation (ANILCA Section 506) has granted Kootznoowoo, Inc..certain rights for
development of a hydroelectric facility at Thayer Creek and has simpliifed the permitting for the project. The project is only six miles from Angoon and closely matches Angoon\'s
energy requirements.
Recommend partial funding of $1,060,500 for completion of all preconstruction activities, including final design and permitting (culminating in the issuance of the USFS Special Use Authorization
for the project) with the provisions that prior to releasing any AEA grant funds: 1) Kootznoowoo and IPEC must provide a written joint report acceptable to AEA that documents the integration
of project design and operation with the needs of the existing IPEC system, 2) Kootznoowoo and IPEC must finalize an MOU that defines a viable business arrangement and will include
intent to sign a cost-based power sales agreement..
City of Ouzinkie proposes resource assessment, feasibility analysis, final design and permitting, and construction of a wind energy project. The applicant requests that AEA manage the
project. Currently Ouzinkie generates over half of its power from a hydro project with limited storage capacity that is used also for the community\'s water supply.
AEA has the following concerns about this project:
1. The wind resource in the proposed site near the old airport is class 3 at 50 m based on the high-resolution wind map. DOTPF-collected wind data in the community measures a class
1 resource. The proposed site is surrounded by 80 ft trees which will likely obstruct wind flow to a project. For a project of this size wind hub height would be approximately 80
feet.
2. Given limited storage potential and water supply constraints at the hydro project it will be difficult and costly to displace the remaining diesel generation.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes recon, feasibility, design and construction of a 375 kW tidal energy project near Angoon. Project would include 3 125 kW vertical axis turbines mounted in a steel
frame. Technology would be supplied by Blue Energy and is still in development. The application provides little detail about the technology. AEA notes that another company, Natural
Currents Energy Ser, LLC., currently holds a preliminary FERC permit for a tidal energy project in this location. The permit will need to renewed by 2/28/2010.
Local utility Inside Passage Electrical Coop (IPEC) provides a letter of support to the project. Angoon Native Corporation Kootznoowoo Inc has submitted another application that proposes
power supply to Angoon--Thayer Lake hydroelectric (#517 and 523).
The reconnaissance phase of the project would develop tidal, bathymetric, and fisheries information that would be useful for siting any tidal energy project. Given the proposed development
of the Thayer Lk project, AEA believes it makes sense to limit funding to recon studies to assess resources, impacts, and economics before proceding to more in-depth development.
Recommend partial funding of $193,200 for reconnaissance assessment.
The City of Atka proposes to install dispatchable hydro energy units for electrical heating of city and school buildings and potentially the fish processing facility. AEA is currently
providing funding to complete construction of a 170 kW run-of-river hydro project at Chuniisax Creek (#58). The project is likely to be completed in 2011. This current proposal is
to use excess hydro energy that would otherwise be lost. It is not clear that the City proposes upgrading the electrical system as part of this project, which AEA believes may be necessary
.
AEA believes that using excess hydropower for heating in Atka is good idea. However,given the slow progress of the project to date AEA believes it is prudent to limit funding to final
design and permitting.
Recommend partial funding of $80,000 for final design and permitting with the provision that the scope of work includes any necessary upgrades to the distribution system.
Kotzebue Electric Association proposes final design and construction of a 1.8 MW expansion to its current 1.14 MW wind farm. The project would include a Premium Power Transflow 2000
flow battery system with 3.7 MWh of storage and ability to produce of 500 kW of power. This application follows from a similar earlier RE Fund round 1 application that was capped at
$4 million (#85). The $4 million in round 1 funding remains allocated to the project.
KEA submitted HOMER optimization model with the application. The application did not provide an assessment of alternative integration/storage options or wind data obtained from onsite
measurement.
KEA has recently upgraded their power system with new SCADA. This project is attractive because it will upgrade Alaska\'s first large-scale wind farm to a high-penetration system.
Recommend full funding with the condition that prior to the release of construction funds, the applicant must provide detailed final design, detailed construction budget, and detailed
integration plans based on empirical load and wind resource data for AEA\'s acceptance.
Combined with # 523 - See it for score and recommendations
AVEC proposes final design, permitting, and construction of a 900 kW wind project and intertie to serve the communities of St. Marys, Mountain Village, Pitkas Point, and Pilot Station.
AVEC requested funding for feasibility assessment for this project in Round 2 (#298). AEA recommended this project for funding; however there was not sufficient funding.
In 2009 AVEC continued with resource monitoring. Met towers between Pitkas and St Marys indicate a class 6 wind resource but also a potential problem with icing. AVEC plans to locate
another met tower near Mountain Village at a lower elevation. AVEC proposes to complete final design and permitting in November 2010 and commence construction in summer 2011. In November
2010 AVEC requests $2.6 million in funding to procure four 225 kW Vestas turbines and other integration equipment.
Feasibility and conceptual design are not yet complete.
Recommend partial funding of $446,400 for completing feasibility, final design, and permitting with the requirement that before final design funds are disbursed AEA accept resource assessment,
feasibility and conceptual design report.
AVEC proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and conceptual design of a wind system to supply New Stuyahok. AVEC requested funding of $117,610 for a
similar project in RE Fund round 2 (#301). AEA notes that the current project request of $142,500 for feasibility costing $150,000 has risen substantially in the current application.
However the revised cost appears consistent with AEA\'s experience for a project of this nature.
Recommend full funding.
AVEC proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and conceptual design of a wind system to supply Scammon Bay. AVEC requested funding of $117,610 for a
similar project in RE Fund round 2 (#299). AEA notes that the current project request of $142,500 for feasibility costing $150,000 has risen substantially in the current application.
However the revised cost appears consistent with AEA\'s experience for a project of this nature.
Recommend full funding.
AVEC proposes final design, permitting, and construction of a 300 kW wind farm that will serve the communities of Teller and Brevig Mission. AVEC has received funding from the Denali
Commission for the intertie connecting the two villages and funding from RE Fund round 2 for resource assessment and feasibility (#297). A met tower was erected in September 2009.
Preliminary wind resource assessment numbers based on Tier 3 wind mapping program output estimate a gross capacity factor of 16%.
Recommend partial funding of $240,300 for final design and permitting with the requirement that AEA accepts that wind resource data collected to date justifies continued project development.
AVEC proposes resource assessment, conceptual design, feasibility assessment, final design, permitting, and construction of a 300 kW project in Kivalina. AVEC is also interested in
assessing a wind project up to 3.3 MW in capacity and an intertie connecting Kivalina to the Delong Mountain Transportation System.
If the larger project is viable AVEC proposes establishing a power purchase agreement with Teck Alaska. The proposal includes a letter of support from NANA.
Recommend full funding.
AVEC proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and conceptual design of a wind system to supply Stebbins and St. Michaels. AVEC requested funding of $108,691
for a similar project in RE Fund round 2 (#301). AEA notes that the current project request of $142,500 for feasibility costing $150,000 has risen substantially in the current application.
However the revised cost appears consistent with AEA\'s experience for a project of this nature.
Recommend full funding.
Village Windpower LLC proposes feasibility, final design and construction of a 1 MW wind farm near Slana. A met tower would be erected in summer 2010 and collect data for one year.
Construction is scheduled to be completed in late 2011. The project would serve Slana, Chistochina, and Mentasta currently or soon-to-be connected by intertie.
Locating a met tower on state land will require access over AHTNA Inc. lands, currently under negotiation. AEA\'s high resolution wind map indicates that proposed project location is
in a class 2-3 wind resource.
Given the questionable wind resource AEA believes it is reasonable to collect met tower data before proceeding with further project development.
Recommend partial funding of $60,000 for wind resource assessment.
Applicant Baker Hughes (BHI) proposes to develop new technology that would modify existing Baker Hughes Centrilift H Series pumps currently used in Cook Inlet oil and gas platforms to
convert hydrokinetic to energy. The team would first develop a bench scale unit at UAF then test a 50 kW unit in the Tanana River. BHI would then use their own funding and resources
to test a 500 kW unit at the King Salmon Platform in Cook Inlet.
BHI is pledging to match $400,000 in RE Funds with $560,000 in private funds for the prototype development and initial demonstration. A substantial portion of BHI\'s investment would
be in survey and environmental assessment at the Cook Inlet site--information that would be useful to other projects.Input from NMFS would be sought for developing an aquatic life diverter.
Since there is no existing prototype technology risk is very high.
Recommend full funding.
TDX proposes to assess feasibility of developing wind, hydro, and geothermal resources for the Adak power system. The work is follow-on to an earlier RE Fund round 2 grant for reconnaissance
study (#315) which is not yet complete.
44% of the proposed funding is for avian interactions with wind development.
Recently Adak Fisheries closed its plant. However the application states that the processing facility may resume operation.
Recommend full funding with the requirements that 1) before round 3 funds are disbursed AEA accepts recon assessment findings that justify further project development and 2) before funding
for avian study is disbursed grantee must identify that further wind development requiring such study will be pursued.
Tatitlek IRA Council/Tatitlek Electric Company proposes final design, permitting, and construction of a 100 kW high-penetration wind system in Tatitlek. Currently the applicant is funded
for resource assessment and feasibility by RE Fund round 2 (#316). Tatitlek has secured federal funding of $900,000 for project development. Feasibility, final design, and permitting
is scheduled for completion in May 2011. Construction would commence in summer 2011.
Given that round 3 funding would not be expended until summer 2011, the applicant can reapply for RE Fund round 4 support in 2010.
Recommend no funding at this time.
TDX Power proposes to conduct field inventories of fish and wildlife populations and habitat on the west side of Cook Inlet. Additionally TDX proposes to conduct onsite assessment
of wind resource on the west foreland. Work would support potential development of Mt. Spurr geothermal, Chakachamna hydro, Beluga in situ coal gasification, and wind development at
the foreland.
These power generation projects have not been proven to be technically and economically viable. AEA has received RE Fund round 3 applications for resource assessment and field studies
for Mt Spurr (#477) and for feasibility and design of transmission to west Cook Inlet (#491). AEA is recommending round 3 funding for both projects. Railbelt IRP findings are favorable
for Mt. Spurr and Chakchamna projects.
Given the potential for interaction and overlap among project development in the area, AEA believes that it will be important for the proposed work to be coordinated closely with other
work in the vicinity.
The proposal is very general. It does not identify particular geographic locations, fish and wildlife issues, or development schemes. TDX proposes to begin work after receiving grant
funds in March 2010 and complete the final report by November 2010. This schedule appears unrealistic given funding availability, time constraints, the scale of the work, and the need
to consult with multiple landowners and resource agencies. The proposer requests $5 million from the grant program despite the state cap of $2 million indicated in the RFA.
Recommend partial funding of $2 million with the requirement that TDX submit a revised detailed scope, budget, and timeline consistent with the funding level provided.
Applicant TDX proposes to team with Voith Hydro Wavegen to assess NOAA wave resource data to expand an earlier report and choose three sites for technical, economic, and environmental
assessment for the purpose of further development. The work will result in sufficient info for TDX to apply to FERC for licensing on viable projects.
Voith\'s technology has been in use in the Scottish island of Islay for 8 years and is performing well. Another 300 kW project is scheduled to be commissioned in spring 2010 in Northern
Spain.
Since TDX has not chosen sites their application does not provide any preliminary information on O&M, capaciity, tie-in to existing system, siting and land ownership, fuel displacement,
or transmission issues.
Recommend full funding.
TDX Corporation proposes design and construction of the interconnection and integration of TDX\'s 675 kW wind farm and the City of Saint Paul\'s power system. TDX proposes to work with
the City to resolve a longstanding impasse on sales of wind power to the City. The application indicates that if TDX and the City cannot secure an agreement on power purchase terms
and conceptual design of modifications to the City power system, no funds will be requested.
Recommend full funding with the requirement that 1) before final design and construction funds are disbursed TDX and the City must finalize an agreement that addresses power purchase
terms and 2) before construction funds are disbursed the TDX and City must finalize an agreement on the design of modifications to the City power system.
Ocean Renewable Power Corporation proposes to permitting, final design and construction of a 1 MW array of proprietary cross-flow tidal instream electric conversion units for potential
scale-up to 5 MW. ORPC will complete conceptual design and feasbility analysis in March 2010. The units would use a gravity foundation on the bottom of Cook Inlet near Fire Island.
Currently the technology is under development in Maine. The proposer states that the most substantial challenges will be impacts on beluga, migrating fish, and sediment flow. Undersea
cable would bring power to shore. ORPC has obtained a preliminary FERC permit and prepared a request to FERC for pilot project license. Other permits will include ADFG fish habitat,
DNR water and subsurface use, Army Corps title 10, Coastal Zone, and Coast Guard navigational assessment. ORPC has developed a team of specialists that they state will address technical
and habitat issues.
ORPC proposes to pay for almost all of the design and permitting. RE Fund dollars would support construction. While AEA remains concerned about the risks associated with deploying
new technology, we note that the Alaska-based developers have assembled a credible project team and have invested substantially in developing the technology. Alaska has most of the
nation?s potential for tidal energy and it is logical for the state to support ocean energy technology development.
Recommend full funding with provision that before any funds are released AEA must accept the conceptual design and feasibility assessment.
Applicant IPEC proposes a staged assessment of geothermal resources of Tenakee Inlet Hot Springs consisting of field work in 2010 followed by exploratory drilling in the summer 2011.
DGGS notes that the hot spring is one of the hottest in Southeast Alaska suggesting a maximum capacity of less than 10 MW. From a resource assessment standpoint DGGS recommends exploration,
but at a lower priority than other locations in Alaska. The hot springs is located in a remote location on Tongass NF land and would require a special land use permit. Exploration
will be covered by a programmatic EIS, but it is likely that permitting will be a significant effort.
The hot springs is approximately 20 miles from Hoonah with no road access. Hoonah has also submitted an application to construct a hydro project at Gartina and Water Supply creeks.
The hot springs is approximately 10 miles from Pelican, which has a hydro resource that supplies all of its power.
The project represents an option for displacing the 350,000 gpy diesel consumption for power in Hoonah. At an estimated installed cost of $27 million not including transmission to Hoonah
or other infrastructure, however, project economics do not appear to be attractive.
AEA recommends full funding.
The City of Homer proposes reconnaissance assessment and feasibility analysis/conceptual design of a 250 kW hydrokinetic device in Kachemak Bay. This is a modified resubmittal of round
2 application #282 that was recommended for funding, but that was not funded due to limited funding. Homer has assembled a strong project team that includes a number of entities with
experience in assessing tidal energy feasibility and resources?NOAA?s Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services, Terrasond, and Re vision. There are letters of support
from the Native Village of Port Graham and the Seldovia Village Tribe who are also interested in the project. The application appropriately addresses potential wildlife impacts and
includes the involvement of ADFG. NOAA commits to $650,000 in in-kind project support.
We are concerned that Homer Electric Association, the likely power purchaser or owner of a potential project, is not included in the plan for implementing the feasibility stage in a
more concrete way.
Recommend full funding of $547,611.
City of Napaskiak requests funding for recon, feasibility study, resource assessment and conceptual design of a wind energy system.
In their application the City provides preliminary wind resource data based on AEA high-resolution wind maps, identifies four potential turbine manufacturers/models, and a potential
project site. Work would be contracted out to Marsh Creek LLC and completed in 2011-12.
Recommend full funding.
Tuntutuliak Community Services Association Electric Division, proposes to install a 5 kWh/500 kW Powerstore flywheel as a component of their 450 kW wind-diesel system. The proposed
project is essentially identical to two other applications for flywheels in Kwigillingok and Kongiganak(# 487 and 484). The wind system in Tuntutuliak is currently under design and
construction and funded in-part by RE fund round 2 (#273). The function of the proposed flywheel is to maintain power quality and stability by quickly supplying power to the system
when load or wind energy supply changes quickly. This allows the system to run less diesel capacity to supply the needed spinning reserve.
The HOMER optimization model that the utility used as a basis for assessment of system benefits was loosely based on Kongiganak\'s power system. HOMER modeling has no ability to evaluate
power quality. Therefore the true economic benefit of the system is difficult to determine. Despite the uncertain economic benefit, AEA considers flywheels as a promising technology
to increase the value of high penetration wind power. AEA recommends that one of the three proposed flywheel projects be funded as a demonstration. The other flywheel projects should
be reconsidered after the technology has been assessed.
Kongiganak has been selected as the best site for demonstration given that this project is furthest along in development and shows the highest benefit/cost ratio of the three proposals.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes funding for the construction of a wood-fired boiler system for the Kenny Lake School, with project completion by December 2010. The project is follow-up to RE Fund
project #46 which is being managed by AEA, currently under feasibility and design. Based on project work to date, pellets or cord wood are the feasibile wood fuels being considered.
Recommend full funding with requirement that final design indicates a viable project.
Applicant proposes funding to conduct the feasibility and conceptual design of a wood-fired heating system for K-12 school building and pool. The proposal provides a practical phased
approach for feasibility, design, and construction. The school district proposes to choose a project manager with the assistance of AEA.
Icy Straits Lumber and Milling provides a letter proposing to supply chips and hog fuel at $60 per green ton and the USFS indicates a committment to supply timber for long term fuel
supply.
Recommend full funding.
Independence Power LLC proposes conceptual design and feasibility assessment of 5.4 MW project on Independence Creek near the Seward Correctional Facility.
Independence Power received a grant for recon assessment from RE Fund round 1 (#86). A 55-page draft recon report was delivered to AEA in early December 2009.
Generally AEA agrees with the report\'s conclusions that further study is warranted.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes reconnaissance assessment for a potential 75 MW storage hydro project in the Knik River valley near Palmer.
Given the large scale of this project and complexity involved in management and financing, a business plan will need to be prepared as a part of the reconnaissance study which details
involvement of railbelt utilities and private developers. Also to be included in study will be a
determination of licensing barriers specific to this project. FERC accepted the preliminary permit application filed by Glacier Fork Hydro LLC on November 10. 2008.
DGGS notes that geotechnical studies will be very important since the project is in the vicinity of several faults. DLWM notes that project lays within the legislatively designated
Knik River Public Use Area, receives heavy recreational use, and may be subject to significant public opposition.
The project was recommended for further study in the Railbelt IRP in December 2009.
AEA notes that the proposal requests substantial funding for reconnaissance but is not broken into sub-phases with decision points.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before grant award is finalized grantee prepares a detailed project budget with go/no go milestones acceptable to AEA for inclusion into
grant document. Additionally requirement that stream gauging to be accomplished by USGS.
Bering Pacific proposes conceptual design and feasibility assessment of a 1.7 MW run-of-river hydro project at Archangel Creek near Hatcher Pass.
AEA requested the reconnaissance study for this project. In response AEA received a two-paragraph document. The document did not provide the required elements of a recon study listed
in the RFP.
Recommend no funding.
Chugach Electric Association proposes a multiphased approach toward developing electrical transmission on the west side of Cook Inlet to carry power from potential geothermal project
at Mt Spurr and a potential hydropower project at Lake Chakachamna. Phase 1 (feasibility) consists of preliminary design, route selection, and assessment of permit requirements. Phase
2 (final design) would consist of permits and rights-of-way, geotechnical and survey work, and final design.
Chugach Electric would complete feasibility activities in June 2011. Following feasibility, Chugach would complete final design activities in June 2013. The proposal provides only
a general description of project tasks and costs.
The two power generation projects have not been proven to be technically and economically viable. AEA has received RE Fund round 3 applications for resource assessment and field studies
for Mt Spurr (#xxx) and Lk Chakachmna (#505). AEA is recommending round 3 funding for both projects. Railbelt IRP findings are favorable for both projects.
AEA believes that the Greater Railbelt Energy and Transmission Corporation (GRETC) should ultimately be the owner of new transmission infrastructure such as this.
Since the two energy generation projects remain in the feasibility determination phase, AEA believes it is reasonable to provide funding for the proposed transmission project to completion
of the feasibility.
Recommend partial funding of $600,000 with the requirements that CEA prepares a more detailed scope and budget for AEA approval.
Port Graham Village Council proposes final design and construction of a project that would convert local biomass into 1.5 MW of power.
The Council has provided two feasibility documents: 1) An in-depth biomass alternatives report by University of North Dakota EERC which concludes that biodiesel and indoor wood boiler
technologies appear most viable. The report also addresses biomass gasification for distributed power production. 2) A brief preliminary design package by rem Engineering in Atlanta
that provides a schematic of a village district heating system for Port Graham and a generic drawing of a steam engine generator. There is no clear tie between the two documents.
AEA has the following concerns about the proposal:
1. The proposal is inconsistent with the findings of the EERC feasbility report in that it requests funding for a system that provides power to individual households for space heating--not
district heating as concluded by the report.
2. The main electrical load for the project appears to be residential space heating. Given conversion losses, the fuel-to-heat efficiency is low. This and the high system cost results
in unfavorable economics.
3. As pointed out in the application, the current distribution system will not support the planned loads and will require a 3-phase upgrade. Although local utility HEA is interested,
there is no funding available for the upgrade at this time.
4. Project development costs are high. The RE Fund RFA caps Railbelt grants at $2 million, but the proposal is for $3.3 million.
Recommend no funding.
Kwig Power Company, owned by the Native Village of Kwigillingok, proposes to install a 5 kWh/500 kW Powerstore flywheel as a component of their 450 kW wind-diesel system. The proposed
project is essentially identical to two other applications for flywheels in Tuntutuliak and Kongiganak(# 497 and 484). The wind system in Kwigillingok is currently under design and
construction and funded in-part by RE fund round 1 (#107). The function of the proposed flywheel is to maintain power quality and stability by quickly supplying power to the system
when load or wind energy supply changes quickly. This allows the system to run less diesel capacity to supply the needed spinning reserve.
The HOMER optimization model that Kwig Power used as a basis for assessment of system benefits was loosely based on Kongiganak\'s power system. HOMER modeling has no ability to evaluate
power quality. Therefore the true economic benefit of the system is difficult to determine. Despite the uncertain economic benefit, AEA considers flywheels as a promising technology
to increase the value of high penetration wind power. AEA recommends that one of the three proposed flywheel projects be funded as a demonstration. The other flywheel projects should
be reconsidered after the technology has been assessed.
Kongiganak has been selected as the best site for demonstration given that this project is furthest along in development and shows the highest benefit/cost ratio of the three proposals.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Pilot Point requests funding for design and construction of a high penetration wind project consisting of one 100 kW Northwind turbine to be sited on City land. Pilot Point
has operated a 10 kW Bergey turbine for 6 years. The City has consulted with USFWS and an archeologist to assess wildlife and historic/archaeological issues. There no indications that
permitting will be an issue.
AEA completed a power system upgrade in 2008 which facilitates wind integration. A diesel heat recovery system supplies the school.
Recommend full funding.
The City of Angoon proposes to conduct feasibility and conceptual design for FERC pre-licensing work on Scenery Lake hydro. The hydro project, a significant distance from the City,
will not be connnected to the Angoon system within the foreseeable future. The City of Angoon has also submitted an application #430 in Round 3 to conduct feasibility and conceptual
design for FERC pre-licensing work on Ruth Lake hydro. That hydro project, a significant distance from the City, will also not be connnected to the Angoon system within the foreseeable
future.
AEA believes that in order for a project of this type to be successful, there needs to be demonstrated buy-in from all regional stakeholders, including the City, SEAPA, IPEC, and Kotznoowoo.
There is no indication that the stakeholders listed have agreed to this concept. In particular on p22 the application indicates the City would sell power to the utilities of Petersburg
and Wrangell. However, there is no indication that these communities would purchase power from the project, nor descritption of a mechnism to flow the benefits of the project directly
to the ratepayers of Angoon.
Kootznoowoo is has submitted a proposal for Thayer Lake hydro (#517 and 523) that would serve the Angoon system, indicates a direct path for benefits to flow to Angoon ratepayers, and
has the support of the local utility IPEC.
Recommend full funding with the provision that prior to release of any funds, the applicant must 1) convene an in-state stakeholder meeting, 2) secure letters of support from SEAPA,
Thomas Bay Power Authority, and the cities of Petersburg, Wrangell, Kake, and Ketchikan, and 3) develop a process acceptable to AEA for benefits to flow to all affected ratepayers equally.
Puvurnaq Power Company, owned by the Native Village of Kongiganak, proposes to install a 5 kWh/500 kW Powerstore flywheel as a component of their 450 kW wind-diesel system. The proposed
project is essentially identical to two other applications for flywheels in Tuntutuliak and Kwigillingok (# 497 and 487). The wind system in Kongiganak is currently under design and
construction and funded in-part by RE fund round 1 (#110). The function of the proposed flywheel is to maintain power quality and stability by quickly supplying power to the system
when load or wind energy supply changes quickly. This allows the system to run less diesel capacity to supply the needed ?spinning reserve?.
AEA requested the HOMER optimization model that PPC used as a basis for assessment of system benefits. HOMER modeling has no ability to evaluate power quality. Therefore the true economic
benefit of the system is difficult to determine. Despite the uncertain economic benefit, AEA considers flywheels as a promising technology to increase the value of high penetration
wind power. AEA recommends that one of the three proposed flywheel projects be funded as a demonstration. The other flywheel projects should be reconsidered after the technology has
been assessed.
Kongiganak has been selected as the best site for demonstration given that this project is furthest along in development and shows the highest benefit/cost ratio of the three proposals.
Recommend full funding.
Kipuk Light and Power of the Chaninik Wind Group requests funding for construction of a high-penetration 675 kW wind farm consisting of 3 V27 turbines, 20 residential heaters, three
commercial electric boilers, and a 500 kW flywheel.
Chaninik is currently funded by the RE Fund for construction of similar wind systems in Kwigillingok, Tuntutuliak, and Kongiganak. Construction in Kong is planned to be completed in
winter 2010-11.
AEA believes that it makes sense to first prove out the system design at smaller scales (Kwigillingok, Kongiganak and Tuntutuliak) before moving to the scale and expense of this project.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes an RE Fund grant of $4 million to assess feasibility of constructing a 2000 MW tidal flow generator at the mouth of Turnagain Arm. The project would include three
arrays of vertical axis turbines and submarine interties connecting to Pt Possession on the Kenai Peninsula and Pt. Campbell in southwestern Anchorage.
AEA has the following concerns about the proposal:
1. Applicant proposes to deploy 200 10MW turbines from Blue Energy Canada. Currently Blue Energy\'s technology is in the pre-commercial stage. Blue Energy itself is proposing through
the RE Fund to develop a 375 kW pilot project to test the technology near Angoon (#520).
2. At $2.5 billion, the project has an extremely high capital cost. The applicant indicates a Chinese firm will finance $500 million. The applicant proposes to use $200,000 of RE
Fund dollars to prepare an application to USDOE to finance the remaining portion of the project.
3. The applicant requests $4 million in a low cost energy area that is capped at a maximum of $2 million.
No funding recommended.
Applicant proposes installing a pellet boiler heating system at the Alaska Divison of Forestry in Tok. Pellets would be supplied from local supplier(s). The proposal is attractive
in that it demonstrates the use of local renewable fuels in a state office building.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant (Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority) proposes to develop a wood fired and solar heating system for the Ionia Renenwable Energy Training Center. The Trust intends to act
as grantee/sponsor for this project and accepts responsibilities under RFA section 1.4 for ownership and control of the facilities. The applicant provides an unsigned draft resolution
to this effect.
Ionia has successfully developed a similar wood fired system that supplies heat and domestic hot water for the Community Long House.
Recommend full funding with requirement that before any funds are disbursed the Mental Health Trust and Ionia enter into an agreement acceptable to AEA which addresses details of ownership
and operation of the facility.
Alaska Power Company proposes construction of a 2MW wood gasification power generation system to serve the Tok area power system. The system includes a 30 mmBtu/hr Nexterra gasification
system and GE Jenbacher reciprocating generators. An important component of the proposed project is demonstration of an innovative gas clean up system.
APC has applied for a $10 million grant from USDOE and expects to be notified of results in early 2010. APC proposes to use USDOE funds and its own resources to complete feasibility/concept
design and permitting/final design during the first half of 2010.
AEA is strongly supportive of demonstrating the Nexterra/GE technology in Alaska. This proposal is particularly attractive because
1. APC has a good track record as a well-operated utility and a leader in renewable energy development in Alaska
2. APC, Nexterra, Tok Community Umbrella Corp and GE are offering a substantial cash and in-kind match to the project
3. Tok, located on the road system, is an excellent site for demonstration of a wood-fired biopower project
4. The upper Tanana Valley has a substantial wood resource and a number of sawmills in operation.
However, AEA notes that
1. Conceptual design and feasibility and final design and permitting have not been completed as required in the RE Fund RFA
2. The RE Fund is funding a significant wood energy project in Tok to supply the school with heat (#49). The current proposal indicates that public involvement and local meetings will
be held in the Tok area during preconstruction phases. However at this point there is no indication of coordination between the two projects.
3. APC is applying for construction funding for Yerrick Creek hydro which would also serve the Tok area.
4. Grant funding has not been committed by USDOE as of yet.
AEA recommends no funding at this time.
Kodiak Island Borough proposes to assess options for ground source heat pump, photovoltaic, solar thermal, and wind systems in conjunction with a planned addition and renovation of the
high school. KIB proposes a phased approach--systems options would be identified and narrowed in the reconnaissance phase with completion by October 2010, followed by more detailed
analysis in the feasbility phase.
AEA recommends partial funding of $38,100 for reconnaissance.
Ormat proposes a staged recon and assessment of the geothermal resources on Mt. Spurr, consisting of aeromagnetic gravity, electromagnetic geophysical surveys, field work, mapping, geochemcial
sampling, and drilling four temperature gradient and two slim holes. Work will begin in spring-summer 2010 and be completed by fall 2011.
AEA recommended against funding Ormat until reconnaisance field work was completed in 2009. Since then Ormat has completed this field work and proposes follow-up activities.
Based on the results of the proposed work, Ormat will decide whether to proceed to drilling production wells and further commercial development. Ormat anticipates a minimum installed
capacity of 50-100 MW.
DGGS review indicates that Ormat is one of the most highly experienced companies in the world and that the proposed stepwise approach is the best way to move toward potential development
of the Mt. Spurr resource. The AEA-sponsored Railbelt integrated energy resource plan identifies Mt. Spurr geothermal, if feasible, as a beneficial component of the Railbelt energy
system.
REcommend full funding with provision that all information resulting from the project will be available to the public.
Applicant proposes funding to install a biomass heating source and solar panels for the Assisted Living Facility for elders in Tanana, the Tanana Tribal Offices and the Internet high
tech training center in Tanana. The project would replicate the successful wood fired boiler system at the washeteria.
The economics of the photovoltaic system are not favorable. AEA estimates that the $80,000 cost of the photovoltaic system would displace approximately 800 gallons of diesel per year.
Recommend partial funding of $412,642 for the biomass portion of the project.
Eklutna Inc proposes recon assessment of a 6.5+MW hydro project on Hunter Cr. The project would include a 13,000 ft cross-basin pipeline, 8,000 ft penstock, and 26 miles of transmission.
DNR DMLW questions that Eklutna owns the land as stated in the application. If BLM owns the land this project falls under FERC jurisdiction. DNR also notes this is popular recreation
area and the project may garner public opposition.
Recommend full funding.
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility proposes to construct a 190 kW run-of-river hydro project on Packers Creek. AEA has awarded $150,000 to the utility for feasibility and final design. Final
design and permitting is not yet complete, and is expected in "mid-2010".
Funding not recommended since final design and permitting are not yet complete.
Applicant proposes recon study of developing hydro projects in four side drainages of Resurrection Valley near Hope totalling 7 MW.
All projects would be on USFS land, likely require FERC licensing, and be located in an area used frequently for recreation. DNR DLWM expects substantial public comment during permitting.
Recommend full funding.
Bering Pacific proposes conceptual design and feasibility assessment of a 1.5 MW run-of-river hydro project at Eska Creek near Sutton.
AEA requested the reconnaissance study for this project. In response AEA received a one-paragraph document. The document did not provide the required elements of a recon study listed
in the RFP.
Recommend no funding.
Bering Pacific proposes assessing conceptual design and feasibility of a 1.2 MW run-of-river hydro project at Virgin Creek near Girdwood.
AEA requested the reconnaissance study for this project. In response AEA received a four-page document that included a vicinity map, a photo of the creek, a simulated flow duration
curve, and an estimated power output profile. The document did not substantially provide the required elements of a recon study listed in the RFP, including anticipated project alternatives,
barriers to project development, environmental screening addressing issues and impacts, land use restrictions, access to the site, adequately supported cost estimate, and basic economic
analysis of alternatives,
Recommend no funding.
The City of Akutan requests funding for continuing with geothermal resource assessment in Hot Spring Bay Valley. AEA awarded Akutan $2,595,000 of RE Fund round 2 funding geothermal
assessment (#249). Following quotes from drilling and helicopter contractors, however, Akutan has determined that their earlier proposal, based on AEA\'s statewide Geothermal Cost
Matrix was overly optimistic. The current proposal asks for additional funds for drilling up to four slim hole wells.
AEA has requested and received documentation of the additional costs of the drilling program and finds they are reasonable. DGGS recommends continued support.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant City of Akutan requests funding for repair of 105 kW hydro project at Town Creek. Work would include upgrading the existing access road, repairs to the intake, rebuilding
the hydro turbine, providing hydro maintenance equipment and storage building, and upgrading the system controls. AEA has awarded round 2 funding for final design and permitting and
notes that $64,000 has not been spent from the current grant.
Recommend full funding with the provision that any funds remaining after completion of permitting and final design from round 2 will be returned for reallocation to other grantees.
UAF ACEP proposes funding for 10 2.4 kW wind turbines to be located in Palmer, Kodiak, St. Paul, Pt. Hope, Dillingham, Togiak, Kwigillingok, Kongiganak, Unalakleet, and Gambell through
the NREL-organized Wind for Schools program.
The primary focus of the program is education--not power production. Through its wind energy development program AEA has pledged up to $36,000 for program activities in non-RE Fund
dollars to match federal funding if ACEP is awarded competitive grants.
While many of these communities have a good wind resource, the turbines are small and will be located near the school where wind resources tend to be poorer. It is expected that only
a portion of the power generated will offset diesel. Thus economics are expected to be marginal to poor.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes assessing feasibility of retrofitting existing coal-fired power system at UAF with biomass or biomass/coal fuel and studying other related waste to energy technologies.
AEA believes the proposal is viable for the following reasons:
- potential for substantial displacement of fossil resources with renewables.
- has potential to utilize unrecyclable waste, extending the life of landfills.
- applicant has the technical capabilities and resources to conduct a successful project.
Recommend full funding.
UAF proposes to assess geothermal resources at Pilgrim Hot Springs through refurbishing existing shallow wells and drilling deep wells. This is a resubmittal of a RE Fund round 2 proposal
(#258) that was recommended for funding, but which did not receive funding due to limits. In October 2009 USDOE notified UAF that the university\'s proposal for exploration was accepted
subject to negotiation. USDOE funding requires a minimum 20% nonfederal match for exploration and a 50% match for confirmation drilling.
The Nome Energy Study identified development of the Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal resource as the least-cost option for long-term power supply. The applications includes letters of
support from Nome Joint Utilities and Mary\'s Igloo Native Council (the owner of the adjacent land). DGGS indicates support for the project (see above). The application also includes
a support letter from landowner Catholic Church Diocese of Fairbanks. In December 2009 AEA learned that the Chuch plans to sell the land.
Recommend full funding with the provision that prior to the disbursement of funds, UAF confirm legal access to the resource with the new landowner.
Applicant Ruby Tribal Council proposes to partner with UAF to conduct assessment of Horner and Melozi hot springs geothermal resources using infrared imagery and aerial photos. The
sites are more than 30 miles from Ruby and located on the other side of the Yukon River from Ruby.
DGGS comments: "This study has the objective ?to determine the potential extent and amount of the energy resource that is available? at Melozi Hot Springs. However, the only data that
are proposed to be collected and analyzed are remotely sensed (satellite and airborne), along with ?limited field validation?. The proposal also outlines an economic feasibility study
of ?developing the resource?. Satellite and airborne visible and infrared data are necessarily restricted to surface evaluation, where emerging geothermal fluids cool by mixing with
surface waters and by conduction and convection. Surface temperatures underestimate reservoir temperatures by an unpredictable amount. For evaluation of the geothermal resource the
reservoir itself must be characterized in terms of volume, temperature, depth, porosity, and permeability (i.e. the temperature and sustainable rate of production of fluids need to
be known). This proposal should be considered a minimal first step in acquiring the data necessary to evaluate Melozi as a geothermal resource. Not recommended for funding at this
time."
No funding recommended.
AVCP Regional Housing Authority proposes to construct a 200 kW wind energy project to serve their campus in Bethel. AVCP would first purchase land from the City of Bethel for $670,000
in late 2010, and begin equipment purchase and construction in spring 2011.
AEA has the following concerns about this proposal:
1. The feasibility study that is provided is not adequate as a basis for proceeding to design and construction. It does not include a conceptual design, detailed cost estimate, a conceptual
business and operation plan, or site-specific assessment of the wind resource.
2. The application appears to be structured based on net metering. The RFA requires that an IPP sell all of its power to the certificated utility. There is no indication provided
in the application that Bethel Utilities will purchase power from the project.
3. AEA notes that the City of Bethel has been funded through the RE Fund round 1 for a 400 kW wind project. To date the City and utility have not reached an agreement for power purchase
or interconnection.
4. The economics of the project are poor with a B/C ratio of less than 0.5.
Recommend no funding.
Yakutat Power proposes to collaborate with Electric Power Research Institute to perform final design / permitting of a 650 kW demonstration wave energy project. EPRI and Yakutat have
completed reconnaissance and feasibility work with their own funding. During the final design and permitting stage Yakutat proposes to conducting siting studies, cost optimization,
environmental studies and permitting, and prepare a detalied civil, mechanical, and electrical design. The team will utilize the Aquamarine Oyster technology.
AEA recommended funding for a similar scope of work in round 2. We remain concerned at the high cost and high risk of demonstrating new technology. However, Yakutat and EPRI have put
together a strong team and are conducting a logical, staged development that minimizes risk. Alaska has substantial potential for wave energy and it is logical for the state to support
ocean energy technology development.
Recommend full funding.
Inside Passage Electric Coop proposes final design and permitting and the initial construction phase for 1.3 MW of run-of-river hydro development at Water Supply and Gartina creeks.
IPEC anticipates that work will include FERC licensing and NEPA review.
Phase 3 final design and permitting is expected to be complete July 2012.
Recommend partial funding of $850,000 for final design and permitting.
Ugashik Traditional Village proposes to partner with Boschma Research Inc to deploy 1 kW residential-scale Stirling generators on heating systems of five houses and the community center.
AEA requested the feasibility analysis for the proposed project. In response BRI provided a one-page email message that provided links to generic technology description websites.
BRI indicates in the proposal that the proposed units are in the technology development phase.
Recommend no funding.
AVTEC proposes refurbishing the 100 kW Marathon Cr hydro project, currently mothballed, to serve as a hydro training facility for AVTEC. The City of Seward would transfer ownership
to AVTEC, an agency within Alaska Dept of Labor . AVTEC would not sell power to the Railbelt grid.
Recommend full funding.
The City of Kotzebue proposes a recon study of using TGER (Tactical Garbage to Energy Refinery) technology under development by the U.S. Army. The unit is packaged in a shipping container,
shreds garbage, soaks it in water, pumps sludge into a bioreactor, converts a portion of the waste stream into ethanol, and pelletizes the remaining solids. Pellets are in turn gasified.
Gas is fed into a recip diesel generator and converted into power.
AEA recommended $15,000 in funding for recon in Round 2, However, funding limitations resulted in zero dollars going to the project. Current proposal requests $1.6MM recon through commissioning.
The first phase of recon and feasibility requests $80,000.
Prototype testing in Iraq by the US Army was not continued. There are no other operating units of this technology. There has been no testing of the technology in the arctic, and there
is no O&M data.
This system is complex, and AEA questions whether there are more suitable, simpler systems that would achieve the same aims of waste reduction and energy (such as a modular incinerator
with stack heat recovery).
AEA believes that there is insufficient justification to assume that a prototype tested in Iraq can be successfully translated into an arctic environment without substantial research
and development. However, AEA recognizes the substantial need for systems to deal with waste in rural areas. Recommend partial funding for recon and feasibility for $80,000.
The applicants request funding for construction for a 4.8 MW expansion of a wind farm at or near the Tesoro refinery in Nikiski above the 9.6 MW that being funded by RE Fund round 2
dollars. The applicants are requesting $4 million in additional grant funds, twice the maximum funding that was stated in the round 3 request for applications.
As noted in AEA\'s round 2 comments, the project will affect not only HEA but other Railbelt utilities. The 14.4 MW project is included in the draft Railbelt Integrated Resource Plan
base case "preferred resource plan".
Recommend partial funding of $2 million with the following grant conditions: 1) applicant is required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic
rate regulation prior to release of construction funds, 2) establish a cost-based power purchase agreement with HEA or other public utility prior to release of construction grant funds.
Applicant proposes design and construction of a 10 kW modular biomass/solar thermal combined heat and power system. The system consists of a GARN WHS 1500 biomass boiler, solar thermal
collectors, and organic Rankine cycle units packaged in a shipping container to be located at Chena Hot Springs. The project is designed for potential use in rural communities.
Given the substantial project development costs, the proposal lacks sufficient design basis for AEA to recommend full funding for final design and construction.
Recommend partial funding of $67,325 with equal match for refinement of conceptual design and feasibility.
Chena Power is proposing funding for final design, permitting and construction of an ORC system utilizing waste heat from the North Pole Refinery to produce electricity for the refinery.
AEA requested the following information from the applicant:
1 Willingness of Chena Power to sell power from the project to the local certificated utility, GVEA. This is required in order for the proposer to be eligible as an IPP.
2. Detailed feasibility analysis
3. Comprehensive risk assessment
4. Letters of committment from Flint Hills for supplying waste heat from the refinery, or the status of reaching such an agreement
Chena Power indicated that it was willing to sell power to GVEA.
Chena Power did not provide AEA with a feasibility analysis that addresses the requirements of the RFA including conceptual system and integration design or comprehensive financial and
economic analyses. The applicant also did not address AEA\'s request for information on waste heat availability. AEA notes that Chena Power requested $3.907,500 in a Railbelt location
eligible for grant funding up to $2 million. Although AEA believes this project has substantial merit as a demonstration of promising technology, the applicant has not provided enough
information to justify proceeding to design and construction.
Recommend no funding.
Chenega Corporation/IRA Council propose final design and permitting of a 90 kW run-of-river hydro project on Anderson Cr. The feasibility study, completed by HDR Inc, was funded by
the Denali Commission under the joint AEA/Denali Commission Alt Energy RFP.
There is potential for construction cost-share with a penstock replacement for the water supply.
Recommend full funding.
Naknek Electric Association requests $15 million to match approximately $20 million of federal and local funds for geothermal drilling, characterization, and testing activities for developing
a 25 MW geothermal plant. Naknek plans to develop an Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) that would involve drilling two production wells, creating a fracture system and geothermal reservoir,
injecting surface waters through the hot, fracture rock and pumping the heated water to the surface.
This project represents a revised approach to a previous proposal to round 1 of the RE Fund (#8).
DGGS comments:
"This project has changed dramatically in presentation since Round I. The applicant now anticipates (quite correctly) a normal geothermal gradient and that the resource will be created
using EGS (Enhanced Geothermal System) techniques. EGS involves drilling into warm or hot rock and artificially creating a fracture system with sufficient volume to host a geothermal
reservoir; surface waters are then injected and heated by contact with the country rock; finally the heated waters are brought to the surface, the contained heat energy extracted and
used, and the waters reinjected. EGS is not a mature technology. There are a few developmental demonstration projects in the world, but none produce electricity in the megawatt range,
and none approach economic viability. (In addition, there are earth process which work against the probability of producing an engineered reservoir with the high volume, porosity and
permeability necessary to host a geothermal reservoir). Because EGS is unproven despite decades of investigation the probability of success of this project is extremely low.
Additionally, at the normal geothermal gradient that the proposers anticipate, temperatures of only about 300F are accessible at 14,000? ? lower than the 390F reservoir temperatures
at known high-temperature resources such as Makushin, yet higher than the temperature of fluids at Chena Hot Springs. The total amount of electricity that can be extracted from a geothermal
system is directly limited by the difference in temperature between the hot and cold reservoirs. It is unclear if the 25MW described can be produced from a single injection/production
doublet.
Finally, it is known that current activity at the proposed site is well under way and that a significant amount of new subsurface data has been gathered. These un-interpreted data would
be critical for the reviewers to make further determination of the geothermal potential and make a more informed decision. Nevertheless, given that EGS continues to be in a research
phase and is an unproven technology at the scale proposed for this project, and that no new information is presented by this proposal to substantiate the existence of a viable geothermal
resource at the proposed site, the reviewer suggests the current proposal should not be funded."
No funding recommended.
Applicant proposes seawater heat pump to supply Alaska Sea Life Center for space heating.
Application includes a complete feasibility analysis that assesses three options for heat pump systems. Denali Commission Emerging Energy Technology grant funds are providing $426,720
of the total project capital cost of $713,300. The project appears to be highly economic and a good demonstration of a technology applicable to coastal Alaska.
Recommend full funding.
CVEA proposes recon assessment of a 15 MW storage hydro at Silver Lake. Silver Lk was studied in the 1980s and 90s and was not pursued further due to poor economics and fish habitat
issues. The project, however, would provide substantial amounts of energy--4 times the output of Alison Lk hydro, currently under development by CVEA.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant is proposing a renewable energy recon, feasibility and conceptual design to utilize solar and wind energy within the Mat-Su Borough. The energy would supply existing and
planned public facilities in the borough.
Recommend funding the first step of the project to assess available renewable energy resources for commercial development and preliminary economics. Recommend partial funding only for
the "resource identification and analysis" portion of the project for $75,000.
Metlakatla Indian Community proposes assessing feasiblity of a 4 MW storage hydro project at Triangle Lk. Improved access to the proposed hydro site by recent road construction to
Walden Point makes hydro development more reasonable to consider at this site. Project would be located on federal trust land. Major issue remains a market for power, which should be
assessed in an regional IRP.
Because the project would connect to the SEAPA grid that has numerous existing and proposed alternatives for generation and transmission, AEA concludes that there is insufficient information
provided to do an economic analysis.
Recommend full funding.
Metlakatla Indian Community proposes funding for constructing an 18 mile intertie that connects the Metlakatla and Ketchikan power systems. Permitting and design were funded by RE Fund
round 1 (#20).
The application provides no indication of a power sale agreement with Ketchikan Public Utility.
MIC is requesting over $6.3 million for financing the balance of the project. The proposal does not recognize the maximum funding of $2 million and no other indication of how the balance
of the project would be financed.
Because the project would connect to the SEAPA grid that has numerous existing and proposed alternatives for generation and transmission, AEA concludes that there is insufficient information
provided to do an economic analysis.
While there appear to be few technical and permitting barriers for project development, market for hydropower remains questionable with the recent completion of the Swan-Tyee intertie.
AEA believes that an integrated energy resource plan is necessary for assessing generation and transmission alternatives in SEAPA grid communities and Metlakatla before allocating
additional public funds for phases 3 and 4--final design, permitting and construction in this subregion.
AEA recommends funding in the amount of $2,000,000.
AEA recommends special provisions be associated with this grant as follows: (1) Before any grant funds can be disbursed, MIC is to submit to AEA for its review and approval, a power
sales agreement between MIC and KPU which clarifies the terms, conditions, rates and amount of power for this intertie; (2) Demonstrate completion of all preconstruction activities
including final design documents and final construction cost estimate; and (3) Demonstrate project site control, including required easements and Rights-of-way, NEPA requirements
and all permits needed to construct have been issued.
The City of St Paul is proposing funding for the puchase and installation of a replacement generator and the extension of the existing heating loop for the utility facilities.
The replacement of the generator does not qualify for Renewable Energy Funding. See economist description of allocation between genset and heat recovery costs.
Recommend partial funding of $98,149 for the design and installation of the heat recovery loop.
The City of Tenakee proposes final design and permitting of a 120 kW run-of-river hydro project at Indian River. Funded by the DC/AEA alternative energy grant program, the City has
completed a feasibility assessment for this project. The project would be located on state and city land.
In round 1 AEA recommended against funding final design and permitting before a subregional energy plan that addressed systems in Tenakee, Hoonah, and Pelican was prepared. Hoonah is
pursuing hydro development in nearby projects, while Pelican is upgrading its existing hydro project. Given these circumstances and the long distances between these comunities, AEA
sees no reason to delay consideration of a hydro project in Tenakee further.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes final design and permitting of a hydro project at Crooked Creek. Feasibility study was already funded by DC/AEA alternative energy RFP. Project site on USFS land,
indicating FERC license will be required. AEA has constructed a power and bulk fuel system under the RUS energy program. Hiring engineering firm underway.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA approve the feasibility study now underway before any funds associated with this application are disbursed.
Applicant is proposing funding for the construction of a wood chip fired district heating system. The application includes a conceptual design report. There is an existing RE Fund
grant for final design work and business plan development.
This is a community wood heating system that combines wood harvest and transport, combustion, district heating and energy sales. AEA remains concerned about the project\'s complexity
and risks. However, these risks are somewhat mitigated by a strong project team and the project\'s phased development under AEA\'s oversight. It is very important that provisions
be included in the business plan to account for the operation and maintenance of the proposed system.
Recommend full funding contingent on completion of an acceptable final design and business plan.
AP&T proposes feasibility assessment, permitting and final design for a 300 kW hydro project at Carlson Cr. that would serve Slana and Chistochina. This is a continuation of a project
funded in round 2 (#226). AEA has concerns about long penstock and the potential for the project to match resource to load. Flashy stream may increase risk to long term success of
project.
Recommend partial funding of $240,000 for feasibility assessment (phase 2) with provision that AEA must approve of recommendations for continued development from recon report before
any funds are disbursed.
AP&T proposes recon and feasibility analysis of developing a 400 kW two-basin tidal energy project in Port Frederick to serve Hoonah.
Permitting risk appears high due to limiting inflow and outflow of the marine basins. Due to high estimated development costs and relatively low energy generation, project economics
are not compelling. Project would result in developing a single lane road and a submarine intertie to the project from Hoonah.
Recon would begin in summer 2010 while feasibility work would largely be completed during summer and fall of 2011.
Recommend partial funding of $64,000 for reconnaisance assessment.
AP&T proposes funding feasibility of developing a 6 MW storage hydro project at Schubee Lake. AP&T has not prepared a formal reconnaissance assessment of the project that meets requirements
of the RFA. AP&T is responding to a level of public opposition to developing another hydro site at Connelly Lk. AEA is recommending feasibility funding for Connelly Lk (#437).
AEA has the following concerns with Schubee Lk: 1) it is located on USFS lands and would be subject to FERC licensing, 2) it has a higher relative cost with less energy output than
Connelly, 3) it would require an expensive submarine cable.
AEA recognizes the importance for the Haines Borough citizens to make informed decisions regarding development of alternative hydro locations. However we believe that sufficient information
for determining the development path can be achieved by more limited analysis.
Recommend partial funding of $80,000 for reconnaissance assessment with the provision that AP&T must provide a revised scope of work for approval by AEA before funds are disbursed.
AP&T proposes to progress to final design, permitting, and construction of a run-of-river 124 kW hydro project at Neck Lake. The project would result in displacing virtually all of
the diesel used for power generation in Whale Pass. RE Fund round 2 (#223) provided $108,000 for feasibility analysis, scheduled for completion in Fall 2010. Permitting and final
design would be completed by Summer 2011, while construction would be completed in 2012.
The current application clarifies an earlier concern that the project was located on USFS land.
Recommend partial funding of $90,000 for permitting and final design with the provision that before funds are disbursed AEA must approve of feasibility recommendations for further development.
Alaska Power Company (APC), a subsidiary of Alaska Power and Telephone (AP&T) proposes funding for the transmission portion of the 5 MW Reynolds Creek hydropower project. Haida Energy,
a joint venture of AP&T and Haida Corp would own the project and sell power on a wholesale basis to APC, the certificated utility on Prince of Wales (PoW) Island.The following grant
allocations totaling $4.1 million have been made for the Reynolds Creek project:1) $100,000 of Denali Comm funds to Haida Corp through the Denali Commission / AEA alternative energy
RFP2) $1 million in RE fund round 1 funds to Haida Corp3) $1 million in RE fund round 1 funds to Haida Power, a joint venture between APC and Haida Corp4) $2 in legislative appropriation
to Southeast ConferenceThe project will be dispatched in conjunction with AP&T\'s existing Black Bear Lk and South Fork hydro projects. Previous applications state that Reynolds Creek
hydro will only be used after the existing hydro projects are fully dispatched. An extension of PoW tranmission to the northern portion of island has been funded by the Denali Commission
and RE Fund round 1.For the purposes of proposal evaluation and management of all state funds, AEA considers the transmission and generation components of the project as one project.Recommend
full funding with the following grant conditions: Before any construction grant funds are disbursed: 1) APC, AP&T, Haida Corp, Haida Power, Haida Energy, and Southeast Conference
must enter into a master agreement that addresses overall fiscal responsibility for the project, disposition of all public grant funds, project debt and equity financing, and project
development, operation and maintenance responsiblities, 2) all final design documents, permits, rights-of-way, and FERC license must be in place, 3) all financing for the transmission
and generation portions of the project must be in place, 4) the grantee must establish a power purchase agreement acceptable to AEA, based on cost-based rate methodology that demonstrates
that benefits of public funds flow to the ratepayers, 5) project owner will be required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity.
AP&T proposes permitting, final design and construction of a 2 MW run-of-river hydro project at Yerrick Cr to serve the communities of Tok, Dot Lake, Tanacross, and Tetlin. Permitting
and final design would be completed in Spring 2010, before funding would be available from the current round of RE funding. The project would result in 20 miles of 3-phase transmission.
AP&T has received a total of $1.75 million from Denali Commission and RUS that will cover final design, permitting, and a portion of construction. If AP&T receives $4 million in round
3 RE Fund support, they would still need to find financing for the remaining $8.725 million.
AP&T is also requesting $4.5 million for construction of a wood-fired power system that would serve the same grid (#479). Similar to Yerrick Cr hydro, AP&T plans to complete final design
before state fy11 begins and round 3 RE funding is available. If AP&T receives $4 million in round 3 RE Fund support, they would still need to find financing for the remaining $16
million of the total project cost of $20 million.
In round 1 AEA recommended against funding this project because local land owner Tanacross Inc had indicated unwillingness to provide legal access for field investigations. Over the
last year AP&T reached a temporary agreement with Tanacross to allow field work. However there remains no permanent agreement with Tanacross to use Tanacross land for the project.
Doyon owns subsurface rights on non-state land.
Recommend funding for construction with provision that no funds are disbursed until AP&T provides evidence of ROWs and other development rights with Tanacross, Doyon, DNR and other resource
owners.
Applicant proposes feasiblity study and final design/permitting for a 12 MW storage hydro project. An IRP is desirable for the Skagway, Haines, Klukwan area before proceeding to final
design and construction for these projects. AP&T is also proposing recon and feasibility study of Schubee Lk hydro project (#441) in response to local input.
Existing recon study proposes a substantially smaller 6 MW project which impounds less water than the current proposal. Project may require intertie and road access across the Chilkat
Bald Eagle Reserve if it is not feasible to route through the Haines State Forest. Application includes March 09 letter from BLM indicating land has been transferred to State of Alaska,
thus reducing likelihood of FERC jusidiction. Power sales/benefits limited to offset of diesel costs and air pollution during summer cruise ship landings in Haines and Skagway. Seasonal
power production would limit year-round availability.
Recommend $428,000 partial funding for Phase 2 feasibility study with scope per application with provision that land issues and licensing jurisdiction question be resolved with go/no-go
points established.
Applicant proposes recon assessment and hydrological resource assessment of a hydro project at Tanalian River near Pt. Alsworth. Overall project site is within the national park, which
will result in permitting challenges. Letters of support from National Park Service, Lake and Pen Borough and others are included in the the application. However the letters refer
to a hydrokinetic type of project-- a significant departure from micro-hydro typeof project written in the application; this demonstrates some confusion. Application Project management
structure is not well-documented in the application and will require further clarification if this project receives funding.
Recommend full funding with the provision that AEA must approve further work after milestone 2 (Resource Identification and Analysis Report).
Nushagak Coop is seeking to develop a 2.7 MW hydro project at Grant Lake and a 1.7 MW hydro project at Lake Elva as part of their Nushagak Area Hydro Project (NAHP). Nushagak has submitted
two applications in earlier RE Fund rounds:
1) AEA has awarded $300,000 in round 1 funding for recon and feasibility assessment of the 1.7 MW Lake Elva project , and has allocated an additional $3.9 million for further development
activities (#6).
2) AEA recommended against funding permitting, final design and construction of Grant Lk (#204) because Nushagak did "not provide adequate justification to proceed to final design and
construction".
AEA has provided $25,000 to Nushagak toward an integrated energy resource plan (IRP) for the Dillingham and Aleknagik grid. The plan will address wind energy, hydro and other alternatives
for energy production. The Lake Elva grant requires that this IRP be completed and approved by AEA before funds are made available for permitting and final design.
The current application requests $20 million in funding for recon, feasibility, final design, permitting, and construction of the Grant Lake project and a 60-mile intertie to Aleknagik
and on to Dillingham. The proposed RE Fund request represents 40% of the $49.5 million Grant Lake portion of NAHP. AEA believes there remains inadequate justification for providing
funding for final design, permitting, and construction at this time.
Nushagak and their contractor have completed recon and preliminary feasibility work on the NAHP. Additional work needs to be done, including stream gauging, geotechnical assessment,
detailed economic and financial analysis of alternatives, and field studies to support future potential permitting activities.
Recommend partial funding of $700,000 for completion of feasibility activities with the provision that funds will not be disbursed until IRP is approved by AEA. AEA recommends that
$700,000 of the remaining round 1 funds be made available for these purposes.
Valdez Fisheries Development Association is requesting funding for permitting and final design of a system to convert recovered heat from the Petrostar Refinery to 630 kW of power to
the CVEA grid, refrigeration to a cold storage and fish processing facility, and tempered water to the Solomon Gulch Hatchery. VFDA submitted a related application in RE Fund round
2 (#207) that was not recommended for funding because it was for the entire cold storage facility, not the energy system. The current application limits the scope to the energy system.
VFDA has not yet secured financing for the cold storage facility that justifies the absorption system.
AEA contacted VFDA to confirm that it is willing to sell to the CVEA grid in order to be eligible as an IPP. AEA also requested confirmation that Petrostar will provide heat to VFDA.
VFDA did not provide the confirmation. VFDA provided a feasibility analysis for the absorption chilling portion of the project, but was unable to provide a similar analysis for the
ORC power generation component.
The project has substantial value for demonstrating a system that would aid development of fish processing and cold storage in coastal communities with access to recoverable heat.
Recommended full funding with the requirement that prior to disbursing funds, VFDA provide a more detailed breakdown of the design budget and a long-term agreement with Petrostar.
Applicant proposes feasibility, design, and construction of a 60 kW wind project in the vicinity of Seldovia that would be connected to the Railbelt grid.
Preliminary economic analysis indicates a low benefit to cost ratio. AEA does not find other significant public benefits that would result from project development.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes feasibility, design, and construction of a 30 kW wind project in the vicinity of Eagle River that would be connected to the Railbelt grid.
Preliminary economic analysis indicates a low benefit to cost ratio. AEA does not find other significant public benefits that would result from project development.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes feasibility, design, and construction of a 21 kW wind project in the vicinity of Tyonek that would be connected to the Railbelt grid.
Economic analysis indicates a low benefit to cost ratio. AEA does not find other significant public benefits that would result from project development.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Angoon proposes to conduct feasibility and conceptual design for FERC pre-licensing work on Ruth Lake hydro. The hydro project, a significant distance from the City, will
not be connnected to the Angoon system within the foreseeable future.
AEA believes that in order for a project of this type to be successful, there needs to be demonstrated buy-in from all regional stakeholders, including the City, SEAPA, IPEC, and Kotznoowoo.
There is no indication that the stakeholders listed have agreed to this concept. In particular on p22 the application indicates the City would sell power to the utilities of Petersburg
and Wrangell. However, there is no indication that these communities would purchase power from the project, nor descritption of a mechnism to flow the vbenefits of the project directly
to the ratepayers of Angoon.
Kootznoowoo is has submitted a proposal for Thayer Lake hydro (#517 and 523) that would serve the Angoon system, indicates a direct path for benefits to flow to Angoon ratepayers, and
has the support of the local utility IPEC.
Recommend full funding with the provision that prior to release funds beyond phase 1 work plan review and coordination, the applicant must 1) convene an in-state stakeholder meeting,
2) secure letters of support from SEAPA, Thomas Bay Power Authority, and the cities of Petersburg, Wrangell, Kake, and Ketchikan, and 3) develop a process acceptable to AEA for benefits
to flow to all affected ratepayers equally.
Delta Mine Training Center proposes the construction of a biomass gasifier and a 105kW Stirling generator system. Attached to the application are a number of system descriptions and
technology offers from Stirling DK based on European installations. Over the last year, DMTC has purchased property, built a road, begun construction of a building, and worked on connecting
to the grid.
However, except for one-line diagrams on the grid tie-in, the applicant does not provide conceptual or feasibility information, final system design, engineering cost estimate, detailed
economic and financial analyses, or final business and operational plans as a basis to justify construction funding.
Recommend no funding.
UAF proposes a three-year study of biomass production from short toation woody crops and impacts of land application of biosolids. The study includes potential species, soil impacts,
and nutritional needs.
The proposal represents a statewide collaboration including UAF ACEP, School of Nat Resources and Agriculture Sciences, Water and Environmental Resource Center; Chugachmiut, the Village
of Eyak, and Tanana Chiefs, and partners to be named in Nome and Bethel.
Recommend full funding.
UAF is proposing funding for expanding an EPA funded project that utilizes heat from the existing Galena power house heat recovery system for establishing a community greenhouse. This
grant application requests funding for assessing the success of utilizing the existing district heating loop for supplying the required heating load to the greenhouse in Galena, assessing
potential for establishing greenhouses in rural Alaska by performing a feasibility analysis for replicating the Galena system in 6 rural Alaskan communities, and providing summer job
for 6 high school students in the greenhouse.
AEA requested additional information on breakdown of construction line items. Based on the submittal, over 90% fo the RE funding would be used for greenhouse equipment, supplies and
freight; and greenhouse development and operation. The application does not provide engineering data on availability of recoverable heat or impacts on the existing system.
Although the proposal reflects an attractive way of using recovered heat and a strong project team, AEA believes that chief aim of the project is developing and operating a greenhouse.
Recommend partial funding of $34,070 for the heat recovery construction portion of the project consisting of 1) pre-, mid-, and final engineering reports, and 2) flow control valves
and related plumbing supplies.
UAF ACEP is conducting a project funded by AEA, EPA, and the Denali Commission that is testing small organic Rankine cycle (ORC) systems in the laboratory . This proposal would expand
this work to deploy the small ORC systems in Ruby and Galena. The units will be owned by Tanana Chiefs Conference. The proposal does not provide details on the business arrangements
among TCC, ACEP, Ruby or Galena or system integration.
Currently the RE Fund is providing almost $4 million to support deployment of larger ORC units in Kotzebue (#235), Unalaska (#271), and Cordova (#22) in 2010. Operational data from
these projects will be available in 2011. AEA believes that operational data from smaller units would be beneficial but recognizes the demonstration value of the proposed work may
be diminished given the amount of ORC development work in progress.
Recommend full funding.
Ketchikan Public Utilities proposes to construct a 4.5 MW storage hydro project on an existing dam at Whitman Lake. KPU was funded for final design and permitting under RE fund round
2 and expects to complete this work by November 2010. KPU has reached reached a settlement agreement with DNR, ADFG, and the USFS on the project.
KPU plans to finance the $14.5 million balance of the project using unspecified grants, municipal bonds, or other options.
Because the project would connect to the SEAPA grid that has numerous existing and proposed alternatives for generation and transmission, AEA concludes that there is insufficient information
provided to do an economic analysis.
While there appear to be few technical and permitting barriers for project development, market for hydropower remains questionable with the recent completion of the Swan-Tyee intertie.
AEA believes that an integrated energy resource plan is necessary for assessing generation and transmission alternatives in SEAPA grid communities and Metlakatla before allocating
additional public funds for phases 3 and 4--final design, permitting and construction in this subregion.
Full funding recommended.
Special provisions are as follows: (1) Grantee to demonstrate that all preconstruction activities (including those previously funded under Round 1 RE Fund grant) have been completed
in a manner acceptable to AEA, including resolution of all land and site control issues; (2) Before any funds can be paid out under this grant, grantee will submit a project financing
plan acceptable to AEA which describes the source and financial cost of all committed funds required to complete the entire Whitman Lake project and allow it to produce and sell power;
and (3) provide FERC notice to proceed with construction activities.
City of Chefornak proposes final design, permitting, and construction of a 300 kW wind-diesel system. The system would include a 5kWh/500 kW Powerstore flywheel and an electric boiler
at the school as a dumpload.
AEA and the City completed a powerhouse upgrade in 2004. The City installed a met tower in fall 2009. The City has not completed a full feasibility assessment including: detailed energy
resource analysis (met. tower data collection is ongoing); assessment of design alternatives; geotechnical analysis and a final report with recommendations.
There are other issues of concern as well. The proposed budget has $503,905 in currently unsecured funding. The economic evaluation shows a poor benefit to cost ratio that is significantly
less than 1.
With the project still in the feasibility stage, it is not developed to the point where funding for design and construction would be awarded.
Recommend partial funding of $151,025 to complete feasibility.
Applicant proposes funding for the feasibility and concept design of a hybrid thermal solar (with storage capability) and ground source heat pump to provide heating for City of Anderson
school.
Project team consists of GVEA, UAF, PDC Engineering, the City, and the Denali Borough. If successful this technology could be widely applicable in rural Alaska.
Recommend full funding.
GVEA proposes to modify control logic at its Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) in Fairbanks in order to integrate intermittent renewable energy generation on the GVEA grid. Currently
there are no significant intermittent renewable projects, such as Eva Creek wind, that would require the BESS modification.
GVEA proposes a reasonable stepwise approach to project development with go/no-go decision points.
Recommend full funding with the provision that GVEA demonstrate near-term needs for integrating intermittent renewable power systems prior to proceeding to control modifications (phase
4 construction.)
The City and Borough of Wrangell proposes final design and permitting of an intertie that would connect the Southeast Alaska Power Authority (SEAPA) grid to British Columbia Transmission
Corporation (BCTC) grid to facilitate export of Alaskan hydropower. This represents the next phase of the project.
There have been some recent positive developments in BC that may result in extension of the BCTC grid to within 60 miles of the border. The Canadian federal and provincial authorities
have agreed to cooperate on developing the Northwest Transmission Line (NWT) from Meziadin Jct to Bob Quinn. However there is no Canadian initiative to connect the northern end of
the NWT line at Bob Quinn substation to the Alaska border.
AEA considered this intertie under the AK-BC Export Intertie feasibility study and found that viability of export depended in part on the Canadians extending their grid to the border.
Additionally the question remains whether export of this power represents the highest and best use of this Alaskan resource. The best venue for considering these issues is through
a regional integrated resource energy plan. AEA will provide funding and other resources to assist SEAPA to complete this plan.
AEA believes there is not sufficient justification to move the project forward given these circumstances.
No funding recommended.
Applicant is proposing to extend the distribution system in the City of Wrangell to provide hydro power to an existing concrete and gravel business that is currently generating with
diesel.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant is proposing to replace overhead distribution with underground cable in the City of Wrangell. The intent of the project is to improve the visual aesthetics and reduce maintenance
cost; however, since the project will not result in an increase in the availablilty or utilization of renewable energy, AEA believes that there are insufficient benefits to justify
funding under the Renewable Energy Fund.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes reconnaissance study of the development of a hydro project on Sunrise Lk with the potential to serve as secondary water source for Wrangell. The proposal is an update
of a round 2 proposal (#228) for feasibility, design, and construction that was not recommended for funding.
Recommend full funding.
C and L Ranch LLC requests funding to complete feasibility through construction of a 1.8MW wind project in the vicinity of Delta Junction. The current wind resource estimate is based
on a 50m meteorological tower that is 3 miles away on a small ridge. The wind data provided in the application shows a poor wind resource and the High Resolution Wind Map from the
State show Class 1 winds at the site. Onsite wind resource assessment is required prior to proceeding to final design or construction phases. The application requests $30,000 for wind
modeling.
There are additional feasibility requirements that will need to be addressed prior to moving to final design. These include obtaining or demonstrating the likelihood of obtaining power
sales and interconnection agreements from GVEA, completing a thorough evaluation of permitting requirements including FAA permits, and completing a conceptual design and cost estimate.
Recommend partial funding of $30,000 for onsite wind resource assessment completed in accordance with statewide standards.
North Slope Borough proposes to complete feasibility assessment, final design and permitting, and construction of a 300 kW wind project in Wainwright. The Borough, which installed a
met tower in the community in June 2009, would finish feasibility and environmental analysis by the end of 2010. Final design and construction would be completed by 2011-2012.
The applicant notes that Wainwright has nesting areas for spectacled and steller eider as well as habitat for other sensitive migratory bird species.
AEA believes that it is reasonable to wait until feasibility is complete before allocating funds for final design and construction.
Recommend partial funding of $132,000 to complete feasibility assessment, including "resolution of land and regulatory issues" and "environmental analysis".
North Slope Borough proposes to complete feasibility assessment, final design and permitting, and construction of a 300 kW wind project in Point Hope. The Borough, which installed a
met tower in the community in June 2009, would finish feasibility and environmental analysis by the end of 2010. Final design and construction would be completed by 2011-2012.
AEA believes that it is reasonable to wait until feasibility is complete before allocating funds for final design and construction.
Recommend partial funding of $132,000 to complete feasibility assessment, including "identification/resolution of land and regulatory issues" and "environmental analysis".
North Slope Borough proposes to complete feasibility assessment, final design and permitting, and construction of a 300 kW wind project in Point Lay. The Borough would finish feasibility
and environmental analysis by the end of 2010. Final design and construction would be completed by 2011-2012.
The applicant notes that Pt Lay is in the USFWS-designated critical habitat for the spectacled eider.
AEA believes that it is reasonable to wait until feasibility is complete before allocating funds for final design and construction.
Recommend partial funding of $132,000 to complete feasibility assessment, including "resolution of land and regulatory issues" and "environmental analysis".
Applicant proposes reconnaissance and feasibility study of a geothermal project that would tap a resource of unknown quality and extent in the Lower Sustna Basin for heating in Anchorage.
See DGGS comments: Geothermal resource has not been demonstrated. Therefore, the concept of piping hot water from the Susitna Valley is questionable.
DGGS comments:
This project suggests the use of an unsubstantiated low-temperature geothermal fluids in the lower Susitna Basin (roughly, near Houston) to provide space heat for Anchorage. However,
the existence of these fluids has never been confirmed, and indirect evidence of their existence is equivocal. Nearly three decades ago exploration wells drilled in the area for oil
and gas and reported elevated bottom-hole temperatures. However, no attempt was made at the time of drilling to analyze or collect other pertinent data in order to record equilibrium
crustal temperatures and identify a geothermal resource. In fact, the area is an unlikely candidate for such a resource. A follow-up geothermal resource investigation in the 80?s was
unable to find direct evidence of geothermal fluids. Subsequent studies have also been unable to confirm elevated crustal temperatures. Finally, recent DGGS investigation of physical
samples from the exploratory holes has provided strong evidence that the elevated temperatures reported during drilling did not reflect crustal conditions. Given there is no direct
evidence that the ?geothermal resource? which underpins this proposal exists, and there are many reasons to doubt its existence, the primary activity in this area (if any) would need
to be resource identification and quantification. However, most of the proposed activities are not related to resource confirmation, they are instead various aspects of system design,
permitting, and land rights analysis. Even the geotechnical activities proposed in the pre-feasibility study at the end of the proposed work period will not, in themselves, provide
direct evidence of a resource. In short, this project and proposal make unwarranted assumptions about the existence of a geothermal resource to power a regional space heating system
and the proposal is not recommended for funding.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes to purchase a chip fuel dryer and lease it to the Viking Lumber Mill which currently provides chip fuel to the city of Craig for use in the biomass boiler to heat
the pool and school for the community. Fuel could also be made available to other facilities on Prince of Wales Island and other locations.
The new biomass boiler currently has a fuel dryer as part of the system; however, high moisture wood chip fuel has caused heat to be diverted from the elementary school to the dryer.
Fuel oil boilers in the elementary school kick-on to compensate for the diverted heat. The moisture content of the fuel has consistently been higher than design parameters. The new
dryer would allow for the fuel to be pre-treated before delivery to the school, and could potentially allow for the development of other chip customers for Viking Lumber.
AEA recongizes that there is significant public benefit from this project, however, it believes that there must be reasonable economic return to the public from the allocation of the
grant fund, while at the same time assuring that Viking recieves reasonable return.
Recommend full funding with the following special provision: Before funds are made available, AEA must approve the lease/operate/maintain business agreement between Viking and Craig.
Applicant proposes final design and construction of the ground source heat pump (GSHP) at the Gastineau Elementary School. The project is projected to displace approximately 28,000
gallons per year of heating oil. Additional pumping costs are expected to be approximately $23,000/yr.
The RE Fund provided grants to GSHP systems at the Juneau Airport and the Dimond aquatic center. GSHP systems on these projects will displace substantially more fuel oil than the proposed
system at Gastineau School. However, economics of the school GSHP appear reasonable
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes assessments of buildings in Cordova for wood heat facilities. This project will also develop a community energy audit protocol.
The budget includes $52,000 in indirect costs that are not allow under the REF program.
Recommended partial funding of $193,065 reflecting the reduction after the removal of the indirect costs.
Cordova Electric proposes to complete relocation and replacement of the intake structure for the Humpback Creek hydro project, inoperational after a fire and a flood in 2005 and 2006.
AEA has awarded $4 million in RE fund round 1 dollars for this work; however the installed cost of the project has increased by $5,431,000 since construction bids came in much higher
than expected. CEC has awarded a construction contract and the project is now on schedule for completion by November 2010. There is substantial support from the local Native tribe
Eyak and fish procesors, and cost share by FEMA. FERC has issued a license for the rebuild.
Eyak submitted a proposal to USDOE for stimulus funding for $4.85 million and expects to receive results by March 2010.
Despite a substantially increased project cost, project economics remain attractive. CEC has obtained debt financing in the event that no additional grant funds are secured.
Recommend full funding of $4,000,000 with the provision that AEA will decrease the grant to CEC by the amount that CEC receives in federal stimulus grant funding for the project.
Applicant is proposing funding for 11 photovoltaic systems in 11 schools to reduce the cost of electricty. This system will provide educational opportunities in renewable energy issues
for the students and the community.
Economics this project appear to marginal. The public benefit of the project will be educational in nature.
Recommend partial funding. Funding for 2 photovoltaic units in the amount of $135,000 will provide for comparison of site effects and will still provide the educational opportunities
over the proposed school website.
CB of Sitka requests funding for assessing feasibility of the potential 28 MW Takatz Lake hydro project. Due to funding limitations, RE Fund round 1 awarded partial funding of $514,684
to the project for this purpose. Sitka requests an additional $2 million in round 3 for this purpose for a total of $2,514,684.
Project is consistent with findings of the 2008 Sitka Power Supply Plan and would follow less expensive alternatives, including increasing capacity of the existing Blue Lk Hydro project,
in order to avoid more costly diesel generation. There is potential for developing road and marine facilities associated with the project that would provide access to eastern Baranof
Island. FERC has issued a preliminary permit to Sitka to assess feasibility of Takatz. Given the widespread interest in linking major electric generation and loads in Southeast, development
of Takatz should be coordinated with the SE Alaska Regional Energy Plan.
AEA is recommending additional funding of $637,449 in reallocated RE Fund round 1 funds for Takatz Lk feasibility consistent with Round 1 recommendations of up to $2 million.
AEA recommends the remaining funding of $1,362,551 in round 3 funding, ($2,514,684 minus $514,684 in original round 1 funds minus $637,449 in reallocated round1 funds).
Applicant proposes the construction of a combined heat and power system. The project includes assessment and management of the local biomass resources, formation of a partnership with
the biomass owner (Gana-a?Yoo Native Regional Corporation), purchasing and installation of the harvesting equipment, boiler, steam powered generator, and heat recovery systems including
Organic Rankine Cycle generators, and providing steam heat for the existing utilidor and buildings occupied by the Galena City School District.
Reconnaissance and feasilbility are not complete, and design and economics cannot be evaluated.
Contruction would not begin until spring 2011. The application does not provide an assessement of availability and delivered cost to the burn point of the wood energy resources, preliminary
assessment of permitting or environmental impact, an assessment of system alternatives, or detailed economic and financial analyses.
Recommend partial funding of $100,000 for feasibility and conceptual design.
Applicant is proposing funding for a wood pellet boiler system to heat the Division of Forestry main office, proposed addition and a warehouse/shop/maintenance facility. The funding
would provide design and construction for the boiler building, 2 wood pellet boilers and pellet storage.
Given the high project cost of $932,000 and a relatively small amount of fuel oil displaced project economics are poor.
Recommend no funding.
Native Village of for a reconnaissance study for a 1+MW storage hydro project on the Jack River located near Cantwell. The project would connect to the Railbelt Energy Grid served by
GVEA.
Recommend full funding of $194,540.
Applicant proposes to continue work toward developing a third turbine at Terror lake hydro. AEA currently has a RE Fund round 2 grant award to KEA for the FERC license amendment and
is working through this process.
According to the application KEA would complete final design and bid document development by June 2012. Following this work KEA would initiate the construction phase.
Recommend partial funding to complete final design and bid document development at $248,160.
Applicant requested funding of $2,868,000 in round 1 and was awarded funding of $2 million due to funding caps applied for the Railbelt (See proposal #112).
During 2009 the Delta SD hired a design firm, obtained a fuel supply commitment, and plans construction in late 2010. An associated school building envelop upgrade is 80% complete.
Recommend full funding.
Failed Stage 1
Failed Stage 1
AHTNA proposes grant funding for constructing a 35,000 ton per year wood pellet plant. AHTNA would harvest wood on public and private lands in the area for feedstock. The project also
includes a wood-fired power plant that would sell 250 kW of power to local utility Copper Valley Electric Association. The for-profit start-up company would sell bagged and bulk pellets
and briquettes within Alaska.
Although we support the concept of using a local, underutilized resource for creating jobs and displacing fossil fuels, AEA has the following concerns about the application: 1) the
application did not include or reference a detailed feasibility analysis that addresses feedstock supply, product market, power sales, construction cost, ramp-up time, or cash flow
and pro forma. The business plan that was submitted with the application was incomplete; 2) the application did not include a complete final design and preliminary power purchase
agreement, nor adequately address permitting; 3) We question whether or not it is the intent for the Renewable Energy Fund to publicly finance facility construction for private businesses
that will manufacture and market a fuel. We can only recommend providing grant assistance for preconstruction activities, i.e. feasiblity assessment. However, in this case, the applicant\'s
funding request did not break out feasibility assessment/conceptual design costs.
Recommend no funding at this time.
Failed Stage 1 review
Applicant proposes supplementary funding for a 1 MW wind energy project in Sand Point. Currently AEA has a grant to TDX for this project--$945,136 in USDOE funds, $528,864 in State
funds, and $437,900 in local cash $552,738 in local in-kind match for a total of $2,464,638. The project has been delayed for over two years due to federal NEPA review.
Additional funds are requested to cover across-the-board increases, mostly in the areas of freight and wind integration with the existing system. Applicant indicates that the revised
project will also include a dumpload in the high school that will provide facility heating.
Discussions with USDOE indicate that NEPA review is almost complete. No further permitting delays are anticipated.
Recommend full funding of $639,805 with the requirement that before grant funds are made available, AWE revise the existing draft power purchase agreement to address additional grant
funding being made available to the project as well as project cost increases.
Applicant proposes studying feasibility and assessing resources for hydro and wind development in Tatitlek. TDX Power will manage the project. Work would commence summer 2009 and be
completed by Nov 2010
Recommend partial funding for reconaissance and feasibility study (phase 1 and 2, tasks 1-6) of $138,210 (total cost of tasks 1-6 minus $10,000, since AEA will provide an instrumented
30 m met tower to the project.)
Applicant proposes to reconaissance study, feasibility, and design of a hydro-wind-diesel system. The project would develop valuable information on available renewable resources, and
establish feasibility and conceptual design for a new community power system.
Recommend partial funding of $85,835 through feasibility and conceptual design.
Applicant proposes assessing kind, quantity, and delivered cost of biomass near four communities--apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana, #314 McGrath. Methodology and objectives
are identical for the four applications. The proposed site-specific assessments are an important component of feasibility analysis for wood energy development in these communities.
However, of these comunities, only McGrath is proposing significant utilization of local wood for energy. Fuel prices are highest in McGrath. While Tanana has recently developed
a wood boiler for the washeteria, wood supply has not been identified as a major issue. While a larger scale chip boiler system is under development in Tok, wood supply is less of
an issue since it is on the road system. Funding only one of the four projects will be sufficient to show that the method is useful for biomass supply assessment.
Recommend full funding of $34,740 for the McGrath biomass supply assessment (app #314) with requirement that the project team coordinates with McGrath Light and Power and other project
participants in assessing harvest supply requirements and system.
Recommend no funding for apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana at this time.
Applicant proposes assessing kind, quantity, and delivered cost of biomass near four communities--apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana, #314 McGrath. Methodology and objectives
are identical for the four applications. The proposed site-specific assessments are an important component of feasibility analysis for wood energy development in these communities.
However, of these comunities, only McGrath is proposing significant utilization of local wood for energy. Fuel prices are highest in McGrath. While Tanana has recently developed
a wood boiler for the washeteria, wood supply has not been identified as a major issue. While a larger scale chip boiler system is under development in Tok, wood supply is less of
an issue since it is on the road system. Funding only one of the four projects will be sufficient to show that the method is useful for biomass supply assessment.
Recommend full funding of $34,740 for the McGrath biomass supply assessment (app #314) with requirement that the project team coordinates with McGrath Light and Power and other project
participants in assessing harvest supply requirements and system.
Recommend no funding for apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana at this time.
Applicant proposes assessing kind, quantity, and delivered cost of biomass near four communities--apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana, #314 McGrath. Methodology and objectives
are identical for the four applications. The proposed site-specific assessments are an important component of feasibility analysis for wood energy development in these communities.
However, of these comunities, only McGrath is proposing significant utilization of local wood for energy. Fuel prices are highest in McGrath. While Tanana has recently developed
a wood boiler for the washeteria, wood supply has not been identified as a major issue. While a larger scale chip boiler system is under development in Tok, wood supply is less of
an issue since it is on the road system. Funding only one of the four projects will be sufficient to show that the method is useful for biomass supply assessment.
Recommend full funding of $34,740 for the McGrath biomass supply assessment (app #314) with requirement that the project team coordinates with McGrath Light and Power and other project
participants in assessing harvest supply requirements and system.
Recommend no funding for apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana at this time.
Applicant proposes assessing kind, quantity, and delivered cost of biomass near four communities--apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana, #314 McGrath. Methodology and objectives
are identical for the four applications. The proposed site-specific assessments are an important component of feasibility analysis for wood energy development in these communities.
However, of these comunities, only McGrath is proposing significant utilization of local wood for energy. Fuel prices are highest in McGrath. While Tanana has recently developed
a wood boiler for the washeteria, wood supply has not been identified as a major issue. While a larger scale chip boiler system is under development in Tok, wood supply is less of
an issue since it is on the road system. Funding only one of the four projects will be sufficient to show that the method is useful for biomass supply assessment.
Recommend full funding of $34,740 for the McGrath biomass supply assessment (app #314) with requirement that the project team coordinates with McGrath Light and Power and other project
participants in assessing harvest supply requirements and system.
Recommend no funding for apps #311 Tanana, #312 Tanacross, #313 Nenana at this time.
Ocean Renewable Power Corporation proposes to complete recon work currently underway and assess feasibility / prepare conceptual design of a 1 MW array of proprietary cross-flow tidal
instream electric conversion units for potential scale-up to 20+ MW. The units would be moored above the bottom of Cook Inlet near Pt. McKenzie but below ice. Currently the technology
is under development in Maine. The proposer states that the most substantial challenges will be impacts on beluga, migrating fish, and sediment flow. Undersea cable would bring power
to shore. ORPC has obtained a preliminary FERC permit and will submit a draft request to FERC for pilot project license in 3/09. Other permits will include ADFG fish habitat, DNR
water and subsurface use, Army Corps title 10, Coastal Zone, and Coast Guard navigational assessment. ORPC has developed a team of specialists that they state will address technical
and habitat issues.
AEA is concerned at the high cost and high risk of developing new technology. Estimated total cost of developing a 1 MW project is $7.9 million. Cost of the feasibility study is $2.4
million?75% of which is proposed to be borne by the renewable energy fund. However, the Alaska-based developers have assembled a credible engineering project team and claim to have
invested over $4 million in technology development to date. Alaska has most of the nation?s potential for tidal energy and it is logical for the state to support ocean energy technology
development. If state funding is approved for the project, substantial oversight will be required to continually assess for fatal flaws that will require curtailment of funding.
Recommend full funding of $1,787,476 with requirement that ORPC submit for AEA approval detailed project plan with go/no-go points during biological and physical site characterizations
before funds are disbursed. AEA will then incorporate the plan into milestones in the grant agreement.
Applicant proposes to recover heat from AVEC diesel generators and supply heat to the city water plant and washeteria. ANTHC would design and manage the project as part of the water
system improvements. Project completion would be in April 2010. The application does not include a letter of support from AVEC, however the app does refer to initial discussions with
AVEC that indicate general agreement price. The application provides a detailed preliminary design.
Recommend full funding of $435,000 with requirement that City and AVEC provide a heat purchase agreement to AEA before disbursement of funds.
Applicant proposes to install a 20 kW wind turbine and battery system that will serve the local public radio station in Sand Point. Station staff would operate the system. The system
is very small compared to the 1000 kW system that is currently under development and funded by State and federal funds.
AEA has a number of concerns with the application. No final design/permitting (phase 3) documentation was submitted or referred to in the app. The app does not specify the manufacturer
of the turbine system nor supply any backup to the claimed 50%+ of energy that the station will provide to the Sand Point grid at no cost. Since the wind system is small in relation
to the grid load, the system will operate as a low-penetration project and likely not need the battery system for integration. Applicants do not appear to have consulted with USFWS
on impacts of the guyed tower. There is no mention of a business arrangement with local utility TDX Power. Given the long-term nature of the project we are concerned that the radio
station can ensure consistent, long-term O&M of the turbine and battery systems.
Recommend full funding of $126,750 with requirement that 1) applicant provide final design and permitting documentation before funds are made available, 2) applicant demonstrates acceptable
business arrangement with local utility.
Stage 3 review update: Following discussions on regional funding allocation, no funding is recommended consistent with policy that not more than one project in a community that uses
the same renewable resource be funded for construction. In this case project #317 Sand Point Wind has a higher overall score.
Applicant proposes feasiblity study and final design/permitting for a 12 MW storage hydro project.
Interaction with other potential projects, including Burro Cr and West Cr. An IRP is desirable for the Skagway, Haines, Klukwan area before proceeding to final design and construction
for these projects.
Existing recon study proposes a substantially smaller 6 MW project which impounds less water than the current proposal. Project may require intertie and road access across the Chilkat
Bald Eagle Reserve if it is not feasible to route through the Haines State Forest.
Power sales/benefits limited to offset of diesel costs and air pollution during summer cruise ship landings in Haines and Skagway. Seasonal power production would limit year-round availability.
Recommend $428,000 partial funding for Phase 2 feasibility study with scope per application. Special provision that land issues and licensing jurisdiction question be resolved with
go-no go points established.
Applicant proposes assessment of geothermal resources in the Seward Peninsula. Although DGGS finds the work plan generally reasonable, they note weaknesses in the methodology. DGGS
indicates hot spring systems in the general area are small and of only moderate temperature, unlikely to produce megawatt scale electricity. In addition, they are in remote from communities
and would require long transmission lines.
Recommend no funding.
AVEC proposes a 200 kW medium penetration wind project consisting of 2 Northwind 100 turbines and electric boilers that would displace approximately 50% of the fuel used for diesel generation.
AVEC states that they have site control for the wind farm. USFWS and USACE would be consulted. USFWS states that Shaktool is close to spectacled eider molting areas but eiders are
not known to migrate through or around Shaktoolik. Onsite wind assessment indicates a class 4 resource.
Recommend for full funding of $2,465,664.
Applicant proposes final design/permitting and construction of a 800 kW wind farm and intertie to serve the communities of Emmonak and Alakanuk. The project team has substantial experience
in wind-diesel development. AEA provided a met tower for Emmonak in 2007. However, the proposal does not give detailed results of wind resource assessment, a general route of the
transmission line, or turbine production estimates, nor a detailed assessment of economic feasibility. The app does not address land ownership implications on transmission and wind
farm development. The project would be completed by 2010.
Recommend full funding of $9,670,361 with requirement that grantee provide feasibility assessment and conceptual design of the wind farm and transmission line for AEA review and approval
before any grant funds are made available.
Stage 3 review update: Stage 3 review update: Following discussions on regional funding allocation, project funding is capped at $2,000,000 per affected community for Railbelt and
lower energy cost Southeast communities and $4,000,000 for other communities. Since this project impacts both Emmonak and Alalanuk, funding recommendation is $8,000,000.
Applicant proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and conceptual design of a wind system in Stebbins. The proposal is reasonable and the project team
has substantial experience in this area.
Recommend full funding of $103,256.
Applicant proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and coneptual design of a wind system in New Stuyahok. The proposal is reasonable and the project
team has substantial experience in this area. The existing met tower erected by AEA and AVEC in 2003 indicates a class 3 wind resource. Due to relocation of the airport, however,
AVEC believes there is a location with a more prosing wind resource.
Recommend full funding of $117,610.
Applicant proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and coneptual design of a wind system in Scammon Bay. The proposal is reasonable and the project team
has substantial experience in this area. The City of Scammon Bay has contacted AEA in 2007 to request a met tower for the City to develop a wind project independent of AVEC.
Recommend full funding of $117,610.
Applicant proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and conceptual design of a wind system and possible transmission in the St. Mary\'s, Mountaina Village,
Pilot Station and Pitka\'s Point area. There are already two met towers near Pitka\'s Point that indicate class 6 wind resource. But there is also significant rime icing. AVEC feels
that further analysis is required to optimize wind resource against rime icing loss. The proposal is reasonable and the project team has substantial experience in this area.
Recommend full funding of $110,000.
Applicant proposes onsite wind resource assessment, geotech analysis, feasibility, and conceptual design of a wind system in the Teller and Brevig Mission area. The proposal is reasonable
and the project team has substantial experience in this area.
Recommend full funding of $117,610.
AEA Staff sent request for further information on January 26 2009 but received no response from the applicant. Applicant was also contacted by phone in February where the applicant acknowledged
receipt of the request for information but no responses were ever received.
Because no followup by the applicant was received by AEA, this application cannot be scored
Recommend no funding.
AEA staff requested further information on January 22 2009 but received no response from the applicant. Applicant was also contacted by phone in February where the applicant acknowledged
receipt of the request for information but no answers were ever provided.
Because no follow up by the applicant was received by AEA, this application cannot be scored.
Recommend no funding.
The City proposes feasibility study and conceptual design of a wood chip fired system that would provide heat to the Sitka hospital and a planned greenhouse and power to the Sitka grid.
Fuel would originate from USFS thinnings of forest plantations or sawmills in the region. Work would be contracted to an engineering firm by the City and be complete by October 2009.
AEA has concerns about availability and delivered cost of second growth thinnings. We expect, however, that this information will be a critical output of the study.
Recommend full funding of $30,000.
Applicant proposes feasibility and final design for stick-fired wood boiler systems to supply heat to school, school housing, and washeteria/water system. fuel savings over the 20-year
life of the project appear to offset high potential project cost. Recon assessments were done for this project by CATG in the summer of 2008 by JEDC and TR Miles in 2006.
Two important outstanding issues are supply of wood and reliable operation of the boilers. The feasibility assessment would address these issues before design commences. A local woodcutter
is currently providing residential supply. Sites are available for the boiler systems near the buildings. Feasibility and final design would be completed by the end of 2009. Since
proposed project manager Bill Wall is involved in numerous wood projects (Ft. Yukon, Upper Kobuk, McGrath, Chalkyitsik) we are concerned about staff resources.
Recommend partial funding for feasibility (task 1,2) at $32,500.
Chalkyitsik proposes feasibility and final design for stick-fired wood boiler and district heating systems to supply heat to school, school housing, water system, and the village tribal
office. The estimated project cost at $1.54 M is expensive. Recon assessment was done for this project by CATG in the summer of 2008. Bill Wall would perform the proposed feasibility
work. AEA is concerned that Wall will have sufficient time to perform this work since he is also involved in similar wood energy projects in Upper Kobuk, Ft. Yukon, and McGrath.
Recommend partial funding for feasibility (task 1,2) at $32,500.
Applicant proposes funding for a wood harvest, processing, storage, and delivery system in conjunction with a proposed biomass energy system (RE Fund Round 1 app #30).
AEA comments from Round 1 app are as follows: "Application refers to a feasibility study that has not been finalized. This is a community wood heating system that combines wood harvest
and transport, combustion, district heating and energy sales. The project will likely interact with proposal number 61-McGrath (diesel) heat recovery, but is expensive and appears uneconomic
as proposed. Since this is a large project with considerable risk and uncertainty, it should be developed in a stepwise manner with stakeholder input. AEA and MP&L jointly defined a
diesel heat recovery and wood heated district heating system project in 2001 that appeared economically viable. We recommend granting $225,000 to MP&L for feasibility andfinal design
(milestones 1-8) in conjunction with proposal 61. If the project is favorable, then ML&P can request construction funding from the RE Fund during round 3."
Since ML&P has not yet completed the work funded in Round 1, AEA recommends no funding at this time for the harvest equipment proposed in this application.
Chignik Lagoon was funded at $150,000 in round 1 of the RE fund for final design and permitting (app#14).
Recommend no funding this round. Lagoon can reapply pending successful outcome of the final design/permitting work.
Applicant requests $5.0 million for project reconnaissance, feasibility , permitting and design. AEA recommends funding limited to reconnaissance study and has concerns with the large
size of the funding amount being requested for that purpose.
Given the large scale of this project and complexity involved in management and financing, a business plan will need to be prepared as a part of the reconnaissance study which details
involvement of railbelt utilities and private developers. Also to be included in study will be a determination of licensing barriers specific to this project.
FERC accepted the preliminary permit application filed by Glacier Fork Hydro LLC on November 10. 2008.
Recommend partial funding of $500,000 with requirement that before grant is finalized grantee prepares a detailed project budget with go/no go milestones for inclusion into grant document.
Applicant proposes final design/permitting and construction of a 300 kW wind energy system to be connected to the existing St. Paul City grid.
The application makes no mention of the option of connecting to TDX Power\'s existing 675 kW wind farm. The City and TDX have so far been unable to reach an agreement to integrate the
existing turbines into the City system. AEA has allocated $174,500 in state funds to match $349,000 in USDOE funds to assist with the integration. AEA has requested that USDOE redirect
these funds from an earlier earmark for this purpose.
AEA recommends no funding. The City and TDX should reach an agreement on using existing energy assets in St. Paul before further funds are made available.
The proposed project is a 2MW wind farm near Tok. The turbines would be tied into the Tok, Tanacross, Dot Lake and Tetlin grids. The application is for resource assessment through construction.
The application lacks detail on reasoning for site selection, integration issues, interconnection of villages, plans for using excess wind energy, or current energy usage. Without having
an onsite wind resource assessment it is impossible to evaluate the viability of the project.
Recommend partial funding for wind resource assessment only.
The proposed project is a 2MW wind farm near Slana. The turbines would be tied into the Slana and Chistochina grid and potentially could be tied to Mentasta as well. The project would
be very high penetration. The application is for resource assessment through construction.
The application lacks detail on reasoning for site selection, integration issues, plans for using excess wind energy, or current energy usage. Without having an onsite wind resource
assessment it is impossible to evaluate the viability of the project. APC can request a meteorological tower from AEA?s met tower loan program to complete the resource assessment.
Recommend no funding.
The applicant proposes a 50MW wind farm near Delta Junction. The project will require a 20 mile tie line and 10 mile access road.
The applicant did not provide information that they had contacted GVEA and jointly determined that a 50MW wind farm could be integrated into the Railbelt System and the power could be
effectively used. The applicant has not secured the land rights needed to access, construct and operate the project. The project should be considered in a regional integrated resource
plan prior to commitment of state funds. Further the financing package through the Power Project Fund will require legislative review and approval.
Recmmend no funding.
The City of Kotzebue proposes a recon study of using TGER (Tactical Garbage to Energy Refinery) technology under development by the U.S. Army. The unit is packaged in a shipping container,
shreds garbage, soaks it in water, pumps sludge into a bioreactor, converts a portion of the waste stream into ethanol, and pelletizes the remaining solids. Pellets are in turn gasified.
Gas is fed into a recip diesel generator and converted into power.
This system is complex, and AEA questions whether there are more suitable, simpler systems that would achieve the same aims of waste reduction and energy (such as a modular incinerator
with stack heat recovery). This is prototype technology with little operating history in an arctic environment.
Recommend full funding of $15,000 for recon assessment with condition that University of Alaska Center for Energy and Power be included in the review team.
Failed Stage 1
The City of Homer proposes reconnaissance assessment and feasibility analysis/conceptual design of a 250 kW hydrokinetic device in Kachemak Bay. Homer has assembled a strong project
team that includes a number of entities with experience in assessing tidal energy feasibility and resources?NOAA?s Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services, Terrasond,
and Re vision. There are letters of support from the Native Village of Port Graham and the Seldovia Village Tribe who are also interested in the project. The application appropriately
addresses potential wildlife impacts and includes the involvement of ADFG. NOAA commits to $650,000 in in-kind project support.
We are concerned that Homer Electric Association, the likely power purchaser or owner of a potential project, is not included in the plan for implementing the feasibility stage in a
more concrete way. We are also concerned that the scope of work for reconnaissance phase of the project is inadequate. Instead of serving as a stand-alone, less in-depth study that
provides a go/no-go or focus for further work, the recon phase appears to be structured as the early phases of coordination of the feasibility stage.
Recommend full funding of $482,387 with condition that before any grant funds are disbursed Homer prepare a more detailed recon plan of work that is approved by AEA. Standard grant
conditions will require that AEA approve recon report findings before proceeding to feasibility study.
Applicant proposes to assess alternative energy resources of Tanana.
The work that the applicant proposes, while potentially valuable to Tanana, is more effectively accomplished using standard methodology on a statewide and regionwide basis that builds
on the work already done in the statewide energy report that was released after this application.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes to assess alternative energy resources of Perryville.
The work that the applicant proposes, while potentially valuable to the region, is more effectively accomplished using standard methodology on a statewide and regionwide basis that builds
on the work already done in the statewide energy report that was released after this application.
Recommend no funding.
Project concept is vague but there is local support. Overall project site is within the national park, which will result in permitting challenges.
Letters of support for this project from NPS and Borough are for hydrokinetic type of project-- a significant departure from micro-hydro type of project written in the application;
this demonstrates some confusion
Recommend partial funding for reconnaissance at $92,000. Special provisions include a requirement that applicant submit detailed project plan for approval by AEA with potential for
granting less funding if appropriate. First go - no go will be at $25k study level. Study should also address long term ownership and operation of any facilities and issues identified
in Stage 1 comments.
The Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority proposes to assess solar thermal resources, construct a model project on the NIHA headquarter or other building in Kotzebue that demonstrates
solar thermal systems functioning in an arctic environment, deploy the technology in regional communities, and provide O&M training and evaluation.
The project would have significant value for demonstrating a technology with substantial promise. Good project team including University of Alaska with appropriate technical, public
information, and project management expertise. Before proceeding to the relatively expensive deployment stage, AEA feels it is appropriate to complete a demonstration project.
Recommend partial funding of $101,000 for resource assessment and demonstration.
Applicant proposes final design and construction for recovering heat from the new diesel generating plant and pipe hot water to two school buildings. As part of the powerhouse project,
the utility has installed equipment for recovering both jacket water and stack heat. The utility has requested that AEA manage the project. Permitting is complete and project construction
would be complete within a year of funding.
Recommend full funding for $545,934..
Applicant proposes to prepare a detailed integrated energy resource plan (IRP) for southern Southeast. The study will be valuable for addressing cost, output, energy market and other
elements of projects under various stages of development in this subregion, a number of them being funded by the RE Fund (e.g. Kake-Petersburg Intertie, Whitman, Triangle, Ruth Lk hydro
development, Wrangell electric boiler).
Recommend full funding. AEA will assist in coordinating the IRP with other energy requirements in the Southeast region and may consider providing additional funding to do so. As with
other projects AEA will approve scope of work.
Application withdrawn by applicant
Applicant proposes wind resource assessment and feasibility study/conceptual design of residential size 7.5 kW wind systems for lighting in the harbors of Chenega and Tatitlek.
The Denali Commission/AEA have already allocated funds for a hydro study in Chenega under the alternative energy RFP. AEA is recommending funding for proposed feasiblity of wind and
hydro in Tatitlek in Round 2 of the RE Fund (app # 316). We feel it is more appropriate to focus on development of community-scale energy systems.
AEA recommends no funding.
This application is for installation of 450 kW of wind turbines in Tuntutuliak, upgrades to the existing diesel system, recovered heat at the washeteria and school, and smart meters
and thermal stoves in approximately 35 residences to displace fuel oil with excess wind energy. The project would be located on village corporation land, and the applicant states that,
based on discussions with USFWS, FAA, and Corps of Engineers, no further authorizations are needed. Connections to the existing system will be undergound. However USFWS has requested
further review due to the known or suspected presence of listed species in the area. Rights-of-way through Native allotments may be needed from BIA. Unlike a similar project in Kongiganek,
there is no onsite met tower data available.
The introduction of a high penetration system into a moderate-sized community that includes remotely controlled dumploads at the washeteria and 20 residences as well as a low load diesel
component brings along a significant level of complexity.
Recommend full funding of $1,760,000 with the following conditions that must be met before funds are disbursed: 1) AEA approval of final design and permitting, 2) the grantee establish
a five-year operation and maintenance contract with an contractor acceptable to AEA that has expertise in this area. Given the substantial demonstration value of this project AEA will
require close monitoring of system performance
Applicant proposes to recover heat from diesel generation plant to supply a 200 kW organic rankine cycle generator. Applicant would provide 32% of total project funding. Project would
be complete by summer 2010.
Recommend full funding of $1,300,000.
UAF proposes to install a 20 kW solar array on the roof of the Student Recreation Center at a cost of $370,000 and expects to displace $4,000/yr of fuel. Economic benefit of the project
is very low to installed cost. AEA judges the demonstration value of a solar array very modest. We note that the Cold Climate Housing Research Center has a larger tracking array in
the near vicinity.
Recommend no funding.
Not eligible applicant
Applicant proposes to recover unutilized heat from UAF\'s coal-fired power plant to operate an absorption chilling system on the University\'s West Ridge to replace existing electric
chillers located in each building. Proposal is based on a detailed feasibility analysis and conceptual design. Final design would begin following grant approval and take approximately
one year. Construction would last 24 months.
Although the project would reduce average electrical load substantially and reduce CO2 emissions, the project is expensive and the applicant\'s economic analysis indicates a payback
in approximately 30 years. Despite the applicant\'s strong design and management team, AEA does not think the demonstration value of the absorption chiller offsets the long payback.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes to construct two containerized biodiesel processing facilities that will convert waste vegetable oil and other feedstocks into biodiesel that will be marketed to displace
heating oil. Feedstock would be provided by an Anchorage-based firm and possibly by cruise lines. Potential customers would be one or more petroleum distributors. The applicant requests
$1.5 million in grant funds, $901,590 of which would cover the first year of operation.
Although we support the concept of using waste vegetable oil or fish oil from fish processing operations to displace heating fuel, AEA has serious concerns with this application: 1)
60% of the grant would be used for operation during the first year, thus calling into question the sustainability of the operation, 2) assumptions on feedstock supply and savings to
consumers have fundamental problems. (See economist notes.)
Recommend no funding.
Birch Creek Village Council proposes to install two 2750 Watt tracking solar arrays and a 35 kW diesel generator in Applicant estimates that the project will displace 11520 gallons of
diesel per year. AEA has recommended funding for one 50 kW utility-scale photovoltaic-diesel hybrid demonstration project in Northwest Alaska in round 1 of the RE Fund (ID #75) before
investing further. The applicants suggestion that 11,000 gallons of fuel per year will be displaced is not supported. KWh displaced by the solar arrays, according to their estimates
would displace only about 1000 gallons of fuel. At a more realistic estimated savings of $5000/yr the economics of the proposed project in Birch Creek are not compelling.
Recommend no funding.
The Igiugig Village Council proposes a multi-stage project to test and develop a river instream energy conversion (RISEC) device. The Village would continue collaboration with the Electric
Power Research Insititute and AEA on RISEC development. Phase 2 would perform a bathymetric profile of the Kvichak River, permitting and environmental analysis, and install two pilot
turbines to test performance (2009-11). Phase 3 would select a technology and complete final design and permitting (2012-13). Phase 4 would complete construction and commissioning
(2012-14).
IVC has assembled a strong team of experienced engineering, technology, and geotechnical specialists. The project is the logical follow-up to earlier work by EPRI and AEA, and will
provide valuable performance data on RISEC devices that is applicable throughout Alaska.
Recommend funding for Phase 2 at $718,175 with the requirement that grantee must coordinate with other ongoing RISEC projects in Ruby, Nenana, and Eagle.
Yakutat Power proposes to collaborate with Electric Power Research Institute to perform final design / permitting and construction of a 500 kW demonstration wave energy project. EPRI
and Yakutat are currently conducting reconnaissance and feasibility work expected to be completed by spring 2009. During the final design and permitting stage Yakutat proposes to develop
specifications and a solicitation package to be sent to known wave energy technology companies, perform site assessment and environmental permitting, work with the chosen technology
vendor on detailed design, and prepare a bid package for construction. Following construction the device would be operated and independently evaluated for at least 18 months.
AEA is concerned at the high cost and high risk of demonstrating new technology. Estimated design and construction cost for the project is $7 million. However, Yakutat and EPRI are
proposing a logical, staged development that would minimize risk. Alaska has substantial potential for wave energy and it is logical for the state to support ocean energy technology
development.
Recommend partial funding of $632,500 for phase 3 final design and permitting with requirement that no funds be disbursed until Yakutat and EPRI have completed feasibility report and
AEA concludes that further work is warranted.
Applicant proposes to assess alternative energy resources of communities served the Chugach SD--Whittier, Chenega Bay, and Tatitlek.
The work that the applicant proposes, while potentially valuable to the region, is more effectively accomplished using standard methodology on a statewide and regionwide basis that builds
on the work already done in the statewide energy report that was released after this application.
Recommend no funding.
Geology of upper West Creek Valley is unstable according to the application.
Project access and associated transmission lines would interact with Klondike Gold Rush National Historic Site and cross the Chilkoot Trail. Project has potential impacts on coho rearing
habitat. Overall project concept is not clear. Project may be configured as storage or run-of-river. Project capital cost and power generation will vary significantly depending upon
scheme selected. Applicant claims that FERC licensing would not be required due to pending land transfer out of federal ownership. Licensing jurisdiction remains with FERC until land
patent is issued.
Land status and licensing jurisdiction should be assessed in grant funded study along with other requested scope.
Interaction with other potential hydro projects for which RE Fund applications have been received include Burro Cr and Connelly Lk. Existing hydros include Goat Creek, Dewey Lakes,
Lutak, 10-Mile, and Kasidaya. An IRP is desirable for the Skagway, Haines, Klukwan area.
AP&T and the City would jointly manage the project, while AP&T would perform the work.
Recommend partial funding of $236,000 for feasibility (phase 2).
Applicant proposes to assess alternative energy resources of communities served the YKSD--Alakaket, Hughes, Huslia, Kaltag, Koyukuk, Manley Hot Springs, Minto, Nulato and Ruby.
The work that the applicant proposes, while potentially valuable to the region, is more effectively accomplished using standard methodology on a statewide and regionwide basis that builds
on the work already done in the statewide energy report that was released after this application.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant requests funding for recon, feasibility, and final design of wood-fired heating system(s) for the community of Kaltag\'s school and community buildings. AEA\'s heat recovery
system inventory indicates that AVEC\'s power system supplies a modest amount of heat to the school. The application does not supply information about fuel usage in buildings in Kaltag,
which uses 18000 gallons/year. There was not sufficent information in the application to assess project economics. Project management would be by the YK school district. Bill Wall
would perform the proposed recon and feasibility work. AEA is concerned that Wall will have sufficient time to perform this work since he is also involved in similar wood energy projects
in Upper Kobuk, Ft. Yukon, and McGrath.
Recommend partial funding for reconnaisance at $16,550.
The Tribal Council proposes installing 8 unspecified residential-sized wind turbines near tribal and municipal buildings. No onsite wind resource has been performed. AVEC proposes
locating met towers in the area and assess feasibility of wind development and interties in the St. mary\'s, Mountain Village, Pitka\'s Point, and Pilot Station. The current application
does not provide sufficient information on O&M measures and costs, turbine type and output, and permitting.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes to assess geothermal resources at Pilgrim Hot Springs through refurbishing existing shallow wells and drilling deep wells.
The Nome Energy Study identified development of the Pilgrim Hot Springs geothermal resource as the least-cost option for long-term power supply. The applications includes letters of
support from Nome Joint Utilities, Mary\'s Igloo Native Council (the owner of the adjacent land), and the USGS, who indicates that they will make a drill rig available for this project.
Project team includes landowner Catholic Chuch Diocese of Fairbanks. DGGS indicates support for the project (see above).
Recommend full funding at $2,349,751 with requirement that AEA and DGGS find that there is adequate likelihood of a viable geothermal resource based on summer 2009 shallow well assessments
before funding is provided for drilling deep wells.
Ormat Nevada Inc, holds a lease from Alaska DNR for geothermal exploration and development in Mount Spurr (Geothermal Lease Sale No. 3). Ormat proposes to use its own funding to support
reconnaissance studies on Mt. Spurr in summer 2009, but requests RE grant funding of $4.5 million to perform geophysical surveys, rig mobilization and demobilization and drilling of
four temperature gradient wells in the summer of 2010.
AEA and DGGS believe that assessment of geothermal resources of Mt. Spurr is very valuable. Since the temperature gradient wells will not be funded until summer of 2010, we feel it
is reasonable to assess the results of summer 2009 recon work before allocating funds to the drilling program.
Recommend no funding at this time.
Did not pass Stage 1
Applicant proposes modeling the existing geothermal resource at Chena Hot Springs to determine why pressures and temperatures of the resource appear to be declining. They will make
use of data from a USDOE-funded deep well. DGGS states "the benefit for the State is not the additional information that will be gained about Chena, but the additional information
that will be gained about this class of system".
Recommend full funding at $198,168.
The proposed project is a run-of-the -river hydro whose power would feed the Railbelt Grid near Moose Pass.
This project would be located on federal lands of the Chugach National Forest and be subject to licensing by FERC. Discussion of potential fish issues is absent from the application
and may pose a risk to ultimate development. Victor Creek drains into Kenai Lake and may provide spawning habitat for anadromous fish.
Work should include determination of the fisheries impacts posed by this project and the liklihood of obstacles to acheiving a FERC license to construct.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes using excess geothermal energy to make hydrogen for use as a transportation fuel. The project would involve building a $1.6M hydrogen fueling system and retrofitting
four vehicles to use hydrogen at $50,000 each. Applicant estimates fuel displacement savings at approximately $90,000/yr. Although we recognize a technology benefit to demonstrating
the use of a stranded renewable energy resource as transportation fuel, there is limited benefit to the public at large.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes to do exploratory drilling and data collection on the Manely Hot Springs area geothermal resource for the purpose of producing heat and power for the community. The
Denali Commission has provided $725,000 through the alternative energy RFP and AEA has provided $215,000 in renewable energy fund funding to TDX Power for the Manley Hot Springs Geothermal
Plant project. TDX Power is the local certificated electrical utility. In the current proposal there is no mention of any involvement by TDX in the proposed project nor any indication
of power sales discussions. This proposal is by an entity other than TDX, which already has been allocated funding for geothermal development in Manley.
Becuase the application does not demonstrate coordination with the funded TDX work, we recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes assessment of geothermal resources in the eastern Aleutians including Akutan, Cold Bay, False Pass, King Cove, Sand Point, and Nelson Lagoon. DGGS states "In summary,
hot spring systems in the general area are small and of only moderate temperature, unlikely to produce megawatt scale electricity. In addition, they are in Wilderness Areas, and unreasonably
distant from communities (esp. Sand Point). Coupled with the flawed and vague proposed exploration program this makes for a very weak proposal." AEA concurs.
Recommend no funding.
City of Galena requests funding to assess river energy resource within the bounds of IPP Hydro Green Energy\'s preliminary permit from FERC for development hydrokinetic power in the
Galena area.
The Legislature has already approved $565,439 in RE Fund round 1 grant funding to University of Alaska for an extensive assessment of hydrokinetic resources in 24 sites along Alaskan
rivers (app #88). The river energy resources of the Yukon River in the Galena area can be addressed at least on a recon level during this effort. Based on these results the City can
refine its application for further RE Fund funding.
Recommend no funding.
Application does not provide an adequate basis for Phase IV construction request. AEA is concerned that the project is too expensive. Trident plant may be able to use excess energy,
but there is no indication of communication. A refined estimate of the total construction cost and energy capacity of the project is required.
AEA recommends partial funding for milestones 1 - 6 (system evaluation, permitting/environmental review and final design of all repairs and upgrades).
Existing reconnaissance study completed in 1989 indicates the proposed site may be a good prospect. Substantial load at Trident and letter of support has been provided by them.
With the existing 105 kW hydro repaired, this project will not be needed unless extra power can be sold to Trident to offset their diesel generation and provide income to City. Trident
should agree to purchase excess power before any future grants for construction funds be considered
Recommend full funding. .
Applicant proposes to assess geothermal resources of Hot Springs Bay Valley near Akutan through drilling to confirm temperatures suggested by earlier surface studies. DGGS (see above)
indicates there is high likelihood of significant geothermal resource and indicates that the resource is one of four stand-out high temperature resources in the state. The proposed
reconaissance project would be completed within a year.
Although the energy load in the City of Akutan is relatively small, the Trident plant nearby has a 6-7 MW electrical load most of the year. Trident provided a general letter support
for the project in the application. Infrastructure projects planned include a $75 million airport and transportation system, a $24 million Corps of Engineers harbor, and an $8 million
road connecting the harbor to the city.
Applicant has also submitted two other applications--#249 to repair the existing hydro system, and #248 to investigate feasibility of developing Loud Creek hydro resources. These projects
more closely match the City load, while the geothermal resources may assist in regional economic development.
Recommend full funding at $2,995,000 with requirement that prior to any expenditure of funds Trident enter into an agreement that states its intent to participate in the reconnaissance
project and make use of energy produced by development of the geothermal resources.
North Slope Borough proposes feasibility and final design of transmission linking Atqasuk to lower cost natural gas-fired power in Barrow. No discussion of permits required. ABR is
on study team to address bird impacts.
Potential demonstration of HVDC.
This transmission line was studied in 1981 by Jack West Assoc along with a secondary line to Wainwright. The 2008 cost equivalent of the Barrow to Atqasuk portion of this line was estimated
in that 1981 study to be more than twice the application estimate. Additionally costs to convert Atqasuk residences to electric heat were not included nor the impacts of line losses
over 70 miles of transmission nor other potential upgrades needed to Atqasuk distribution system.
Recommend Tasks 1 - 3 in the amount of $175,000 be funded at this time due to the above concerns which provides for concept design, construction cost estimate and economic analysis.
Applicant proposes to recover heat from jacket water of existing diesel generators and pump hot water to various public buildings. Applicant estimated recoverable heat available but
did not correlate availability with specific building heating load. Applicant also did not provide an estimate of amount of arctic pipe that would be required or heat loss from distribution.
Projected O&M costs appear low. This is an expensive project that requires a high level of engineering and construction expertise. Due to the project\'s arctic location there will
be a high cost for design, installation, and long-term operation.
Recommend partial funding of $395,912 for final design (task #1).
Applicant proposes to recover heat from jacket water of existing diesel generators and pump hot water to various public buildings. Applicant estimated recoverable heat available but
did not correlate availability with specific building heating load. Applicant also did not provide an estimate of amount of arctic pipe that would be required or heat loss from distribution.
This is an expensive project that requires a high level of engineering and construction expertise. Due to the project\'s arctic location there will be a high cost for design, installation,
and long-term operation.
Recommend partial funding of $300,000 for final design (task #1).
Applicant proposes harvesting beetle-killed spruce and other wood from Anchorage residential lots and public lands, transporting it to Russian Jack park, and burning it to displace natural
gas currently heating 1/3rd of the greenhouse.
The concept of thinning and beautifying the Anchorage-area urban forests in order to displace fossil fuel is very appealing. However the relative scale required to economically displace
natural gas is much larger than that of the proposal. As proposed the economics of this proposal are not attractive.
Recommend no funding.
The City of Pilot Point requests funding for design and construction of a high penetration wind farm consisting of one Northwind 100 turbines to be site on City land. Pilot Point has
operated a 10 kW Bergey turbine for 5 years and were in the process of adding another in November. The City has consulted with USFWS and an archeologist to assess wildlife and historic/archaeologic
al issues. There no indications that permitting will be an issue. Project manager would be Dennis Meiners, who is also involved with projects in Kwig, Kong, and Tuntutliak.
Recommend full funding of $910,180.
Applicant proposes to construct a 1 tph wood pellet production plant in the Kotlik area including a 1000 sf building; harvest enough willow, alder and other biomass in the area to produce
1040 tons per year or pellets; purchase 130 pellet burning appliances for local residents; and retrofit 130 houses to use pellet appliances. Later development phases, not proposed
here, would develop a pellet-fired combined heat and power system for the community and develop liquid fuels from biomass for transportation.
The application demonstrates a substantial commitment to addressing local energy needs in Kotlik. However, we have the following concerns about the proposal:
1. Given that the proposal is for construction, the applicant does not reference or adequately address feasibility or design requirements listed in the request for applications (pp
17-18), including
a. Yearly sustained yield supply, harvest methods, delivered cost, and handling and processing methods for feedstock for the pellet facility.
b. Identification and assessment of system alternatives; economic and financial analysis of alternatives; conceptual design of the recommended system.
c. Detailed site location of the proposed facility.
d. A draft operational and business plan
2. The applicant does not demonstrate a project team that has experience in larger scale harvest and regeneration of biomass, or in developing and operating a densified biomass fuel
facility.
Recommend no funding.
Applicant proposes developing a hydro project at 5-mile Creek near Chitna. Project appears lower risk than previous study of hydro potential of O\'Brien Creek. AEA has prepared a conceptual
design, final design, and construction for the diesel power plant. Recon work was done in May 2008. Although applicant requests funding for recon, we would characterize it as feasibility
level work since it includes stream gauging, an investigation of penstock route and intake structure loaction. Applicant requests project management assistance from AEA.
Project would result in airport receiving power since it is nearby.
Recomm partial funding for milestones 1-4, 7 , 8 totaling $303,000 with requirement that AEA must approve "reconnaissance" feasibility report before additional funding provided.
Applicant proposes to install equipment that will recover unutilized heat from the diesel generator exhaust stacks for district heating and absorption chiller to make ice for the fishing
fleet. Utility has track record in heat recovery and high level of management expertise. Stack heat recovery is commercially viable.
Recommend full funding of $915,627.
Applicant proposes feasbility assessment, final design and permitting, and construction to retrofit the existing Knik Arm Power Plant (KAPP) to use local biomass as fuel to supply heat
and 5 MW of power to the Railbelt grid. The applicant requests $500,000 for feasibility assessment, $2,000,000 for final design and $12,500,000 for construction.
The applicant states that the facility would require 100,000 tons per year of primarily woody biomass fuel and that the project could receive a disposal fee of $10 per ton for material
that it receives. No reconnaissance level assessment was provided that justifies these figures.
Recommend no funding.
Crooked Creek Traditional Council proposes feasibility and conceptual design of a hydrokinetic energy device of undetermined capacity on the Kuskokwim River. Unlike river energy projects
proposed for funding in Igiugig and Ruby, this proposal does not demonstrate a sufficiently detailed work plan, a strong technical team, or statewide collaboration with others with
similar goals.
Recommend no funding.
Naknek Electric in partnership with the Bristol Bay Borough proposes to assess feasibility of developing a waste processing that recovering fish oil from salmon waste stream in the Naknek-Kvichak
fishery to be used as a fuel blend in the NEA power system. The project team would hire a consultant for $65,000 to quantify the estimated 26,000 ton per year fish waste stream from
13 local processors. The application refers to a recon study that NEA and the Borough have completed at a cost of $5000, however the study was not included with the application.
This application is the same as an earlier application submitted in round 1 (app #7) that did not pass stage 1 review due to an incomplete proposal (no cost and budget worksheet).
Recommend full funding of $75,000 with requirement that NEA submit and AEA review and approve recon study before funds are disbursed.
Applicant proposes final design and permitting of a hydro project at Crooked Creek. Feasibility study was already funded by DC/AEA alternative energy RFP. Project site on USFS land,
indicating FERC license will be required. AEA has constructed a power and bulk fuel system under the RUS energy program. Hiring engineering firm underway.
Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA approve the feasibility study now underway before any funds associated with this application are disbursed.
Did not pass Stage 1
The project proposes the installation of one NW100 wind turbine at the AVTEC. The wind turbine would generate very little power due to the poor wind resource at the training facility
however, the turbine would provide a significant training benefit for operators of wind-diesel systems.
The poor wind resource prevents this project from producing enough energy to fulfill the intent of the grant program. This project is not recommended for funding.
Applicant proposes to study the development of a 5 mile 8" submarine penstock to link Sunrise Lake to Wrangell, primarily to provide a water supply for Wrangell. The penstock would
need to convey 11.6 CFS of water to provide 1.7 MW of hydropower capacity. The stated penstock would be adequate to convey significantly less water (less than 1 CFS) thus reducing
available energy production by 90%.
The alternative would be to use larger capacity, high pressure penstock that will make the project economically infeasible for energy production. A study completed for the City of Wrangell
in 1998 by RW Beck for a larger 4 MW project connecting Sunrise Lake to Wrangell would cost $21M in 2009 dollars.
Recommend no funding.
AEA has considered this intertie under the AK-BC Export Intertie Project, and a recent study on the project, and meetings between AEA and the AK-BC Advisory Work Group has led AEA to
not pursue the project for the time being. One key determinate will be whether BC Transmission Corporation decides to construct an intertie link within BC to extend its network to
near the Alaska border. No such intertie exists now.
On this basis funding not recommended.
AEA has concerns about long penstock and the potential for the project to match resource to load. Flashy stream may increase risk to long term success of project.
Recommend $40,000 partial funding for Application\'s Phase 1 - Reconnaissance (stream gauging and reconnaissance study).
Improved access to the proposed Triangle Lk hydro site by recent road construction to Walden Point makes hydro development at more reasonable to consider. Project would be located on
federal trust land. Major issue is market for power. Will need to be determined in regional IRP.
Recommend full funding for feasibility.
Utility AP&T proposes, on behalf of Haines Assisted Living Inc, to assess temperature of groundwater in a test well ($100,000), prepare a final design and obtain permits ($85,486) and
construct a ground source heating system ($2,193,521) to displace 16,600 gallons per year of heating fuel for a assisted living facility under development. The test well would be completed
in April 2009. Final design permitting and material order would be completed in June, and construction would be completed in October.
AEA is concerned at the very high cost of the project compared to modest potential fuel displacement. Economics appear marginal and do not support applicants claims of cost savings
to residents. Although geothermal resources are generally sustainable, at this scale the project does not produce enough net benefits to be sustainable in the long term without some
form of subsidy.
Recommend no funding.
Project may interact with SSRAA smolt rearing and fish taking facility. Question whether AP&T will be able to access resource.
Recommend partial funding of $108,000 for Phase 2 - Feasibility (includes mapping, conceptual design, geotech and environmental surveys) with requirement that AP&T work closely with
SSRAA and provide for their involvement as a reviewer of the resulting feasibility study.
The applicants request funding for final design and permitting and construction funds for a 9 MW wind farm to be located at or near the Tesoro refinery in Nikiski. As noted in the application
this project will affect not only HEA but other Railbelt utilities.
Recommend full funding with the following grant conditions: 1) applicant is required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation
prior to release of construciton funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement with HEA or other public utility prior to release of construction grant funds.
Stage 3 review update: Following discussions on regional funding allocation, project funding is capped at $2,000,000 per affected community for Railbelt and lower energy cost Southeast
communities and $4,000,000 for other communities.
Applicant proposes biomass-fired CHP system in Kake which includes a Challenger gasifier in conjunction with a organic rankine cycle turbine-generator system. (Applicant submitted revised
information / see file. CCTHI Tribes of Alaska has withdrawn from the project and a letter requests that a new applicant, Agenor Resource TEchnolgies LLC take their place, thus leaving
the project with no Alaskan representation.) AIG Tribal Growth would provide project finance and budget reporting. AEA has the following concerns about the proposal:
1. No indication that the local certificated utility IPEC is involved or supportive of the project. Application simply states that the power would be sold local residents, without
regard to regulatory requirements.
2. 20-year fuel supply is not documented.
3. Budget includes $660,000 for "project finance advisory, project management, and engineering services for 12 months"
4. There are currently no biomass CHP systems operating in Alaska. AEA would like to see success of the RE Fund-supported Chena system on the road system near Fairbanks before investing
additional funds in a project in a more remote location.
Recommend no funding.
Kipnuk proposes design/permitting and construction of a high penetration 1.5 MW wind farm that would include 2 X 750 kW America\'s Wind Energy turbines, smart grid technology, electric
boilers at the school and water plant, and electric heaters at 180 residences to use excess wind generation. This project is a scaleup of similar systems in Kwigillingok and Kongigianek
that are being developed by Chaninik wind group. The turbine has not previously been installed in Alaska.
AEA believes that it makes sense to first prove out the system concept at smaller scales (Kwigillingok and Kongiganak) before moving to the scale and expense of this project. Not recommended
for funding.
Applicant proposes studying feasibility of using local wood and waste cardboard to heat public buildings including Cordova City Hall, the pool, the hospital, and schools. Applicant
estimates roughly 80,000 gallons per year of fuel usage in these buildings. The applicant does not provide a reconnaisance-level assessment, but does provide detailed information on
individual building fuel consumption. Project would be managed by the Native Village of Eyak and performed by a consulting engineer yet to be identified. Feasibility study would be
complete within 3-4 months of grant funding. There are support letters from the school district and the City. No sites are identified for boiler systems.
Recommend partial funding for phase 1--feasibility analysis at $50,000.
This application proposes a multistage wind energy program for the communities of Cordova and Eyak. The project includes a small scale regional wind resource assessment plan, wind farm
design and permitting, pilot scale wind projects, and construction of a community scale wind farm.
The application states that at this time it is unclear as to which entity, Cordova Electric Coop or Native Village of Eyak, would own the wind project. The wind site has not been selected
at this point. The pilot scale wind projects do not provide value commensurate with their costs. Recommend partial funding of $32,597 for the mobile anemometer wind assessment.
Kodiak Electric requests funding for a FERC license amendment and final design to add a 3rd turbine at Terror Lake. The turbine will interact with the power generated by the future
Pillar Mt. Wind project (under construction) to allow the combined system to meet the current peak load. No additional hydro annual energy will be generated by this additional turbine.
It will allow offsetting diesel generation to meet peak demand by providing spinning reserve for wind turbine backup.
Recommend full funding of $500,000.
Did not pass Stage 1 review
This request is for a reconnaissance study for the hydro electric plant for the Jack River located near the Native Village of Cantwell. The village is on the Railbelt Energy Grid served
by GVEA.
Recommend full funding of $194,540.
Applicant proposes feasibility through construction of a wind energy system of unspecified scale and location in Akiakchak. The applicant requests AEA to manage the project.
The application provides only a general description of the project. There is no detailed budget.
AEA recommends funding only onsite wind resource assessment at $15,000. AEA will supply an instrumented met tower.
Applicant proposes final design and construction of a stick-fired boiler system that would provide heat to the school in Thorne Bay. Wood would be supplied by sawmills in the industrial
park, landings, and small local wood cutters. A feasibility report was completed by TR Miles in 2006, followed by another report by JEDC. Contractors would be chosen based on existing
school district procurement policies, referenced in the app. School maintenance staff would operate the system.
Recommend full funding of $178,179 for final design and construction .
Applicant proposes recon and feasibility assessment of hydro projects that would serve the Bethel area. Although an engineering firm is not selected, selection would follow a formal
process. Storage hydro would be complementary with wind energy, under development in Bethel.
There may be significant permitting issues--see DNR comments. Substantial regional is demonstrated.
Recommend full funding of $250,000.
Applicant proposes to study feasibility of a two stick-fired wood boiler systems that would serve the school, other community buildings and a lodge. Wood would be supplied by local
sawmills in the Thorne Bay and Kasaan area. There would need to be a heat sale agreement between the tribal council and the City and/or other building owners.
Recommend full funding at $30,000.
Applicant proposes final design and construction of a stick-fired boiler system that would provide heat to the school in Coffman Cove. Wood would be supplied by local sawmills. A recon
assessment report was completed by JEDC in 2008. Contractors would be chosen based on existing school district procurement policies, referenced in the app. School maintenance staff
would operate the system. The applicant has requested that AEA manage the project. Project construction would be completed by summer 2010. The application includes a letter of support
from the City of Coffman Cove. The app also includes a letter stating interest by a local sawmill manager stating interest in providing slabs for fueling the boiler.
Recommend full funding of $341,056 for final design and construction .
APPLICATION WITHDRAWN BY SCHOOL DISTRICT
Valdez Fisheries Development Foundation requests funding for final design and permitting ($3.5 million) and site preparation ($2.5 million) for a $35 million cold storage facility that
would include cold and dry heated storage, a secondary seafood processing area, an office and loading docks. The project would also include equipment to recover 22.5 mmBtu/hr of heat
from the Petrostar Refinery and convert it into 45 million lb of -20 degree cold storage through a absorption chilling system and 450 kW of power through organic rankine cycle system.
The proposal budget does not separate out design engineering costs for the energy systems from those of the entire cold storage project. The energy system represents only a modest portion
of the entire project. Table 4 of appendix 7 estimates the installed cost of the absorption chilling system at $2.8 million, less than the grant request for final design. We were
unable to identify installed cost of the ORC units.
Recommend no funding.
This project has been licensed by FERC and is ready to construct. FERC licensing process has demonstrated need for project.
Recommend full funding of $12,020,000.
Stage 3 review update: Following discussions on regional funding allocation, project funding is capped at $2,000,000 per affected community for Railbelt and lower energy cost Southeast
communities and $4,000,000 for other communities.
Same as Stage 2 comments from Round 1 application #106.
Stage 3 review update: Following discussions on regional funding allocation, no funding is recommended consistent with policy that not more than one project in a community that uses
the same renewable resource be funded for construction in Rounds 1 and 2. In this case round 1 project #52 Nome Newton Peak Wind farm has a higher overall score and is recommended
for funding.
Nushagak Electric proposes final design and construction for Grant Lake hydro project. Feasibility analysis of Lake Elva hydro project was offered in RE Fund round 1 (project #6).
Applicant does not provide adequate justification to proceed to final design and construction, at this time. Recommend no funding.
FERC notice of competing preliminary applications is in process. Preliminary applications have been filed by the Petersburg Municipal Power and Light, C/B Wrangell, Cascade Creek LLC,
and City of Angoon.
Funding is not recommended at this time until the earlier funded reconnaissance study has been completed and found acceptable and a FERC ruling on the preliminary application found favorable
to City of Petersburg.
There are two entities planning wind energy projects in Bethel: 1) the City of Bethel (# 122) is proposing a 400 kW construction project in addition to a 100 kW project that was approved
by the AEA and the Denali Commission in the alternative energy RFP, and 2) Village Wind Power is proposing construction of up to 2 MW (# 67). Additionally AVCP Regional Housing Authority
is proposing study of hydro at the Kiseralik and Chikuminuk Rivers in Round 2 of the RE Fund. Therefore, there is a need for a regional integrated resource energy plan in the Bethel
area to coordinate when and where energy projects should be developed. This proposal should be considered in the context of an integrated plan to assure proper sizing, timing, and
integration of multiple energy projects.
Recommend full funding but require interconnection study and power purchase agreement to be finalized prior to releasing funds.
This application proposes a residential-sized system (4.9 kW photovoltaic and 1.8 kW wind) to serve the Ambler City Hall, washeteria, and the water plant. AEA requested, but did not
receive, information to support the claimed generation estimate of 25,000 kWh/yr (average 2.9 kW output).
Therefore AEA modeled system performance based on AEA\'s high resolution wind map (wind class 1--"Poor") and a federal solar database via National Renewable Energy Lab\'s HOMER model.
Results indicate a yearly output of 900 kWh for photovoltaic and 1700 kWh from wind based on HOMER modeling--a small fraction of Ambler\'s 1.3 million kWh/yr electrical load.
Given minimum impact on the community energy system and an installed cost that is high relative to the savings and displaced diesel, AEA does not recommend this project for funding.
The City of Napaskiak requested that AEA develop and manage a wind energy project. The application did not include cost estimate and budget, a schedule, or a project description sufficent
for evaluation.
AEA has proposed to the Denali Commission a conceptual design to be prepared as part of the Rural Power System Upgrade program. A meteorological tower should be installed as soon as
possible to provide data on which to base assessment of wind energy feasibility as part of the power system design.
Recommend no funding for this project through the RE fund because the project application does not provide suffient information to allow AEA to evaluate the application.
However, we recognize that the applicant contacted AEA staff repeatedly requesting technical assistance in assessing wind feasibility and support for filling out the RE Fund RFA application.
AEA did not have available staff time to assist the City. AEA will assess staffing priorities in March 2009 for providing met tower and wind energy planning assistance for Napaskaiak
and other communities in similar situations.
This project is linked to a previously funded renovation and energy upgrade of the Delta HS that includes the heating system and the external thermal envelop. Together the projects
will result in the development of a fully fuctional, energy efficient facility that uses local sources of renewable energy. There is substantial accessible biomass wood supply in the
upper Tanana from sawmills, two pellet mills in development, and state-owned forest land. Tok Umbrella Corp received a grant for a whole tree chipper which can potentially be used
to supply fuel for this project. Recommend.
Applicant proposes final design and construction of a ground source heat pump system at the Juneau Aquatic center. Project appears well-conceived and organized with relatively low risk.
Excellent technical analysis and detailed cost info.
Recommend for full funding.
This application is for installation of 475 kW of wind turbines in Kwigillingok, upgrades to the existing diesel system, recovered heat at the washeteria, and smart meters and thermal
stoves in 20 residences to displace fuel oil with excess wind energy. The project would be located on village corporation land, and the applicant states that, based on discussions
with USFWS, FAA, and Corps of Engineers, no further authorizations are needed.
The introduction of a high penetration system into a moderate-sized community that includes remotely controlled dumploads at the washeteria and 20 residences as well as a low load diesel
component brings along a significant level of complexity.
Recommend full funding with the follwing conditions that must be met before funds are disbursed: 1) AEA approval of final design, 2) the grantee establish a five-year operation and
maintenance contract with an contractor acceptable to AEA that has expertise in this area.
Given the substantial demonstration value of this project AEA will require close monitoring of system performance.
Applicant requests feasibility assessment, final design and permitting, and construction funding for a 24 MW wind energy project near Healy. Feasibility work would begin in 2009 and
be completed by March 2010. Final design and permitting would be complete by October 2011. Construction would complete by the end of 2012.
GVEA has performed substantial onsite wind assessment since 2003 and confidently estimates a capacity factor of 33-36%, indicating a good to excellent resource.
Since the project is not fully defined at this point, the proposal does not indicate who owns the land that the project would occupy, but lists a number of public and private landowners
in the project vicinity. Permit requirements include USACE wetland and river crossing, FAA, Alaska Railroad, and State DNR easements and historical/archaeological approvals. GVEA
has studied avian impacts in the area as part of the Northern Intertie. The project area has been identified as a major sandhill crane migration route and will require further study
for potential mitigation activities.
The proposal is for a major Railbelt energy project that would require substantial study for proper integration and operation. Development should be coordinated with the Railbelt Integrated
Resource Plan.
Recommend funding for Task 2--Detailed Feasibility, minus the initial wind turbine payment. Recommended amount is $6,770,260 - $3,770,260 (initial wind turbine payment) - $28,000 (grant
from Denali Commission/AEA alternative energy RFP for wind interconnection study) = $2,972,000. Since GVEA has committed to a 15% match in Task 2, we recommend 85% of $2,972,000, or
$2,526,200.
Golden Valley Electric Association proposes to develop a solar thermal system for the Denali Education Center owned by Denali Education Foundation. The project would save an estimated
32-36 MWh/yr and cost $190,000. At an educational center the project would demonstrate technology potentially applicable to other areas of Alaska.
In order to minimize risk of scalding and provide adequate energy storage this project will have to include significant O&M and controls costs.
Currently GVEA is working on a feasibility analysis, not yet complete. Recommend full funding with requirement that AEA approve feasibility analysis and conceptual design in progress.
This application is for installation of 475 kW of wind turbines in Kwigillingok, upgrades to the existing diesel system, recovered heat at the washeteria, and smart meters and thermal
stoves in 20 residences to displace fuel oil with excess wind energy. The project would be located on village corporation land, and the applicant states that, based on discussions
with USFWS, FAA, and Corps of Engineers, no further authorizations are needed.
The introduction of a high penetration system into a moderate-sized community that includes remotely controlled dumploads at the washeteria and 20 residences as well as a low load diesel
component brings along a significant level of complexity.
Recommend full funding with the following conditions that must be met before funds are disbursed: 1) AEA approval of final design, 2) the grantee establish a five-year operation and
maintenance contract with an contractor acceptable to AEA that has expertise in this area.
Given the substantial demonstration value of this project AEA will require close monitoring of system performance.
Independent power producer Banner Wind LLC has erected 18 Entegrity EW15 turbines providing installed capacity of 1,170 kW. Banner Wind LLC is owned by Bering Straits Native Corporation
and Sitnasuak Native Corporation. Nome Joint Utilities System has requested funding for the 2-mile intertie between Banner Wind farm and the Nome power system, completed in December
2008, through a separate proposal (Nome Banner Peak transmission #47). We also note there is a separate proposal for larger turbines on Newton Peak #52, consistent with the USDOE/AEA-supported
Nome Region Energy Assessment. The three proposals do not indicate coordination between wind projects, and AEA is concerned that this may result in unnecessarily high development,
integration, and operation costs.
NJUS is preparing a feasibility assessment for the Newton Peak project that will address the quality of the wind energy resource, wind system design and integration into the existing
power system, operation and maintenance, land ownership and other development issues. This study should provide valuable information for integrating the Newton Peak and Banner Peak
wind farms into the NJUS system.
Recommend full funding for expenses incurred after August 20, 2008 with the following conditions: 1) before any funds are disbursed NJUS provide to AEA, and AEA approves, a feasibility
assessment and conceptual design for the Newton Peak project that addresses integration of the Newton Peak and Banner Peak wind farms and other developent issues, 2) applicant required
to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation prior to release of construction funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement with
NJUS prior to release of construction grant funds.
This project is ready to go. Mechanical work to be awarded via bid process. Recommend.
AEA considered this project in the Denali Commission / AEA alternative energy RFP, and has offered $1.1 million in state and Denali Commission grant funds to the project. In addition
the Southeast Conference has received $2 million from the state legislature for this project. This appears to be a viable hydro resource that will benefit the Prince of Wales network
especially given recent funding allocated to an extension of the network to the northern portion of the island and load growth in the existing. This hydropower project will apparently
be dispatched in conjunction with AP&T\'s Black Bear Lk and South Fork hydros. The applicants state that the proposed project will only be used after the existing projects are fully
dispatched.
Recommend with the following grant conditions: 1) applicant joint venture will be required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation
prior to release of construction funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement with AP&T prior to release of construction grant funds. The recommended funding amount equals total
amount appropriated, offered, and requested from the state and Denali Commission ($13,600,000) minus amount already offered and appropriated ($3,100,000).
This application proposes to expand the planned Pillar Mt. windfarm from 1.5 MW to 4.5 MW, thus boosting renewable energy production from the current 80% to 91%, and displacing 1.2 million
gallons of diesel per year. The project development team is experienced, and project economics are favorable.
Recommend full funding. AEA has already allocated funding of $1 million of RE Fund dollars. Therefore, recommended additional funding is the proposed $9.65 million minus $1 million
= $8.65 million.
Applicant seeks funding for a 2 MW wind energy project in the Delta area. The project, as submitted, would install 20 Northwind 100 kW turbines. In a letter dated November 13, after
the submittal deadline, the applicant requested an amendment to the project that would result in substituting 2 Americas Wind Energy 900 kW turbines for eighteen of the Northwind 100
turbines, yielding a reduced cost. Since AEA received the requested amendment after the deadline, the evaluation here is based on the original submittal. AEA will evaluate the amended
proposal in Round 2 of the RFA.
The applicant has already received $801,500 in RE Fund funding from AEA for installation of NorthWind 100 wind turbines on the proposed site. The applicant\'s current proposal would
bring the total number of NorthWind 100 turbines up to twenty.
Based on AEA\'s high resolution wind map, the wind resource at the proposed location is Class 1 (poor). However the applicant provided 10 months of wind data that indicates a better
wind resource. For the purpose of this evaluation, AEA has assumed a Class 3 resource (fair).
Recommend partial funding with the following grant conditions: 1) AEA will require confirmation of an acceptable wind resource prior to dispersing funds to the project. 2) applicant
required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation prior to release of construction funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement
with GVEA prior to release of construction grant funds. The recommended funding amount equals total amount requested from the state ($6,269,750) minus amount already offered ($801,500).
This proposal requests $20.5 million for construction of a plant that would convert 33,000 dry tons/yr of sawmill waste into 1.63 million gallons/yr of liquid fuel and 33,600 MWh/yr
of power. Although the proposal references recon, feasibility, and final design as development stages, it lumps the development stages together and does not provide individual timelines
or budgets for development stages. Thus it is not possible to recommend funding for any intermediate stages.
We have the following concerns regarding the application: 1) No evidence of experience in projects similar to the one proposed, 2) No demonstration of local support or interest in the
developing the project or purchasing fuel and power from the project, 3) Little documentation of feedstock availability and delivered cost, 4) Overly optimistic timeline for preconstruction
activities, 5) No examples of facilities that the team has developed that use the proprietary fuel and power production processes.
Recommend no funding.
The applicants request funding for final design and permitting and construction funds for a 15-18 MW wind farm to be located at or near the Tesoro refinery in Nikiski. Because Tesoro
is a customer of HEA and, under this proposal, would purchase power from BQ Energy, the only member of applicant Kenai Winds, there appears to be regulatory implications. In the application
there is no indication that the plan has the approval of RCA. As noted in the application this project will affect not only HEA but other Railbelt utilities.
Recommend partial funding for final and design and permitting (phase 3 tasks 1-10 excluding task 11 the downpayment on wind turbines) with the following conditions: 1) Prior to the
release of funds applicant is required to submit, and AEA must approve, a detailed plan to obtain RCA regulatory approval of power purchase agreements and certification 2) Because
this project involves public funds AEA will require that all power produced by this project be sold to a public utility.
Applicant proposes resource assessment and feasibility analysis and permitting/deployment of a hydrokinetic device at Nenana. The project team appears well-qualified.
The primary benefit of this project to the State of Alaska is the demonstration and testing of a technology with significant potential in rural Alaska. However, project costs appear
excessive. At $975,000, (p13) cost of development and construction of the 30 kW ORPC generating unit is of concern, especially in regard to the potential for eventual technology commercialization.
Recommend partial funding for resource assessment (tasks 1-3).
The project file contains correspondence indicating lack of agreement and poor communication between the two critical stakeholders: the City of Unalaska as the certificated utility,
and KSLC LLC, the resource owner.
See DGGS comment above under DMLW.
The fish processors are not partners to this proposal, nor have they endorsed the concept which depends almost completely on their participation.
The project budget is too high.
Project appears to be championed by outside interests and has not adequately included the local community, government, or power utility. Project not recommended for funding because of
lack of communication, support, and coordination among stakeholders. Recommend prior to any state funding that critical stakeholders determine project development approach and leadership
in order to ensure state funds benefit residents of the State of Alaska.
This wind energy project would supply most of its output during the winter months, when load is greatest. Applicant Alaska Wind Energy is a partnership of Cook Inlet Region Inc. and
renewable energy developer EnXco Development Corp. The project would be located on CIRI land. The project would tie into the HEA system at the Anchor Point substation. A 10-mile
24.9 kV line would connect the wind turbines to the substation. The final location of the line is not yet established. The line may cross CIRI, Native Village of Ninilchik, Kenai
Borough, and State land.
The applicant references a number of existing project feasibility analyses, but does not provide the analyses or their content in detail. The application includes a letter of support
from local utility Homer Electric. Project risks indicated in the application are the ability to obtain a power purchase agreement with HEA and powerline right-of-way with land owners.
By December 2009 the applicant proposes to obtain all permits and rights-of-way, complete all necessary field studies, complete a design-build package, finalize design, and substantially
complete construction.
Given the uncertainty of obtaining necessary permits and rights-of-way, allocation of construction funding for the project appears premature. Recommend partial funding for Final Design
and Permitting with requirements that before the disbursement of grant funds that AEA review and approve feasibility studies.
In the application there is no indication that the plan has the approval of RCA. As noted in the application this project will affect not only HEA but other Railbelt utilities.
Recommend partial funding for final and design and permitting (phase 3 tasks 1-10 excluding task 11 the downpayment on wind turbines) with the following conditions: 1) Prior to the
release of funds applicant is required to submit, and AEA must approve, a detailed plan to obtain RCA regulatory approval of power purchase agreements and certification 2) Because
this project involves public funds AEA will require that all power produced by this project be sold to a public utility.
The proposer offers a significant match and claims monetary benefits to the Muni of Anchorage; however there is no discussion of power purchase agreement in section 4.4.3 (Power Purchase/Sale)
although a 6 cents/kWh is indicated in Section 2.5.5. Primary hurdles for the applicant are the lack of gas purchase agreement, land for project site, and power purchase agreement.
Proposal 68-Anchorage Landfill Gas Electricity Construction submitted by the Muni requests funding to do similar work. While both proposals have technical and economic merit, the application
by the Muni may simplify the project. Under project 68 the Muni could work with Alaska Wind Energy LLC or another IPP to develop and operate the project.
We recommend that either proposal 68 or proposal 93 be funded, but not both For the purposes of funding allocation we are recommending funding for project 68.
Applicant proposes a 2.7 kW photovoltaic / battery system that would cost approximately $123,000. Assuming a capacity factor of 15% the project would displace approximately 350 gallons
per year, thus saving about $2,100 per year.
This proposal does not account for inverter losses or roundtrip battery storage efficiency. An efficient diesel generator and heat recovery system would provide more economic benefit.
AEA recommends that the applicant pursue a powerhouse project, which appears to be more applicable to the applicant\'s goal of re-establishing the village of Napaimute. Depending on
available resources, AEA can provide assistance identifying potential funding sources and preparing grant application materials.
Not recommended for funding.
This application proposes a 225 kW high penetration wind system that would serve the St. George power system, including a new lodge and fish processing facility to be developed by APICDA.
The project would be located on St. George Tanaq Native Corporation land. The City and Corporation have not yet come to formal agreement on using the land, but the application states
that there are no problems with site ownership, and the Corporation submitted a support letter for the project.
The introduction of a high penetration system into a moderate-sized community that includes remotely controlled dumploads brings along a significant level of complexity. Successful
performance will require commitment to providing skilled and timely operation and maintenance.
Recommend full funding with the following conditions that must be met before funds are disbursed: 1) AEA approval of final design, 2) the grantee establish a five-year operation and
maintenance contract with an contractor acceptable to AEA that has expertise in this area.
This project would result in a medium penetration wind project in a community with very high diesel prices. AEA completed a new power plant in 2006. TDX Power installed a 65 kW wind
turbine on behalf of the utility in 2007 using USDA RUS grant and APICDA funding, Currently the turbine is wired to the power plant but not connected. This proposal would provide
funding to integrate the turbine into the power system and develop a heat recovery system in the existing power plant and provide for electric boilers in the lodge and school to use
excess wind energy.
Nikolski is very remote and difficult to access at times due to weather, has a harsh environment, and the proposed wind-diesel system is technically complex.
Recommend with condition that prior to AEA providing grant funds, the grantee establish a five-year operation and maintenance contract with an contractor acceptable to AEA that has
expertise in this area.
Applicant proposes to assess hydrokinetic resource in 24 Alaskan locations. Proposal includes an excellent use of university resources and good training for Alaskan students in alternative
energy technologies that may be deployed in Alaska.
The proposal is not clear on how will sites will be chosen. AEA project manager will assist the project team.
Recommend full funding.
AEA considered this project in the Denali Commission / AEA alternative energy RFP, and has offered $553,071 in state grant funds to the projects. This appears to be a viable hydro resource
that will benefit the Railbelt network. At 2 MW, the project\'s relatively small capacity and energy output will likely not impact regional planning.
Recommend with the following grant conditions: 1) applicant required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation prior to release
of construction funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement with MEA prior to release of construction grant funds. The recommended funding amount equals total amount requested from
the state ($2,242,961) minus amount already offered ($553,071).
This proposal seeks complete development funding for a hydro resource that, while promising, is currently undefined. The proposal does not include reconaissance-level analysis that
would justify further stages of development. However the rough assessment provided is sufficient to justify funding reconnaissance level assessment.
Recommend partial funding for reconnaissance study (task 1).
NOTE: On Jan 9, 2009 scoring was adjusted in light of information from a November 18, 2008 press release on VRB Power Systems\' website. The press release revealed that the company
was unsuccessful in seeking offers for the merger, sale, refinance or other strategic alternatives for the company. As a result VRB Power Systems has laid-off or given notice terminating
most of its employees, and has ceased accepting new orders. AEA was unsuccessful in contacting VRB Power Systems by phone. Based on this information a VRB flow battery will likely
not be part of the Kotzebue Wind Farm Expansion Project. Alternate storage and/or integration options will need to be considered.
This project is attractive because it will result in a high penetration wind farm in Alaska\'s first large-scale wind farm. There are two other proposals for wind development in the
Nome (52) and Unalakleet (50) utilities that are proposed be developed jointly--e.g. potentially sharing turbine purchase and cranes.
Due to the issues with the proposed energy storage system (VRB Flow Battery) and its role in mantaining power quality under increased wind penetration, more assessment and modeling
will be required to define system architecture and potential performance.
Because of the importance of the project and its relationship to the projects in Unalakleet and Nome, we recommend full funding with the condition that prior to the release of construction
funds the applicant must provide for AEA\'s review and approval detailed final design, detailed construction budget, and detailed integration plans based on emperical load and wind
resource data.
The short-term economics of this project are moderately beneficial, however its primary value is as a pilot project to prove the technical feasibility of this technology.
The technology is just recently migrating into the commercial realm and has significant potential in rural Alaska.
The applicant team has proven its competence in the 2008 season.
Recommend full funding.
NOTE: On Jan 9, 2009 scoring was adjusted in light of information from a November 18, 2008 press release on VRB Power Systems\' website. The press release revealed that the company
was unsuccessful in seeking offers for the merger, sale, refinance or other strategic alternatives for the company. As a result VRB Power Systems has laid-off or given notice terminating
most of its employees, and has ceased accepting new orders. AEA was unsuccessful in contacting VRB Power Systems by phone. After reconsidering the project AEA is no longer recommending
funding for this project for funding.
The following text shows AEA\'s original comments:
[The applicant states that there will be a 15% reduction in diesel peak power which will directly lower the cost of electrical generation while allowing for a higher level of wind penetration.
AEA\'s review suggests limited economic benefits without installing more wind capacity, but there will be significant field demonstration benefits that could facilitate field deployment
of the flow battery technology.
The applicant\'s modeling effort, which was based on HOMER, focused on economic dispatch and did not address critical power quality and stability considerations. Both economics and
power quality/stability should be addressed under this project.
This project is attractive because it demonstrates a promising mass energy storage technology. The application is related to a separate proposal (85) for an identical energy storage
system that includes 3MW of wind capacity.
NREL prepared a technical review of proposal 85 for AEA. They conclude that the system is technically viable, although "...still in its deployment infancy."
We recommend full funding for either this proposal 83 (flow battery only) or proposal 85 (battery and additional wind generation), but not both.]
Applicant proposes demonstrating an energy storage technology that has potential to increase the value and use of intermittent and stranded renewable energy resources such as excess
hydro, wind, tidal, and wave. Project participants are credible. Introducing the uncertainty and risk of a pre-commercial ammonia production process (SSAS) does not benefit the primary
goal of this proposal, which is to demonstrate ammonia production and storage from a renewable energy resource in Alaska.
Recommend full funding with the requirement that prior to funding, project participants prepare a technical and economic assessment acceptable to AEA that confirms viability of approach.
.
This proposal includes four components: 1) Final design and construction of a natural gas-fired combined heat and power (CHP) plant, 2) final design and construction of a thermoelectric
generator (TEG) using heat from the CHP plant, 3) final design and construction of a 125 kW microhydro plant at California Cr. and feasibility through construction of microhydro at
Virgin Cr., and 4) reconnaissance through construction of wind and solar power generation.
We exclude from consideration the combined CHP /TEG facility, since it is fueled by natural gas in an area that has viable renewable energy resources. We exclude the wind and solar
plants because the application did provide enough information to evaluate the component of the project. We limit consideration to California Creek microhydro, since this is the only
component of the application that is defined in suffient detail for meaningful evaluation.
California Cr. hydro appears to be a valid stand-alone project. However, the feasibility analysis does not adequately address interconnection with Chugach Electric, permitting, land
use agreements, and resource availability. Recommend partial funding for reconaissance.
Applicant proposes to install 50 kW of photovoltaic in the existing Shungnak power system. Resulting project would be the largest hybrid PV-diesel system in the state. PV system would
generate an average of 5 kW. AVEC submitted virtually identical proposals for Ambler, Noatak, and Shungnak (#75, 76, and 77). The project would be the largest utility scale photovoltaic-diesel
hybrid project in Alaska.
O&M costs, which were assumed to be zero in the application, may include panel cleaning, rreplacement of broken panels, electrical component replacement (inverters, controls, relays),
snow removal from panels and twice annual panel angle adjustment. During rare periods of peak PV output and miminum electrical loads AEA questions whether there will there be system
stability issues and whether the diesel genset efficiency and reliability of the smallest genset will be adversely affected.
Installed cost of the project is high relative to the estimated savings. As an arctic utility PV-diesel hybrid application, however, the project has demonstration value above its modest
economic return. For this reason we feel it is reasonable to support funding one of the three PV-diesel proposals as a demonstration.
Recommend full funding for either project #75, 76, or 77 at the choice of applicant.
Applicant proposes to install 50 kW of photovoltaic in the existing Noatak power system. Resulting project would be the largest hybrid PV-diesel system in the state. PV system would
generate an average of 5 kW. AVEC submitted virtually identical proposals for Ambler, Noatak, and Shungnak (#75, 76, and 77). The project would be the largest utility scale photovoltaic-diesel
hybrid project in Alaska.
O&M costs, which were assumed to be zero in the application, may include panel cleaning, rreplacement of broken panels, electrical component replacement (inverters, controls, relays),
snow removal from panels and twice annual panel angle adjustment. During rare periods of peak PV output and miminum electrical loads AEA questions whether there will there be system
stability issues and whether the diesel genset efficiency and reliability of the smallest genset will be adversely affected.
Installed cost of the project is high relative to the estimated savings. As an arctic utility PV-diesel hybrid application, however, the project has demonstration value above its modest
economic return. For this reason we feel it is reasonable to support funding one of the three PV-diesel proposals as a demonstration.
Recommend full funding for either project #75, 76, or 77 at the choice of applicant.
Applicant proposes to install 50 kW of photovoltaic in the existing Ambler power system. Resulting project would be the largest hybrid PV-diesel system in the state. PV system would
generate an average of 5 kW. AVEC submitted virtually identical proposals for Ambler, Noatak, and Shungnak (#75, 76, and 77). The project would be the largest utility scale photovoltaic-diesel
hybrid project in Alaska.
O&M costs, which were assumed to be zero in the application, may include panel cleaning, rreplacement of broken panels, electrical component replacement (inverters, controls, relays),
snow removal from panels and twice annual panel angle adjustment. During rare periods of peak PV output and miminum electrical loads AEA questions whether there will there be system
stability issues and whether the diesel genset efficiency and reliability of the smallest genset will be adversely affected.
Installed cost of the project is high relative to the estimated savings. As an arctic utility PV-diesel hybrid application, however, the project has demonstration value above its modest
economic return. For this reason we feel it is reasonable to support funding one of the three PV-diesel proposals as a demonstration.
Recommend full funding for either project #75, 76, or 77 at the choice of applicant.
NANA has prepared a regional plan for this area, that recommends further work in hydro development for this subregion. The applicants propose detailed hydro assessment work in the area
near Ambler, Kobuk, Shungnak, and Kiana.
There are no far north utility hydroelectric projects currently in operation in Alaska. Because of this there are risks with hydro development in this region.
The economic analysis shows little savings compared to project cost assuming the hydro development serves only local communities. If the project were to serve a large load, such as
a mine, project economics would likely improve.
Recommend.
Applicant proposes feasibility and design of a 300 kW hydro system in Old Harbor. Proposal will follow up earlier federally-sponsored project development work in 2001-03 that concluded
in shelving the project due to high costs compared to displaced fuel. New configuration will assess adding flow from a nearby creek. Recommend full funding.
Proposal is well thought out and permitting risks appear low because of previous USFWS consultation. Construction budget is detailed and realistic. The project appears to result in
high wind penetration, but the proposal does not provide detailed information regarding integration of wind into the existing system. Given a fuel displacement of 29,000 gallons and
a project cost of $ 3.5 million, net monetary benefits over the life of the project appear to be less than project cost.
Prior to release of construction funding AEA requires the applicant to produce detailed integration documentation and dispatch strategy for the wind-diesel system.
Proposal is well thought out, and given existing turbines in Toksook, permtting risks are low. Construction budget is detailed and realistic. The project appears to result in high
wind penetration, but the proposal does not provide detailed information regarding integration of wind into the existing system. Given a fuel displacement of 11,000 gallons and a
project cost of over $1 million, net monetary benefits over the life of the project appear to be less than project cost.
As a part of final design AEA requires the applicant to produce detailed integration documentation and dispatch strategy for the wind-diesel system.
Applicant proposes design and construction of a 300 kW wind farm in Quinhagak. Proposal is well thought out and permitting risks appear low because of previous USFWS consultation.
Construction budget is detailed and realistic. The project appears to result in high wind penetration, but the proposal does not provide detailed information regarding integration
of wind into the existing system. Given an annual fuel displacement estimated at 46,223 gallons and a project cost of $4.3 million, present value of net monetary benefits over the
life of the project appear to be less than the project cost.
Recommend full funding with provision that prior to release of construction funding AEA requires the applicant to produce detailed integration documentation and dispatch strategy for
the wind-diesel system.
Given overall Muni of Anchorage support and extent of matching funds we expect successful power sales agreement negotiations. Note proposal 93 - Anchorage Landfill Gas Electricity
requests funding for Alaska Wind Energy LLC to do similar work. While both have technical and economic merit, the application by the owner of the landfill may simplify the project.
Under this project the Muni can work with an Alaska Wind or another IPP to develop and operate the project. Additionally the Muni proposes 50% match.
We recommend that either proposal 68 or proposal 93 be funded, but not both.
.
There are two entities planning wind energy projects in Bethel: 1) the City of Bethel (# 122) is proposing a 400 kW construction project in addition to a 100 kW project that was approved
by the AEA and the Denali Commission in the alternative energy RFP, and 2) Village Wind Power is proposing construction of up to 2 MW (# 67). Additionally AVCP Regional Housing Authority
is proposing study of hydro at the Kiseralik and Chikuminuk Rivers in Round 2 of the RE Fund. Therefore, there is a need for a regional integrated resource energy plan in the Bethel
area to coordinate when and where energy projects should be developed. This proposal should be considered in the context of an integrated plan to assure proper sizing, timing, and
integration of multiple energy projects.
A 2 MW wind project will likely impact system reliability and stability of the existing diesel power system. However there is no allowance in the proposed work plan and budget to integrate
the project into the existing network to ensure continued reliability. Without the integration work the viability of the project cannot be assured.
On the basis of our integration concerns, AEA recommends not awarding funding for construction.
Applicant proposes to study impacts on raptors and migratory birds of a potential 40-50 MW wind farm near Delta that would tie into the GVEA grid. Proposal follows onsite wind measurement
at two sites, for 9 and 21 months that estimatesa 30% capacity factor. Applicant is an IPP that includes AP&T as a partner.
Recommend full funding with the requirement that applicant will be required to cooperate and share data, including interconnection study analysis and outputs, on a non-confidential basis
with the ongoing AEA-sponsored Railbelt Regional Integrated Resource Plan project.
The City of Tenakee has received funding for assessing feasibility of this project under the DC/AEA alternative energy grant program.
Recently AEA has learned there is potential for a regional power solution that would interconnect Tenakee, Hoonah, and Pelican. It would allow hydro (and possibly geothermal) resources
to be shared. This proposal, while well-conceived from the standpoint of serving only Tenakee, may not be optimal for a regional solution.
AEA does not recommend funding for this proposal. AEA will work with Southeast Conference and other stakeholders to move toward a regional power solution.
Applicant proposes to assess feasibility of and prepare conceptual designs for potential wind systems in Pedro Bay, Port Alsworth, Egegik, Iliamna-Newhalen-Nondalton, Port Heiden and
Pilot Point. The major outcome of the work would be a set of bid documents for a regional design-build package for wind systems in suitable locations. Recommend specialized experts
to consult in wind-diesel integration work.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes final design of small, efficient wood-fired boilers that would use local beetle-killed wood to heat school buildings in Pedro Bay, Newhalen/Iliamna, Nondalton, Kokhanok
and Port Alsworth displacing approximately 40,000 gallons of heating fuel per year.
Recommend full funding.
Note that app# 14 Chignik Lagoon hydro, app# 62 Chignik hydro/wind feas, and app#40 Chignik Hydro all address the same subregion. Because all three proposals request feasiblity assistance,
the proposed wind/hydro integration/transmission budget is too large. Milestones 7 to 13 are final design and permitting activities that should only be undertaken if a decision is
made to interconnect the three communities. Recommend that feasbility milestones 1, 3-6 be funded at this time and that the three applicants be required to coordinate on data collection,
study and milestones.
Proposal includes a new 456 kW genset in addition to the exhaust and jacket water heat recovery system. Recommend partial funding for the complete heat recovery system development,
but excluding the genset and associated freight. The genset is not considered an element of the "waste heat recovery" system eligible for funding under the RE Fund legislation.
Proposal number 30 requests funding for development of a community wood heating system that would likely interact with this proposal. Proposal 30 refers to integration with a water
project with Village Safe Water and refers to future coordination with this project. We note there are different engineering teams supporting the two projects. On this basis we require
coordination of design of both projects.
Technology demonstration appears valuable, however the demonstration project is not defined well enough to assure that the construciton project will be successful. Reconnaisance and
feasibility work is not finalized and incomplete. There is no evidence of a technology review and selection process. There is no detailed assessment of delivered biomass fuel cost
and long-term availability. There is no detailed budget for equipment and contractual.
Because the concept appears promising, recommend partial funding for design, NEPA permitting, and resource selection. Prior to granting any funds, the applicants will be required to
submit a detailed budget for these activities.
Applicant proposes reconnaissance and feasibility assessment of stick- or chip-fired community wood heating stems in Kobuk, Shungnak and Ambler that would displace around 130,000 gallons
of fuel oil. While economics of the project remain in question, feasibility study will result in the development of valuable biomass resource and utilization information for three
communities with high fuel costs and limited options.
Recommend full funding.
This project is approximately 45% complete and has received funding support from Deanli Commission through AEA\'s rural power system upgrade program. Currently the project is halted
due to insufficient construction funding. There are no other major barriers to development.
While the project did not indicate a particular team, the application describes a process underway with EDA for selection of a design and construction team.
AEA recommends full funding with the following conditions before funding is made available: 1) City of Atka provide a revised and detailed project schedule, including outstanding permits,
and budget, 2) submit management team resumes for approval by AEA, 3) submit revised final design and cost estimate for AEA approval.
This appears to be a viable hydro resource that will benefit the Railbelt network. At 1 MW, the project\'s relatively small capacity and energy output will likely not impact regional
planning.
Recommend with the following grant conditions: 1) applicant required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation prior to release
of construction funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement with MEA prior to release of construction grant funds.
Recommend with conditions.
It is likely that viable projects with proposed energy savings can be completed. Recommend full funding with requirement that prior to disbursement of construction funding applicant
submit feasibility and final design documents acceptable to AEA that indicate viable project.
Applicant requested proposal be withdrawn.
Applicant proposes a high-efficiency cordwood-fired boiler to supply heat to a community building in Galena. Project appears well-conceived and economic. Project management and development
team is strong.
Recommend full funding.
Applicant proposes construction of a 400 kW (net) biomass (wood and paper)-fired combined heat and power plant in the North Pole area. The project would include two 250 UTC Pure Cycle
ORC units; a biomass boiler; fuel processing, storage, and handling equipment; cooling pond; controls and grid tie-in. As a small biomass-fired CHP system the project holds considerable
value as a demonstration project for rural heat and power production. Note that $1 million of the requsted $2 million has been approved for RE Fund funding already.
Recommend with the following grant conditions: 1) applicant required to petition RCA for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation prior to release
of construction funds, 2) establish a power purchase agreement with GVEA prior to release of construction grant funds. The recommended funding amount equals total amount requested
from the state ($2,000,000) minus amount already offered ($1,000,000).
The 3 MW Newton Peak wind project proposed by local utility Nome Joint Utilities Systems (NJUS) represents substantial additional wind generation capacity for the Nome system. It
is consistent with the Nome Regional Energy Assessment findings. It is part of a joint effort to coordinate a bulk purchase of large turbines within the region. The separate 1,170
kW Banner Peak Wind project (proposal #106) has recently been constructed in a different area. NJUS has requested funding for the intertie that connects the Banner Peak project to
the Nome system (proposal #47). The three proposals do not indicate coordination between wind projects, and AEA is concerned that this may result in unnecessarily high development,
integration, and operation costs.
The application states NJUS is preparing a feasibility assessment for the Newton Peak project that will address the quality of the wind energy resource, wind system design and integration
into the existing power system, operation and maintenance, land ownership and other development issues. This study should provide valuable information for integrating the Newton Peak
and Banner Peak wind farms into the NJUS system.
Recommend full funding with the condition that before any funds are disbursed NJUS provide to AEA, and AEA approves, a feasibility assessment and conceptual design that addresses integration
of the Newton Peak and Banner Peak wind farms and other developent issues.
This project represents substantial additional wind generation capacity that directly integrates into the utility. It is part of a joint effort to coordinate a bulk purchase of large
turbines within the region Recommend monitor current power system upgrade and coordinate final integration design. Recommend up to full funding $8,770,080.
There is substantial accessible biomass wood supply in the upper Tanana from sawmills, two pellet mills in development, and state-owned forest land. Tok Umbrella Corp received a grant
for a whole tree chipper which can potentially be used to supply fuel for this project.
Recommend.
For economic viability this project will likely need to be interconnected to the Railbelt grid. Recommend project team evaluate technical and regulatory issues associated with interconnection.
Recommend.
This project, scheduled for completion in December 08, provides transmission from Banner Wind (proposal #106) to the Nome electrical system. We note there is a separate proposal for
larger turbines on Newton Peak #52, consistent with the USDOE/AEA-supported Nome Region Energy Assessment. The three proposals do not indicate coordination between wind projects, and
AEA is concerned that this may result in unnecessarily high development, integration, and operation costs.
NJUS is preparing a feasibility assessment for the Newton Peak project that will address the quality of the wind energy resource, wind system design and integration into the existing
power system, operation and maintenance, land ownership and other development issues. This study should provide valuable information for integrating the Newton Peak and Banner Peak
wind farms into the NJUS system.
Recommend full funding for expenses incurred after August 20 with the following conditions: 1) before any funds are disbursed NJUS provide to AEA, and AEA approves, a feasibility assessment
and conceptual design that addresses integration of the Newton Peak and Banner Peak wind farms and other developent issues, 2) Banner Wind LLC has petitioned RCA for a certificate of
public convenience and necessity and economic rate regulation prior to release of construction funds, 3) a power purchase agreement for the Banner Peak project is in place with NJUS
prior to release of construction grant funds.
AEA will manage project. Given relatively small fuel displacement chip-fired system is too expensive. Recommend partial funding for feasibility assessment and final design (tasks 2
and 3) to consider options with higher B/C ratio.
Applicant proposes studying feasibility of a potential 500-2000 kW hydro project at Burro Creek on private land near Skagway. Project would supplement other hydro projects that serve
AP&T\'s Haines-Skagway grid. Recommend for full funding.
The Haines Borough proposes to study feasibility of a wood chip fired system located downtown that would serve the K-12 school, two other school buildings, and the town library. As
currently configured the system cost appears rather high compared to expected annual savings in fuel oil. However, alternate configurations to be assessed in the conceptual design
will likely improve economics. Recommend for full funding.
Note that app# 14 Chignik Lagoon hydro, app# 62 Chignik hydro/wind feas, and app#40 Chignik Hydro all address the same subregion. Recommend this proposed feasibility study be funded
up to $207,500 and that the three applicants be required to coordinate on data collection, study and milestones.
We note that Trident Seafoods holds the FERC license for the current project and the applicant proposes to negotiate the use of Trident\'s license to expand the hydro project and generate
electricity for the community at large. Recommend that an agreement that ensures access to the resource be signed by City and Trident before expenditure of any grant funds.
The project has merit in that it demonstrates the use of a local fuel, for which a local producer is willing to sell at $100/ton. However, at $831,203, project is too expensive for
relatively small benefit.
This project would serve the Southeast Alaska Power Authority (SEAPA) area. Note that SEAPA is projected to come into existence in early 2009 in restructuring the Four Dam Pool PA.
A private company, Cascade Creek LLC, currently holds a preliminary permit on this project from FERC that expires on 1/31/09. [ref FERC webpage status of preliminary permits]. The
applicant proposes to file a preliminary permit on 2/1/09.
This project would interconnect with an existing power network that serves Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg. There are proposals to expand this network to include Metlakatla and Kake.
There are other projects being proposed for this network and potential load increases on the network. There is a need to integrate these projects. On this basis we recommend approval
of the proposal to assist the integration process.
Design documents would be useful in the preparation of a regional integrated resource plan for the southern Southeast network. An integrated resource plan should be prepared before
significant construction funding is provided to projects to be interconnected to this network. If the project receives state funds, AEA will require as a grant condition that ratepayers
of all connected utilities receive equal generation and transmission rate treatment.
Recommend.
Recommend full funding for design and permitting.
This project would interconnect with an existing power network that serves Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg. There are proposals to expand this network to include Metlakatla and Kake.
There are other projects being proposed for this network and potential load increases on the network. There is a need to integrate these projects. On this basis we recommend approval
of the proposal to assist the integration process.
Design documents would be useful in the preparation of a regional integrated resource plan for the southern Southeast network. An integrated resource plan should be prepared before
significant construction funding is provided to projects to be interconnected to this network. If the project receives state funds, AEA will require as a grant condition that ratepayers
of all connected utilities receive equal generation and transmission rate treatment.
Following detailed review by project manager, we conclude that the project is not adequately defined. The proposer would investigate ways to utilize heat recovered from diesel generation
or biomass combustion. The stated goal of this project is to prove concepts that have been already been demonstrated.
Applicant proposes to install 200 kW of wind turbine at $2.2 million to displace 16,000 gallons per year of heating fuel at the Hooper Bay water treatment plant. Given modest savings
in fuel AEA has concerns that the project is not optimized to maximize diesel displacement for community heat and power. For this reason we recommend that applicants consult with the
community and power utility to integrate the project into the community energy system. We recommend funding be limited to feasibility analysis that matches heating load profile with
resource availability, and develop alternate scenarios. Develop two scenarios--1) interconnected with utility grid, 2) stand alone for water treatment plant only.
Recommend partial funding of $80,000 under task 6 to prepare feasibility assessment and conceptual design as above.
AEA is providing $100,000 for reconnaisance assessment under the DC/AEA Alternative Energy RFP. Recommend full funding for feasibility and FERC permit preparation with requirement that
AEA approve recon study indicating project viability before any AEA funds are expended.
Applicant proposes design and construction of cordwood-fired heating systems for four 4-plex housing units. Project offers good potential savings over heating oil and provides a demonstration
project for southeast Alaska. Recommend.
The proposal is somewhat unclear as to who will manage the project. Sec 3.1 applicant states "A construction manager will be hired through AEA..." We assume that the applicant will
manage the project.
This project was configured using stick-fired combustors under the application received by AEA and the Denali Commission. Chip-fired systems proposed are more complex and costly. We
question whether they are appropriate for a remote community.
Application refers to a feasibility study that has not been finalized. This is a community wood heating system that combines wood harvest and transport, combustion, district heating
and energy sales. Since this is a large project with considerable risk and uncertainty, it should be developed in a stepwise manner. Economics appear favorable, and there has been
considerable federal investment in the project (DC and USDOE). Recommend funding to final design and permitting (stages 1-8) only because applicant has not yet established final design
concept.
Recommend at lower funding level.
Application refers to a feasibility study that has not been finalized. This is a community wood heating system that combines wood harvest and transport, combustion, district heating
and energy sales. The project will likely interact with proposal number 61-McGrath (diesel) heat recovery, but is expensive and appears uneconomic as proposed. Since this is a large
project with considerable risk and uncertainty, it should be developed in a stepwise manner with stakeholder input. AEA and MP&L jointly defined a diesel heat recovery and wood heated
district heating system project in 2001 that appeared economically viable. We recommend granting $225,000 to MP&L for feasibility and final design (milestones 1-8) in conjunction with
proposal 61. If the project is favorable, then ML&P can request construction funding from the RE Fund during round 3.
Recommend at lower funding level.
This project is structured as an integrated road-intertie project in a 300\' right-of-way through USFS land that was previously granted to DOT/PF through federal congressional action.
The project will address both the road and intertie in a cost-effective manner. Savings for intertie construction are calculated to be $8 million if projects occur together. The
intertie would result in lowering Kake power costs significantly. AEA expects DOT/PF to fully participate in the project.
Design documents would be useful in the preparation of a regional integrated resource plan for the southern Southeast network. An integrated resource plan should be prepared before
significant construction funding is provided to projects to be interconnected to this network. If the project receives state funds, AEA will require as a grant condition that ratepayers
of Kake and its distribution utility IPEC receive generation and transmission rate treatment equal to other distribution utilities on the network.
Recommend.
This project would result in significant savings to the Hoonah ratepayer but the project has a very high capital cost. According to the brief economic analysis completed as part of
AEA review, the project has a benefit to cost ratio over 1 if it is assumed that hydropower is available from the Alaska Electric Light and Power system. The estimated capital cost
has risen from $37 million to over $40 million. Other factors that might influence economics are decreased availability of potentially recoverable heat in Hoonah if diesel generation
is curtailed, and the existence of other potentially viable hydro and geothermal projects in the Hoonah area.
If the project receives state funds, AEA will require as a grant condition that Hoonah residents receive rate treatment equal to Juneau residents.
If the intertie connects to Hoonah, the Two-County Rule introduces considerable uncertainty in the tax-exempt status of the Snettisham Hydro project, the main generation source for the
Juneau area. AEA understands that, although there have been attempts to resolve the issue, at present there is no resolution. Therefore, the continuing uncertainty of the intertie
on the Snettisham project?s tax exempt financing is considered in AEA?s review of this proposal.
AEA does not recommend that this project be funded because: 1) the high capital cost of the project, 2) continuing uncertainty of the impact of the project on Snettisham financing,
and 3) the existence of other potentially viable hydro and geothermal projects in the Hoonah area.
Applicant proposes feasibility assessment and final design/permitting for a hydro project at Allison Lake that will result in up to 4 MW added capacity and energy production of 20.5-24.7
GWh/yr. Recon work indicates substantial benefit, and utility Copper Valley Electric has demonstrated track record in hydro development and operation.
Recommend full funding.
Project appears to be well-conceived and a practical way to use a local energy resource. We are concerned about efficiency of the current residential woodstoves and possible health
impacts from increased smoke. We do not recommend funding for processing and distributing the firewood. Recommend funding for only firewood processor equipment and freight as quoted
($147,720).
Recommend at lower project cost.
The powerhouse, access road, and a portion of the penstock would be located on Tanacross Inc. land. AEA contact with village corp president Bob Brean indicates potential controversy.
Feasibility analysis funded through DC/AEA Alt Energy RFP is pending. AP&T has $1.675 million from USDA Rural Utilities Service for the project. Recommend no funding at this time.
Following completion of design and permitting, including resolution of land use authorizations with Tanacross Inc., AP&T can apply to the RE Fund for construction funding.
Applicant proposes to construct an intertie from southern to northern Prince of Wales Island, thus providing hydropower to Naukati and Coffman Cove, currently generating with diesel.
Balance of project funding $2,402,838 is provided by the Denali Commission under the Energy Cost Reduction Program announced in 2008.
Recommend up to full funding of $3,752,181.
Project appears viable but proposer does not provide adequate level of detail on design, cost estimate, ORC equipment and integration, and schedule. Recommend full funding and careful
review of final design by AEA project manager prior to release of construction funds.
Cordova Electric proposes to relocate and refurbish the existing Humpback Creek hydro project, currently inoperational after a fire and a flood in 2005 and 2006 thus doubling the life
of the project and increasing energy output by 60%. 90% design is complete, and there is substantial support from the local Native corporation and fish procesors, cost share by FEMA.
FERC has issued or soon will issue a license for the rebuild. Construction schedule indicates completion by end of 2009. Recommend full funding of $5,500,000.
This project would follow an existing road and require a short submarine cable to interconnect the hydro resources of Metlakatla with the Ketchikan electric system. With the completion
of the Swan-Tyee intertie this would extend the southern Southeast electical network to Metlakatla. This project is one of a number of transmission and generation projects that would
interconnect with the existing network. Because the Swan-Tyee intertie is expected to go into operation in late 2009, substantial excess Tyee hydro power will be available to Ketchikan.
Therefore the Metlakatla-Ketchikan intertie may not be needed in the near term.
Permitting and design documents would be useful in the preparation of a regional integrated resource plan for the southern Southeast network. However, an integrated resource plan should
be prepared before significant construction funding is provided to projects to be interconnected to this network. If the project receives state funds, AEA will require as a grant condition
that ratepayers of all connected utilities receive equal generation and transmission rate treatment.
Recommend partial funding for design and permitting (tasks 1-3).
The proposal is detailed and there is significant interest in tidal energy development for Alaska.
However, Gustavus will have hydro by 2009, Wrangell already has hydro, Angoon has an undeveloped hydro resource with the potential to provide excess and baseload power, and Nikiski has
relatively cheap railbelt grid power as well as other alternatives (wind and hydro) that are commercial technologies. Although this is a demonstration project, the sites selected are
less than optimal.
The recon portion of the project could be useful for gathering energy planning data.
Not recommended for funding.
The major weakness of this application is the lack of evidence of a geothermal resource, per the DGGS opinion. For this reason we cannot assess economic feasibility or other benefits.
Other aspects, including the proposed team, are impressive and would bode well for a successful project.
AEA does not recommend this project for further consideration.
Agree with DGGS comments regarding access and the pre-existing rights of Ormat at Mt. Spurr. Applicant has limited background in geology and development of geothermal powerplants.
No economic analysis was prepared for this project. Not enough information is available to justify funding.
Project is low risk and potentially very beneficial. Long term wood supply is reliable and sustainable. However at $839,000 the project is expensive compared to wood heating installations
in Tanana and Ionia, so B/C is poor.
AEA would manage project per request in proposal. AEA Project manager thinks this project can be built for $500,000. Wood storage may not be required and bulding cost at $150/sf, not
$350/sf, is appropriate. Project can be coordinated with Gulkana for economy.
Recommended. At lower cost.
Note that app# 14 Chignik Lagoon hydro, app# 62 Chignik hydro/wind feas, and app#40 Chignik Hydro all address the same subregion. Recommend this proposed feasbility study be funded
up to $150,000 and that the three applicants be required to coordinate on data collection, study and milestones.
This proposal requests substantial funding for reconnaisance work in assessing application of proprietary pre-commercial technology. It is one of five very similar proposals that request
funding for solid waste-to-energy conversion in Anchorage, Palmer, Fairbanks, Juneau, and Ketchikan. The project team has technically competent staff. We have the following concerns
about supporting demonstration of the proposed technology: 1) installed and O&M cost estimates are inadequate, 2) little information on what form of energy would be produced and who
would buy it, 3) since no evidence is provided that PWR\'s technology has been demonstrated at either a pilot or commercial scale, technical and environmental risk is substantial. 4)
the budget of $35,220 for travel, meals, and Per Diem appears excessive, 5) the remaining budget of $65,400 for contractual services is unspecified and no technical consultant is identified.
This proposal requests substantial funding for reconnaisance work in assessing application of proprietary pre-commercial technology. It is one of five very similar proposals that request
funding for solid waste-to-energy conversion in Anchorage, Palmer, Fairbanks, Juneau, and Ketchikan. The project team has technically competent staff. We have the following concerns
about supporting demonstration of the proposed technology: 1) installed and O&M cost estimates are inadequate, 2) little information on what form of energy would be produced and who
would buy it, 3) since no evidence is provided that PWR\'s technology has been demonstrated at either a pilot or commercial scale, technical and environmental risk is substantial. 4)
the proposal does not tie-in with the ongoing Juneau Solid Waste Management Strategy and would likely duplicate existing efforts., 5) the budget of $25,500 for travel, meals, and Per
Diem appears excessive, 6) the remaining budget of $64,500 for contractual services is unspecified and no technical consultant is identified.
Proposal requests assistance for recon assessment of alternatives in Cold Bay, False Pass, and Nelson Lagoon.
The proposal plans to look at current and tidal potential; these options should only be covered briefly in the study since there is little chance of immediate help from these emerging
technologies.
Recommend full funding with condition of AEA review and approval of RFP and consultant before AEA disbursement of grant funds.
This 800 kW hydro project is 90% complete but needs additional funding for completion. Recommend full funding.
This project would retrofit heating systems of public buildings in Wrangell to utilize interruptible power for resistance heating.
AEA has concern that widespread use of resistance heating will exhaust available hydro capacity and energy. However we recognize value of this project for demonstration.
Therefore, recommend full funding with the following provisions: 1) Prior to final design analyze relative merits of heat pump vs resistance heating design concepts, 2) Make results
available in near future for regional integrated resource plan.
Applicant proposes reconaissance and feasibility study of a geothermal project that would tap a resource of unknown quality and extent in the Lower Sustna Basin for heating in Anchorage.
See DGGS opinion above: Geothermal resource has not been demonstrated. Therefore, the concept of piping hot water from the Susitna Valley is questionable.
The applicant\'s CEO, Magnus Johanneson, resigned as of 11/7/008.
Recommend no funding due to lack of evidence that a geothermal resource is available.
Applicant did not provide feasibility and final design documentation to justify proceeding to construction. Project would have interacted with No. 55 - Bristol Bay Health Corp Wind
project, now withdrawn. Recommend providing feasibility funding for Lk Elva project. Given scale of project and potential interaction with other projects, however, cooperative planning
approach is needed between applicants, utilty and community. Recommend partial funding of $300,000 for "comprehensive feasibility assessment and ongoing consultative support" referenced
in section 6 of the grant application.
This proposal requests substantial funding for proprietary pre-commercial technology. It is one of five very similar proposals that request funding for solid waste-to-energy conversion
in Anchorage, Palmer, Fairbanks, Juneau, and Ketchikan. The project team has technically competent staff. We have the following concerns about supporting demonstration of the proposed
technology: 1) installed and O&M cost estimates are inadequate, 2) little information on what form of energy would be produced and who would buy it, 3) the project manager Mr. West
is the managing member of Alaska Recycling Energy, president of WFT Management Company, and advisor to Plasman Waste Recycling (PWR). We are concerned that with these executive duties
that he will have adequate time to manage the project. 4) since no evidence is provided that PWR\'s technology has been demonstrated at either a pilot or commercial scale, technical
and environmental risk is substantial. 5) at a $100 million project cost the applicant\'s project savings of $1.5 million/yr do not appear to predict an economically viable project.
This proposal requests substantial funding for proprietary pre-commercial technology. It is one of five very similar proposals that request funding for solid waste-to-energy conversion
in Anchorage, Palmer, Fairbanks, Juneau, and Ketchikan. The project team has technically competent staff. We have the following concerns about supporting demonstration of the proposed
technology: 1) installed and O&M cost estimates are inadequate, 2) little information on what form of energy would be produced and who would buy it, 3) the project manager Mr. West
is the managing member of Alaska Recycling Energy, president of WFT Management Company, and advisor to Plasman Waste Recycling (PWR). We are concerned that with these executive duties
that he will have adequate time to manage the project. 4) since no evidence is provided that PWR\'s technology has been demonstrated at either a pilot or commercial scale, technical
and environmental risk is substantial. 5) at a $60 million project cost the applicant\'s project savings of $1million/yr do not appear to predict an economically viable project.
This proposal requests substantial funding for proprietary pre-commercial technology. It is one of five very similar proposals that request funding for solid waste-to-energy conversion
in Anchorage, Palmer, Fairbanks, Juneau, and Ketchikan. The project team has technically competent staff.
We have the following concerns about supporting demonstration of the proposed technology: 1) installed and O&M cost estimates are inadequate, 2) little information on what form of energy
would be produced and who would buy it, 3) the project manager Mr. West is the managing member of Alaska Recycling Energy, president of WFT Management Company, and advisor to Plasma
Waste Recycling (PWR). We are concerned that with these executive duties that he will have inadequate time to manage the project. 4) since no evidence is provided that PWR\'s technology
has been demonstrated at either a pilot or commercial scale, technical and environmental risk is substantial. 5) at a $200 million project cost the applicant\'s project savings of $2
million/yr do not appear to predict an economically viable project., 6) while the applicant indicates informal discussions with the Anchorage Solid Waste Service (SWS), there is no
formal support and, in fact, SWS is proposing a different method for recovering energy from the city waste stream.
Funding not recommended.
Project is low risk and potentially very beneficial. Long term wood supply is reliable and sustainable. However at $898,000 the project is expensive compared to wood heating installations
in Tanana and Ionia, so B/C is poor.
AEA would manage project per request in proposal. AEA Project manager thinks this project can be built for $500,000. Wood storage may not be required and bulding cost at $150/sf, not
$350/sf, is appropriate. Project can be coordinated with Gulkana for economy.
Recommended. At lower cost.
CB of Sitka requests funding for assessing feasibility of potential 28 MW Takatz Lake hydro project. Project is consistent with findings of the 2008 Sitka Power Supply Plan and would
follow less expensive alternatives, including increasing capacity of the existing Blue Lk Hydro project, in order to avoid more costly diesel generation. There is potential for developing
road and marine facilities associated with the project that would provide access to eastern Baranof Island. FERC has issued a preliminary permit to Sitka to assess feasibility of
Takatz.
Given the widespread interest in linking major electric generation and loads in Southeast, development of Takatz should be coordinated with the SE Alaska Regional Energy Plan. Recommend.
S2 Reconsideration
Accepted
Rejected
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Requested
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Rejected
Requested
Requested
Accepted
Requested
Accepted
Requested
S3 Evaluator 1
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Helen Traylor
Warren
Stromberg
Traylor
Traylor
Stromberg
Stromberg
Traylor
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Plentovich
Stromberg
Traylor
Ott
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Stromberg
Baldivieso
Plentovich
Stromberg
Stromberg
Craft
Craft
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Craft
Vail
Reiche
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Baldivieso
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Traylor
Traylor
Traylor
Ott
Ott
Warren
Traylor
Plentovich
Trayolr
Traylor
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Warren
Ott
Ott
Traylor
Stromberg
Ott
Ott
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Ott
Ott
Baldivieso
Ott
Baldivieso
Baldivieso
Stromberg
Ott
Stomberg
white
Plentovich/Traylor
White
White
White
Ott
White
Ott
White
Stromberg
Ott
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Strandberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Stromberg
Calfa
Calfa
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Calfa
Stromberg
Stromberg
Stromberg
Calfa
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Stromberg
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Ott
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Plentovich/Traylor
Ott
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
Plentovich/Traylor
Calfa
Calfa
Calfa
White
Stromberg
White
Ott
white
white
White
Stromberg
White
White
Ott
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
Plentovich
Jensen
McMahon
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Ott
McMahon
Ott
McMahon
Jensen
Plentovich
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Stromberg
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich, Brown
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Plentovich
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Ott
Stromberg
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich
Stromberg
Ott
Plentovich, Brown
Jensen
Ott
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
McMahon
Jensen
Ott
McMahon
Jensen
McMahon
McMahon
McMahon
Jensen
Plentovich
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich/Brown
McMahon
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Jensen
Plentovich/Brown
McMahon
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Jensen
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Landis
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
McMahon
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Plentovich
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Plentovich
Plentovich
Ott
Jensen
Landis
Jensen
Landis
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Plentovich/Brown
McMahon
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Landis
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Ott
Ott
Plentovich/Brown
Jensen
Jensen
Landis
Brown/Kerr
Lenny Landis
Landis
Jensen
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Jensen
Landis/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Brown
Brown/Kerr
Ott
Reiche
Jensen
Jensen
Landis
Lenny Landis
Ott
Lenny Landis
Landis
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Landis
Landis
Lenny Landis
Landis
Lenny Landis
Ott
Landis
Brown/Kerr
Landis
Landis
Reiche
Landis
Landis
Crimp
Ott
Landis
Ott
Landis
Landis
Jensen
Ott
Landis
Landis
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Ott
Jensen
Jensen
Brown/Kerr
Jensen
Reiche
Reiche
Jensen
Brown/Kerr
Ott
Brown/Kerr
Brown/Kerr
Ott
Repeat of round 1 #106
Ott
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
Lockard Butch #2 & # 6
Jensen & Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
Lockard Butch #2 &# 6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
This application failed Stage I review
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
Butch #2 & #6
lockard Butch #2 & 6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 &
Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & # 6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen,Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
WITHDRAWN Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Crimp
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Butch #2 & #6, Jensen
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
This application failed Stage I review
This application failed Stage I review
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Crimp
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Dabo, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
Crimp
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
This application failed Stage I review
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch#2 & #6
Lockard, Butch #2 & #6
Butch #2 & #6
Lockard, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch #2 & #6
Ott//Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Lockard Butch #2 & #6
Butch #2 & #6
Ott, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Jensen, Butch #2 
Jensen, Butch #2 & #6
Brown, Butch / #2 & #6
Ott Butch / Match & Local Support
Stage 3 Score Total
50
32.56
66.29
62.99
49.74
64.87
52.33
73.24
70.85
44.52
71.64
37.73
29.18
43.63
66.29
78.62
29.78
54.19
74.17
55.74
51.71
40.58
40.98
16.46
29.36
32.84
79.7
44.09
68.28
57.96
65.59
64.59
42.58
52.7
50.95
47.86
65.75
52.79
58.97
51.75
59.46
56.37
44.87
35.63
48.27
56.12
32.69
55.69
31.9
28.87
64.38
50.44
0
54.686666666659
16.75
67.5799999999881
61.3266666666595
69.176666666654
8.88
45
48.376666666664
20
49.7366666666664
69.6933333333169
34.0899999999981
14.54
59.5466666666591
59.1933333333169
54.4699999999856
34.4933333333324
50.45
31.9233333333304
61.123333333321
60.6699999999919
48.8899999999969
65.7799999999845
38.5633333333324
54.5133333333331
25.35
47.98333333333
52.8099999999969
54.013333333331
45.51
69.0699999999896
59.14
61.689999999993
56.383333333328
56.783333333327
52.48
41.826666666666
66.6966666666561
53.3966666666571
69.4966666666525
60.7733333333255
44.6733333333324
56.1533333333194
66.6999999999855
69.35666667
71.975
57.32666667
61.95166667
68.52166667
48.33
49.25833333
51.68166667
45.88
70.54333333
8
48.315
54.54166667
66.21166667
66.06666667
62.19666667
54.175
62.43333333
72.21166667
70.25833333
52.31666667
60.35166667
0
14
54.76666667
70.94
61.89666667
18.625
3
62.76666667
12.81666667
44.49833333
66.665
73.69333333
47.92166667
8
52.26833333
42.22666667
77.39833333
61.67
64.24666667
80.61666667
67.41333333
55.38666667
65.21
68.15666667
62.12666667
68.74333333
83.36
5
2
55.34333333
67.28833333
67.92666667
52.43666667
19.44166667
52.135
70.62666667
85.03666667
68.19833333
26.55
59.95333333
53.32833333
67.54833333
10
25.24166667
43.61833333
64.71333333
63.94666667
68.43166667
53.39
59.52666667
51.82666667
72.39333333
55.77166667
48.69333333
10
52.02166667
12
8
11.60833333
20
20.45833333
45.845
0
32.54965
62.15160417
75.6525125
65.40843125
27.37525
38.23439583
82.26435625
37.29033333
72.69166667
54.26772917
44.80946042
30.6685625
27.5625
19.62583333
37.93420625
40.751475
29.6548125
74.05496667
82.46666667
58.92284375
16.84166667
26.38955
56.12083333
47.052275
27.880125
51.07366667
0
53.32601458
55.42282292
57.14166667
54.1875
59.61666667
59.41666667
36.1001125
34.8601125
58.65096875
65.41851667
49.04875833
48.25
63.375
76.79927083
58.12366667
65.27916667
72.30838333
70.13209167
73.73344583
39.84013125
71.53445208
63.85
70.60833333
70.98936458
64.3875
37.71875
60.76533333
67.5175
68.34913125
60.91199792
73.25833333
49.81871042
58.81037708
60.91839583
41.26597917
75.96513125
56.01878958
44.27058125
6.4629375
45.75617708
69.89225
62.343375
72.06482292
54.33117708
68.0260625
79.03333333
72.85833333
46.75
49.49627083
79.30410417
47.8129375
61.90644375
19.5379375
53.65164583
50.83242083
46.82366667
47.925
10.5
18.6875
0
20.9375
26.5
33.72916667
50.25
62.20833333
7.25
60.45833333
12.875
73.275
36.875
35.125
22
54.9625
55.21666667
62.0875
31.3125
55.6
36.75
33.8125
68.02916667
69.90416667
50.2125
59.63333333
36.3125
67.90416667
67.40416667
59.675
26.6875
45.75
49.19583333
0
0
39.125
39.4375
12.5
38.0625
33.0625
75.59166667
65.86666667
75.33333333
34.1875
20.6875
44
37.4375
36.3125
36.3125
39.8125
77.75833333
69.07916667
32.8125
40.125
67.41666667
65.91666667
39.4375
37.3125
70.925
67.9
26.575
9.75
71.23333333
48.72083333
56.62916667
5.6875
65.1125
0
37.55
25.625
17.125
24.0625
12.0625
71.8875
33.1875
72.75416667
53.08333333
55.60833333
65.97083333
47.90416667
0
25.125
28.875
8
40.46666667
20.375
15.1875
24.75
16.125
30.50833333
22.75
47.67916667
35.75
20.5
16.1875
70.875
18.125
17
42.94166667
29.95833333
29.69166667
54.475
28.625
29.59375
28.625
15.28125
37.40625
21.6875
29.1875
36
18.71875
61.35208333
9
57.42083333
56.65208333
19.90625
42.33125
41.98958333
62.60416667
76.55416667
63.72916667
59.9
47.925
19.71875
60.9625
61.03958333
68.96666667
53.9
45.90833333
21.6875
38.39791667
68.12916667
52.27708333
56.77083333
63.06875
13.1875
68.64583333
49.12916667
73.65208333
56.85833333
31.1875
68.36041667
56.15833333
22.1875
10.1875
18.71875
46.78541667
29.1875
61.23541667
50.87916667
35.41666667
25.61666667
75.08333333
68.79791667
60.29375
36
50.6875
39.62916667
56.65625
51.43541667
52.92291667
58.79583333
66.76666667
54.15625
50.81041667
53.17083333
50.17916667
56.25416667
21.09375
58.02291667
71.6375
52.19166667
31.9375
31.46875
27.8
41.59375
39.26666667
51.39791667
30.59375
46.63333333
29.3125
31.65833333
30.525
40.63125
44.46875
49.74375
56.61666667
22.15625
66.05208333
29.59375
63.68333333
58.51041667
34.75
38.72916667
36.72916667
36.99583333
38.3375
53.52083333
58.61041667
57.975
30.575
57.89791667
68.26458333
26.675
24.28125
20.1875
35.78125
51.9875
27.40625
7.28125
28.00416667
78.68541667
72.325
13.1875
55.37708333
52.52916667
52.37291667
54.92083333
63.81458333
50.40625
30.87083333
23.25
41.54375
53.73958333
45.75
23.69375
34.725
71.79166667
54.46041667
31.77916667
48.7375
4
48.225
26.59375
32.62083333
40.92916667
60.4875
46.46458333
18.28125
39.26041667
18.34375
0
30.28125
27.1875
47.3
29.17916667
56.0875
36.40625
4.71875
57.89375
53.9625
36.15625
45.29791667
63.82708333
64.35833333
46.37291667
27.625
38.33541667
18.28125
17.71875
60.93541667
64.18541667
30.03541667
32.34166667
62.95833333
25
35.78125
35.16875
68.1375
9
24.52083333
34.35833333
54.22083333
45.01666667
26.25
66.94375
38
65.8125
46.10416667
39.87291667
26.28333333
36.90833333
64.04166667
58.85208333
51.86041667
64.60833333
13
52.82708333
45.12916667
45.16666667
61.66041667
60.46458333
72.61458333
54.88333333
34.0625
69.16041667
42.45416667
20.28125
20.28125
18.5
30.57916667
19.25
37.59375
44.20208333
49.225
56.66666667
52.37083333
52.78333333
16.25
57.84166667
7.125
22.125
49.15833333
20.125
21.19166667
23.725
36.89583333
38.92083333
36.39583333
25.71875
60.55625
50.63541667
45.46041667
80.70208333
50.75833333
53.225
60.28541667
5.25
29.025
69.74791667
35.63333333
82.774583334
69.100000004
74.60833333
68.8925
52.882083337
73.866666667
67.441249996
59.999166667
65.158749997
62.52458333
58.197916663
54.92708333
60.853333336
59.20833333
64.185833337
42.592916667
74.39166667
75.13333333
33.032916663
47.90208333
53.78541667
51.634583334
47.065833333
53.341666663
72.1725
52.528333337
72.366666664
77.24041667
62.845833337
50.97583333
56.9325
50.334583333
49.41708333
32.183750003
58.067916663
52.785833334
55.652499997
49.9125
78.566666664
62.883333336
59.058333336
59.650000003
72.970833337
73.38541667
48.809166667
59.783333336
67.269999997
37.60583333
73.600833334
61.334583336
60.26958333
53.03625
68.906666663
41.450416666
51.333333333
61.845416667
79.928333336
46.778750003
58.005833337
61.25041667
73.02833333
42.31333333
63.86125
72.658333337
64.446666664
42.346666667
71.783333337
59.25041667
59.513333336
68.91208333
65.306666667
60.84666667
56.334583333
43.71333333
64.13458333
71.54791667
72.4
46.86666667
62.881250003
52.160416667
62.71875
71.766666663
31.027916667
53.412916663
64.848333336
65.628333336
67.233333336
55.330416666
62.372500003
60.378750003
56.883750003
61.475416663
69.014583336
58.28
75.771249997
67.355
71.37916667
81.22583333
62.409166667
75.316249997
82.566666663
65.647916667
62.081249997
77.425000003
63.713333336
65.817083337
60.729999997
71.53541667
51.87958333
61.08375
46.05083333
61.565833333
54.7325
63.9125
62.049583337
63.305833337
39.120416666
60.734583334
63.065833337
64.71708333
67.7925
74.505833337
65.25083333
70.036249997
83.941666667
76.436250003
78.069583336
57.039166663
63.37666667
56.746250003
65.264999997
70.75875
51.910416666
61.775833337
35.117499997
38.425000003
Stage 3 total w/ match increase
53.3333333333333
35.56
69.9566666666667
67.99
54.0733333333333
67.2033333333333
55.9966666666667
77.5733333333333
75.1833333333333
49.52
75.3066666666667
42.73
29.18
48.63
68.29
83.62
32.1133333333333
56.19
76.17
57.74
54.71
43.58
44.6466666666667
16.46
34.36
35.1733333333333
84.7
47.4233333333333
73.28
60.2933333333333
68.59
66.9233333333333
47.58
52.7
55.95
49.86
69.4166666666667
54.79
60.97
54.75
62.46
60.0366666666667
49.87
35.63
48.27
61.12
35.69
59.3566666666667
35.5666666666667
31.87
69.38
54.1066666666667
-1.13
53.5885714285638
-4.15571428571429
19.2866666666667
68.2123809523691
56.3266666666595
69.9123809523683
5.92095238095238
2.57142857142867E-02
48.1257142857143
3.91142857142857
-3.95285714285714
-2.03428571428571
46.456666666664
0.395714285714286
-0.901904761904763
0.353809523809524
-1.33333333333333
24.1685714285714
47.7309523809521
70.0690476190312
36.6266666666648
13.3842857142857
-1.93095238095238
57.5409523809448
58.4690476190312
1.14
53.7457142856999
-3
34.194761904761
52.5128571428571
33.9861904761875
62.5490476190353
-1.81285714285714
61.1657142857062
46.5799999999969
66.4904761904607
-7.90476190476195E-02
-3
-2
38.9390476190467
54.4228571428569
24.1509523809524
46.3795238095205
-2.10380952380952
52.0614285714255
0
55.9161904761881
43.597619047619
67.6790476190372
57.5404761904762
60.0919047618978
55.7276190476137
60.1604761904699
53.2157142857143
42.989047619047
69.2666666666561
55.9219047618952
72.2071428571287
60.7814285714207
4.25
3.58333333333333
45.2428571428562
60.4033333333194
69.6695238095093
3.99428571428571
-1.10380952380952
67.8123958161905
0
69.9125
61.38229167
65.20088542
72.553396045
52.3617291687143
49.05088583
50.52541667
48.6022916666667
72.47822958
6.03919437428571
50.2041666666667
52.47916667
64.72140667
65.4000000033333
60.46229167
53.5244275
62.34807333
71.0557812533333
69.1917229133333
51.4998437533333
59.0835937533333
-2.71875
13.9540104166667
55.8925525033333
69.49640625
60.56375042
16.314722707619
-1.62489562571429
60.1000000033333
7.81666667
46.84208333
0
67.1875522909524
74.7141666633333
46.8566147942857
6.84651062428571
54.33083333
44.28916667
75.87770833
60.40296875
62.7770833571429
77.61666667
66.32807333
53.61432292
64.1824481242857
66.80812542
0
61.8502087533333
71.7724374966667
82.7032291666667
0.913073124285714
1.395885
59.75158333
68.60473958
71.693787295
56.24747917
20.3740000033333
53.734
71.2282291809524
84.3179166495238
66.6540624761905
26.3301041666667
64.3145507862857
55.0228841633333
69.1721353924286
12
27.5750000033333
40.6460416428571
65.8288024966667
64.778541877619
71.65416667
53.6125
63.93491667
54.23491667
76.80158333
57.6539395866667
49.6256666633333
7
54.9321458366667
11.1798437704762
5.9375
9.85833333
24.3612175
21.3906666633333
45.23520875
0
27.8997
61.29304167
74.205725
64.9465125
25.9645
40.84495833
80.9551625
37.88933333
69.44166667
57.12829167
44.32120417
27.001625
23.625
17.84833333
38.5864625
37.71555
28.204125
71.32806667
79.21666667
59.8124375
18.59166667
25.8339
54.43333333
46.40195
31.39725
49.67266667
0
51.64134583
53.78622917
56.89166667
52.875
57.74166667
56.79166667
34.871525
33.451525
56.9686875
63.40396667
48.11798333
46
63.25
74.65770833
61.47266667
62.96666667
70.45123333
68.70131667
72.25485833
35.9701125
70.15572083
60.6
67.98333333
69.67064583
60.25
36.1875
61.36433333
70.74
70.9421125
61.57337917
71.75833333
48.78270417
57.77437083
61.71695833
40.07679167
73.8451125
55.34229583
42.6462125
5.825375
48.14577083
74.0505
63.86575
71.62222917
56.47077083
72.136625
76.53333333
70.48333333
45
53.60870833
78.83804167
50.175375
59.0662375
19.900375
56.39545833
48.22540833
46.42266667
44.175
13
20.375
0
23.375
24.5
30.29166667
49
57.20833333
9
59.45833333
11.75
76.4
36.75
35.75
23.5
58.65
51.34166667
63.775
27.125
54.225
36.5
33.125
66.71666667
68.46666667
49.275
57.88333333
36.125
66.46666667
65.71666667
59.05
30.375
43
47.50833333
0
0
39.25
39.875
15
37.625
32.625
74.21666667
65.36666667
73.83333333
32.875
21.875
42
36.375
36.125
36.125
39.125
74.75833333
67.39166667
32.125
39.75
66.54166667
61.54166667
39.375
36.625
68.675
68.65
25.7
13
72.23333333
49.03333333
57.56666667
4.875
61.675
0
38.175
25.25
20.75
20.625
13.125
72.7
34.5
72.06666667
49.45833333
55.60833333
65.03333333
52.09166667
0
28.25
32.25
10
39.09166667
24.75
16.375
25.5
17.75
31.88333333
24.5
48.74166667
36
21.5
17.875
74.75
20.75
17.5
44.81666667
33.5476190442857
33.2809523842857
58.397619047619
30.0595238095238
30.8898809523809
29.0595238095238
17.860119047619
39.4910714285714
18.875
30.0654761904762
35.4285714285714
22.0446428571429
63.7017857109524
12
61.85833333
57.9839285680952
23.5386904761905
45.910119047619
45.7589285680952
65.0000000033333
80.3369047652381
65.8511904795238
59.8880952380952
48.3595238095238
24.0446428571429
61.5964285714286
63.1363095204762
68.7583333366667
53.2630952380952
46.2535714252381
18.875
41.6434523842857
73.2452380985714
58.2696428538095
55.6488095204762
67.239880952381
11.3035714285714
71.0952380919048
48.9833333366667
73.0851190442857
58.1202380919048
36.9702380952381
69.656547622381
57.5035714252381
24.9702380952381
9.97023809523809
21.3779761904762
52.7779761938095
34.3035714285714
59.3886904795238
50.9833333366667
39.6726190509524
25.2059523842857
79.4404761871429
74.781547622381
65.9529761904762
40.1428571428571
50.7857142857143
39.4119047652381
56.6041666666667
51.8446428604762
52.8172619080952
60.1440476157143
66.6476190509524
54.0327380952381
50.6601190509524
53.6916666633333
50.1761904795238
55.7869047652381
18.5565476190476
54.92916667
73.3190476190476
56.0726190509524
35.7202380952381
33.4017857142857
26.0857142857143
45.8898809523809
42.6535714319048
54.631547622381
33.3184523809524
50.3535714252381
30.6488095238095
33.0452380919048
33.2690476190476
42.2101190476191
45.3244047619048
52.3017857142857
62.8547619080952
25.6101190476191
69.9077380919048
30.8898809523809
69.5999999966667
60.8363095271428
34.3095238095238
41.7261904795238
39.7261904795238
39.9928571395238
41.0011904761905
56.5178571395238
56.0970238128571
56.7369047619048
32.4916666666667
63.0184523842857
70.5339285680952
26.2642857142857
21.0982142857143
22.9702380952381
38.0505952380952
50.1035714285714
31.1101190476191
6.52678571428571
26.1202380985714
79.5946428604762
76.2535714285714
11.3035714285714
56.9827380919048
52.3833333366667
52.2672619080952
55.6440476157143
63.2446428538095
50.3541666666667
28.5404761871429
27.8333333333333
47.2029761904762
50.5565476157143
48.3571428571429
23.0196428571429
37.4809523809524
73.7380952414286
60.1196428604762
29.8952380985714
53.5202380952381
4
45.5464285714286
27.5565476190476
31.7369047585714
39.0452380985714
64.925
50.043452377619
21.8601190476191
41.2529761938095
16.2946428571429
0
35.7172619047619
28.0654761904762
49.0678571428571
27.2952380985714
56.9654761904762
38.8244047619048
4.04464285714286
58.8565476190476
56.7452380952381
40.7529761904762
50.6148809557143
69.4863095204762
65.7273809490476
49.951785717619
28.7261904761905
41.9946428604762
21.8601190476191
21.3779761904762
62.826785717619
66.076785717619
28.0398809557143
31.59166667
65.6488095204762
21.4285714285714
38.0505952380952
33.6196428571429
69.9202380952381
12
23.95833333
32.2869047585714
60.0035714252381
50.26666667
31.8333333333333
69.335119047619
42.8095238095238
71.25
50.2202380985714
42.1184523842857
25.8726190442857
39.4976190442857
66.6547619080952
61.2017857109524
53.1922619080952
67.2154761871429
17.3333333333333
55.3017857109524
47.9119047652381
48.5535714319048
64.3851190509524
64.2517857109524
77.5446428538095
58.6035714252381
31.2142857142857
73.7601190509524
46.2369047652381
24.0505952380952
24.5267857142857
22.0476190476191
28.6952380985714
23.1666666666667
36.0267857142857
41.6886904728571
45.7785714285714
62.9047619080952
52.135714282381
56.3666666633333
18.1666666666667
61.4250000033333
6.53571428571429
26.8690476190476
53.5690476157143
24.2023809523809
20.6023809557143
22.975
40.2261904728571
42.2511904728571
39.7261904728571
31.0446428571429
65.6767857142857
54.8065476223809
46.3160714319048
85.5577380919048
51.0202380919048
56.8142857142857
60.1053571461905
4.5
30.6083333333333
75.731547622381
34.88333333
-4.05642857142857
-2.58107142857143
-0.662678571428571
-3.35892857142857
87.178214286381
68.3619047659048
75.8166666633333
71.3030952380952
-0.92625
-2.63839285714286
-3.04982142857143
59.4036904798571
-3.19928571428571
-0.92625
74.2476190479524
70.1782142817143
65.099285714619
-0.461785714285714
67.9694047589048
65.5924999966667
58.8553571391905
55.5041666633333
61.2980952407619
59.9595238061905
64.5116666703333
-0.680892857142857
-0.680892857142857
46.0320238098571
76.3738095271429
76.8476190442857
-3.25607142857143
-2.76375
32.3520238058571
-3.42857142857143
45.2636904728571
-3.99214285714286
-0.92625
58.1875000033333
-0.910714285714286
58.5582142863809
-3.04982142857143
-3.21428571428571
43.3040476187143
54.0499999963333
73.8907142857143
57.9004761941429
-0.92625
-4.07142857142857
76.914285711619
-3.21428571428571
81.3298809557143
-0.92625
-0.92625
-0.92625
-0.910714285714286
-4.01785714285714
63.2821428608095
51.7935714252381
-2.33035714285714
62.3659523809524
-4.18125
51.2867857139524
-2.49964285714286
47.7194047585714
-0.680892857142857
-0.910714285714286
31.257500003
63.3248809487143
-0.92625
-3.21964285714286
-1.73035714285714
-2.13214285714286
49.9926190482857
52.8592857112857
48.1821428571429
80.2809523782857
64.4857142883809
61.2071428598095
-2.51785714285714
-0.92625
-0.910714285714286
-0.478392857142857
60.6380952410952
-3.06
75.1702380989048
78.45416667
-0.680892857142857
-4.15125
54.2554761908095
62.533333336
-0.92625
-0.743035714285714
-0.563571428571429
-0.563571428571429
70.0933333303333
37.0669047585714
-1.23321428571429
76.4102380959048
68.9248809550476
-3.28178571428571
-0.478392857142857
-1.71428571428571
62.2310714252381
55.6644047619048
0
75.5533333296667
-0.560892857142857
43.8574999993333
53.4523809520476
66.4627380955714
84.395714288381
49.3960714315714
-3.23839285714286
-0.662678571428571
64.1335714322381
66.2194047652381
-1.22035714285714
-0.627857142857143
76.1623809490476
-4.28571428571429
-3.21428571428571
41.17333333
70.2810714285714
77.0452380989048
70.306666664
44.5400000003333
76.4380952417619
64.2194047652381
64.7066666693333
74.5294047585714
70.9533333336667
67.70666667
-0.538928571428571
63.9248809520476
44.9066666633333
-4.15125
-2.91053571428571
71.7248809490476
-0.549107142857143
0
-4.15125
77.57916667
74.1857142857143
45.0571428604762
70.1553571458571
60.0089285717619
67.1208333333333
70.814285710619
-1.93125
30.4477380955714
-2.14285714285714
-2.14285714285714
61.0824999963333
65.903333336
66.5719047645714
67.9476190502857
56.3546428564762
64.905000003
63.1294047649048
60.1336904791905
64.1360714249048
76.2886904788571
-3.19928571428571
63.14
-2.89285714285714
78.1182142827143
69.9757142857143
74.0202380985714
84.3030952347619
64.2269047622381
79.5377380922381
87.2761904725238
72.9220238098572
63.2982142827143
5.44630952380952
83.2928571458571
70.573333336
69.7860714322381
-0.484821428571429
62.9257142827143
75.2303571461905
58.8824999966667
64.3860714285714
48.4959523776191
-0.606428571428571
-0.66375
-0.725892857142857
65.9992857139524
58.4992857142857
60.5535714285714
-1.14
67.3901190512857
69.1002380989048
-2.14285714285714
36.5698809517143
66.3248809530476
66.8326190512857
-2.14285714285714
69.6241666633333
72.2030952380952
78.890714289381
-3.28178571428571
70.6959523776191
75.9977380922381
-1.23321428571429
-2.63839285714286
88.716666667
82.7310714315714
84.6977380979048
60.8335714249048
-2.19535714285714
-1.90821428571429
-1.14
-0.552857142857143
63.0371428604762
53.982500003
-0.538928571428571
-0.590892857142857
69.1985714255714
66.9836904761905
55.3184523802857
-0.552857142857143
-1.90821428571429
68.8888095274762
-0.92625
-0.680892857142857
-0.478392857142857
34.2292857112857
38.502380955381
S3 Cost of Energy
7.91
24.02
29.09
7.91
21.24
35
29.85
32.38
34.82
13.12
7.62
27.67
28.24
27.44
18.23
31.98
23.19
35
5.82
28.04
18.37
7.91
8.09
29.85
28.04
5.07
27.02
5.07
35
16.09
6.56
6.56
4.02
26.69
17.53
30.17
11.36
26.22
35
35
18.37
26.3
27.06
27.56
31.06
26.24
21.68
29.72
26.07
27.53
27.52
25.59
11.36
29.85
17.53
17.01
7.99
11.36
25.61
5.25
5.25
21.68
5.25
4.88
7.04
24.06
27.14322931
0
28.4375
6.610625
12.25546875
6.777894375
6.777895819
22.4521325
22.09375
6.610625
21.45572625
27.72563938
12.4425
28.4375
24.43182
35
26.140625
25.5540075
21.59682
24.42453125
23.79960625
22.05109375
25.20984375
19.03125
25.98859375
22.4521325
24.10515625
23.33041375
32.50527438
32.37426938
35
35
4.59375
0
22.00880063
23.1875
21.45536313
22.07442563
6.5625
6.5625
24.644375
29.86921875
24.28708319
35
21.59682
26.40640625
21.19286313
23.43978875
0
18.26853875
4.4629375
30.2640625
28.60848813
4.228805
4.14225
25.78515625
8.630155625
8.3243125
9.807
9.807
21.45572909
30.69791681
27.14322931
27.2059375
4.471477806
4.4714775
9.633385563
0
0
20.80604181
17.8583825
10.51020688
12.4425
12.4425
4.14225
4.14225
4.14225
12.49075625
9.807
35
5.2933125
22.07442694
28.4375
26.25
4.4714775
9.807
18.26853875
0
32.54965
27.0099375
29.3775125
31.23343125
22.12525
6.2260625
30.16435625
9.807
35
6.2260625
26.16779375
25.6685625
27.5625
12.4425
25.18420625
33.501475
22.4048125
31.3383
35
9.52284375
0
19.63955
24.0625
30.802275
8.630125
9.807
0
25.79268125
25.45615625
22.75
24.9375
27.125
32.375
24.3501125
23.8601125
25.77596875
28.10185
22.265425
35
21.875
27.2409375
9.807
28.4375
27.00005
22.265425
24.3501125
27.09013125
23.65111875
35
30.625
21.48103125
28.9625
28.21875
9.807
12.4425
11.59913125
18.12033125
24.5
21.25204375
21.25204375
8.4100625
8.3243125
27.09013125
22.23545625
27.12058125
4.4629375
9.52284375
4.14225
10.343375
25.84815625
9.52284375
6.2260625
35
30.625
35
4.4629375
26.0124375
4.4629375
19.88144375
4.4629375
5.2933125
18.2490875
9.807
26.25
0
7.4375
0
7.4375
22.75
24.0625
35
35
0
26.25
7.875
11.375
25.375
21.875
8.75
5.6875
27.125
16.1875
29.3125
23.625
22.75
22.3125
23.1875
24.0625
20.5625
26.25
22.3125
24.0625
25.8125
25.375
7.4375
35
17.0625
0
0
23.625
23.1875
0
24.0625
20.5625
25.375
19.25
26.25
23.1875
9.1875
31.5
24.9375
22.3125
22.3125
25.8125
35
24.0625
22.3125
25.375
21.875
30.625
24.9375
24.0625
35
15.75
6.125
0
17.5
17.0625
7.4375
5.6875
24.0625
0
9.625
16.625
4.375
24.0625
4.8125
24.0625
6.5625
24.0625
25.375
22.75
27.5625
5.6875
0
9.625
9.625
0
9.625
4.375
7.4375
12.25
4.375
4.375
12.25
17.0625
24.5
12.25
5.6875
7.875
4.375
8.75
9.625
2.875
2.875
2.875
15.625
16.59375
15.625
5.28125
20.40625
19.6875
17.1875
25
4.71875
9.21875
0
3.9375
16.34375
4.90625
5.28125
6.28125
13.5625
13.1875
17.8125
18.75
15.625
4.71875
16.5625
22.65625
20.125
23.125
16.25
19.6875
5.28125
6.1875
4.71875
24.1875
3.46875
13.1875
13.1875
19.6875
24.96875
14.5
6.1875
16.59375
16.25
6.1875
6.1875
4.71875
4.71875
6.1875
17.59375
3.9375
2.875
2.875
11.5
4.78125
4.71875
13
20.3125
6.1875
19.03125
20.46875
19.40625
18.5625
19.5
19.53125
19.71875
19.6875
18.6875
21.9375
20.09375
21.65625
18.5625
5.5
6.1875
14.46875
12
16.59375
6.625
10.03125
13.59375
6.625
16.3125
6.625
4.125
5.28125
10.34375
10.09375
3
6.15625
10.34375
16.59375
5.25
4.71875
21.75
4.6875
4.6875
4.6875
4.6875
4.6875
17.59375
25
5.25
6.15625
16.78125
2.875
22.28125
6.1875
16.78125
13.1875
11.40625
5.28125
13.1875
23.96875
14.5
13.1875
19.09375
19.6875
19.40625
22.9375
22.65625
19.03125
16.3125
5.25
4.71875
22.28125
23.75
4.71875
6.375
14.375
4.71875
13.1875
6.1875
0
18.75
16.59375
6.1875
13.1875
3.9375
5.28125
5.28125
4.71875
14.34375
0
6.28125
17.1875
15.625
13.1875
17.1875
20.40625
4.71875
16.59375
6.1875
12.15625
4.78125
4.71875
20.75
5.28125
15.625
4.71875
5.28125
4.71875
10.09375
10.09375
13.96875
5.25
11.5
25
16.78125
10.84375
13.1875
0
3.9375
14.5
6.1875
5.25
5.25
13.59375
13
3.9375
6.1875
5.28125
2.875
2.875
14.375
9.21875
16.34375
16.75
0
15.34375
13.1875
6.625
13.59375
6.15625
12.15625
6.625
19.9375
14.46875
6.1875
6.28125
5.28125
5.5
13.1875
5.25
10.96875
17.59375
24.125
3
20.3125
5.25
5.25
5.25
4.125
4.125
4.125
4.125
4.125
5.25
4.6875
4.6875
4.6875
4.71875
6.15625
3.46875
10.34375
10.34375
14.5
2.875
17.59375
5.25
5.25
4.78125
5.25
28.395
18.0675
4.63875
23.5125
22.84125
28.5
28.875
22.7925
6.48375
18.46875
21.34875
3.34875
22.395
6.48375
30
22.84125
8.6325
3.2325
17.65875
18.19125
18.73125
19.29375
20.22
18.075
21.0525
4.76625
4.76625
3.92625
28.125
30
22.7925
19.34625
4.76625
24
18.46875
27.945
6.48375
13.51875
6.375
5.20125
21.34875
22.5
26.3325
18.375
22.9725
4.395
6.48375
28.5
19.5
22.5
20.37375
6.48375
6.48375
6.48375
6.375
28.125
22.6125
19.9425
16.3125
8.6325
29.26875
19.00125
17.4975
11.88375
4.76625
6.375
6.48375
5.20125
6.48375
22.5375
12.1125
14.925
19.5525
19.5525
12.1125
30
21.45
17.625
17.625
6.48375
6.375
3.34875
18.75
21.42
21.9375
13.51875
4.76625
29.05875
8.5425
15.75
6.48375
5.20125
3.945
3.945
24.57
3.7725
8.6325
24.6675
5.20125
22.9725
3.34875
12
11.93625
11.93625
0
7.14
3.92625
6.48375
22.5
9.67875
22.395
9.67875
22.66875
4.63875
3.7725
11.88375
8.5425
4.395
22.395
30
22.5
7.98
4.06125
20.625
7.98
7.98
18.75
11.88375
7.98
9.67875
7.14
7.98
3.7725
5.20125
7.98
29.05875
20.37375
5.20125
3.84375
0
29.05875
13.78125
22.5
15
5.08125
3.39375
13.51875
30
13.51875
4.06125
15
15
4.64625
27.615
28.395
30
23.16375
17.2725
18.07875
14.58375
18.70875
5.08125
22.395
7.98
20.25
25.57125
23.655
23.5125
22.7925
19.9425
24.11625
20.7
5.08125
19.48125
8.5425
14.925
7.98
11.88375
3.39375
12.63
18.46875
4.64625
11.88375
6.2175
4.245
4.64625
5.08125
8.6325
8.6325
23.5125
7.98
4.61625
3.7725
15
17.85375
5.20125
8.6325
15
16.98375
22.7925
22.9725
22.9725
6.2175
11.93625
8.6325
18.46875
22.575
11.93625
11.93625
3.7725
15.3675
13.3575
7.98
3.87
25.71
19.34625
3.7725
4.13625
21.465
28.75875
4.14375
3.87
13.3575
8.5425
6.48375
4.76625
3.34875
6.2175
4.125
S3 Funding Resource
10
9
11
15
13
7
11
13
13
15
11
15
0
15
6
15
7
6
6
6
9
9
11
0
15
7
15
10
15
7
9
7
15
0
15
6
11
6
6
9
9
11
15
0
0
15
9
11
11
9
15
11
7
0
11
11
0
15
5
15
15
15
6
6
9
11
11
11
15
6
9
11
0
7
6
0
15
0
6
6
9
9
6
6
9
6
7
11
6
9
9
11
8
7
7
9
15
7
7
7
7
9
15
15
11
15
11
13
11
15
13
11
15
11
15
7
7
6
15
15
15
15
9
6
11
15
6
11
6
6
13
6
9
9
7
7
7
7
0
11
13
6
6
7
0
7
0
9
11
13
6
6
9
9
6
9
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
11
11
0
0
15
15
15
15
7
9
11
11
7
11
15
7
9
6
7
0
11
7
15
6
15
9
15
11
7
6
11
7
6
6
15
7
6
0
9
8.25
12
5.25
10.5
9
6
5.25
11.25
9.75
0
0
0
12.75
5.25
5.25
5.25
5.25
6.75
5.25
6.75
5.25
11.25
14.25
0
6
6
9
6.75
6
6
6.75
6
6
6
6.75
8.25
9
5.25
14.25
5.25
6
5.25
6
0
6
5.25
5.25
5.25
0
7.5
6
15
12.75
9.75
6
6
6
6
0
5.25
7.5
6.75
0
11.25
14.25
9
9.75
10.5
15
7.5
6
9.75
14.25
9.75
9
0
3
10.5
0
3
0
7.5
8.25
10.5
3.75
0
11.25
0
5.25
8.25
14.25
10.5
11.25
8.25
13.5
0
12
0
6
9
7.5
6
6
6
6
9
6
6
9
14.25
6.75
2.25
10.5
11.25
7.5
9
7.5
6.75
6.75
6.75
6
7.5
7.5
7.5
9
9
9
6
5.25
7.5
9.75
6.75
0
10.5
8.25
8.25
9
0
9.75
10.5
8.25
6
0
0
6
6
12.75
5.25
12.75
6.75
8.25
0
9.75
9
15
13.5
14.25
6
0
15
6.75
7.5
6.75
6
10.5
10.5
11.25
8.25
7.5
15
9.75
5.25
9.75
12
12
13
11
11
8
10
15
0
10
9
12
11
9
15
11
13
13
14
13
17
14
8
8
15
9
16
8
8
8
0
12
18
20
7
14
13
8
9
10
20
11
11
11
2
10
20
18
2
2
14
0
18
20
19
18
9
2
8
10
8
12
8
8
8
10
8
8
1
0
13
14
14
12
0
20
13
14
14
14
11
7
10
7
7
12
20
13
16
11
20
9
8
11
11
11
10
11
0
7
8
18
14
0
0
11
14
0
16
0
0
13
18
0
13
8
8
12
8
8
0
16
19
0
18
0
11
12
19
0
17
0
0
10
0
0
15
13
13
8
0
0
19
10
12
0
10
16
0
10
11
19
18
19
13
13
10
13
13
13
10
10
0
0
13
0
14
0
11
9
0
0
20
18
19
13
20
18
15
9
0
9
14
11
11
15
13
14
14
13
14
14
20
14
0
20
14
14
15
13
0
14
0
0
0
20
8
13
8
13
0
16
15
14
0
0
12
12
12
18
18
14
7
19
7
12
7
0
7
20
0
23
10
16
17
21
14
18
19
16
17
10
10
10
10
10
12
18
18
0
0
19
23
0
10
15
18
22
21
11
11
20
11
0
0
18
0
0
0
18
14
14
11
16
21
20
15
19
0
19
25
11
13
23
10
16
18
23
12
20
20
19
0
21
22
21
10
22
20
19
21
20
24
25
7
25
24
15
1
24
25
19
10
0
25
15
15
15
13
15
16
16
16
24
18
18
18
18
19
14
23
23
24
12
20
24
24
17
12
19
23
15
10
17
15
0
18
19
0
19
15
22
23
23
19
23
24
24
25
13
10
0
21
1
12
25
0
2
Match increase
13.3333333333333
12
14.6666666666667
20
17.3333333333333
9.33333333333333
14.6666666666667
17.3333333333333
17.3333333333333
20
14.6666666666667
20
0
20
8
20
9.33333333333333
8
8
8
12
12
14.6666666666667
0
20
9.33333333333333
20
13.3333333333333
20
9.33333333333333
12
9.33333333333333
20
0
20
8
14.6666666666667
8
8
12
12
14.6666666666667
20
0
0
20
12
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
12
20
14.6666666666667
0
9.33333333333333
0
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
0
20
6.66666666666667
20
20
20
0
8
8
12
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
20
8
12
14.6666666666667
0
9.33333333333333
8
0
20
0
8
8
12
12
8
8
12
8
9.33333333333333
14.6666666666667
8
12
12
14.6666666666667
10.6666666666667
9.33333333333333
9.33333333333333
12
0
20
9.33333333333333
9.33333333333333
9.33333333333333
9.33333333333333
12
20
20
14.6666666666667
20
14.6666666666667
17.3333333333333
14.6666666666667
20
17.3333333333333
14.6666666666667
20
14.6666666666667
20
9.33333333333333
9.33333333333333
0
8
20
20
20
20
12
8
14.6666666666667
20
8
14.6666666666667
8
8
17.3333333333333
8
12
12
9.33333333333333
9.33333333333333
9.33333333333333
9.33333333333333
0
14.6666666666667
17.3333333333333
8
8
9.33333333333333
0
9.33333333333333
0
12
0
14.6666666666667
17.3333333333333
8
8
12
12
8
12
8
8
8
8
8
8
0
9.33333333333333
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
0
0
20
20
20
20
9.33333333333333
12
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
9.33333333333333
14.6666666666667
20
9.33333333333333
12
8
9.33333333333333
0
14.6666666666667
9.33333333333333
20
8
20
12
20
14.6666666666667
9.33333333333333
8
14.6666666666667
9.33333333333333
8
8
20
9.33333333333333
8
0
0
12
11
16
7
14
12
8
7
15
13
0
0
0
17
7
7
7
7
9
7
9
7
15
19
0
0
8
8
12
9
8
8
9
8
8
8
9
11
12
7
19
7
8
7
8
0
8
7
7
7
0
10
8
20
17
13
8
8
8
8
0
7
10
9
0
15
19
12
13
14
20
10
8
13
19
13
12
0
4
14
0
4
0
10
11
0
14
5
0
15
0
7
11
0
19
14
15
11
18
0
16
0
8
12
10
8
8
8
8
12
8
8
12
19
9
3
0
0
14
15
10
12
10
9
9
9
8
10
10
10
12
12
12
8
7
10
13
9
0
14
11
11
12
0
13
14
11
8
0
0
0
8
8
17
0
7
17
9
11
0
13
12
20
0
18
19
8
0
20
9
10
9
8
14
14
15
11
10
20
13
7
13
16
16
17.3333333333333
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
10.6666666666667
13.3333333333333
20
0
13.3333333333333
12
16
14.6666666666667
12
20
14.6666666666667
17.3333333333333
17.3333333333333
18.6666666666667
17.3333333333333
22.6666666666667
18.6666666666667
10.6666666666667
10.6666666666667
20
12
21.3333333333333
10.6666666666667
10.6666666666667
10.6666666666667
0
16
24
26.6666666666667
9.33333333333333
18.6666666666667
0
17.3333333333333
10.6666666666667
12
13.3333333333333
26.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
2.66666666666667
13.3333333333333
26.6666666666667
24
2.66666666666667
2.66666666666667
18.6666666666667
0
24
26.6666666666667
25.3333333333333
24
12
2.66666666666667
10.6666666666667
13.3333333333333
10.6666666666667
16
10.6666666666667
10.6666666666667
10.6666666666667
13.3333333333333
10.6666666666667
10.6666666666667
1.33333333333333
0
17.3333333333333
18.6666666666667
18.6666666666667
16
0
26.6666666666667
17.3333333333333
18.6666666666667
18.6666666666667
18.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
9.33333333333333
13.3333333333333
9.33333333333333
9.33333333333333
16
26.6666666666667
17.3333333333333
21.3333333333333
14.6666666666667
26.6666666666667
12
10.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
13.3333333333333
14.6666666666667
0
9.33333333333333
10.6666666666667
24
18.6666666666667
0
0
14.6666666666667
18.6666666666667
0
21.3333333333333
0
0
17.3333333333333
24
0
17.3333333333333
10.6666666666667
10.6666666666667
16
10.6666666666667
10.6666666666667
0
21.3333333333333
25.3333333333333
0
24
0
14.6666666666667
16
25.3333333333333
0
22.6666666666667
0
0
13.3333333333333
0
0
20
17.3333333333333
17.3333333333333
10.6666666666667
0
0
25.3333333333333
13.3333333333333
16
0
13.3333333333333
21.3333333333333
0
13.3333333333333
14.6666666666667
25.3333333333333
24
25.3333333333333
17.3333333333333
17.3333333333333
13.3333333333333
17.3333333333333
17.3333333333333
17.3333333333333
13.3333333333333
13.3333333333333
0
0
17.3333333333333
0
18.6666666666667
0
14.6666666666667
12
0
0
26.6666666666667
24
25.3333333333333
17.3333333333333
26.6666666666667
24
20
12
0
12
18.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
20
17.3333333333333
18.6666666666667
18.6666666666667
17.3333333333333
18.6666666666667
18.6666666666667
26.6666666666667
18.6666666666667
0
26.6666666666667
18.6666666666667
18.6666666666667
20
17.3333333333333
0
18.6666666666667
0
0
0
26.6666666666667
10.6666666666667
17.3333333333333
10.6666666666667
17.3333333333333
0
21.3333333333333
20
18.6666666666667
0
0
16
16
16
24
24
18.6666666666667
9.33333333333333
25.3333333333333
9.33333333333333
16
9.33333333333333
0
9.33333333333333
26.6666666666667
0
0
0
0
0
30.6666666666667
13.3333333333333
21.3333333333333
22.6666666666667
0
0
0
28
0
0
18.6666666666667
24
25.3333333333333
0
21.3333333333333
22.6666666666667
13.3333333333333
13.3333333333333
13.3333333333333
13.3333333333333
13.3333333333333
0
0
16
24
24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
25.3333333333333
0
30.6666666666667
0
0
0
13.3333333333333
20
24
0
0
29.3333333333333
0
28
0
0
0
0
0
14.6666666666667
14.6666666666667
0
26.6666666666667
0
14.6666666666667
0
0
0
0
0
24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24
18.6666666666667
18.6666666666667
0
0
0
0
14.6666666666667
0
21.3333333333333
28
0
0
26.6666666666667
20
0
0
0
0
25.3333333333333
0
0
25.3333333333333
33.3333333333333
0
0
0
14.6666666666667
17.3333333333333
0
30.6666666666667
0
13.3333333333333
21.3333333333333
24
30.6666666666667
16
0
0
26.6666666666667
26.6666666666667
0
0
25.3333333333333
0
0
0
28
29.3333333333333
28
13.3333333333333
29.3333333333333
26.6666666666667
25.3333333333333
28
26.6666666666667
32
0
33.3333333333333
9.33333333333333
0
0
33.3333333333333
0
0
0
32
20
1.33333333333333
32
33.3333333333333
25.3333333333333
13.3333333333333
0
0
0
0
33.3333333333333
20
20
20
17.3333333333333
20
21.3333333333333
21.3333333333333
21.3333333333333
32
0
24
0
24
24
24
25.3333333333333
18.6666666666667
30.6666666666667
30.6666666666667
32
16
26.6666666666667
32
32
22.6666666666667
0
16
25.3333333333333
30.6666666666667
20
13.3333333333333
0
0
0
22.6666666666667
20
0
0
24
25.3333333333333
0
0
25.3333333333333
20
0
29.3333333333333
30.6666666666667
30.6666666666667
0
25.3333333333333
30.6666666666667
0
0
32
32
33.3333333333333
17.3333333333333
0
0
0
0
13.3333333333333
0
0
0
28
1.33333333333333
16
0
0
33.3333333333333
0
0
0
0
2.66666666666667
S3 Comments Funding
$ 126,209 offered
$10,000 offered
$22,000 offered
$809,000 offered
$420,680 offered
$60,252 offered
$66,300 offered
$126,044 offered
$1,545,000 offered
$61,996 offered
$125,000 offered
$210,000 offered
None offered
$4,014 offered
after further assessment Grantee has provided more than 100% match from dam reconstruction.
$6,884 offered
$ $423,275 offered
$ 25,000 offered
$3,050 offered
6,566 offered
$4,277 offered
$201,782 offered
$44,000 offered
$64,448 offered
$2,600,000 offered for design and construction but application if for recon and feasibility
$210,000 offered
$277,000 offered
$2,500,000 offered
875528
$3,000,000 offered
$8,000 offered
$283,943 offered
$57,500 offered
$2,925,000 offered
None offered
$213,193 offered
$25,000 offered
$39,000 offered
$4,916 offered
$3,083 offered
$54,799 offered
37,200 offered
$113,000 offered
$100,000 offered
None offered
none offered
$15,000,000 offered
$62,500 offered
$98,800 offered
$100,000 offered
$10,000 offered
$750,000 offered
$240,000 offered
$70,000 Local Contributions
nothing offered
$ 79,300 Local Contribution
$76,780 Local Contributions
Nothing offered
$30,000 Local Contribution, including $20K for biomass inventory.
$280 Local Contribution
$403,900 Local Contribution
$1,061,000 Local Contribution
$10,497,695 Local Contributions
$1,000 Local Contribution
$2,968 Local Contribution
$29,650 Local Contributions
$61,890 Local Contribution
50673
$50,673 Local Contribution
$75,000 Local Contribtuion
3050
$124,708 Local Contribution
$875,528 Local contribution
nothing offered
4000
$7,563 Local Contributions
Nothing offered
$ 105,773 Local Contribution
Nothing offered
7500
$25,164 Local Contribution
$201,782 Local Contribution
$44,000 Local Contribution
$34,450 Local Contributions
$5,000 local contribution
$250,000 Local Contribution
$7,538 Local Contribution
$40,000 Local Contribution
$74,004 Local Contributions
$6,989 Local Contribution
$296,500 Local Contribution
$62,500 Local Contributions
$89,990 Local Contribution
$53,796 Other Grant
$ 26,439 Local Contribution
$515,00 Local Contribution
$ 92,296 Local Contribution
$11,000,000 Local Contribution
$27,036 Local Contribution
$33,980 Local Contribution
$ 6,500 Local Contribution
$57,500 Local Contribution
$537,460 Local Contribution
$314,381 Local Contribution
$266,592 Local Contribution
$64,448 Local Contribution
$600,000 Local Contribution
$43,000 local support
$186,850 Local Support
$ 97,800 Local Support
$10,593,934 local support
$300,000 Local support
$ 108,400 Local match
$81,842 Local Contribution
$113,000 Local Contribution
$1,250,000 Local Match
$15,000 Local Match
$20,000 in kind match offered
$ 13,669 In kind match offered ANTHC.
$12,000 Cash $23,750 in kind match offered.
$1,900,000 Cash match offered
$13,591,226 cash match offered
$ 100,000 Cash match offered.
$ 5,000 in kind match offered.
$ 10,000 in kind match offered.
$ 25,802 cash match offered
$11,500,000 cash match offered
$ 11,000 in kind match offered.
$ 14,000 cash $ 16,000 in kind match offered
$ 9,000 cash match offered
$ 9,000 cash match offered. NEED RESOLUTION 11/5/13
Sean updated score to count match, which is expected and will be written into the grant if awarded.
$ 20,000 cash $10,000 In kind match offered
$ 9,000 cash match offered
$ 141,000 cash match offered.
$ 474,953 cash, $33,000 in kind match offered
$18,000 cash match offered
$ 6,500 cash match offered
$ 18,600 cash match offered
$57,500 Cash match offered
No match offered
$120,000, in kind match offered.
$ 137,820 in kind match offered
$20,677 in kind match ANTHC
$ 14,933 in kind ANTHC match
$ 75, 000 cash $ 75,000 in kind match offered
No match offered
$ 25,000 in kind match offered
No match offered
$25,000 in kind match offered
$25,000 cash $ 24,290 in kind match offered
$153,000 in kind match offered
$4,000 cash Match offered
$5,000 in kind match offered.
$ 201,782 cash match offered
$ 44,000 cash match offered
$ 47,302 in kind match offered
$ 10,000 in kind match
$ 9,687 In kind ANTHC match offered
$ 5,954 in kind ANTHC Match offered
$ 22,057 In kind ANTHC match offered
ANTHC to provide in-kind match of $ 8,663
$ 16,765 in kind ANTHC match offered
ANTHC to provide $ 21,941 of in-kind support
$30,000 cash, $95,000 in kind match offered
$296,936 cash, $56,286 in kind match offered
$ 470,000 cash, $50,000 in kind match offered
No match offered
No match offered
$ 905,000 cash $25,000 in in kind match offered
$ 278,800 in kind match offered
$411,835 in kind match offered
$1,900,000 cash match offered
$11,250 in kind match offerd
$ 6,000 in kind match offered
$14,000 cash, $15,800 in kind match offered
$ 20,289 Cash match offered
$25,000 Cash match offered
$ 125,000 in-kind match offered
$ 8,813,869 cash offered
$ 8,356 cash $3,456 in kind offered
$ 86,448 cash, $51,000 in kind
$10,000 cash
$ 500 cash, $3,000 in kind offered
No match offered
$ 40,000 cash, $137,825 in kind offered
$4,000 cash, $40,000 in-kind
$ 5,914,491 Cash Match offered
$ 11,000 in-kind offered
$ 379,947 cash and $192,891 in-kind offered
$113,000 Cash match offered
$2,035,476 Cash match, $1,021,393 in-kind
$ 82,550 in-kind $10,000 cash match offered
$ 25,800 in-kind match
$6,770 ANTHC pleage of in-kind support
$165,000 cash match offered
$97,000 in -kind offered
$ 13,669 in-kind match offered
$300 in-kind match offered
$ 4,000,000 of cash match offered
In Kind Match of $120,000
$50,000 of in-kind not eligible. $5,900 determined to be allowable match
$1,500,000 identified by applicant as cash match is funds from another State of Alaska grant.
Match offered not acceptable. In-Kind is not part of the project expenses.
No matching offered.
Cash - 5, % - 2, Amount - 3 = 10
Inkind - 5, % - 4, Amount - 2 = 11 (Inidirect costs for Chugachmuit ($14,268) and Port Graham ($38,978) were not included in calculation. Also need to remember to lower grant amount
by $38,978; as this amount was included as being funded by grant funds. New grant total = $387,855
Application withdrawn
Inkind - 5, % - 6, Amount - 3 = 14
No match offered, however language in the report mentions housing offered and local labor; therefore 5 for type.
No match offered or considered 0
Cash & in-kind - 5, % - 6, Amount - 4 = 15 Needed to reduce match to $1,414,756 as matching funds from Round II included.
No match offered = 0
Inkind - 5, % - 1, Amount - 1 = 7 FAILED Stage 1
Cash & inkind - 5, % - 4, Amount - 2 = 11
Info requested 11/17
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 10 Amount 4 = 19
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, Amount 3 = 14
Other SOA Grants 3, % 8, Amount 4 = 15 Need to know about the State grants offered
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 2 = 11
SOA appropriation 3, % 10, Amount 5 = 18
No matching amount identified
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 8, Amount 3 = 16
Match offered is not really match = 0
cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 =
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, amount 3 = 12
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4 Amnount 1 = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 3 = 12
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Caash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 3 = 12
$ 4,696,494 Actual Matching amount.
Cahs and In-Kind 5, % 10, amount 4 = 19
Cash and in-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 2 = 9
Any kind referanced 1, % 1, Amount 1 =3
Failed Stage 1
Failed Stage 1
CAsh and In-Kind 5, % 6, Amount 3 = 14
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 8, Amount 2 = 15
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, amount 1 = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, amount 1 = 12
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 1, = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 2 = 9
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 2 = 9
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 2 = 9
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 1 = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 1 = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 1 = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, amount 1 = 12
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, amount 1 = 12
CAsh and In-Kind 5, % 6, Amount 1
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 1, amount 1 = 7
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 1 = 10
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, Amount 2 = 13
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 2 = 9
Washeteria is not allowable match.
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, amount 2 = 13
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 2 = 11
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, amount 2 = 11
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, amount 3 = 12
Administrative Indirect NOT considered allowable match
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, amount 2 = 13
Cash and In-kind 5, % 6, amount 3 = 14
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, amount 2 = 11
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 1, Amount 2 = 8
No matching funds provided
No actual match provided
Did not pass Stage 1
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, Amount 1 = 8
Match $500k Denali, $2m SOA total match $2.5m $2,500,000/12,725,000 = 19.65%
SOA grant 3, % 10, amount 4 = 13
Match amount $ 872,402 Project amount $ 4,372,402 Match=19.95%
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, amount 3 = 14 Combined with #825
Other Private (Trident Seafood) 4, % 2, Amount 1 = 7
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 8, Amount 4 = 17
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, amount 2 = 9
3 men for 40 days @ $75 = $ 9,000 not $10,800. $20,000 Excivating, lifting and hoisting equipment. Total match =$ 29,000. 29,000/265,000 = 10.94 %
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, amount 2 = 11
No match provided
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 6, Amount 2 = 13
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 4, Amount 3 = 12
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 10, amount 5 = 20
FAILED STAGE 1
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 10, Amount 3 =18
Fed Grant 4, % 10, Amount 5 = 19 Grantee may not be able to apply for all they have requested because of the cap.
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 1, amount 2 = FAILED STAGE 1
Type 0, % 0, Amount 0.
Cash and in-kind 5, % 10, Amount 5 = 20
Cash and In-Kind 5, % 2, amount 2 = 9
Cash & in-kind 5, % 4, Amount 1 = 10
Cash - 5, % - 2, Amount - 2 = 9
Cash - 5, % - 2, Amount - 1 = 8
Cash & in-kind - 5, % - 6, Amount - 3 = 14
Cash & in-kind - 5, % - 6, Amount - 3 = 14
Cash - 5, % - 6, Amount - 4 = 15
Cash - 5, % - 4, Amount - 2 = 11 Only counted $39,500 of match; as the other $40,000 is shown being expended in 2011.
In-kind - 5, % - 2, Amount - 3 = 10
Cash & Loan - 5, % - 10, Amount - 5 = 20
Local cash - 5, % - 6, Amount - 2 = 13
In-kind - 5, % - 1, Amount - 1 = 7
(appears to be in-kind, application not specific)
Cash - 5, % - 6, Amount - 2 = 13
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 6 @ 12
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 6 @ 12
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount (some costs may have already been incurred) = 2, % = 6 (same comment) @ 13
Need additional info to accurately assess match offered. Per Ona Brase only $100,000 available for match. Type (federal grant) = 4; Amount = 3; % = 4 @ 11
Need additional info to assess match offered / Per Ona Brase, only $100,000 actually available for match. Type (other federal grant) = 4; Amount = 3; % = 4 @ 11
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 1 @ 8
Need additional information to assess match offered. Requested 10/7/10; nothing received to date. Type (unidentified) = 1; Amount = 3; % = 6 @ 10
Type (other State grant) = 3, Amount = 4, % = 8 @ 15 / Need additional info to accurately assess match. Score stands per applicant?s representative (Ona Brase)
Failed Stage 1 review
No match offered = 0
Type (other State grants) = 3, Amount (grants not specifically identified, so unsure how definite this amount is?) = 3, % = 4 (same comment) @ 10 Score stands per comments from applicants
representative ( Ona Brase).
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2 @ 9
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 4 @ 12
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Failed Stage 1 review
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2 @ 9
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 8 @ 15
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2 (though the application mentions more inkind services to be provided), % = 4 (same comment) @ 11
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6 @ 13
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6 @ 13
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Type (federal grant) = 4, Amount (only $500,000 available per budget sheet) = 3, % = 6 @ 13
Type (federal grant) = 4, Amount = 3, % = 10 @ 17
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (unidentified) = 1, Amount = 4, % = 10 @ 15 (Requested clarification, nothing provided by applicant.)
Only $500,000 eligible, as the remaining amount is a previous RE Fund grant (not eligible as match) Type (land) = 2, Amount = 3, % = 4 @ 9
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 8 @ 16
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
No match offered = 0
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 6 @ 12
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 10 @ 18
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 5 (though not all in place, only approximately half appears currently available, still gets maximum points) 5, % (same comment) = 10 @ 20
Need additional info to assess match.
Match = $25,000 / Type (unidentified) = 1; Amount = 2; % = 4 @ 7
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Score #670--not this proposal--Unless Doug/Audrey find something different between hydro gen and TX proposals.
Type (other Federal grant) = 4, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 13
Need additional info to assess Match, per review there is only $5,000 offered - not $15,000; scored on the $5,000 amount. No response received for clarification.
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2 @ 9
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 4 @ 10
Type (cash [debt]) = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10 @ 20
However, project failed Stage 1 review
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
No match offered = 0
The $99,000 noted was incurred prior to the eligible date (7/1/2011), therefore not eligible as match, but worth 2 points as previous investment in the project = 2
No match offered for this stage of project = 0
(Though the application budget sheets do note match to be provided.) If this match is to be considered, then:
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 2 @ 10
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10 @ 20
Type (other grants and local funds, highest scoring type considered) = 5; Amount = 3, % = 10 @ 18
None listed in application, but budget sheet lists $613,106 in other State and federal grants. These funds will be spent before eligible date (7/1/11) per UAF; so go to ?previous investment?.
= 2
Funds listed have already been expended, therefore not eligible as match, but worth something as a previous investment towards project completion = 2
Type (other State and federal grants) = 4, Amount = 4, % = 6
The Round I grant ($820,000) is listed as match, not eligible as match. Need to check on remaining match, per applicant only $2,070,000 now eligible as match.
No match offered = 0
Type (other federal grant funds) = 4, Amount = 4, % = 10 @ 18
(Though the application seems to infer this match is tentative - see page 19)
Type (cash / bonding) = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10 @ 20
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 4, % = 10 @ 19
Type (other federal grant) = 4, Amount = 4, % = 10 @ 18
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2 @ 9
Land offered for the site, but no matching dollars or inkind = 2
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 4 @ 10
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 4 @ 12
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 4 @ 10
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
No match offered; but AP&T did offer the use of their facility during the project?s work period = 1
No match offered = 0
Type (Cash & Inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6 @ 13
Type (Cash and other grants, benefit for the higher value) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 4 @ 12
No match offered = 0
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10 @ 20 Failed Stage 1 review - already has a grant from Round III for $4,000,000.
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6 @ 13
Type (cash or loan proceeds) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14 12/6/2010 AP&T indicted it won?t pursue this project
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
Type (cash & inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (Cash) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 1 @ 7
Type (cash) = 5 , Amount = 1, % = 4 @ 10
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, %= 1 @ 7
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 1 @ 7
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 4 @ 12
Type (bonding) = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10 @ 20
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6 @ 13
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 8 @ 16
$560,000 listed, but not budgeted - appears to be amount offered for Round I grant. Will need to receive updated budget before these funds can be counted as match.
$60,000 is for wood stockpiled - per FAQ #2 not eligible as match
$500,000 is for wood processor purchased previously, not eligible as match / need to confirm this.
Per school district (Scott McManus) they will now provide $75,000 in cash. Therefore:
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (cash & financing) = 5, amount = 5, % = 10 @ 20
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2 @ 9
Type (inkind) = 5, Amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (cash) = 5, amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (cash) = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (cash) =5, amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Type (cash) = 5, amount = 1, % = 4 @ 10
Type (cash) = 5, amount = 2, % = 4 @ 11
Per the application, costs of $25,000 have already been incurred; therefore not eligible; the remaining $24,300 is to come from a federal grant not yet obtained = 0
Type (inkind) = 5, amount = 1, % = 1 @ 7
Type (unidentified, but probably inkind) = 5, amount = 1, % = 2 @ 8
Type (in-kind labor & materials) = 5, Amount = 3, % = 10 @ 18
Type (cash) = 5. amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
No match offered @ 0
No match offered = 0
$356,000 offered; however, only $206,000 allowable as the other $150,000 has already been incurred - thererfore not eligible.
Amount = 3, Type (land) = 2, % = 6 @ 11
Type (cash) = 5, amount = 3, % = 6 @ 14
To be considered as one applicaton with #517
match source unidentified Therefore unable to score
land and building offered as inkind Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 8
no match offered
Match source unidentified Therefore, unable to score
cash & inkind offered as match Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 6
other federal grant offered as match Type = 4, Amount = 4, % = 10
To be considered as one applicaton with #523
match source unidentified Therefore unable to score
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 4, % = 4
(CoE = St. Mary\'s @ .594 + Pilot Station @ .632 + Mountain Village @ .606 / 3 = .611)
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 1, % = 2
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 1, % = 2
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 4
(Coe = Teller @ .715 + Brevig @ .753 / 2 = .734)
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 1, % = 2
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 1, % = 2
match offered = \'as needed to complete\'; unidentified Therefore unable to score
(CoE = Slana)
cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 8
(CoE = Delta Junction)
cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 4, % = 10
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
no match offered
inkind offered as match Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 10 However, the grant also has received another federal grant = $900,000 for this project, so their match really is significantly
higher. Scores reflect this additional grant funding.
no match offered
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
Inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4
(CoE = .204 [Statewide rate])
$1,500,000 of this match is for turbines in place; therefore only $200,000 counted as match.
Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 4
cash offered as part of match Type = 5, amount = 4, % = 10
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
no match offered
(CoE = Hoonah)
other fed grant offered as match Type = 4, amount = 3, % = 10
(CoE = Homer)
no match offered
no match offered / application referenced possible future land donation
other State grant for match Type = 3, amount = 3, % = 4
no match offered land previously offered for project
no match offered aplication referenced possible future land donation
cash & inkind offered as match Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 8
inkind & cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 6
(CoE = MEA rate)
inkind offered as match Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 6
(CoE = MEA rate)
inkind offered as match Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 1
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
no match offered
no match offered
inkind & loan offered as match Type = 5, amount = 4, % = 10
Other State grant offered as match Type = 3, Amount = 3, % = 4
Cash & Inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 4
$411,060 match offered, however only $205,000 is really identified and from the narrative it appears this amount was already incurred, so not eligible; but could go to readiness? Therefore,
unable to score
$166,137 match offered/other State grant Type = 3, Amount = 3, % = 4
federal grant source of match Type = 4, Amount = 4, % = 8
(will need to determine if these match dollars have already been spent before awarding grant)
no match offered
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 1, % = 4
(state budget source of cash)
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4
cash and other federal grant offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 4, % = 10
(This score does NOT include the federal grant-unable to determine if it is place.)
(CoE = Tok @ .531 + Tetlin @ .197 + Tanacross @ .531 + Dot Lake @ .295 / 4 = .389)
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 10
(part of school district\'s budget for renovations)
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 4, % = 10
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
inkind and land offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
(CoE = MEA rate)
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 2
($150,000 grant from Round I also awarded for this project, can NOT be counted as match)
inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
in kind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 2
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 2
no match offered
no match offered
(Narrative states there will be $17,524 in staff support/should go to readiness?)
federal grant offered as match Type = 4, Amount = 3, % = 6
(applicant has applied for it)
(CoE = Nome)
no match offered
(CoE = Ruby)
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
other federal grant (not yet applied for) offered as match not counted as match
federal grant offered as match Type = 4, Amount = 3, % = 4
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2
no match offered
no match offered
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10
(CoE = HEA rate)
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 10
(CoE = GVEA rate)
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 4, % = 10
(CoE = GVEA rate)
inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
cash and other federal grants offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10; thou some of the match may not be in place yet
(CoE = Naknek Electric rate)
Match = federal grant and City funds Amount = 3, Type = 5 (some City funds), % = 10
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 8
(CoE = CVEA rate)
inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 2
(CoE = Palmer)
no match offered
(CoE = Metlakatla)
$820,000 of match is RE Fund grant from Round I/not counted; therefore match = $500,000. Match scored using this amount
other fede grant offered as match Type = 4, Amount = 3, % = 2
(CoE = Metlakatla)
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4
cash and inkind offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 4
other fed grant offered as match Type = 4, amount = 3, % = 8
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
(Coe = Chistochina @ .459 + Slana @.522 / 2 = .491
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
(CoE = Whale Pass)
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6(CoE = Craig & Hydaburg)
cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10
(CoE = Tok @ .531 + Tetlin @ .197 + Tanacross @ .531 + Dot Lake @ .295 / 4 = .389)
Cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 6
no match offered
cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 5, % = 10
$350,000 match offered, though $125,000 may have been incurred prior to eligible date (7/1/2010) ? Therefore, match scored at $225,000 Type = 5 (land purchase), Amount = 3, % = 6
$150,000 offered, as cash and other grants? Type = 5, amount = 3 % = 6
$80,000 cash offered as match Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 8
(CoE for Eagle River used)
$40,000 inkind offered Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 6
$402,610 offered, however only $95,000 is really identified and from the narrative it appears this amount was already incurred, so not eligible; but could go to readiness? Therefore,
unable to score
(CoE = Angoon)
Capital (cash) offered as match, per application the grantee will need to raise this
Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
Will need to document this amount of match before a grant could be offered
(CoE = Delta Junction)
no match offered
No match offered, but application states possibility of additional university funding-should go to readiness.
12/09 requested info on match, grantee said no match but it appears there may be some
(CoE = Ruby @ .980 + Galena @ .563 / 2 = .772)
Cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 5, % = 10
In-kind = $15,000 and $80,000 for land (?) seems high; land value will need to be confirmed if grant to be considered.
Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 1
Cash offered as match Type = 5, Amount = 2, % = 6
$72,000 match offered Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 1
$45,000 match offered Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 6 Cash and inkind offered
no match offered
$102,602 match offered Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 8 Inkind support offered for truck to be used and funds from another federal grant in place
$42,123 match offered Type = 5, amount = 2, % = 8 Inkind offered for construction and installation costs
$255,744 match offered Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 6 Inkind offered is for removing overhead lines and admin of the project?
no match offered
simply identified, no evidence presented that application actually made for funds. Further concern, the use of the Minnesota Flip Model will raise questions about ownership-the RFA
was specific about this. So I am reluctant to move this project forward.
(CoE = Delta Junction)
$350,641 match offered Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 4
$350,641 match offered Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 4
$350,641 match offered Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 4
$261,680 match/ cash & inkind Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 10
(CoE = Chugach @.126 + ML&P @ .176 / 2 = .151)
$250,000 Match offered Type = 5, amount = 3, % = 10 (federal grant applied for, so counts as match with the inkind offered)
$250,000 match offered Type = 5, Amount = 3, % = 6
$3,000 Match offered Type = 5, amount = 1, % = 1
$13,031,000 offered as match, but $4 M is a RE Fund-Round I grant; therefore match = $9,031,000
Type = 4 (federal grant), amount =5, % = 10
$12,500 offered as inkind Type = 5, Amount = 1, % = 1
(Used Kotzebue\'s energy cost for #1)
Type of match = 5, amount = 3, % = 4
$49,300 of the $7,187,738 actually in hand-remainder simply identified per Phil Kootz with Louden Tribal Council. Therefore, only that amount reflected here Amount = 2, Type = 4 (fed
grant) %= 1
No match offered
cash & inkind source of match Type = 5, amount = 1, % = 1
Cash offered of over $8,000,000. Type = 5, Amount =5, and % = 10
Match consists of Round I RE Fund grant. No points awarded for this.
Failed Stage 1
Failed Stage 1
Failed Stage 1
Type (federal grant and local funds; take higher valued item) = 5; % = 15; amount = 3
Type (local inkind) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (local) = 5; % = 8; amount = 3
type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 1
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 13; amount = 1
Type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 1
Type (local) = 5; % = 13; amount = 3
Type of Match (federal grant) = 4; % = 8; amount = 2
Type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 3
Type (inkind and cash) = 5; % = 8; amount = 3
Type (cash and inkind) = 5; % 8; amount =4
Type (cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 6; amount = 1
Type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type of match (local in-kind and federal grant, take higher value)= 5; % of grant = 15; amount = 3
no match offered
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 6; amount = 3
No specific match offered
Type (cash) = 5; % = 13; amount = 1
Type (multiple; took highest ranked-local) = 5; % = 15; amount = 3
Type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
No match offered
Type (local funding) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 8; amount = 2
Type (local) funds = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Application withdrawn by applicant
Type of match (local) = 5; % = 13; amount = 2
type (application says local funds, it is believed the source of these funds is a State grant) = 3; % = 15; amount = 4
Failed Stage 1
Type (local funds) = 5; % = 13; amount = 3
Failed Stage 2
Not eligible applicant per Mike Mitchell
Type (local) = 5; % = 15; amount = 4
Failed Stage 2
Type (local_ = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 4; amount = 2
Type (cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 2
No match noted
Type (local_ = 5; % = 11; amount = 4
Type (inkind and local cash) = 5; % = 4; amount = 2
No match offered
No match offered
Type (cash) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type (local cash & inkind) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
No match offered
No match offered
No match offered
Type (lcoal) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type (local funds) = 5; % = 6; amount = 3
Type (local cash) = 5; % = 6; amount = 3
Type (inkind) = 5 % = 4; amount = 2
City commits the local utility to provide items?
Type (land) = 5 (will need to confirm value posted for land if grant awarded); % = 8; amount = 3
Type (inkind, took higher valued item) = 5; % = 13; amount = 3
No match offered = 0 Failed Stage 1
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 13; amount = 2
Type (local) = 5; % = 8; amount = 2
Failed Stage 1
Type (AP&T cash) = 5; % = 11; amount = 3
No match offered
Type (other federal grant) = 4; % = 15; amount = 3
Type (AP& T funding) = 5; % = 11; amount = 3
Type (cash) = 5; % = 15; amount = 5
Applicant submitted revised information
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 4; amount = 3
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 4; amount = 2
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 6; amount = 2
Type (cash) = 5; % = 15; amount = 3
Failed Stage 1 review
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Same as 203 / only this one (212) is to be scored.
(Match actually is $650,000; but the additional amount does not change the score; per the match matrix.)
Type (other grant and inkind; item with higher value used) = 5; % = 8; amount = 3
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 11; amount = 2
Type (Inkind offered as match) = 5; % = 15; Amount = 3
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 6; amount = 1
APPLICATION WITHDRAWN BY SCHOOL DISTRICT
Type (inkind) = 5; % = 4; amount = 1
Type (local) = 5; % = 6; amount = 3
Type (local) = 5; % = 11; amount = 4
11 for %, 4 for ammount, and 5 for the type of match offered
The source of the $18M Other Funds listed on the Budget Summary is "Federal funds to be solicited"
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
no match offered
no match offered
Applicant basically asked for AEA help and to complete a feasibilty study
no match offered
13 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 3 for type of match offered (State grant per call to Harvey Paul, manager Kong Power)
11 for %, 5 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
4 for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 3 for type of match offered (State grant per call to William Igkurak, manager Kwig Power)
11 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
Grant request is really only $10,500,000
13 for %, 4 for amount, and 4 for type of match offered
PCrimp: Added $6,645,000 to Other Funds and increased Total Grant Costs so that match amount/score consistent.
11 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
13 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
Applicant requested to lower request to $3,450,00 and a match of $2,825,000 to be provided. (Match score changes to 24 with this change - 15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match
offered.)
11 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 5 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
4 for %, 2 for amount, and 1 for type of match offered
Match offered is a \'reduced\' rate for overhead - this application also budgeted for indirect costs which are not eligilble.
no match offered directly - reduced royalties offered as match
Match of $17,588,400 shown in the application / need to determine if this is for this phase
15 for %, 5 for amount, and 5 for type
PCrimp: Added $17,588,400 to Other Funds and increased Total Grant Costs so that match amount/score consistent.
Match of $6,157,850 documented in the application / need to determine if this applies to this phase
15 for %, 5 for amount, and 5 for type
PCrimp: Added $6,157,850 to Other Funds and increased Total Grant Costs so that match amount/score consistent.
8 points for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
no match offered However, the application does discuss a lower rate for certain studies and staff time as a match too
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 5 for amount, and 5 for type
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
This match is not confirmed and partially composed of a $2,000,000 bond which has not yet been issued.
Budget worksheet amounts do not match the grant application amounts; application amounts used.
4 for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
Amount of match should be = $586,000
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
no match offered
15 for %, 5 for amount, and 5 for type (land)
This amount of match ($7,000,000) is an estimate and not firm at all; at least $6 Million is in future \'donations\'.
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
6 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 3 for amount and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
11 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
11 for %, 2 for amount, 5 for type of match offered
4 for %, 3 for amount, and 4 for type of match offered (other federal grant)
11 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered (in-kind)
11 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type (in-kind) match
11 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type (in-kind)
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type
6 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type (multiple types, but cash is part of the match)
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 4 for type (other federal grants included)
Application and budget worksheet have different amounts. Application amounts used.
15 for %, 4 for amount and 5 for type of match
4 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match
11 for %, 4 for amount and 5 for type of match
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered (land) Match source(s) were not clearly identified - will need to make sure of this if this becomes a grant
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type
8 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
4 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered (in-kind for part of the match)
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
no match offered; however value of land offered, but no amount was provided. Therefore, minimum given for Amount (1) and % (4) and 5 points given for land as in-kind.
11 for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
No match offered
no match offered; however in narrative it dicuss grant administration at no cost, therefore eligible for 1 point as some match was offered
11 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match
no match offered
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match
8 for %, 2 for amount, and 5 for type of match (in-kind)
13 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match
13 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 4 for type of match (other grants)
4 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match
11 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match
15 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match (in-kind)
11 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match
15 for, % 5 for amount, and 5 for type of match
6 for %, 3 for amount, and 4 for type of match (federal grant)
11 for %, 3 for amount, 5 for type of match
Concern: Application\'s budget has indirect costs in certain areas / these costs are not eligible
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type of match
4 for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type of match
no match clearly identified for 1st phase
4 for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
no match offered
no match offered
no match offered
15 for %, 1 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
no match offered However, previous investments were counted
4 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for type of match offered
15 for %, 4 for amount, and 5 for type
11 for %, 2 for amount, & 5 for type of match
15 points for %, 5 points for amount, & 5 for type of match
no match offered
no match offered
6 for %, 3 for amount, and 5 for Type
No matfch offered
Previous investment taken into account
S3 Stage 2 Project Feasibility
0
0
9.11
5.44
1.72
11.22
2.94
6.5
11
0
14.39
0
0
0.22
7.17
14.44
0
3.22
10.83
4.83
12.67
6.06
0
0
0
0
11.89
5.56
8.67
4.17
10.56
9.5
0.61
11.22
6.94
6.56
3.33
1.56
6.5
3.06
0.17
10.83
6.56
7.33
14.22
5.72
0
7.72
0
0
13
6
0
7.666666666659
0
0
11.8899999999881
7.1666666666595
12.666666666654
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.666666666664
0
0
0
0
0
0.276666666666389
16.4433333333169
1.88999999999811
5.33
0
7.55666666665911
16.4433333333169
0
14.3899999999856
0
0.94333333333239
13.06
2.94333333333039
12.333333333321
0
8.10999999999189
3.10999999999689
15.4999999999845
0
0
0
0.94333333333239
0.223333333333111
2.56
3.33333333333
0
3.10999999999689
0
2.333333333331
0
10.3899999999896
6.44
6.999999999993
5.333333333328
6.333333333327
11.94
0.666666666666
10.5566666666561
9.55666666665711
14.1666666666525
7.8333333333255
0
0
0.94333333333239
13.9433333333194
14.4999999999855
0
0
14.76666667
16.26666667
14.63333333
14.23333333
18.86666667
12.3
9.266666667
10.46666667
8.733333333
11.66666667
9.166666667
9.333333333
14.83333333
9.4
12.83333333
9.5
13
16.66666667
15.83333333
10.43333333
11.26666667
8.566666667
17.53333333
11.53333333
5.5
10.6
7.066666667
11.53333333
13.53333333
17.53333333
11.96666667
14.83333333
13.16666667
17.6
9.3
16.03333333
17.03333333
17.03333333
14.03333333
17.06666667
16.6
12.56666667
16.86666667
17.26666667
0
10.96666667
13.86666667
11.63333333
13.36666667
7.066666667
12.2
17
16.56666667
14.6
7.8
16.23333333
18.06666667
17.7
7.866666667
10.43333333
15.33333333
15.56666667
17.86666667
12.9
12.23333333
11.53333333
16.1
13.26666667
10.93333333
9.866666667
4.233333333
7.833333333
9.2
12.1
16.4
11.46666667
9.133333333
16.1
7.9
9.566666667
12
5.766666667
0
5.433333333
16.46666667
14.8
17.06666667
5.966666667
9.6
17.43333333
10.86666667
11.13333333
10.43333333
9
9.366666667
8
11.83333333
12.4
8.533333333
12.33333333
17.93333333
15.06666667
14.3
15.76666667
16.53333333
17.46666667
7
16.8
11.93333333
14.73333333
16.3
15.3
16.83333333
15.86666667
16
12.5
16.3
8.4
13.1
17.8
11.4
15.66666667
12.2
5.9
8.4
18.5
18
15.13333333
12.1
18.8
14.53333333
13.4
9.866666667
18.33333333
12.76666667
15.4
6.2
15.23333333
12.33333333
11.6
5.633333333
0
5.666666667
13.33333333
8
0
18.4
13.9
12.46666667
14.4
11.6
15.96666667
15.96666667
11.4
12.46666667
15.96666667
14.96666667
10.8
13.13333333
0
16.8
15.86666667
16.5
0
0
0
0
0
15.96666667
13.76666667
0
15.83333333
15.5
12.63333333
16.56666667
7.2
15.73333333
11.03333333
17.4
14.96666667
10.8
11.36666667
5.5
16.73333333
12.83333333
8.9
12.2
11.96666667
12.3
8.466666667
8.866666667
18
0
9.9
10.33333333
10.06666667
14.6
0
0
16.13333333
15.06666667
10.43333333
11.63333333
8.5
13.33333333
17.86666667
12.33333333
14.56666667
10.63333333
15.73333333
6.8
16.46666667
11.06666667
10.53333333
10.53333333
18.06666667
11.43333333
11.5
17.93333333
15
11.06666667
14.93333333
13.56666667
16.26666667
12.53333333
7.566666667
15.43333333
18.06666667
8.333333333
9.866666667
17.33333333
17.26666667
15.03333333
10
13.9
12.83333333
9.8
12.76666667
12.9
15.93333333
12
11.46666667
12.06666667
11.86666667
11.4
16.2
15.2
12.56666667
3
6.8
10.26666667
9.366666667
10.13333333
7.533333333
9.4
11.26666667
11.33333333
11.9
13.7
16.33333333
0
15.76666667
17.66666667
10.66666667
10.66666667
10.93333333
11.4
14.66666667
14.93333333
9.266666667
7.2
13.2
15.4
11.46666667
14.46666667
7.566666667
16.8
15.03333333
12.2
11.46666667
11.96666667
10.73333333
14.53333333
12.16666667
6.766666667
7.866666667
14.83333333
9.1
8.6
18.66666667
12.53333333
9.133333333
11.13333333
14.1
11.93333333
11.86666667
16.8
12.43333333
12.66666667
10.13333333
5.2
11.56666667
15.3
15.4
8.766666667
14.9
14.4
13.13333333
9.366666667
17.13333333
16.46666667
9.566666667
12.8
14.83333333
11.36666667
17.2
8.333333333
9.066666667
10.86666667
9.933333333
17.6
16.33333333
11.83333333
8.133333333
10.53333333
11.2
16.16666667
15.13333333
9.766666667
12.23333333
11.23333333
9.066666667
12.66666667
14.4
16.1
15.16666667
12.8
6
12.4
9.933333333
4.6
12.66666667
10.56666667
11.26666667
13.83333333
10.43333333
12.86666667
17.13333333
13.53333333
9.4
8.016666667
10
10.9
10
13.9
15.33333333
12.2
18.73333333
11.63333333
16.26666667
12.9
7.066666667
16.96666667
13.13333333
17.6
13.26666667
13.73333333
13.6
11.86666667
13.2
11.93333333
13.7
14.33333333
12.33333333
13.13333333
11.13333333
13.46666667
14.13333333
14.96666667
12
12.26666667
12.13333333
12.93333333
13.93333333
10.26666667
10.6
8.233333333
10.13333333
17.2
13.46666667
13.03333333
16.86666667
12.06666667
10.53333333
12.8
9
16.53333333
10.86666667
16.53333333
14.9
16.93333333
16.8
13.73333333
12.26666667
12.26666667
13.06666667
16.36666667
17.86666667
8.933333333
12.86666667
11.53333333
15.33333333
12.1
12.96666667
15.33333333
12.1
17.93333333
7.133333333
6.333333333
17
14.86666667
11.26666667
17.06666667
12.86666667
15.13333333
6.933333333
7.6
13.83333333
17.8
14.36666667
16.63333333
8.533333333
13.86666667
11.86666667
14.86666667
17.73333333
18
11.86666667
6.1
12.8
11.73333333
11.6
14.93333333
16.2
7.466666667
15.76666667
15.4
11.86666667
17.46666667
13.6
13.7
11.93333333
8.566666667
11.8
10.93333333
11.06666667
11.06666667
11.06666667
8.333333333
14.76666667
12.46666667
12.46666667
11.93333333
18.26666667
12.56666667
15.8
11.4
14.53333333
11.2
12.36666667
17.93333333
12.3
11.53333333
17.53333333
18.4
12.43333333
18.66666667
14.06666667
15.26666667
14.43333333
14.06666667
10.73333333
14.2
12.33333333
14.6
12.6
17.4
9.066666667
18.26666667
18.86666667
4.133333333
9.266666667
16.2
18.26666667
10.73333333
9.333333333
11.86666667
11.3
18.53333333
14.93333333
16.13333333
18.2
16.66666667
18.46666667
17.93333333
5.533333333
6.4
1.8
13.66666667
17.06666667
4.666666667
4.2
10.13333333
19
17.1
5.6
10.56666667
7.133333333
6.866666667
6.866666667
12.73333333
13.96666667
S3 Project Readiness
4.33
5
1.5
3.5
2.33
2.67
1.5
5
2.33
4
3.5
1.83
3.33
4
2.5
4
3
3
3
3
2
3.33
3.83
2.5
4.5
1.83
4
3
3.5
2.5
2.17
4.5
4.33
5
4
1.67
2.5
1.83
3.33
2.5
3.33
2.83
2.33
2.33
3
1.17
2.5
1.33
1.83
2.17
3.67
4.5
2.5
2.33
3
4
2.33
3
2.5
2
3
2.5
3
3
1.67
2
1.5
4
3.17
3.83
3.33
3.33
0.5
2.67
2.83
3
2.5
0.67
1.67
4.5
2
3.833333333
2
2.833333333
5
0
2.5
3.833333333
3
3
3
2.833333333
2.833333333
2.5
2.833333333
3
5
3
2.5
2.5
2
2.5
4
4
2
4.5
2
3
4
2.5
3
3.833333333
1.333333333
3.833333333
4
3.833333333
5
3
5
2
3.666666667
5
4
3
4.5
3.5
1.5
2.5
5
2
3
2
3.833333333
3.5
3
3
4
3
5
5
5
3
3
4
4.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
6
6
6
0
4
8
8
6
4
6
6
6
4
4
4
0
6
6
5
6
6
4
4
0
3.666666667
4
6
5.666666667
6
4
6
5.666666667
4
6
2
10
4.666666667
3.333333333
2
4
4
4
2
2
2
5
4
8
6
1
2
6
6
1.666666667
0.666666667
6
4
5.666666667
7.666666667
6
8
4
4
4
4
4
5
4.333333333
8
2
9
3.666666667
4
8
1
6
8
5
3.666666667
4
4
4.666666667
5
1.666666667
2.333333333
4
4
4
7.666666667
7
1.333333333
4.333333333
2.333333333
6
6
6
2
4
5.333333333
2.333333333
8
4
4
4
10
3.333333333
1
0.666666667
4.666666667
9
3
4
6.666666667
6
6
6
2.333333333
6.666666667
4.666666667
6
6
6
10
6
6
2.666666667
6
6
7.666666667
6
4
2
5
6.333333333
5.666666667
6
0
4.333333333
5.666666667
4.333333333
4
4.666666667
6
7.333333333
4
10
4.333333333
7
2.666666667
1.666666667
4
4
4
8.333333333
2.333333333
4
10
7
4
3
2
6
5
4.5
4.5
5
5
4.5
4
2.333333333
4
4.5
3.5
4
4.5
4
4.5
4.5
5
3.833333333
3.833333333
2.833333333
2
4.5
4.166666667
1.5
3.5
5
5
3.666666667
4.333333333
4.166666667
3.666666667
4.333333333
3.5
5
5
4.5
5
4
4.5
3.666666667
3.833333333
3.833333333
4.5
4.166666667
4.5
3.666666667
3.333333333
4.5
4.5
4
3.333333333
5
4
4.5
2.833333333
2
5
4.333333333
5
4
1.666666667
2.5
5
5
4.5
4.166666667
4.5
4.5
1.666666667
4.833333333
3.5
4.5
4
3.333333333
5
4
4.166666667
5
5
3.5
1
3
5
4
2.5
5
5
5
4.333333333
5
5
5
4.166666667
4.833333333
4
4.5
5
3.833333333
5
1.833333333
5
4.833333333
4
3.666666667
5
4.5
4.666666667
4.666666667
5
4.5
5
5
4.666666667
5
3.5
5
5
1.833333333
5
5
2.5
2.5
3.5
5
4
4.5
4
4.833333333
5
4.833333333
4.833333333
5
5
4.333333333
4.333333333
5
4.833333333
S3 Benefits
6.63
2
2
13.25
10.25
11.75
12.12
12.25
0.63
4.13
12.25
6.5
9
1.88
12.87
0.75
1.62
12.5
4.13
3.75
1.13
12
8.5
0.75
12.12
1.13
8.63
3.75
1.75
4.13
5
5.13
5.5
0.38
1.75
8.5
7.13
6.38
0.63
11.37
6.5
4.5
1.75
11.5
10
12.38
1.88
1.25
6.38
0.5
7.25
14.5
5.63
2.37
6.25
13.13
9.63
0.63
13
3.75
11.75
7.13
0.75
14.5
0.75
1.75
6.12
0.75
0.75
6
0.63
11.75
5.5
8.5
2.63
4.75
12.87
7.13
12.63
5.25
13.88
7.5
5.88
12.12
9
1.13
12
10.125
11.25
7.625
12.875
8.25
0.375
4.125
0.75
11.25
6.375
2.125
12.375
0
10
4.125
4.5
11.625
11.625
1.5
5.375
0.75
12.5
1.25
1.125
4.5
0.75
4.875
8.875
12.5
3.375
12.375
4
14.125
9
9
11.25
11.25
4.5
12.5
10.25
6
13
11
0
0.5
5.375
5.25
3.25
0.375
11.625
12.5
12
11.625
3.75
11.25
13.125
12.625
8.375
4.875
9.75
13.5
12.125
6.25
1.75
0.75
10.75
6.375
1
0.625
0.375
0.625
0.375
1.375
12.625
0.375
8.875
11
1.25
11.875
8.125
0.125
0
1.75
10.5
12.25
12.75
3.625
1.375
13
0
0
1.125
0
1.125
0.375
3.375
3.75
0
4.5
12.875
12.5
7.125
10.875
12.75
12.75
1.75
12.75
1
6
11.625
9.625
13.125
12.375
12
4.875
12.625
1
7.625
12.875
11.875
12.125
1.75
0.5
8.25
13
13
9
11.375
13
8.5
4.5
11.75
12.375
9.75
11.625
1.875
11.125
0.25
11.75
0.375
0
1
2.375
4.125
0
13.25
1.875
6.625
11
1.375
11.375
11.375
0.75
5.25
11.375
9.125
2.5
1.75
0
12
12
12
0
0
0
0
0
8.625
12.5
0
8.625
6.625
2.375
11.75
0.75
12
1.375
13.125
13.25
1.125
12.375
12.375
11.875
3.375
2.875
8.375
1.25
3.875
1
1.25
12
0
8.5
0.75
0.75
10
0
0
12
11.75
4.875
8.25
1.375
9.375
12.5
8.25
8.25
1.5
7.5
2.25
12.375
0.375
0.625
6.75
11.875
1.125
3.75
12
12.125
0.375
12.75
10.125
13.5
4.875
1.5
12.875
13.375
0.375
0.375
13.75
12.75
6.375
0.375
3.375
2.625
0.5
2.25
2
10.5
1.125
1.125
0.75
1.125
0.75
7.5
9.375
7.125
6.75
1.5
0.375
5
1.375
1
1
2.25
2.625
2.75
2.25
11.875
0
8
14.125
0.375
0.375
0.375
0.75
12
14.25
1.375
0.625
3.375
11.75
2
12
0.75
12.75
9.625
1.75
0.375
1.5
0.75
7.125
1.875
0.625
2.125
7.125
2.375
0.75
14.25
2.375
1.625
1.75
3.875
2
2.375
12.75
9.25
2.875
0.375
1.125
3
7.5
7.875
2.25
6.375
6.375
11.625
8.25
13.875
12.125
1
2.625
8.125
2.125
11.75
0.75
2.125
1
2.5
12.75
12.375
1.75
1.125
0.375
1.5
12
10.5
3.75
6.625
3.75
1.375
4.875
7.5
12.875
12.125
6.625
0.625
12.125
3.5
1.125
2.625
2.875
1.5
2.5
0.625
5.5
12.625
2.5
0.5
6.125
0.375
1.5
0.375
6.5
7.5
2.75
12.625
2.125
12.25
14.125
0.375
12
3.25
8.166666667
5.666666667
4.333333333
4
4
6.166666667
7.5
7.166666667
5.666666667
5.166666667
5.833333333
3.5
6.833333333
6.5
7.166666667
4
6
6
7.5
8
4.333333333
3.5
4.5
3.333333333
7.5
4.666666667
6.666666667
8.666666667
4.5
3
6.5
2.5
9
1.833333333
7.5
7.166666667
8.5
8.833333333
8.166666667
6.833333333
6.833333333
6.5
8.5
9.5
4
6.5
4.5
7.5
5.166666667
5
8.5
6.333333333
9.333333333
6.333333333
2.5
8.666666667
9
2.5
8.166666667
7.833333333
7.833333333
1.666666667
5.5
5.5
9
7.666666667
8.166666667
2.666666667
7.166666667
6.833333333
6
8.166666667
9.166666667
5
4
5.5
5
7.5
7.166666667
10
1
8
7.666666667
5
7.833333333
7.5
7
4.833333333
2.5
4.5
5.5
2.333333333
2.333333333
2.333333333
3.833333333
6.333333333
3.833333333
3.833333333
3.833333333
9.833333333
8.333333333
9
4.5
7.5
4
7.666666667
9
7.666666667
3.5
9.666666667
9.166666667
5.5
9.833333333
8.833333333
7.333333333
7.333333333
6
4.5
8.333333333
4.5
8.333333333
4.5
9.666666667
2
9.166666667
9.666666667
1.333333333
3.833333333
8.666666667
9.166666667
6
3.666666667
4
4.833333333
9.5
9.166666667
9.166666667
9.666666667
9.833333333
9
9.333333333
1.5
0
0.833333333
4.166666667
9.166666667
2.666666667
3.166666667
2
10
8.333333333
1
7.666666667
3.166666667
3.166666667
3.166666667
4.166666667
6.5
S3 Comments Benefits
Potential regional fishing benefits from hydropowered ice making and other development in Elfin Cove to supply the fishing fleet.
Trail development and possible tourism benefits.
Learning about 2-stage hydro.
trails, water supply possibilities in future
The grant request is to augment existing funding to reduce the new debt applicant requires to complete the project. The project recently completed the first phase of construction and
is expected to resume construction in the first half of 2016. The additional funding request would cover project costs that are above the original estimates. As the overall project
cost has increased and the benefit has remained constant the B/C ratio has declined to slightly less than 1.0. If grant funded the applicant anticipates that the grant will reduce energy
costs to residents by $0.13 per kWh.
The applicant requested funding for final design. The B/C ratio is based upon initial findings from a draft feasibility study that had not yet been finalized at the time of evaluation,
nor accepted by the applicant or AEA. Once the final feasibility study is finalized, the B/C ratio may change up or down. AEA’s issuance of the final design grant is contingent upon
acceptance of the feasibility study that demonstrates a technically and economically feasible project.
Roads and infrastructure (penstock)
Economic development
Improvements to water system
Potentially improve salmon habitat, hatchery potential
Less noise and air pollution due to diesels off operation
Information on a new PRV replacement system.
Will coordinate with new powerhouse design and build, possibly allow opening of hatchery
Demonstrating heat loop for heat pumps, piping infrastructure
Water supply (but have that already)
Economic sustainability
The applicant has recently reconstructed a failed dam which provides drinking water for the community. That project was funded through water project funding sources. The REF application
seeks design and construction funding to rebuild the end-of-life penstock and hydro turbine to provide electricity. AEA’s economic evaluations capture the full cost of each project.
In this case the full cost of the dam is counted as a cost, and the full benefits of all hydro power displacing diesel generation is counted as the benefit. This method, while fair
and consistent to all applicants, may be a conservative approach due to the dam construction having been completed with other funding. If only the turbine costs and the full hydro benefit
are used in the model, the economics are very good. The AEA B/C ratio of 0.73 provides information about the net value of the overall project (drinking water and energy) over its lifetime.
1. Additional income for AVEC
2. Redundant heating systems for the facilities served
3. Infrastructure for heating
4. Sustainability for the Water treatment plant by lowering costs to maintain. There are significant health benefits from properly maintained WTP and Washeteria.
Technical learning on bridging, and possible diesels off.
Low load diesel demonstration.
Potential water system improvements
New trail/road
1. Additional income for AVEC
2. Redundant heating systems for the facilities served
3. Infrastructure for heating
4. Sustainability for the Water treatment plant by lowering costs to maintain. There are significant health benefits from properly maintained WTP and Washeteria.
5. ANTHC partnership with VSW.
1. Additional income for AVEC
2. Redundant heating systems for the facilities served
3. Infrastructure for heating
4. Sustainability for the Water treatment plant by lowering costs to maintain. There are significant health benefits from properly maintained WTP and Washeteria.
The applicant requested design and construction funding. AEA recommends funding only the final design. AEA believes that cost saving measures can be identified during the final design
phase that can significantly improve the project economics.
High quality power, CO hazard reduction, trails/roads potential, redundancy of electric source, Fiberoptic line to be included, learning from fiberglass reinforced poles in tundra conditions
Cold climate experience/learning and variable speed controller. Roads.
The applicant requests funds for final design for wind project. The budget is high due to arctic conditions but the application scored well elsewhere in the evaluation and wind may be
the community’s only renewable energy option.
1. Diversion of combustible waste from the landfill2. Could potentially increase recycling of combustible waste.3. Job creation4. Useful information
New roads and infrastructureEconomic development: Long term increase in jobs; local employers may stay open more of the year if energy costs are lower.Public information.- The project
will reduce the handling of diesel fuel and lubricants in the community, reducing thepossibility of a spill, which could contaminate the Copper River and cause significant downstreameconomic
impacts.
Trail, road, bridge contemplated. Potential to unconstrain Kenai Peninsula transmission.
The applicant requested funding for the feasibility stage. The B/C ratio could potentially increase based on site specific meteorological data once it is available for analysis. The
state-wide wind model often under-predicts the wind resource on the west coast of Alaska. Wind measurement at the specific targeted site through the requested feasibility study will
increase the confidence of the project economics.
Infrastructure of piping that could be used for other heat sources
Income to utility
benefits to generator operation
Trails/roads
Waterfall creek hydro: This project is currently under construction however project costs have exceeded the original budget. The applicant is seeking additional grant funding to offset
additional loans to reduce energy costs for ratepayers.
Roads and trails.
Long term economic development.
The applicant requested funding for final design and construction of an air source heat pump to replace existing oil-fired boilers that are nearing the end of life. The project would
replace 100 percent of their heating oil by efficiently using hydro-powered electricity through an air source heat pump to heat the low-income multi-family complex. The economics are
challenged by the high renovation costs to allow for lower temperature emitters in the building.
1. Utilize a local fuel source that is currently a waste product
2. Every school on POW will be heated with wood when this project is complete.
3. Multiple fuel sources so that the school system can use the most cost effective fuel.
4. Supporting local jobs.
5. Opportunity for Greenhouse addition
Learning regarding barge/fly logistics, intertie upgrades would be needed and would provide other benefits, landmark for navigation
1) Use existing local biomass fuel source
2) Local jobs to wood harvest and processing and boiler O&M.
3) Development of a cordwood infrastructure and economy of scale for other project development.
4) Energy Independence
The applicant requested design and construction funding. AEA recommends funding final design only with an emphasis on improving the project economics before committing to construction.
If constructed, the project will save the community an estimated 8,474 gallons of fuel per year and would provide local wood fuel jobs. Many of the costs in the B/C ratio would remain
in the local economy for wood harvest and biomass plant operator jobs.
1. Additional income for AVEC
2. Redundant heating systems for the facilities served
3. Infrastructure for heating
4. Sustainability for the Water treatment plant by lowering costs to maintain. There are significant health benefits from properly maintained WTP and Washeteria.
1) Use existing local biomass fuel source
2) Local jobs to wood harvest and processing and boiler O&M.
3) Development of a cordwood infrastructure and economy of scale for other project development.
4) Energy Independence
Roads, infrastructure.
Jobs
cold climate hydro learning
Demonstration of effluent heat pump, redundant heating system.
Generation of a feasibility report that is public.
The project is recommended for partial funding as AEA believes the feasibility can be completed at half of the applicant’s estimated total phase cost. The feasibility study will help
determine the project economics, including possible use of federal incentives.
Redundant heat sources, redundant fuel sources
Local or nearby (Prince Rupert) sourced fuel.
Local labor from forestry to wood processing and maintenance.
Use for Tongass Stewardship Contracts.
Trails, roads.
transmission extension
Learning from cold climate operation
Jobs: add hydro, don't take away diesel jobs
Hatchery support, economic development, possible reduction of self-generating buildings.
Trail, economic benefit
Information generated with statewide applications
Wood harvest jobs, operational jobs, district heating infrastructure, heating redundancy, test case of heat utility (in future phases), waste from sawmill, possible greenhouse.
Fiberoptic line to be included, learning from fiberglass reinforced poles in tundra conditions
Redundant heating system, extra income for public electric utility.
Demonstration and information for other communities, solving a waste stream issues including full dump, jobs, economic development.
Local jobs, energy expenses for fuel stay in the community, wildfire mitigation, cordwood infrastructure benefits to other cordwood systems,
Redundancy of heating source for water system, cost savings to water utility, additional revenue for electric utility.
Redundant heating of water system, lower water treatment costs, revenue to electric utility
Development of understanding of hydro in cold climate
Road, learning from logistical challenges of the location, verification of wind map
Upgrade intertie to 3-phase
Employment for turbine operations and maintenance
Visual landmark for local navigation
Economic development, local and regional; pellet delivery infrastructure development; first of its kind in Alaska.
Water supply, improvements to existing hydro resources, improved access to lake area,
Use of waste wood, local jobs, potential greenhouse, reduced emissions from decking and burning waste wood.
Local jobs, economic development, information gained through first microchip system in Alaska,
Hatchery support, economic development, possible reduction of self-generating buildings.
Additional value of knowing wind in SE AK
Demonstration of effluent heat pump, income for public electric utility, reduced fuel cost for water utility, redundant heating system.
Enhanced fish habitat, continued operation of low cost hydro.
Possible pollution prevention improvements, less traffic on highway, jobs
Possible evaluation benefits to vertical axis,
Bat study
Information value, heat benefits direct to residents
Demonstration value
Demonstrating Aeronotica turbines.
Could be first Northwind 24M blade NPS100*24
Economic development, road to powerhouse
Information
Would support economic development
Local employment, funding staying in community, coordinates with other energy projects.
Powerline is closer to Wainright, useful info through permafrost pole design, conversion to electric heat based on natural gas rather than distributing heating oil.
Local jobs, fuel money staying in local economy, possible roads, improved services and lower costs to GILA, possible improved heating distribution infrastructure, possible habitat improvements.
Additional benefit of redundant heating source for circulating water system. Future possible use of water piping for other purposes.
Infrastructure, sanitation.
Landfill impacts, local jobs, dollars circulating locally.
Local fuel used. wood fuel is a waste product.
Road building, excess heat for school,
demonstration
Harvest jobs, winter stoking jobs, fuel money stays in local economy,
Demonstrating performance of GSHP in an area where not much data is available, and demonstrating a hybrid heating fuel system.
Demonstration, potential integration of more wind, improved port operations, extend battery life,
Road improvements, economic development due to rate reductions,
Water supply improvements
Information on wind resource in SE, improvements to wind model, adding energy in winter, when hydro systems need, possible road access improvements, facilitate transition from diesel
to electric heating.
Jobs, demonstration of multiple systems in one community.
Information value of demo project.
Fish habitat, support of water system improvements, economic development/fish processing
Roads and trails, jobs, lower energy costs of about 16 cents per kWh in the first year, depending upon grant.
Information value of new commercial-sized ASHP
Demonstration of effluent heat pump.
Information value of new commercial-sized ASHP
Local employment, reduced fire risk, potential use of piping for other heat exchange purposes.
Useful information, possible local AQ improvements.
Additional road may provide some local benefit.
Useful information as a demonstration. Could be beneficial in other parts of the state.
web public information value
Solar connection to a biomass system, improvement of the Econoburn efficiency.
Jobs, waste disposal
long term econ dev
dispatchable electricity for heating community bldgs and homes; econ dev.
Demonstration, solve high penetration wind issues
Demonstration, jobs, economic development, air quality in non-attainment area benefits,
Infrastructure, shutting down power plants, improved reliability
Benefit point for intertie potential
Possible removal of old turbine.
Scored for developed infrastructure, economic development, and water temperature stability.
Possible road or intertie
This would be the most in-depth geothermal exploration in SE.
Potential tourism development
commercial econ dev.
Econ Development, lower cost, reliability
Infrastructure, demonstration project, econ development
Pellet distribution, demonstration, jobs, training
commercial econ dev
Hub for biomass supply could be future benefit, ash for gardens, local labor.
econ dev
Could obtain solar data. Higher summer loads will be well matched to wind and/or solar.
Generates heating for buildings in the region. Promote or sustain commercial and economic development in the region. May create or sustain jobs in the region.
Economic development, demonstration
increase in economic activity
Infrastructure, demonstration, jobs
Demonstration value of solar in Alaska.
Distributed energy generation for local energy security; jobs.
The Native Village of Nikolski requests funding to complete construction and commissioning of a 65-kW wind-diesel system.
In May 2006 AEA constructed a power plant with a total capacity of 180 kW. The community purchased a refurbished Vestas V15 wind turbine generator with a grant from USDA RUS and cost
share from APICDA in July 2007 ($474,475). In 2009, Nikolski received an RE Fund round 1 grant (#89) for $409,430 to integrate the wind turbine generator with a heat-recovery system
by installing boilers and thermal nodes. Most of the work was done by the community?s contractor TDX Power. Currently the wind system remains inoperable.
Given our experience with the project, AEA has the following concerns:
1. Proposed budget seems too high.
2. The wind turbine generator may need repair due to extended non-operation in a marine environment.
3. The power output from the wind turbine generator is too high for the village load and diesel power system.
4. The proposed solution has not been demonstrated to be functional in other Alaska wind systems and is thus not guaranteed to provide a working system.
Recommend full funding of $331,240 with a special provision that AEA will be directly involved in the management of this project. AEA staff will work directly with the community and
its contractors to establish a scope, design and budget for a functioning power system. The design portion of this project will not exceed $50,000. Construction funds will be unallocated
until the design, budget and schedule has been accepted by AEA. AEA notes that the round 1 grant recommendation requires a 5-year O&M agreement with an entity acceptable to AEA.
`
Fish processing facility
project would upgrade existing USFS logging road.
AEA BCE calculated using estimated transmission line upgrade costs of $11 million which were not covered in the application
Possible integration of USFWS turbines into community
Two fish plants in community--one operating.
Score #670--not this proposal--Unless Doug/Audrey find something different between hydro gen and TX proposals.
AEA B/C used data from Draft Application for Capacity Amendment to License, which was lower in cost and lower in electricity displaced by 3rd unit than those data submitted in the application.
Result was still a relatively high B/C which merited all possible points (10).
May allow heat production.
Application B/C score assumes cruise ship load in Skagway. (not assumed in economic analysis "AEA"). Load to be determined in SE IRP.
Project has spinoff benefits for producing feedstock for densified fuel.
Applicant assumed 0% discount rate; AEA assumed 3% discount rate (consistent across all AEA B/C calculations in Round 3).
Applicant proposes to involve students in project.
Although economist provided B/C ratios ISER comments indicated "insufficient information to perform an economic analysis" B/C score is discounted by one point for this reason.
The B/C computation was based upon a 1981 study by the US ACE for a seasonal run-of-river hydro on Cosmos Creek to serve Shungnak/Kobuk. The project capital costs and O&M costs were
escalated in 2008 dollars.
The AEA B/C was estimated based upon capital costsof $3M from a 1984 US Army Corps study for a 270 kW run-of-river hydro plant escalated to today\'s dollars at $6.14M. The applicant\'s
capital estimate is $2.4M.
Given AEA\'s experience with the high historical costs of hydro construction, it appears the applicant\'s estimate of capital costs is low. It is also highly likely the project will
require a FERC license which has not been costed out by the applicant. Consequently, the AEA B/C has been used in computing the score.
The applicant B/C was computed without the cost of the replacement energy purchased from AEL&P and included an unsupported additional cost of $4.1M in the base case.
AEA added in the cost of the replacement hydro energy and did not include the $4.1M capital cost in computing its B/C. The AEA assumptions are considered to be valid adjustments and
therefore the AEA B/C ratio has been used to compute the benefits score in Stage 2.
The plan describing the future financing for the construction cost ($40M intertie + $40 M road) has not been identified.
The main differences between the AEA and the applicant computed the B/C ratios were the generated kWh versus the sold kWh and the annual O&M costs. AEA used the more conservative assumptions
for these items; the Stage 2 score was based upon these assumptions.
The B/C ratio was calculated at 6.19 using MIC assumptions that all excess energy from Annette Island would be purchased by Ketchikan.
AEA believes this is overly optimistic and chose a more conservative set of assumptions. Based upon Swan-Tyee Intertie in place, providing cheap abundant power to meet KTN needs, AEA
computed a B/C ratio of 2.26 based upon a 98% availability of Swan-Tyee power. The 2% outage rate assumption would allow MIC to sell approx. 2 MkWh in annual sales.
S3 Local Support
5
2
4
5
2
5
4
3
5
4
4
1
3
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
2
2
3
2
0
3
5
2
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
3
3
5
5
3
2
3
5
2
5
2
4
4
3
5
2
3
5
2
3
4
5
4
2
3
5
5
5
3
2
5
3
3
5
3
4
5
2
2
3
3
5
4
5
3
4
2
5
5
5
5
2
5
4
4
5
5
4
5
5
5
2
5
4
3
3
5
5
2
5
5
5
5
4
3
4
5
5
2
4
2
2
5
2
5
2
0
3
2
2
5
5
5
5
5
3
5
3
5
5
3
2
5
5
5
5
2
2
2
2
5
0
4
4
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
2
5
5
5
5
5
5
2
3
2
4
5
5
2
4
2
0
5
3
2
4
5
5
5
2
5
4
4
5
2
1
5
5
3
0
5
0
2
0
5
5
4
4
3
5
0
0
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
4
5
5
0
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
0
0
2
2
5
4
4
2
2
2
5
5
2
5
0
5
5
5
5
3
5
5
5
5
4
2
5
5
2
0
5
0
5
5
2
5
0
5
5
4
2
5
5
5
3
3
0
3
0
3
4
1
2
5
5
5
1
2
5
5
2
2
2
5
5
4
4
5
5
5
5
3
4
4
5
4
2
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
3
5
3
5
5
4
4
5
5
3
5
5
3
5
0
5
0
3
3
0
2
3
2
3
5
4
3
3
2
5
2
5
1
1
5
5
5
0
1
0
0
3
5
4
3
2
0
0
5
2
2
5
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
3
5
2
2
4
3
4
3
3
3
0
2
5
4
4
4
2
2
3
4
2
5
5
2
5
5
5
5
4
5
2
4
5
5
4
3
2
2
5
5
5
5
5
0
5
3
4
5
4
5
4
4
4
5
0
5
4
2
2
5
4
5
4
2
3
5
2
5
2
5
5
4
5
3
3
2
2
5
5
4
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
4
2
2
2
3
5
0
0
2
3
2
3
0
0
5
3
0
3
0
3
2
3
3
4
0
0
0
5
4
5
4
5
0
2
4
3
2
0
3
4
0
5
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
5
5
5
5
2
0
2
0
0
0
2
2
0
3
5
0
5
2
4
0
3
5
5
2
2
0
5
5
3
2
2
2
0
2
2
3
0
0
0
3
3
0
5
5
5
2
0
0
0
0
5
0
4
4
4
5
5
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
0
2
2
2
3
4
3
5
5
4
2
3
0
5
5
5
2
4
2
3
5
2
3
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
0
2
5
4
0
2
4
2
5
0
2
2
2
3
2
2
3
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
3
0
2
5
5
5
2
2
5
0
0
4
2
0
5
2
5
2
0
2
5
2
5
2
5
2
4
0
3
3
3
4
4
0
0
2
5
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
2
0
2
2
2
3
5
5
2
0
5
2
0
0
5
5
4
2
2
3
4
4
5
2
2
2
2
2
3
4
5
2
5
0
5
4
3
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
S3 Comments Support
3 letter 1 res
no letters, 1 res
2 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
no letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
2 letters 1 res
1 letter 1 res
3 letters 1 res
2 letters, 1 Res
2 letters 1 res
1 letter, no resolution
1 letter 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
2 letter 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
no letters 1 res
no letters 1 res
1 letter 1 res
no letters 1 res
No letters no resolution
1 letter 1 res
3 letters 1 res
1 letter 1 res1 letter against
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
2 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
2 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
1 letter 1 res
1 letter 1 res
3 letters 1 res
3 letters 1 res
1 letter 1 res
7 letters provided, 0 accepted, 1 res
1 letr 1 res
3 ltrs 1 res
No Letters of support, 1 Res
3 letters, 1 resolution
no letters, 1 resolution
2 letters, 1 resolution
2 letters accepted, 2 letters from the City only 1 counted1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
0 letters accepted, 5 letters out of date
1 resolution
1 letter accepted, 2 letters out of date
1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
0 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
2 letters accepted, 1 letter from ANTHC1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
2 letters, 1 resolution
0 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter accepted, 4 letters from legislatures
1 resolution
0 letters accepted, 1 letter from applicant1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
1 Letter accepted, 1 letter form ANTHC 1 Letter from ARUC
1 Resolution
1 letter accepted, 2 out of date1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter accepted, 2 letters out of date1 resolution
2 letters accepted, 1 letter from applicant1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
0 letters, 1 resolution
0 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
2 letters accepted, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter accepted, 1 Resolution
2 Letters Accepted, 1 Resolution
No Letters accepted, 1 from Contractor 1 from applicant
1 Resolution
3 letters, 1 Resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
0 Letters, 1 resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
2 Letters, 1 resolution
2 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
2 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 letters, 1 Resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
No Letters, 1 resolution
PCE Reporting3 letters, 1 resolution
2 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
2 letters for wrong project, 1 resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 Letters, 1 Resolution
3 Letters Accepted, 1 Resolution Accepted
2 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
2 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
No letters, 1 resolution
2 letters, 1 resolution
no letters, 1 resolution
3 letters Rejected out of date, 1 resolution
6 letters of support 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
1 letter of support, REJECTED applicant provided their own letter of support, Job Description for Superintendent of Schools accepted in lieu of resolution
4 letters 3 max accepted letters, 1 resolution
no letters, 1 resolution
No letters, No resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
no letters, 1 resolution
no letters, letter of authorization in lieu of resolution
6 letters 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
6 letters 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
No letters, no resolution
2 letters only 1 accepted 1 from applicant, 1 resolution.
3 letters, 1 resolution
1 letter, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
10 letters 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, no resolution
no letters, 1 resolution
4 letters 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
4 letters 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
5 letters of support 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
over 30 demonstrations of local support, including petition, 1 resolution
no letters of support, 1 resolution.
1 letter of support not accepted, applicant provided their own letter of support, 1 resolution
no letters of support, 1 resolution.
no letters, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution--All dated 2008, too old.
2 letters of support, 1 resolution
2 letters of support, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
4 letters of support and 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
2 letters of support and 1 resolution
5 letters of support 3max accepted, 1 resolution
3 letters, 1 resolution
5 letters of support 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
over 30 letters of support, 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
no letters of support, 1 resolution
5 letters of support 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
5 letters of support, max 3 accepted, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
5 letters of support max of 3 accepted, 1 resolution
No letters of support, 1 resolution
1 letter of support, 1 resolution
no letters of support, 1 resolution
2 letters of support, 1 resolution
4 additional resolutions counted as the max of 3 letters of support, 1 resolution
4 letters 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
no letters of support, 1 resolution
2 letters of support, 1 resolution
No letters of support, 1 resolution
No letters of support, no resolution
6 letters of support, 3 max accepted, 1 resolution
1 letter of support, 1 resolution
0 letters of support, 1 resolution
2 letters of support, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
3 letters of support, 1 resolution
3 letter of support, 1 resolution
no letters of support, 1 resolution
11 letters of support, max of 3 accepted, 1 resolution
2 letters of support, 1 resolution
3 letters of suppoort provided, 1 email string of non-support, 1 resolution
9 letters provided, first 3 accepted, 1 resolution
2 letter of support, only one is accepted. no resolution.
6 letters of support provided. 1 resolution. Maximum points awarded
3 letters 1 resolution
No letters of support 0 pts. No city or council resolutions 0 pts.
5 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
no letter of support 0 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
no letters of support 0 pts. No city resolution 2 pts.
2 letter of support from the grantee 0 pts. No city or coincil resolution 0 pts.
no letter of support 0 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
5 letters of support 5 points. city resolution 2 pts.
3 Letters of Support 5pts. No City or Council Resolution 0 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. No cityor council resolutions 0 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. No city or council resolutions 0 pts.
1 letter of support 3 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
4 letters of support 5 pts. City resolution for round 5 0 pts.
No letters of support 0 pts. No city or council resolutions 0 pts.
No letters of support 0 pts. No city or councilresolutions 0 pts.
no letter of support 0 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
no letters of support 0 pts. Borough resolution 2 pts.
no letters of support 0 pts. City and borough resolutions 2 pts.
no letters of support 0 pts. Borough resolution 2 points
No letters of support 0 pts. council resolution 2 pts.
no letters of support 0 pts. Borough resolution 2 pts.
2 letters of support out dated 0 pts. Borough resolution 2 pts.
No letters of support 0 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
1 leter of support 3 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
8 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
No letters of support 0 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
4 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
3 letters of support 5 pts. No cityor council resolution 0 pts.
11 letters of support 5 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
11 letters of support 5 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
9 letters of support 5 pts. 2 city resolutions 2 pts.
8 letters of support 5 pts. 2 city rsolutions 2 pts.
6 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
3 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
3 letters of support 5 pts. No cityor council resolution 0 pts.
3 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
4 letters of support in application out dated 0 pts. 2 letters emailed in 4 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
4 letters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
10 leters of support 5 pts. No city or council resolutionresolution 0 pts.
no letters 0 pts. No city resolution 0 pts.
no letters 0 pts. No city resolution 0 pts.
leters from ANTHC and AVEC 0 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
leters from ANTHC and AVEC 0 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
one letter 3 pts. ANTHC and AVEC letters 0 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. ANTHC letter doesn?t count. No city resolution 0 pts.
2 letters 4 pts. City of Hoonah letter from the Mayor in support not counted as there was a letter from council member rejecting the letter?s authority to represent Public support.
ANTHC Letter of commitment not considered support 0 pts. 2 letters from marsh creek and START not local support 0 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
ANTHC Letter of commitment not considered support 0 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
ANTHC Letter of commitment not considered support 0 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
6 leters of support 5 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
No leters of support 0 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
8 letters of support 5 pts. 3 resolutions resolution 2 pts.
13 letters of support all out of date 0 pts.. No city or council resolution 0 pts.
3 letters of support 5 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. Resolution from city 2 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. 1 letter from applicant not eligible. Resolution from the local council and board 2 pts
5 letters of support 5 pts. Resoltuion from board 2 pts.
UAF Letter out of date 0 pts. CCHRC letter of support referances differant project 0 pts. ACEP Letter out of date 0 pts. AEA letter not eligible 0 pts. NREL letter 3pts
6 letters of support 5 pts. No City or Council Resolution 0 pts.
2 letters of support 4 Pts. Council resolution 2 pts.
4 letter of support 5 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
4 letters of support 5 pts. Resolution 2 pts.
2 letters of support 4 pts. No City or Council resolution.
No letters of support 0 pts. resolution from council 2 pts
2 letters of support 4 pts. One letter not specific to the project 0 pts Resolution 2 pts
2 letters of support 4 pts. City resolution 2 pts.
No letters of support 0 pts. Resolution from School board 2 pts.
2 letters of support out of date and for a hydro project, 0 pts. No city or council resolutions 0 pts.
3 letters of support 5pts. 2 letters of support were outdated 0 pts. Borough resolution not specific to the Project 0 pts
outdated letters of support, letters from 2010, 0 pts. No city or council resolutions
Letter of support from Egegik 3 pts. Borough resolution 2 pts
letter of support from Levelock 3 pts. Borough resolution 2 pts
no leters of support 0 pts.. City resolution 2 pts.
6 eligible letters of support 5 pts. a city resolution 2 pts.
No letters of support provided. No resolution from city or village council
Letters from the Utility and SD worth 0 because they are components of the City. 1 leter of support from Econ develop council worth 3. Resolution worth 2 pts
3 letters of support 5 pts. No city or Council resolution 0 pts.
2 letters of Support 4 pts. No City or Council Resolution 0 pts.
No letters of support. City or Council Resolution 2 pts.
1 letter of support 3 pts. City or Council Resolution 2 pts.
3 letters of Support 5 pts. No City of Council Resolution 0 pts.
One letter of Support 3pts. Council Resolution 2pts.
Resolution 2, letter of support 1 = 3
2 letters, no resolution and one letter dated last year (?) 1 = 3 points
Unexcuted Resolution included in application- Followup? / application withdrawn
Current resolution = 2 and other letter from 2009 (?) 1 = 3
None provided = 0
Current resolution = 2, one dated resolution noted 1= 3
resolution - 2, current letter of support - 1 and one dated letter from the borough 1
One letter of support - 1 (no resolution from City?)
Council resolution 2
Resolution and 3 letters of support noted = 5
Resolution and several letters of support = 5
Resolution and 3 letters of support = 5
One letter of support noted - 1; resolution referenced, but not found ?
Current resolution noted - 2
Resolution referenced and backed up with MOU, and 3 letters of supporrt = 5
Multiple letters of support noted and a resolution = 5, though a couple of non-supportive comments were noted (minimal)
Council Resolution 2 (paper file)
Council Resolution 2
City Resolution 2
LOS City of St. Michael 1
LOS City of Stebbins 1
LOS Stebbins Native Corp. 1 and generic AVEC resolution 2 = 5
LOS City of Emmonak 1
LOS Emmonak Corp. 1
LOS Emmonak Tribal Council 1and similar letters from Alakanuk, plus generic AVEC resolution = 5
LOS City of Kalskag 1
LOS Native Village of Kalskag 1and generic AVEC resolution 2 = 4
LOS City of Gambell 1, letter from ANTHC 1 and generic AVEC resolution 2 = 4
LOS ARUC 1
LOS City of Chevak 1 and letter from ANTHC 1 and generic AVEC resolution 2 = 5
LOS City of Goodnews Bay 1
LOS Kuitsarak, Inc 1
LOS NAtive Village of Goodnews Bay 1and generic AVEC resolution 2
LOS City of Shishmaref 1
LOS Shishmaref Native Corp. 1
LOS Native Village of Shishmaref 1and generic AVEC resolution 2
LOS City of Mountian Village 1
LOS Azachorok Inc. 1
LOS Asa\'carsaemuit Tribal Council 1and generic AVEC resolution 2
LOS ANTHC 1 - Providing match and generic AVEC resolution 2
LOS from the City 1
LOS from ANTHC 1 - Providing match and generic resolution from AVEC Board 2
LOS Yupik of Andreafski 1
LOS Pitka\'s Point Village Council 1 and generic resolution from AVEC 2
ORPC Resolution 2 and 9 letters of support (one other from HEA subsidiary) 3 = 5
Council Resolution 2
LOS Bay View Inc. 1 and one other letter 1
Board Resolution 2
failed Stage 1 review
failed Stage 1 review
LOS AVEC 1
LOS Native Village of Elim 1
LOS Elim Native Corp. 1
City Resolution 2
City Resolution 2
LOS False Pass Tribal Council 1
LOS ISanotski Corp. 1and another resolution (show of support) 1
City Resolution 2
LOS Native Village of St. Michael 1
LOS AVEC 1 and two other letters 1
City resolution 2
LOS SEARHC 1
LOS Native Village of Angoon 1 and one other letter 1
LOS City of Goodnews Bay 1 and two other letters 2
Council Resolution (in paper file) 2
Council Resolution 2
LOS Traditional Village of Togiak 1
LOS BBAHC 1
LOS AVEC 1
City Resolution 2
LOS AVEC 1and one other letter 1
City Resolution 2
LOS AVEC 1and two other lettes 2
Council Resolution 2
LOS YKHC 1
LOS Kasigluk Inc. 1 and one other letter 1
City Resolution 2
LOS SEARHC1 and one other 1
City Resolution 2
LOS White Mountian Native Corp. 1
LOS Native Village of White mountain 1 and other letter 1
City Resolution 2
LOS Stuyahok 1
LOS New Stuyahok Traditional Council 1 and one other letter 1
City Resolution 2
LOS Nunakauiak Yupik Corp. 1
LOS Nunakauyak Traditional Council 1
LOS YKHA 1
Council Resolution 2
LOS LYSD 1
LOS ARUC 1
LOS Village of Lower kalskag 1
City Resolution 2
LOS AVEC 1
LOS Native Village of Selawik 1
LOS ARUC 1
Council Resolution 2
and one letter from ANTHC 1
LOS Askinuk Corp. 1
LOS LYSD 1
LOS AVEC 1
City Resolution 2
LOS LYSD 1
LOS ARUC 1 and one other letter 1 = 3
No Resolution 0
Council Resolution 2
LOS Noorvik Native Community 1
LOS AVEC 1
LOS ARUC 1
Council Resolution 2
LOS ARUC 1
LOS Iqurmiut Traditional Council 1
LOS LYSD 1
Council Resolution 2
LOS YKHC 1and one other letter 1 = 4 (didn?t count email from Alan Fetters)
City Resolution 2
LOS Chinik Eskimo Community 1
LOS ARUC 1
City Reolution, Signed but not dated only one signature 2; requested fully executed copy.
Letter of Support Oganized Village of kake 1
SEARHC letter of Support 1
Other letter of support 1
Council resolution 2
3 letters of support 3
Board resolution 2 and letter of support 1 = 3
Council resolution 2 and letters from community members 3 = 5
Application withdrawn
BBNA Letter of support 1
Lake and Pen letter of support 1
Other letters of support and resolution noted 3
3 letters of support 3, no resolution ?
Multiple letters of support 3; and letter from the school superintendent 2 = 5
Board resolution 2 / However letters received in opposition to the project also; unsure whether to give this application any points = 0 ?
School Board Resolution 2
3 letters of suppport 3
Failed Stage 1 review
4 letters of support = 3, no resolution ?
2 letters of support 2 and authorization from president to apply 1 (?) = 3
No local support provided
Combined with #825
Borough resolution 2
Council resolution 2 and dated letters of support 1
Borough Resolution 2
Council Resolution 2 and one letter of support 1 = 3
Board Resolution 2
Letters of support 3
Council Resolution 2 and 2 letters of support 2 = 4
Board resolution 2 and letter from ANTHC committing funds 1= 3
Board resolution 2
Dated letters of Support 1
Board resolution 2 / However, failed Stage 1 review
Letters of local support 3 & resolution 2 = 5
Board resolution
Letter of support SOA DNR 1
Letter of support US DOI 1
Letter of Support AHTNA, Inc. 1 Resolution also noted 2 = 5
Dated letters of support 1
Dated letter of support 1
Letters of support 3 and resolution 2 = 5
Letter of Support KGB 1
Letter of support City and Borough of Wrangell 1
Letter of support City of Ketchikan 1 Resolution also noted 2 = 5
letter of support City of Ketchican 1
Letter of support KGB 1
Letter of support City and Borough of Wrangell 1 Resolution also noted 2
No local support provided
2 letters of local support 2
Dated letters of support 1 Also received letters in opposition to the project Unsure how much to allow for local support / Suggest 1
No local support Provided
No local support provided
Board resolution 2
Dated letters of support 1
Letter from Kodiak Island Borough 1
Letter from Pacific Seafood 1
Letter from Kodiak Island Convention and Visitors Bureau 1
City Resolution 2
Resolution from City 2
Peterburg Economic Development Council Letter 1
PMP&L Memo, with promise of cash match 1
Village Council Support letter 2
Dated support letters 1
Resolution from the City
Nothing noted = 0
Nothing noted = 0
9 letters supporting funding of the project provided = 5 (Two from area legislators not counted per REFAC meeting 11/9/10.)
Applicant?s resolution noted = 2
Applicant?s resolution noted = 2
Applicant?s resolution noted and 3 letters of support = 5
Discussed, but nothing provided = 0
Applicant?s resolution noted = 2
Failed Stage 1 review
Applicant?s resolution noted = 2
Applicant?s resolution = 2
Applicant?s resolution = 2
Applicant?s resolution = 2
Applicant?s resolution noted = 2
Failed Stage 1 review
None noted = 0
One letter of support (dated) and applicant?s resolution noted = 3
3 letters or emails of support noted and applicant?s resolution = 5
Applicant?s resolution noted = 2
Applicant resolution noted = 2
2 letters of support and applicant?s resolution = 4
One resolution of support and applicant?s resolution = 3
Two letters of support and the applicant?s resolution noted = 4
Borough resolution and applicant resolution = 3
One letter and one resolution from City, which owns the utility - therefore counted as applicant?s resolution, in support of the project noted = 3
Resolution of support and applicant?s resolution noted = 3
None provided = 0
Letter of support from applicant = 2
4 letters or emails indicating support = 5
2 resolutions noted = 4
2 resolutions noted = 4
2 resolutions noted = 4
Applicant resolution noted = 2
Applicant resolution noted = 2
Resolution from one utility and the applicant?s resolution noted = 3
Two letters of support noted and the applicant?s resolution = 4
Letters referenced, but not provided. Did note a resolution from the applicant = 2
3 letters of support = 5
(Letter from signed by all 3 Juneau State legislators not counted per REFAC meeting of 11/9/10.)
Score #670--not this proposal--Unless Doug/Audrey find something different between hydro gen and TX proposals.
2 letters of support and a resolution noted (all dated) and the resolution from Kootznoowoo = 5?
Resolution noted = 2
6 letters or resolutions of local support noted, also noted resolution from housing authority = 5
5 letters of support noted = 5
3 letters of support, a resolution from the Kenai Peninsula Borough = 5
(Letter of support from the local State representative not counted per REFAC meeting of 11/9/10.)
However, project failed Stage 1 review
6 letters of support noted (including one from some ?sleazy guy? by the name of Peter Crimp.) = 5
Two letters of support and resolution noted = 4
5 letters of support submitted = 5
Resolution noted (other local support discussed, but not documented) = 2
Two letters of support (though one is from a vendor) and an unsigned agreement with a local union = 4
5 letters of support (though at least 2 are from professional firms and not local entities) = 5
7 letters of support and resolution submitted = 5
Two letters of support offered = 4
Letters from the grantee (considered as the ?resolution?) and City = 3
Resolution provided = 2
(Same one for both application #655 and #656.)
Resolution submitted = 2
(Same one for both application #655 and #656.)
Three letters of support submitted = 5
Four letters and resolutions submitted = 5
At least 7 different entities indicated their support for the project = 5
Letters of support and various resolutions noted = 5
4 letters of support noted = 5
Local support discussed, but not documented = 0
Five letters of support and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 5
One letter of support from NANA (needs to be a local entity?) and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 2
Two letters of support and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 4
Three letters of support and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 5
Two letters of support and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 4
Three letters of support and generic corporate resolution from AVEC noted = 5
Two letters of support and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 4
Two letters of support and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 4
Two letters of support and generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 4
A joint resolution presented by 3 different entities in Eek and a generic corporate resolution from AVEC = 5
None noted = 0
Several letters of support from impacted communities noted = 5
Two letters of support and a board resolution noted = 4
Corporate resolution noted = 2
(Three letters of support from local representatives and senator not counted per REFAC meeting of 11/8/10.) The Authority is also aware of opposition to this project, but no documented
issues noted or received.
Corporate resolution noted = 2
(Letters of support from local state representatives and senator not counted per REFAC meeting of 11/9/10)
Six letters of support noted = 5
Two letters of support and a resolution noted = 4
Three letters of support, a petition with several signatures and a generic corporate resolution from AP&T = 5
One letter of support, a ?watered-down? resolution from the Haines Borough, and a generic corporate resolution from AP&T = 4
None noted, but a generic corporate resolution from AP&T = 2?
One letter of support from a business and a generic corporate resolution from AP&T = 3
Several letters of support noted and Borough resolution = 5
Generic corporate resolution from AP&T = 2
2 letters of support (one signed by several individuals, therefore counted as a petition) and Borough resolution = 5
Borough resolution noted = 2
more than 3 letters of support from other entities (also noted letters from local individuals too), a letter from the borough too (supporting their own project). = 5 However, letter
from one individual was received, opposed to the project. This letter did not provide ?documented, unresolved issues...? therefore, the final score was unchanged. Discussed with Devany
and Peter.
3 letters of support & resolution from tribe = 5
Two letters of support & Council resolution noted = 4
3 letters of support and a letter from the borough = 5
One letter of support, no resolution from City and no authorized signers form (will need before grant in place - something that gives EP signatory authority) = 3
One letter of support and Board resolution noted = 3
Board resolution noted = 2
GVEA Resolution noted = 2
Four letters of support noted (one from MEA came in later) = 5
Three letters of support noted = 5
Two letters of support & borough resolution noted = 4
Borough resolution noted = 2
Resolution from NSB = 2
Local support demonstrated by resolution from city government; NSB resolution also noted = 3
Local support demonstrated by resolution from village government; NSB resolution also noted = 3
2 letters of support & resolution noted = 4
Two letters of support = 4
Six letters of support noted = 5
Resolution and 2 letters of support = 4
Resolution referenced in letter = 2
Resolution noted from assembly = 2
Corporate resolution noted @ 2
Email from Petro-Star supporting the project = 3
Letters of support for the project provided from at least 15 different entities. 5
letters of support mentioned in application, but nothing found
Discussed in application, but nothing found
Resolution provided, additional support discussed in application but nothing provided
Resolution and one letter of support provided
Resolution provided, letter of support mentioned in application but not found
Letter of support from NWAB
letters of support mentioned in application, but nothing found
generic resolution from 2000?; application unsigned
generic resolution from 2000?; 3 letters of local support provided, application unsigned
generic resolution from 2000?; one letter of support provided, application unsigned
generic resolution from 2000?; local support discussed in application but nothing provided
generic resolution from 2000?; local support discussed in application but only one letter provided, application not signed
generic resolution from 2000?; application not signed; local support discussed in application but nothing provided
Resolution (of sorts) and letter of support from AP&T
Resolution (of sorts) provided
Support from another entity (Kenai Peninsula Borough) application not signed
letter of support from City government
2 letters of support provided
mentioned in application, but nothing provided
mentioned in application, but nothing provided
discussed in application, but nothing provided
Resolution, 6 letters of support and 2 letters from vendors
Resolution provided and a letters of support from Sealaska and Huna Totem
9 letters of support and one from a vendor
2 letters of support
Resolution and 3 letters of support found
nothing provided, application not signed
Resolution provided
City Council Resolution and two letters of support (Forest Service and local vendor)
Resolution provided and letter of support from Seward Chamber of Commerce
Resolution from GFH, LLC provided
nothing provided
Resolution provided and letter of support from HEA
Resolution provided and two letters of support
one letter of support mentioned in the application, but not found
Resolution provided, 4 letters of support and a letter from BIA
nothing provided, application not even signed by anyone local
nothing provided, application not signed
Resolution from City Council, and resolutions from ANB, Tlingit & Haida Council and Wrangell
resolution provided from council
nothing noted, application not signed
FERC authorization provided (?), unsigned Memorandum of Agreement with Labors, letter from gravel source and an engineering firm - no specific support noted.
not demonstrated, but mentioned in the application
Letter of support from the Kenai Peninsula Borough and two other letters from individuals
Letters from another corporation (Tok Umbrella Corp), NREL, and UAF in support
resolution from the borough and several emails or letters from private individuals in support of the project
Letters of support from Kenai Peninsula Borough, Chugach Electric, Tyonek Native Corp and the Homer Electric Association Members Forum (?), MoA, Cook Inlet Keepers and other.
resolution provided
nothing provided
resolution provided
nothing found
nothing found
several letters of support provided, but not for this proposed project
city resolution
city resolution provided
nothing found
letter of support from borough
3 letters of support provided
support discussed in application, but none documented
resolution and 6 letters of support
borough resolution included
board resolution a letter of support from Hoonah and a resolution Sealaska.
none provided
emails from City indicating support
3 letters of support and a resolution from the school district
Support from Kenai Peninsula Borough, HEA, Tesoro, and other letters of support provided
letter of support from applicant in place of resolution
letter in support from applicant in place of resolution
none found
3 resolutions of support (but dated 2008 or earlier) 2 letters of support and 2 resolutions from the board
resolution and 4 letters of support, but one from the applicant itself
resolution and one letter of support
one letter of support, but from the MSB itself /count equivalent to resolution?
generic resolution provided supporting application
generic resolution provided supporing application
application says there are letters of support, but not found
Resolution from City received
Corporation (Utility) Resolution provided
3 letters of support provided
2008 board resolution provided, not specific to project ?
non-specific board resolution
non-specific board resolution
One letter of support (inlcuded in Connelly Lake support) and generic resolution from AP&T
2008 non-specific resolution and one letter of support from Whale Pass
none found / 2008 resolution is non-specific
3 letters of support and a petition with several signatures included
Seven letters of support and generic resolution from AP&T
4 letters/ resolutions provided in support of project
2008 board resolution submitted / is this acceptable ?
nothing provided, but applications mentions city council support discussed
nothing provided / mentioned getting support once "rant approved"?
nothing provided / mentioned getting support once "grant approved"?
nothing provided
updated Resolution from City Council, 2 resolutions / letters from other entities and one resolution from Wrangell
letter of support from Delta Junction mentioned; but not found
Also, no resolution from the applicant submitted
3 letters of support; but 2 were from TCC ?
2 letters of support
2 letters of support
3 letters of support and a resolution from the city
resolution and 3 letters of support
board resolution
Board Resolution and unsigned resolution of support from the Denali borough ?
Board Resolution
all inclusive resolution from the borough and one letter of support
all inclusive resolution from the borough
all inclusive resolution from the borough
all inclusive resolution from the borough
all inclusive resolution from the borough
unsigned resolution (letter) and a seperate letter from applicant stating he had spoke with entities in Delta Junction and indicated their support / no credit given; must be from entity
itself
Resolution from borough
Resolution from borough
Resolution from borough
Corporate resolution and one dated letter of support (2008 - signed by former mayor ?)
Resolution from City and 2 letters of support
one letter of support provided
4 letters of support
Resolution from Coop Board, 2 letters of support and a resolution of support from the City
Support letters from AVEC and Kotzebue Electric Assn. and a resolution from the borough
updated borough resolution found
one letter of support from City
none provided
Several letters of support (one from Polar Consult - private vendor ?) application unsigned and resolution was dated
Borough Council Resolution and 3 letters of support
8 letters of support provided
Letter of Authorization ?
Resolution and two letters of support found (take higer value) = 4
Letter authorizing signature (resolution)
Resolution and Letter of support provided (take higher valued item)
Resolution and letter of support (take higher valued item)
Resolution and letter of support (take higher valued item)
Multiple letters of support / some from firms that will probably benefit from the project?
Resolution from Ambler noted
One letter of support submitted
Comments received both for and against this project ; however, overwhelming support for the project was demonstrated with several emails and letters. Since this only funds a feasibilty
study, need to proceed with this project to answer the questions raised by those for and against the project.
resolution
resolution
Resolution
Resolution
Resolution
Resolution
Resolution
letter jointly signed by applicant and another entity
Resolution and letter of support submitted (take higher valued item)
Resolution noted
2 letters found from local entities other than applicant
Resolution noted
Resolution
resolution
No support noted
Resolution noted
Resolution
Four letters of support submitted
Two letters of support and resolution noted
No local support demonstrated
Resolution noted
Resolution from applicant = 2
Two letters of local support found = 4
Resolution
Resolution noted
letter from the Village Council in support of their project
Three letters of support found
Resolution noted
No support noted
Resolution noted (discussed support in minutes of council meeting)
Resolution noted
Resolution noted
One letter of support provided
Resolution / Board Authorization noted
Resolution noted = 2
Resolution noted
Resolution from council and one letter of support
Two letters of support noted (took higher valued item)
Resolution
Resolution
Resolution
Resolution from the City noted
Resolution
Resolution noted
Resolution submitted = 2
No local support demonstrated
One letter of support found
no local support noted
Resolution noted
Resolution noted
At least 7 letters of support submitted = 5
Resolution from Kenai Peninsula Borough and letters from Rep. Chenault, Borough Mayor and Homer Electric (?)
No local support demonstrated
3 letters of local support noted
Resolution noted
Resolution noted
Several letters of support noted
None noted
no support noted
Resolution and two letters of local support noted (take higher value) = 4
resolution noted
Letter of support found and resolution
No local support noted
No support noted
numerous lettes of support provided
resolution from city
One letter of support and resolution provided
no local support demonstrated
Numerous resolutions and letters of support provided
resolution from assembly
no local support demonstrated - however, resolution at #107 says \'Kongiganak\' ???
Resolution from utility
Numerous letters of support provided
resolution names Kongiganak???
Numerous letters of support provided
Resolution from board
Numerous letters and resolutions of support provided
Resolution from utility board
no local support demonstrated
no local support provided
no local support demonstrated
A letter of support was provided from BQ Energy; but this entity is participating in the project
one letter of support submitted
known differences between City and grant applicant exist / therefore no points awarded for local support; per matrix
letter from KPB Assembly
There also was a letter from HEA, but they are particpating in the project, therefore not counted in the tally for local support
no local support documented
resolution from council submitted
1 letter of support submittted / a letter from AIPCDA also was submitted; however they also participating in the project, therefore this letter was not counted in the tally for support
2 letters of support submitted
2 letters of support from within the University system (?)
no local support demonstrated
no local support demonstrated
resolution from utility board
3 letters of support provided
reolution from NWAB submitted
resolution from utility\'s board
one letter of support provided from University, a co-applicant? This is a questionable score.
no local support noted
no local support noted
no local support noted
no local support noted
no local support needed
no local support noted
no local support noted
resolution from another entity
resolution from assembly
no local support demonstrated
no local support demonstrated
none found
Resolution from Borough Assembly
resolution from Borough Assembly
resolution from Borough Assembly
letter of support submitted
3 letters of support submitted
resolutions from impacted communities and other entities in the area
resolution from council
no local support demonstrated
resolutions from 3 communities impacted and from the NWAB and NANA
resolution from board
no local support demonstrated
no local support demonstrated
3 letters of support provided
4 letters of support provided
two letters of support submitted
resolution from council
resolution from council
Support offered from wood supplier for proposed project
Two letters of support provided
Two letters of local support provided and a resolution from the borough assembly
3 letters of support provided
no local support demonstrated
resolution from council
resolution from council
no support demonstrated
resolution of support referenced in letter from mayor
board resolution
resolution from council
One letter of local support found
resolution and two letters of support (local)
several letters of support submitted
Several letters of support submitted from Hoonah businesses
resolution from utility board
3 letters of support submitted
Known differences with another local entity; therefore per the scoring matrix score is zero
no sprecific board resolution or letters of support found
3 letters of support
2 letters of support
letter of support from Ketchikan Public Utilities
resolutioin from one of the impacted communities included
no local support demonstrated and no resolution noted
4 letters of support submitted
no local support demonstrated
no local support noted
resolution submitted
no local support submitted
no local support submitted
resolution from AEB
City resolution included
resolution from City
MOU with Anchorage provided
no local support demonstrated and no resolution included
resolution from utility board
IPP, no local support demonstrated
IPP, no local support demonstrated
IPP, with no local support demonstrated
Resolution from council
Resolution from City & Borough of Sitka
S3 Sustainability
3.67
4.17
4
4.83
2.17
2
4
4.33
3.33
5
4.67
2.5
5
5
4.83
4.33
4.17
4.17
4.5
2.67
2.33
4.5
3.5
3.17
4.17
2.67
3.67
3.83
5
1.17
3
4.5
5
4.33
4.33
3.33
3
2
4
4
4
3.33
3
3.17
4.33
2
4
3.33
3
3.17
5
5
3.33
4.5
4.67
3.67
3
4.5
3.5
2.5
3.83
1.17
4.5
4.83
3.33
2.17
2.83
3.67
4.5
5
4.33
4.33
3
3.83
4
4.5
3.33
2.5
3.17
4.83
4
3
3.833333333
5
5
4
1.666666667
3.166666667
4.166666667
3.166666667
1.333333333
2.5
3
3.166666667
2.5
4
4.333333333
4.5
4.5
3.833333333
4.5
2.5
2.666666667
2.833333333
1.666666667
5
4.166666667
3.5
4
5
4.5
4.5
3.166666667
3.5
3.333333333
4.166666667
3.833333333
2.833333333
3.166666667
3
3.5
3.833333333
4.166666667
3.166666667
3.833333333
4
3
4.166666667
4
3.833333333
5
3.666666667
4.5
4
4
3.5
5
3
4.833333333
4.833333333
4.833333333
3.5
4
4.5
4.5
3
3
4
3.5
5
3.333333333
2
3
4.5
3.5
3.833333333
3.833333333
4.5
2.666666667
3.833333333
3.5
3.5
4
3.666666667
3.666666667
3.5
2.5
3.666666667
4.833333333
2.833333333
2.166666667
4.666666667
3
2.833333333
4.333333333
2.666666667
4
4.333333333
1.5
4
4.833333333
5
4.666666667
2.833333333
4.166666667
2.833333333
4.833333333
3
4.833333333
3.333333333
1
5
4
4.333333333
1.833333333
5
4.5
4
1.166666667
4.166666667
4.5
4
4.5
5
1.666666667
2.666666667
4.5
2.166666667
5
5
3
2.5
4
3.5
3.5
4.5
2.666666667
3.5
3.5
4
5
3.666666667
3.333333333
2.833333333
3.166666667
2.5
3.333333333
3.166666667
1.666666667
3.833333333
3.5
4.5
4
3.666666667
3.833333333
3
2.333333333
2.833333333
2.5
3.333333333
1.833333333
5
3.666666667
1.666666667
3
5
1.166666667
4
4
5
5
2.666666667
3
2.166666667
3.833333333
2.333333333
4
2.333333333
3.333333333
3.166666667
4.166666667
2.333333333
4
3.333333333
2.5
1.833333333
5
5
3.333333333
4.666666667
4.333333333
4
3
3.666666667
2.333333333
3.5
2
3.666666667
4.5
3.833333333
4.5
3.833333333
5
4.166666667
4
4.166666667
4.5
4.333333333
4.5
4.333333333
4.833333333
4.5
4.5
4.666666667
4.5
4.166666667
3.666666667
3.5
5
2.5
3
5
3.5
2.833333333
3.333333333
3.833333333
4.166666667
3.333333333
5
2.5
4.666666667
4
4
4
4
4.5
3.166666667
3.5
3.333333333
2.5
4.166666667
4.666666667
4.333333333
4.333333333
2.5
4.166666667
4.166666667
4.333333333
4.333333333
4.5
4.5
3.833333333
4.333333333
2.5
2.5
2.5
3.5
4
4.833333333
3.833333333
2.5
3.333333333
4.166666667
4.5
3.5
3
2.5
4
3.833333333
2.333333333
4.333333333
4.5
4.5
2.5
3.833333333
4.5
2.333333333
2.333333333
3.166666667
4.5
2.5
4.666666667
3.833333333
2.833333333
5
2.5
1.333333333
4.5
2.666666667
4
4.166666667
2.333333333
4.333333333
4.5
4.333333333
4.833333333
5
3
3.333333333
2.5
3.5
3
4.166666667
5
2.5
3.833333333
2.5
3.833333333
3.166666667
2.333333333
3.333333333
4.5
2.333333333
5
4
4.166666667
3.5
5
2.5
2.666666667
3.833333333
3.833333333
3.333333333
3.666666667
5
4.166666667
5
4.5
3.833333333
2.666666667
2.333333333
5
4
4.666666667
3.166666667
4.666666667
3.5
3.166666667
4.5
1.833333333
2.5
5
4.333333333
4.5
4.5
4.333333333
4
4.5
3.666666667
3.166666667
3.166666667
3
3.5
2.166666667
3.166666667
1.5
4
4.5
5
3.5
4
3.5
2.833333333
2.666666667
3.333333333
5
5
4.333333333
4.166666667
3.666666667
3.666666667
3
2.5
2.5
3.833333333
4
5
3.666666667
3.333333333
3.166666667
4.5
3.666666667
4.833333333
3.5
3.666666667
5
3.666666667
2
3.5
2.333333333
4.333333333
5
2
4.166666667
5
5
3.5
4.5
3.666666667
3.5
2
4.833333333
3.833333333
4.5
4
4.5
4
4.833333333
2.833333333
2.833333333
5
5
1.666666667
4.5
5
4.666666667
1.833333333
3.833333333
3.833333333
3.833333333
2.666666667
4
5
5
3.833333333
5
3.5
3.666666667
3.5
4
4.5
1.666666667
3.166666667
4.833333333
5
4
5
4.333333333
4.666666667
4.666666667
5
2.5
4.666666667
5
4.333333333
5
4.833333333
5
5
4.333333333
4.666666667
5
3.5
2.5
4.166666667
5
2
5
5
4.833333333
5
5
4.333333333
3.666666667
5
4
3.666666667
5
5
S3 Comments Sustain
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting. Issued noncompliance declaration for State Audit for FY2009 and FY2012
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
Tax Liens $1,091,121
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting Tax Lien $25
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting Issued noncompliance declaration for State Audit FY2010
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting Tax Lien $80,000
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting Fuel Loans $193,510
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting Tax Lien $5,365
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting Fuel Loan $122,115
PCE Reporting Tax Lien Native Village of Tanacross $ 253,516
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
PCE Reporting
Small and decreasing population. Power house needs work. Wind resource is turbulent.
DCCED Comments - 3 liens
BF - none
PCE Comments - Buckland Non Fuel Costs not reported
Private lodge ownership is a concern
DCCED Comments - 11 liens
One delinquent audit.
BF - None
BF Comments - Current
PCE Comments - Power is purchased from Bethel Utilities Corp.
PCE Comments - Reported kWh sold exceed kWh generated Jan 12 through May 12
PCE Comments - Reported kWh sold exceed kWh generated Sep 11 through Jun 12
BF Comments - None (DCRA database); DCRA Fuel Watch says 1 loan
DCCED Comments - 2 liens
BF - None
DCCED Comments - 6 liens against the city.
BF None
PCE Comments - Non Fuel Costs not reported
BF Comments: Remaining
BF Comments: Complete
PCE Comments: No issues.
BF Comments: Remaining
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: No generation data: Sep-Dec;
South Naknek and King Salmon receive power from Naknek via intertie.
BF Comments: Complete
BF Comments: Complete
BF Comments: In progress; Alan Fetters is PM
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Complete
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Missing PCE report: Jan-Jun
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Remaining
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Lutak-No generation data: May;
Power purchased from AP&T. Southern Energy Inc.
10 Mile - No data available
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues for City of Unalaska utility
BF Comments: Complete
BF Comments: Complete
BF Comments: Final Design; David Lockard is PM
Kobuk is a new AVEC community. Previous PCE reporting issues.
BF Comments: Ambler, Shungnak: N/A; Kobuk: Remaining
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Kobuk - No generation data: Jan-Dec;
Kobuk recieves power from Shungnak via intertie. Power purchased from AVEC.
BF Comments: Stebbins: N/A; St. Michael: Conceptual Design; David Lockard is PM
BF Comments: Complete
DCCED Comments: Not included
PCE Comments: Kobuk: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Shungnak: N/A; Kobuk: Remaining
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Kobuk - No generation data: Jan-Dec;
Kobuk recieves power from Shungnak via intertie. Power purchased from AVEC.
DCCED Comments: Not included
PCE Comments: No issues.
BF Comments: N/A
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: No generation data: Jan-Dec;
Pitkas Point receives power from St. Mary\'s/Andreafsky via intertie.
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: No issues.
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes:No generation data: Jan, Feb, Dec
BF Comments: All complete
BF Comments: Complete
DCCED Comments: Not included
PCE Comments: No issues.
BF Comments: All either complete or N/A
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Beaver- Missing generation data: Mar& Dec; Sept-Dec not yet processed by PCE. Stevens Village - Missing PCE reports: Jan-Dec
DCCED Comments: Not included
PCE Comments: Beaver, Hughes: Some reporting issues. Stevens Village: Not in 2011 report but not currently inactive.
BF Comments: All either complete or N/A
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Ruby - No generation data: Mar, Apr, Jun. Beaver- Missing generation data: Mar& Dec; Sept-Dec not yet processed by PCE. Stevens Village - Missing PCE reports:
Jan-Dec
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Complete
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Power purchased from Focus Energy Corp
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: Not in 2011 report but not currently inactive.
BF Comments: Remaining
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Missing PCE reports: Jan-Dec
2010 Energy Statistics Notes:
Dot Lake & Tetlin - No generation data: Jan-Dec
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes:
No generation data: Jan-Dec.
Chilkat Valley provides power to Klukwan via intertie.
Some power purchased from AP&T.
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: No generation data: Jan-Dec
BF Comments:Complete
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Missing PCE report: Apr
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Complete
2010 Energy Statistics Notes: Missing PCE reports: March-Jun. No generation data: Nov
DCCED Comments PCE Comments BF Comments
No liens Some reporting issues. Newhalen: Construction; Kris is PM
BF Comments: Remaining ???
2010 Energy Statistics Notes
Ketchikan - SEPA no Tyee Lake data available
DCCED Comments PCE Comments BF Comments
Not included Some reporting issues. N/A
DCCED Comments: No liens
PCE Comments: Some reporting issues.
BF Comments: Complete
Kodiak Electric Association proposes 4.5 MW of additional wind generation capacity.
#311 is a Biomass project also in Tanana
No indication that the local utility will own and operate.
AEA assistance requested
Flashy stream may increase risk to project.
KEA is experienced in O&M of Terror Lake hydro
Applicant proposes feasibility through construction of a wind energy system of unspecified scale and location in Akiakchak. The applicant requests AEA to manage the project.
The application provides only a general description the project. There is no detailed budget.
AEA recommends funding only onsite wind resource assessment at $15,000. AEA will supply an instrumented met tower.
Difficult project to maintain; will require helicopter access since roads not likely. Long transmission line construction involved through difficult terrain will be a challenge to
maintain.
1. No obvious obstacles
Project organization structure is complex. May be difficult to achieve all project goals.
S3 Regional Balance
Compare
Compare
Compare
Compare
Compare
Compare
Compare
Compare
Fail
S3 Compliance
Stage 3 Rank
2
2
3
1
3
3
3
4
1
3
2
1
2
1
3
2
1
2
3
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
4
2
1
3
3
1
2
4
4
1
2
2
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
2
1
3
2
3
1
4
1
4
3
2
2
1
4
1
3
1
4
4
3
3
3
4
3
4
3
2
3
1
1
1
4
2
1
1
3
4
4
3
1
4
1
1
2
1
1
3
3
2
3
2
3
3
2.5
2
3
2
1
1
1
2
2
4
3
3
4
2
3
2
1
1
2.5
1
2
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
3
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
4
4
4
3
3
S3 Comments
This project is potentially competing for same energy market as #1243, Cordova Electric dispatchable heat.
Rich to enter mwh and diesel totals
DEV TO ENTER STAGE 3 ENERGY PRODUCTION NUMBERS.
DANIEL FILL OUT ENERGY PRODUCTION AND START YEAR...
Annual MWH production number is between current use of 900 MWH and total capacity of 2140.
the anticipated start dates will likely be spread out as the different boilers are completed. Some might start fall 2015.
S3 Score 75.22
Project Rank
22
6
11
4
34
31
29
2
38
39
16
17
24
37
28
40
12
14
30
9
23
15
32
27
25
33
5
18
10
20
19
1
36
8
26
3
13
35
21
7
13
8
39
34
15
57
55
54
60
11
58
44
24
25
32
45
31
7
12
49
36
43
9
35
30
62
23
5
59
50
64
4
28
3
21
41
26
18
33
14
2
42
22
19
48
51
10
1
17
37
47
20
63
27
29
16
46
38
53
6
40
56
52
61
30
6
24
59
1
60
11
49
8
2
39
45
51
46
43
40
47
38
35
36
27
54
29
7
37
26
12
17
9
13
28
18
16
21
34
23
19
33
10
52
22
32
58
5
41
56
20
31
15
44
25
3
14
50
4
53
48
42
55
57
23
26
4
31
29
17
28
12
9
32
24
13
14
25
34
2
20
3
1
11
15
22
8
19
41
7
33
27
21
39
6
5
30
18
16
35
38
40
36
10
37
72
73
37
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
0
29
33
0
58
59
16
1
13
22
53
0
20
19
5
39
56
0
64
10
43
31
15
7
52
3
30
0
8
36
0
0
0
54
0
18
47
68
75
2
6
21
0
49
61
32
45
42
23
11
38
48
41
50
35
0
26
4
44
0
0
74
0
62
46
0
55
0
69
71
60
57
51
34
0
12
0
14
25
0
63
67
66
65
40
24
27
70
28
9
0
0
0
0
42
85
2
4
29
39
40
30
16
46
80
62
35
89
74
5
32
79
49
50
77
63
21
52
65
51
83
28
25
34
56
15
12
53
67
19
13
82
78
17
73
8
87
75
33
59
9
10
54
64
86
69
14
24
43
11
37
58
57
18
22
3
31
76
7
61
81
68
60
47
27
41
38
26
48
90
88
70
66
71
20
45
55
1
44
36
23
84
6
72
1
16
5
14
42
8
17
30
19
23
34
38
27
31
20
56
7
6
59
53
40
45
55
41
13
43
12
4
21
48
37
49
50
60
36
46
39
51
3
22
32
29
11
9
52
33
18
58
10
26
28
44
15
57
47
24
2
54
35
25
10
76
87
81
40
12
37
82
14
58
60
23
33
64
89
67
79
84
35
41
59
17
15
75
46
74
44
11
69
92
71
34
28
26
66
48
52
62
47
21
25
61
70
7
24
16
3
49
8
2
30
45
5
38
27
54
13
73
55
78
53
68
39
93
50
42
88
85
57
43
29
22
9
56
32
20
19
1
6
4
63
77
80
98
36
65
97
96
31
18
72
83
51
94
95
91
90
86
Project Rank Region
0
0
2
3
2
1
4
2
1
0
1
0
0
3
2
1
0
4
1
2
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
3
1
3
2
1
6
3
6
8
1
3
3
3
2
4
2
9
7
1
0
5
0
0
2
5
1
1
2
4
3
6
5
2
1
2
2
9
12
2
1
2
7
1
2
6
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
3
1
4
10
1
4
1
2
3
8
4
11
5
2
2
3
2
1
6
5
3
7
4
3
12
6
2
10
4
9
1
4
13
1
3
3
7
8
8
6
1
8
1
2
2
6
1
5
11
7
2
1
3
1
12
5
2
2
4
3
1
4
9
13
5
5
7
8
1
2
10
15
1
11
5
14
2
17
18
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
5
8
0
10
11
5
1
1
2
3
0
2
2
1
2
4
0
13
1
6
5
4
3
11
1
2
0
1
7
0
0
0
9
0
2
8
14
20
1
1
3
0
10
4
2
3
9
3
2
8
3
5
4
6
0
4
2
7
0
0
19
0
13
11
0
12
0
15
16
12
3
3
9
0
1
0
2
4
0
2
5
4
3
1
3
4
14
7
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
2
2
3
7
6
2
6
3
1
2
5
3
7
1
2
4
4
3
4
1
3
3
5
1
1
1
2
3
3
3
1
4
4
1
3
4
3
4
5
2
11
2
1
6
5
3
4
5
4
2
8
2
2
1
9
7
4
5
7
2
6
5
7
1
2
3
2
1
2
4
5
3
12
1
1
4
5
1
5
6
3
1
10
6
3
1
9
10
17
5
2
4
18
3
4
9
4
1
11
18
12
16
5
3
6
7
3
2
1
7
15
5
3
8
3
13
4
3
2
7
2
6
8
5
1
4
10
14
1
3
2
1
8
1
1
2
6
2
5
1
2
4
14
3
6
10
13
4
21
9
6
2
9
8
7
7
6
2
11
4
3
5
1
2
1
12
16
7
24
5
6
20
19
4
3
15
19
5
22
23
20
7
17
AEA Managed
Yes
Yes
Yes
Y
Y
Y
Request Early Funding
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Award Code
7071087
7071085
7071082
7071077
7071073
7071072
7071068
7071067
7071061
7071053
7071052
7071047
7071044
7071043
7071041
7071040
7071037
7071036
7071032
7071031
7071027
7071026
7071025
7071021
7071015
7071011
7060982
7060978
7060976
7060967
7060966
7060944
7060941
7060940
7060939
7060937
7060935
7060934
7060933
7060930
7060929
7060927
7060925
7060922
7060917
7060915
7060912
7060911
7060908
7050887
7050881
7050876
7050875
7050871
7050870
7050858
7050856
7050848
7050847
7050844
7050840
7050839
7050836
7050825
7050823
7050821
7050820
7050803
7040071
7040072
7040001
7040041
7040043
7040060
7040061
7040040
7040036
7040009
7040016
7040011
7040012
7040010
7040004
7040006
7040051
7040063
7040003
7040005
7040002
7040039
7040038
7040057
7040028
7040029
7040045
7040020
7040059
7040046
7040058
7040068
7040074
7040007
7040013
7040032
7040056
7040055
7040008
7040030
7040022
7040017
7040014
7040021
7040052
7040049
7040053
7040019
7040048
7040037
7040035
7040073
7040067
7040066
7040069
7040070
7040062
7040054
7040050
7040044
7040031
7040033
7040024
7040027
7040026
7040025
7040023
7040047
7040018
7040064
7040042
7040015
7030001
7030015
7030006
7030016
7030002
7040034
7030007
7030018
7030022
7030023
7030003
7030037
7030019
7030010
7030017
7030004
7030021
7030038
7040065
7030020
7030008
7030013
7030012
7030014
7030009
7030011
2195446
2195461
2195450
2195459
2195453
2195463
2195468
2195464
2195452
2195451
2195476
2195457
2195449
2195466
2195474
2195473
2195472
2195475
2195448
2195467
2195471
2195456
2195454
2195462
2195455
2195460
2195469
2195447
2195432
2195395
2195393
2195411
2195425
2195394
2195410
2195391
2195440
2195371
2195370
2195433
2195437
2195426
2195398
2195375
2195442
2195435
2195420
2195427
2195402
2195422
2195412
2195413
2195431
2195384
2195385
2195383
2195430
2195465
2195374
2195406
2195409
2195416
2195424
2195397
2195376
2195434
2195377
2195443
2195358
2195438
2195401
2195417
2195396
2195444
2195302
2195400
2195372
2195388
2195415
2195441
2195439
2195428
2195373
2195405
2195403
2195414
2195390
2195399
2195360
2195407
2195386
2195429
2195380
2195389
2195408
2195387
2195423
2195419
2195381
2195418
Application Round
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Match percent
0.301004343869327
0.117647058823529
0.2
0.57958301286715
0.255316566323558
5.55090812270942E-02
0.2
0.300000476025001
0.282708142726441
0.393053908919729
0.147058823529412
0.6
0
9.99897867930779E-03
9.90118946596286E-03
0.394733774439175
0.072463768115942
9.9009900990099E-03
9.99980201427629E-03
9.90087549944211E-03
9.09091728239322E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
0.143479867669387
0.866666666666667
0.6
4.98291059543083E-02
0.433333333333333
0.179576037713249
0.484183344092963
0.05
9.99999295633775E-02
0.05
0.891129032258065
0.15
0.418656758916877
2.91186597030363E-02
0.224137931034483
9.90079069374011E-03
9.90064034631367E-03
0.113059660691038
9.82736074603405E-02
0.144871794871795
0.5
0
0
0.789473684210526
0.124299201104175
0.2
0.205761316872428
0.111111111111111
0.5
0.17910447761194
0.198783910196445
5.09090909090909E-02
0
0.188466246004302
0.2
0
0.4
2.86509495743288E-04
0.357412060301508
0.370849353372947
0.72409407150585
0
6.02409638554217E-03
0.266749680052575
9.11116232618883E-02
0.2
0.199996842549799
0.166666666666667
0.5
9.9009900990099E-03
0.130264701366177
0.179576037713249
0.278894689780496
6.66666666666667E-02
9.90053645905605E-03
0
0.34736161101332
0
1.92357014619133E-02
9.90104853378786E-03
9.09091728239322E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
9.90087627784532E-03
1.75708632916552E-02
9.10684109545827E-02
1.06664629029816E-02
6.05164778804709E-02
0.159335820847319
9.90093399424559E-03
0.128188000997834
0.127253403265017
0.152786974311958
3.50705045261694E-02
5.49992095124772E-02
0.061576354679803
0.112296446265708
0.032258064516129
0.578947368421053
4.89750668434667E-02
5.00005150141335E-02
0.05
0.05
0.11
0.754533716063131
0.525631723398214
0.143479867669387
0.411764705882353
0.166252574605843
0.274799617618943
0.2
0.705290330001394
0.111111111111111
0.2
0.479775359939971
0.211596448034524
0.5
0.075
8.76912216702547E-02
1.14710891845065E-02
2.91256757246261E-02
0.5
0.703703703703704
0.797366358727581
0.4
9.60614793467819E-02
3.16455696202532E-02
0.168787246429903
0.657142857142857
2.35419003021924E-02
0.15
3.46397656812295E-02
2.80849789050603E-02
0.272727272727273
0.02972877448082
0.100901457918725
0.106210146600292
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0
0.130434782608696
0.243297920793128
0.029125488781961
2.91258538031542E-02
0.048828125
0
0.0625
0
0.1
0.124223602484472
0.146934322236001
0.253731343283582
6.35930047694754E-03
2.12765957446809E-02
9.09091728239322E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
1.50442083836906E-02
5.91715976331361E-02
5.66032774624062E-02
5.66018005342662E-02
0.029125880266579
2.91283354852593E-02
2.91271919232634E-02
2.91260073833851E-02
0
3.66768602600042E-02
0.199999886756835
0.563446288087414
0
0
0.688166374439249
0.503658206124108
0.56406172102273
0.5
0.05
0.1
0.200268817204301
0.150006654147012
8.33333333333333E-02
0.151515151515152
0.68783823215299
6.92448837222936E-02
9.99730152576534E-02
0.044735523584568
5.32141336739038E-02
0
0.158946168800697
7.00748526835483E-02
0.5
3.95470070106058E-02
0.455909012481948
0.117343590340026
0.81449953070662
0.143465415363226
6.55213134737724E-02
2.91270490040012E-02
0.2
4.99902338666827E-02
2.91256757246261E-02
0.003690036900369
0.5
7.14048548160789E-02
0.012987012987013
0
0
0.140056022408964
9.80392156862745E-02
0.379650721336371
0.181818181818182
0.214285714285714
0.1
0.05
8.54700854700855E-03
0.259409380428489
0.2
0
0
0
0.368751687038968
2.24019355272296E-02
2.62888088540708E-02
4.35672896789091E-02
2.63157894736842E-02
8.70406189555126E-02
0.044735523584568
1.63616531329536E-02
0.035
0.263157894736842
0.770022264144608
0
0
0.05
0.05
0.1
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.1
9.99999837503825E-02
0.113138686131387
0.5
2.91254830876569E-02
2.91318071470427E-02
3.17124735729387E-02
1.63862547844508E-02
0
2.91255084253341E-02
2.91267323750723E-02
0.029126213592233
2.68646003113477E-02
0
7.61323771186053E-02
3.94988582361291E-02
0
0.333333333333333
6.55479811221814E-02
2.88842015790931E-02
3.35475768347444E-02
2.92682926829268E-02
3.37541353585343E-02
0
2.23580265315248E-03
7.35426710756969E-02
0.072463768115942
0
0.2625
0.5
0.206349206349206
0.2
0.2
0.833923693622604
0.111111111111111
9.09090909090909E-02
0.18
9.09090909090909E-02
0.157894736842105
0.194704049844237
0.170616113744076
0.020049321330473
0.2
0
0.05
0.003690036900369
0.121431864775188
0.159900166389351
0.150279329608939
0
0
0.162820880068012
0
0.04
0.131333263400818
0.4
0.5
0.130718954248366
0.271263681861954
0.117647058823529
0.862068965517241
0
0.288135593220339
0.217864923747277
0.05
9.99998879038125E-02
0.1
4.99990114865266E-02
4.99990114865266E-02
0.05
0.05
0.100000094847279
4.99990114865266E-02
5.00003592237892E-02
9.99999099756844E-02
0.770022264144608
5.20074890784273E-02
6.35930047694754E-03
2.86071875558734E-02
3.40425531914894E-02
0.212228267046531
0.262714718760525
0.1
0.175257731958763
0.1
8.87531366983422E-02
0.049999212114527
4.99998471887311E-02
0.08
0.107142857142857
0.1
0.1
0.167567567567568
0.21875
0.175257731958763
4.99966253965159E-02
0.033443821487891
0.1
0.159130434782609
5.45144804088586E-02
0.119617931466309
0.159130434782609
0.107142857142857
0.113092942297691
9.10647803425167E-02
0.214207139858699
0.152646972799064
0.207828663347766
0.113744075829384
2.70696959332469E-02
0
0
0.797211660329531
7.56122569979702E-02
5.88235294117647E-02
0.353634577603143
8.52475815207446E-02
0.235507571642224
9.09090909090909E-02
0.104124408384043
0
0.168378286403845
0.125105561935068
0.837446065105912
0
0.5
0.5
1.55864488264576E-02
0
0.858672376873662
0
0.15
6.74902470741222E-02
0.1
0.166666666666667
0.2
0.2
0.2
8.73015873015873E-02
0.5
0.2
0.05
0.2
0.230769230769231
0.230769230769231
0.242424242424242
0.818799220707842
0.818799220707842
0.024
0.185915765285065
0.259513269886664
0
0.106404768126412
6.61386597000612E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
0.11353711790393
5.49828178694158E-02
0.310606060606061
0.121518987341772
0.16
0.16
0.175371391751054
0.656422324445066
0.527363184079602
0.208763548760644
5.28134937093875E-02
6.24721106648818E-02
0.830508474576271
0.182292849035187
0.25
5.93031875463306E-02
5.93031875463306E-02
7.21370604147881E-02
0
0.166666666666667
0.5
0.916317991631799
0.1
0.2
0.196464443551627
0.196464443551627
0.12
7.40740740740741E-02
9.81432360742706E-02
0.8
0.105882352941176
9.93788819875776E-02
0.120164734927519
9.39278937381404E-02
0
0.7515693982191
0.532252389365862
0
2.30264801745726E-02
0.26089963222582
0
0.600516384038635
0.515898916927563
0.659999965999521
0.584372402327515
5.66037735849057E-02
0
0.05
9.09090909090909E-02
0.05
0.111111111111111
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.1
0.05
0.05
0
0
0.166666666666667
0.2
0.2
9.99997749577483E-02
0
0.68565815324165
0.2
0.166666666666667
0.244262295081967
0.2
0.1
3.05688869868248E-02
0.1
7.27994705493051E-03
1.20936044988209E-02
0.116393442622951
0.878787878787879
0.2
0.25
0.425968565041216
0.961283425855855
4.49438202247191E-02
8.34953142429647E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
0.330207635632954
4.16666666666667E-02
0.05
0.416666666666667
0.15
0
0
0.255234680996757
0.197628458498024
0.173511028462214
0.235294117647059
0
0.333333333333333
0.15
0.407889604569434
9.99999939817953E-02
0.05
0.05
9.99999485866734E-02
0.05
0.05
0
0.25
0.830508474576271
0
8.80482456140351E-03
0
0.108162676665705
0.472222222222222
0.699433908223667
0
0.56502043393821
0
0
0.100000120382721
0
0
0.310606060606061
0.16
0.176470588235294
4.49438202247191E-02
0
0
0.621837937097829
0.100000120382721
9.54660013747104E-02
0.201965312238982
0.100000120382721
0.261817507213072
0
0.12987012987013
0.122894500657299
0.77371975
0.408083483085848
0.520045366926692
0.162693226143635
0.16
0.06
0.178571428571429
0.176470588235294
0.166666666666667
8.01282051282051E-02
6.70690811535882E-02
0
0
0.18908400239331
0
0.166868911787753
0.25
0.101123595505618
6.46078304690528E-02
0
0
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.132530120481928
0.577541866516354
0.583204863434073
0.271137026239067
6.91410964897311E-02
0
0.172503920543649
0.169999236506057
0.11353711790393
0.121457489878543
0.299251418043651
0.192307692307692
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.20926243567753
0.166666666666667
0.68565815324165
0.2
0
0.595959595959596
0.255234680996757
0.227963525835866
0.235294117647059
0.166666666666667
0.2
0.217953743629949
0
0
0
0.878787878787879
2.31990231990232E-02
0.211822660098522
0.430647766014714
0.15
0
0.246407231647102
0.261007770190723
0.172003091084079
0
0.555555555555556
9.09091851875282E-02
9.09091851875282E-02
9.09091851875282E-02
0.4
0.416666666666667
0.2
1.20936044988209E-02
0.76513416710704
2.22464659264229E-02
0.103849504070316
0.642465706651336
0
0.0273
0.528537617983461
0.697350069735007
0
4.95587312964788E-02
0.45241116751269
0
0.406326029547947
4.65809685128895E-02
0.111111111111111
0.209376422394174
0.240431040588157
0.236847376065749
0.230755724999373
0.263898503521598
0.5
0.13
0.136286201022147
0.2
3.26066180190917E-02
9.61509699555712E-02
9.90217343808391E-02
5.00041401771996E-02
0.05
0.05
4.76190476190476E-02
0.05
0.375
0.03125
0.0625
0.184331797235023
0.184331797235023
0.482451329860159
0
0
9.09090909090909E-02
0
0
5.10948905109489E-02
0.25
0
0.582172381057971
0.229440234325836
0
0
1.00401606425703E-02
0.11651729796386
0.192307692307692
0.2
0.32967032967033
0.476190476190476
0
0.32284859884353
0.135135135135135
2.14340109843002E-02
0.333333333333333
4.58318755764766E-02
0.201426024955437
0.039301911274475
6.33640552995392E-03
0
0.2
7.05394190871369E-02
5.71895424836601E-02
8.37116806123598E-02
0
0.818376298886592
0.156276046007668
0
0.2
0.5
0.230859143578439
1.58840014068687E-02
0.2
0
0
0
0.2
6.15440124253133E-02
8.63787375415282E-02
8.63787375415282E-02
0
0
0
4.73907855901869E-02
7.39207569485512E-02
0.107307651035519
0.246786226367134
0.625
0
0.25
0.121457489878543
0.276651046626604
0.104370749954511
0
0.119203387601338
0.2
0
0.39768735442981
0.2
0.721428571428571
0.05
0.363636363636364
0.157047506870828
1.47758070785434E-02
5.33262811258656E-02
0.166666666666667
0.5
0.147887323943662
0.0273
0.117647058823529
0.19075388661044
0.375
0.0625
3.94303997115948E-02
5.51181102362205E-02
0.199733688415446
0.19992243552453
0.473684210526316
0.206349206349206
0.187513641398055
0
0
0.256410256410256
0.46875
0.149999997321664
1.85950413223141E-02
0.5
0.19992243552453
0.2
0.387576552930884
0.171673819742489
0.250378352837425
0.2
0.75
4.28719221588046E-02
0.296609952798106
0
0.802280709756876
0.745696519069734
0
0.113551808751644
0.5
9.22333325942842E-02
0
0.529631762791373
0.5
0.188228524217784
2.30707861116272E-02
0.199979696717814
0
0
6.83153692148933E-02
0.572281153555297
9.09090909090909E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
9.09090909090909E-02
4.70656595002905E-02
0.1
0.100000114076921
0.100000346904227
9.99999304525706E-02
0.5
0.200918484500574
0.2
0.04
0.178571428571429
0.189473684210526
0.203821656050955
0.168378175365366
6.60501981505945E-02
0.499478414379714
0.574358974358974
0.676060900550696
1.48790066646962E-02
0.217054263565891
0.924090026869401
0.500985553531775
0.1019023762177
0
2.47589373681758E-02
0.147161272198687
0.575
0.1
0
0
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.142348754448399
0
0
0.219512195121951
0.197530864197531
0.166666666666667
0
0.2
8.98301600379198E-02
0
0.289436228877487
0.237952559300874
0.455373406193078
2.00213721473883E-02
0.2
0.420784797042102
0.39768735442981
0.2
0.390386772161061
0.661596958174905
0.525862068965517
6.53423941453215E-02
0.209775967413442
0.5
0.0273
0.990320937340805
1.43027413587604E-02
0
0
0
0.375
0
3.63582618977239E-02
0.514884073831239
0.2
0.545454545454545
0
0
8.33333333333333E-02
0
0
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Average Match
0.225594279308929
0.158136420044588
0.208668769845097
0.211356488560203
0.163015676348628
0.10858885767634
0.162277979673844
0.177095785169504
0.226662807850702
Median Match
0.175122624156959
0.107307651035519
0.162693226143635
0.112324114507521
0.100000094847279
0.05
6.92448837222936E-02
0.112296446265708
0.145965309200603
Match weight
0.25
0.25
0.2
0.2
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
Application Number
1226
1237
1234
1245
1242
1244
1224
1250
1238
1216
1222
1247
1221
1202
1249
1212
1214
1223
1211
1207
1233
1205
1235
1215
1219
1246
1213
1232
1218
1201
1252
1248
1208
1217
1210
1243
1225
1239
1220
1230
1231
1241
1209
1227
1206
1251
1204
1236
1228
1240
1203
1229
Application Round
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
Stage 3 Score Total
79.7
78.62
74.17
73.24
71.64
70.85
68.28
66.29
66.29
65.75
65.59
64.87
64.59
64.38
62.99
59.46
58.97
57.96
56.37
56.12
55.74
55.69
54.19
52.79
52.7
52.33
51.75
51.71
50.95
50.44
50
49.74
48.27
47.86
44.87
44.52
44.09
43.63
42.58
40.98
40.58
37.73
35.63
32.84
32.69
32.56
31.9
29.78
29.36
29.18
28.87
16.46
Stage 3 total w/ match increase
84.7
83.62
76.17
77.5733333333333
75.3066666666667
75.1833333333333
73.28
69.9566666666667
68.29
69.4166666666667
68.59
67.2033333333333
66.9233333333333
69.38
67.99
62.46
60.97
60.2933333333333
60.0366666666667
61.12
57.74
59.3566666666667
56.19
54.79
52.7
55.9966666666667
54.75
54.71
55.95
54.1066666666667
53.3333333333333
54.0733333333333
48.27
49.86
49.87
49.52
47.4233333333333
48.63
47.58
44.6466666666667
43.58
42.73
35.63
35.1733333333333
35.69
35.56
35.5666666666667
32.1133333333333
34.36
29.18
31.87
16.46
Rank Pre
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Rank Post
1
2
4
3
5
6
7
8
12
9
11
14
15
10
13
16
18
19
20
17
22
21
23
26
32
24
27
28
25
29
31
30
37
34
33
35
39
36
38
40
41
42
44
47
43
46
45
49
48
51
50
52
Change
0
0
1
-1
0
0
0
0
4
-1
0
2
2
-4
-2
0
1
1
1
-3
1
-1
0
2
7
-2
0
0
-4
-1
0
-2
4
0
-2
-1
2
-2
-1
0
0
0
1
3
-2
0
-2
1
-1
1
-1
0
Application Number
1147
1109
1161
1118
1163
1103
1111
1131
1116
1162
1135
1108
1133
1143
1142
1117
1114
1115
1104
1166
1126
1140
1120
1110
1122
1113
1137
1148
1132
1154
1124
1119
1158
1105
1112
1127
1138
1146
1136
1125
1149
1164
1145
1160
1167
1165
1159
1157
1156
1155
1153
1152
1151
1150
1144
1141
1139
1134
1130
1129
1128
1123
1121
1107
1106
1102
1101
Application Round
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
Stage 3 Score Total
69.6933333333169
69.4966666666525
69.176666666654
69.0699999999896
67.5799999999881
66.6999999999855
66.6966666666561
65.7799999999845
61.689999999993
61.3266666666595
61.123333333321
60.7733333333255
60.6699999999919
59.5466666666591
59.1933333333169
59.14
56.783333333327
56.383333333328
56.1533333333194
54.686666666659
54.5133333333331
54.4699999999856
54.013333333331
53.3966666666571
52.8099999999969
52.48
50.45
49.7366666666664
48.8899999999969
48.376666666664
47.98333333333
45.51
45
44.6733333333324
41.826666666666
38.5633333333324
34.4933333333324
34.0899999999981
31.9233333333304
25.35
20
16.75
14.54
8.88
0
Stage 3 total w/ match increase
70.0690476190312
72.2071428571287
69.9123809523683
67.6790476190372
68.2123809523691
69.6695238095093
69.2666666666561
66.4904761904607
60.0919047618978
56.3266666666595
62.5490476190353
60.7814285714207
61.1657142857062
57.5409523809448
58.4690476190312
57.5404761904762
60.1604761904699
55.7276190476137
60.4033333333194
53.5885714285638
54.4228571428569
53.7457142856999
55.9161904761881
55.9219047618952
52.0614285714255
53.2157142857143
52.5128571428571
47.7309523809521
46.5799999999969
46.456666666664
46.3795238095205
43.597619047619
48.1257142857143
45.2428571428562
42.989047619047
38.9390476190467
34.194761904761
36.6266666666648
33.9861904761875
24.1509523809524
24.1685714285714
19.2866666666667
13.3842857142857
5.92095238095238
-1.13
-4.15571428571429
2.57142857142867E-02
3.91142857142857
-3.95285714285714
-2.03428571428571
0.395714285714286
-0.901904761904763
0.353809523809524
-1.33333333333333
-1.93095238095238
1.14
-3
-1.81285714285714
-7.90476190476195E-02
-3
-2
-2.10380952380952
0
4.25
3.58333333333333
3.99428571428571
-1.10380952380952
Rank Pre
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
Rank Post
2
1
3
7
6
4
5
8
14
18
9
11
10
16
15
17
13
21
12
24
22
23
20
19
27
25
26
29
30
31
32
34
28
33
35
36
38
37
39
41
40
42
43
44
57
67
52
47
66
62
50
55
51
58
60
49
64
59
54
64
61
63
53
45
48
46
56
Change
1
-1
0
3
1
-2
-2
0
5
8
-2
-1
-3
2
0
1
-4
3
-7
4
1
1
-3
-5
2
-1
-1
1
1
1
1
2
-5
-1
0
0
1
-1
0
1
-1
0
0
0
12
22
7
2
21
17
5
10
6
13
15
4
19
14
9
19
16
18
8
0
3
1
11
Application Number
1087
1086
1085
1084
1083
1082
1081
1080
1079
1078
1077
1076
1075
1074
1073
1072
1071
1070
1069
1068
1067
1066
1065
1064
1063
1062
1061
1060
1059
1058
1057
1056
1055
1054
1053
1052
1051
1050
1049
1048
1047
1046
1045
1044
1043
1042
1041
1040
1039
1038
1037
1036
1035
1034
1033
1032
1031
1030
1029
1028
1027
1026
1025
1024
1023
1022
1021
1020
1019
1018
1017
1016
1015
1014
1013
1012
1011
1010
1009
1008
1007
1006
1005
1004
1003
1002
1001
Application Round
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
Stage 3 Score Total
69.35666667
71.975
57.32666667
61.95166667
68.52166667
48.33
49.25833333
51.68166667
45.88
70.54333333
8
48.315
54.54166667
66.21166667
66.06666667
62.19666667
54.175
62.43333333
72.21166667
70.25833333
52.31666667
60.35166667
0
14
54.76666667
70.94
61.89666667
18.625
3
62.76666667
12.81666667
44.49833333
66.665
73.69333333
47.92166667
8
52.26833333
42.22666667
77.39833333
61.67
64.24666667
80.61666667
67.41333333
55.38666667
65.21
68.15666667
62.12666667
68.74333333
83.36
5
2
55.34333333
67.28833333
67.92666667
52.43666667
19.44166667
52.135
70.62666667
85.03666667
68.19833333
26.55
59.95333333
53.32833333
67.54833333
10
25.24166667
43.61833333
64.71333333
63.94666667
68.43166667
53.39
59.52666667
51.82666667
72.39333333
55.77166667
48.69333333
10
52.02166667
12
8
11.60833333
20
20.45833333
45.845
Stage 3 total w/ match increase
67.8123958161905
0
69.9125
61.38229167
65.20088542
72.553396045
52.3617291687143
49.05088583
50.52541667
48.6022916666667
72.47822958
6.03919437428571
50.2041666666667
52.47916667
64.72140667
65.4000000033333
60.46229167
53.5244275
62.34807333
71.0557812533333
69.1917229133333
51.4998437533333
59.0835937533333
-2.71875
13.9540104166667
55.8925525033333
69.49640625
60.56375042
16.314722707619
-1.62489562571429
60.1000000033333
7.81666667
46.84208333
0
67.1875522909524
74.7141666633333
46.8566147942857
6.84651062428571
54.33083333
44.28916667
75.87770833
60.40296875
62.7770833571429
77.61666667
66.32807333
53.61432292
64.1824481242857
66.80812542
0
61.8502087533333
71.7724374966667
82.7032291666667
0.913073124285714
1.395885
59.75158333
68.60473958
71.693787295
56.24747917
20.3740000033333
53.734
71.2282291809524
84.3179166495238
66.6540624761905
26.3301041666667
64.3145507862857
55.0228841633333
69.1721353924286
12
27.5750000033333
40.6460416428571
65.8288024966667
64.778541877619
71.65416667
53.6125
63.93491667
54.23491667
76.80158333
57.6539395866667
49.6256666633333
7
54.9321458366667
11.1798437704762
5.9375
9.85833333
24.3612175
21.3906666633333
45.23520875
Application Number
985
984
983
982
981
980
979
978
977
976
975
974
973
972
971
970
969
968
967
966
965
964
963
962
961
960
959
958
957
956
955
954
953
952
951
950
949
948
947
946
945
944
943
942
941
940
939
938
937
936
935
934
933
932
931
930
929
928
927
926
925
924
923
922
921
920
919
918
917
916
915
914
913
912
911
910
909
908
907
906
905
904
903
902
901
Application Round
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
Stage 3 Score Total
0
32.54965
62.15160417
75.6525125
65.40843125
27.37525
38.23439583
82.26435625
37.29033333
72.69166667
54.26772917
44.80946042
30.6685625
27.5625
19.62583333
37.93420625
40.751475
29.6548125
74.05496667
82.46666667
58.92284375
16.84166667
26.38955
56.12083333
47.052275
27.880125
51.07366667
0
53.32601458
55.42282292
57.14166667
54.1875
59.61666667
59.41666667
36.1001125
34.8601125
58.65096875
65.41851667
49.04875833
48.25
63.375
76.79927083
58.12366667
65.27916667
72.30838333
70.13209167
73.73344583
39.84013125
71.53445208
63.85
70.60833333
70.98936458
64.3875
37.71875
60.76533333
67.5175
68.34913125
60.91199792
73.25833333
49.81871042
58.81037708
60.91839583
41.26597917
75.96513125
56.01878958
44.27058125
6.4629375
45.75617708
69.89225
62.343375
72.06482292
54.33117708
68.0260625
79.03333333
72.85833333
46.75
49.49627083
79.30410417
47.8129375
61.90644375
19.5379375
53.65164583
50.83242083
46.82366667
47.925
Stage 3 total w/ match increase
0
27.8997
61.29304167
74.205725
64.9465125
25.9645
40.84495833
80.9551625
37.88933333
69.44166667
57.12829167
44.32120417
27.001625
23.625
17.84833333
38.5864625
37.71555
28.204125
71.32806667
79.21666667
59.8124375
18.59166667
25.8339
54.43333333
46.40195
31.39725
49.67266667
0
51.64134583
53.78622917
56.89166667
52.875
57.74166667
56.79166667
34.871525
33.451525
56.9686875
63.40396667
48.11798333
46
63.25
74.65770833
61.47266667
62.96666667
70.45123333
68.70131667
72.25485833
35.9701125
70.15572083
60.6
67.98333333
69.67064583
60.25
36.1875
61.36433333
70.74
70.9421125
61.57337917
71.75833333
48.78270417
57.77437083
61.71695833
40.07679167
73.8451125
55.34229583
42.6462125
5.825375
48.14577083
74.0505
63.86575
71.62222917
56.47077083
72.136625
76.53333333
70.48333333
45
53.60870833
78.83804167
50.175375
59.0662375
19.900375
56.39545833
48.22540833
46.42266667
44.175
Application Number
898
897
896
895
894
893
892
891
890
889
888
887
886
885
884
883
882
881
880
879
878
877
876
875
874
873
872
871
870
869
868
867
866
865
864
863
862
861
860
859
858
857
856
855
854
853
852
851
850
849
848
847
846
845
844
843
842
841
840
839
838
837
836
835
834
833
832
831
830
829
828
827
826
825
824
823
822
821
820
819
818
817
816
815
814
813
812
811
810
809
808
807
806
805
804
803
802
801
800
Application Round
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Stage 3 Score Total
10.5
18.6875
0
20.9375
26.5
33.72916667
50.25
62.20833333
7.25
60.45833333
12.875
73.275
36.875
35.125
22
54.9625
55.21666667
62.0875
31.3125
55.6
36.75
33.8125
68.02916667
69.90416667
50.2125
59.63333333
36.3125
67.90416667
67.40416667
59.675
26.6875
45.75
49.19583333
0
0
39.125
39.4375
12.5
38.0625
33.0625
75.59166667
65.86666667
75.33333333
34.1875
20.6875
44
37.4375
36.3125
36.3125
39.8125
77.75833333
69.07916667
32.8125
40.125
67.41666667
65.91666667
39.4375
37.3125
70.925
67.9
26.575
9.75
71.23333333
48.72083333
56.62916667
5.6875
65.1125
0
37.55
25.625
17.125
24.0625
12.0625
71.8875
33.1875
72.75416667
53.08333333
55.60833333
65.97083333
47.90416667
0
25.125
28.875
8
40.46666667
20.375
15.1875
24.75
16.125
30.50833333
22.75
47.67916667
35.75
20.5
16.1875
70.875
18.125
17
42.94166667
Stage 3 total w/ match increase
13
20.375
0
23.375
24.5
30.29166667
49
57.20833333
9
59.45833333
11.75
76.4
36.75
35.75
23.5
58.65
51.34166667
63.775
27.125
54.225
36.5
33.125
66.71666667
68.46666667
49.275
57.88333333
36.125
66.46666667
65.71666667
59.05
30.375
43
47.50833333
0
0
39.25
39.875
15
37.625
32.625
74.21666667
65.36666667
73.83333333
32.875
21.875
42
36.375
36.125
36.125
39.125
74.75833333
67.39166667
32.125
39.75
66.54166667
61.54166667
39.375
36.625
68.675
68.65
25.7
13
72.23333333
49.03333333
57.56666667
4.875
61.675
0
38.175
25.25
20.75
20.625
13.125
72.7
34.5
72.06666667
49.45833333
55.60833333
65.03333333
52.09166667
0
28.25
32.25
10
39.09166667
24.75
16.375
25.5
17.75
31.88333333
24.5
48.74166667
36
21.5
17.875
74.75
20.75
17.5
44.81666667
Application Number
707
706
705
704
703
702
701
700
699
698
697
696
695
694
693
692
691
690
689
688
687
686
685
684
683
682
681
680
679
678
677
676
675
674
673
672
671
670
669
668
667
666
665
664
663
662
661
660
659
658
657
656
655
654
653
652
651
650
649
648
647
646
645
644
643
642
641
640
639
638
637
636
635
634
633
632
631
630
629
628
627
626
625
624
623
622
621
620
619
618
617
616
615
614
613
612
611
610
609
608
607
606
605
604
603
602
601
600
Application Round
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Stage 3 Score Total
29.95833333
29.69166667
54.475
28.625
29.59375
28.625
15.28125
37.40625
21.6875
29.1875
36
18.71875
61.35208333
9
57.42083333
56.65208333
19.90625
42.33125
41.98958333
62.60416667
76.55416667
63.72916667
59.9
47.925
19.71875
60.9625
61.03958333
68.96666667
53.9
45.90833333
21.6875
38.39791667
68.12916667
52.27708333
56.77083333
63.06875
13.1875
68.64583333
49.12916667
73.65208333
56.85833333
31.1875
68.36041667
56.15833333
22.1875
10.1875
18.71875
46.78541667
29.1875
61.23541667
50.87916667
35.41666667
25.61666667
75.08333333
68.79791667
60.29375
36
50.6875
39.62916667
56.65625
51.43541667
52.92291667
58.79583333
66.76666667
54.15625
50.81041667
53.17083333
50.17916667
56.25416667
21.09375
58.02291667
71.6375
52.19166667
31.9375
31.46875
27.8
41.59375
39.26666667
51.39791667
30.59375
46.63333333
29.3125
31.65833333
30.525
40.63125
44.46875
49.74375
56.61666667
22.15625
66.05208333
29.59375
63.68333333
58.51041667
34.75
38.72916667
36.72916667
36.99583333
38.3375
53.52083333
58.61041667
57.975
30.575
57.89791667
68.26458333
26.675
24.28125
20.1875
35.78125
Stage 3 total w/ match increase
33.5476190442857
33.2809523842857
58.397619047619
30.0595238095238
30.8898809523809
29.0595238095238
17.860119047619
39.4910714285714
18.875
30.0654761904762
35.4285714285714
22.0446428571429
63.7017857109524
12
61.85833333
57.9839285680952
23.5386904761905
45.910119047619
45.7589285680952
65.0000000033333
80.3369047652381
65.8511904795238
59.8880952380952
48.3595238095238
24.0446428571429
61.5964285714286
63.1363095204762
68.7583333366667
53.2630952380952
46.2535714252381
18.875
41.6434523842857
73.2452380985714
58.2696428538095
55.6488095204762
67.239880952381
11.3035714285714
71.0952380919048
48.9833333366667
73.0851190442857
58.1202380919048
36.9702380952381
69.656547622381
57.5035714252381
24.9702380952381
9.97023809523809
21.3779761904762
52.7779761938095
34.3035714285714
59.3886904795238
50.9833333366667
39.6726190509524
25.2059523842857
79.4404761871429
74.781547622381
65.9529761904762
40.1428571428571
50.7857142857143
39.4119047652381
56.6041666666667
51.8446428604762
52.8172619080952
60.1440476157143
66.6476190509524
54.0327380952381
50.6601190509524
53.6916666633333
50.1761904795238
55.7869047652381
18.5565476190476
54.92916667
73.3190476190476
56.0726190509524
35.7202380952381
33.4017857142857
26.0857142857143
45.8898809523809
42.6535714319048
54.631547622381
33.3184523809524
50.3535714252381
30.6488095238095
33.0452380919048
33.2690476190476
42.2101190476191
45.3244047619048
52.3017857142857
62.8547619080952
25.6101190476191
69.9077380919048
30.8898809523809
69.5999999966667
60.8363095271428
34.3095238095238
41.7261904795238
39.7261904795238
39.9928571395238
41.0011904761905
56.5178571395238
56.0970238128571
56.7369047619048
32.4916666666667
63.0184523842857
70.5339285680952
26.2642857142857
21.0982142857143
22.9702380952381
38.0505952380952
Application Number
523
522
521
520
519
518
517
516
515
514
513
512
511
510
509
508
507
506
505
504
503
502
501
500
499
498
497
496
495
494
493
492
491
490
489
488
487
486
485
484
483
482
481
480
479
478
477
476
475
474
473
472
471
470
469
468
467
466
465
464
463
462
461
460
459
458
457
456
455
454
453
452
451
450
449
448
447
446
445
444
443
442
441
440
439
438
437
436
435
434
433
432
431
430
429
428
427
426
425
424
423
422
421
420
419
418
417
416
415
414
413
412
411
410
409
408
407
406
405
404
403
402
401
400
Application Round
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Stage 3 Score Total
51.9875
27.40625
7.28125
28.00416667
78.68541667
72.325
13.1875
55.37708333
52.52916667
52.37291667
54.92083333
63.81458333
50.40625
30.87083333
23.25
41.54375
53.73958333
45.75
23.69375
34.725
71.79166667
54.46041667
31.77916667
48.7375
4
48.225
26.59375
32.62083333
40.92916667
60.4875
46.46458333
18.28125
39.26041667
18.34375
0
30.28125
27.1875
47.3
29.17916667
56.0875
36.40625
4.71875
57.89375
53.9625
36.15625
45.29791667
63.82708333
64.35833333
46.37291667
27.625
38.33541667
18.28125
17.71875
60.93541667
64.18541667
30.03541667
32.34166667
62.95833333
25
35.78125
35.16875
68.1375
9
24.52083333
34.35833333
54.22083333
45.01666667
26.25
66.94375
38
65.8125
46.10416667
39.87291667
26.28333333
36.90833333
64.04166667
58.85208333
51.86041667
64.60833333
13
52.82708333
45.12916667
45.16666667
61.66041667
60.46458333
72.61458333
54.88333333
34.0625
69.16041667
42.45416667
20.28125
20.28125
18.5
30.57916667
19.25
37.59375
44.20208333
49.225
56.66666667
52.37083333
52.78333333
16.25
57.84166667
7.125
22.125
49.15833333
20.125
21.19166667
23.725
36.89583333
38.92083333
36.39583333
25.71875
60.55625
50.63541667
45.46041667
80.70208333
50.75833333
53.225
60.28541667
5.25
29.025
69.74791667
35.63333333
Stage 3 total w/ match increase
50.1035714285714
31.1101190476191
6.52678571428571
26.1202380985714
79.5946428604762
76.2535714285714
11.3035714285714
56.9827380919048
52.3833333366667
52.2672619080952
55.6440476157143
63.2446428538095
50.3541666666667
28.5404761871429
27.8333333333333
47.2029761904762
50.5565476157143
48.3571428571429
23.0196428571429
37.4809523809524
73.7380952414286
60.1196428604762
29.8952380985714
53.5202380952381
4
45.5464285714286
27.5565476190476
31.7369047585714
39.0452380985714
64.925
50.043452377619
21.8601190476191
41.2529761938095
16.2946428571429
0
35.7172619047619
28.0654761904762
49.0678571428571
27.2952380985714
56.9654761904762
38.8244047619048
4.04464285714286
58.8565476190476
56.7452380952381
40.7529761904762
50.6148809557143
69.4863095204762
65.7273809490476
49.951785717619
28.7261904761905
41.9946428604762
21.8601190476191
21.3779761904762
62.826785717619
66.076785717619
28.0398809557143
31.59166667
65.6488095204762
21.4285714285714
38.0505952380952
33.6196428571429
69.9202380952381
12
23.95833333
32.2869047585714
60.0035714252381
50.26666667
31.8333333333333
69.335119047619
42.8095238095238
71.25
50.2202380985714
42.1184523842857
25.8726190442857
39.4976190442857
66.6547619080952
61.2017857109524
53.1922619080952
67.2154761871429
17.3333333333333
55.3017857109524
47.9119047652381
48.5535714319048
64.3851190509524
64.2517857109524
77.5446428538095
58.6035714252381
31.2142857142857
73.7601190509524
46.2369047652381
24.0505952380952
24.5267857142857
22.0476190476191
28.6952380985714
23.1666666666667
36.0267857142857
41.6886904728571
45.7785714285714
62.9047619080952
52.135714282381
56.3666666633333
18.1666666666667
61.4250000033333
6.53571428571429
26.8690476190476
53.5690476157143
24.2023809523809
20.6023809557143
22.975
40.2261904728571
42.2511904728571
39.7261904728571
31.0446428571429
65.6767857142857
54.8065476223809
46.3160714319048
85.5577380919048
51.0202380919048
56.8142857142857
60.1053571461905
4.5
30.6083333333333
75.731547622381
34.88333333
Application Number
321
320
319
318
317
316
315
314
313
312
311
310
309
308
307
306
305
304
303
302
301
300
299
298
297
296
295
294
293
292
291
290
289
288
287
286
285
284
283
282
281
280
279
278
277
276
275
274
273
272
271
270
269
268
267
266
265
264
263
262
261
260
259
258
257
256
255
254
253
252
251
250
249
248
246
245
244
243
242
241
240
239
238
237
236
235
234
233
232
231
230
229
228
227
226
225
224
223
222
221
220
219
218
217
216
215
214
213
212
211
210
209
208
207
206
205
204
202
Application Round
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Stage 3 Score Total
82.774583334
69.100000004
74.60833333
68.8925
52.882083337
73.866666667
67.441249996
59.999166667
65.158749997
62.52458333
58.197916663
54.92708333
60.853333336
59.20833333
64.185833337
42.592916667
74.39166667
75.13333333
33.032916663
47.90208333
53.78541667
51.634583334
47.065833333
53.341666663
72.1725
52.528333337
72.366666664
77.24041667
62.845833337
50.97583333
56.9325
50.334583333
49.41708333
32.183750003
58.067916663
52.785833334
55.652499997
49.9125
78.566666664
62.883333336
59.058333336
59.650000003
72.970833337
73.38541667
48.809166667
59.783333336
67.269999997
37.60583333
73.600833334
61.334583336
60.26958333
53.03625
68.906666663
41.450416666
51.333333333
61.845416667
79.928333336
46.778750003
58.005833337
61.25041667
Stage 3 total w/ match increase
-4.05642857142857
-2.58107142857143
-0.662678571428571
-3.35892857142857
87.178214286381
68.3619047659048
75.8166666633333
71.3030952380952
-0.92625
-2.63839285714286
-3.04982142857143
59.4036904798571
-3.19928571428571
-0.92625
74.2476190479524
70.1782142817143
65.099285714619
-0.461785714285714
67.9694047589048
65.5924999966667
58.8553571391905
55.5041666633333
61.2980952407619
59.9595238061905
64.5116666703333
-0.680892857142857
-0.680892857142857
46.0320238098571
76.3738095271429
76.8476190442857
-3.25607142857143
-2.76375
32.3520238058571
-3.42857142857143
45.2636904728571
-3.99214285714286
-0.92625
58.1875000033333
-0.910714285714286
58.5582142863809
-3.04982142857143
-3.21428571428571
43.3040476187143
54.0499999963333
73.8907142857143
57.9004761941429
-0.92625
-4.07142857142857
76.914285711619
-3.21428571428571
81.3298809557143
-0.92625
-0.92625
-0.92625
-0.910714285714286
-4.01785714285714
63.2821428608095
51.7935714252381
-2.33035714285714
62.3659523809524
-4.18125
51.2867857139524
-2.49964285714286
47.7194047585714
-0.680892857142857
-0.910714285714286
31.257500003
63.3248809487143
-0.92625
-3.21964285714286
-1.73035714285714
-2.13214285714286
49.9926190482857
52.8592857112857
48.1821428571429
80.2809523782857
64.4857142883809
61.2071428598095
-2.51785714285714
-0.92625
-0.910714285714286
-0.478392857142857
60.6380952410952
-3.06
75.1702380989048
78.45416667
-0.680892857142857
-4.15125
54.2554761908095
62.533333336
-0.92625
-0.743035714285714
-0.563571428571429
-0.563571428571429
70.0933333303333
37.0669047585714
-1.23321428571429
76.4102380959048
68.9248809550476
-3.28178571428571
-0.478392857142857
-1.71428571428571
62.2310714252381
55.6644047619048
0
75.5533333296667
-0.560892857142857
43.8574999993333
53.4523809520476
66.4627380955714
84.395714288381
49.3960714315714
-3.23839285714286
-0.662678571428571
64.1335714322381
66.2194047652381
-1.22035714285714
-0.627857142857143
Application Number
122
121
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
101
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
86
85
84
83
82
81
79
78
77
76
75
74
73
72
71
70
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
61
60
59
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Application Round
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Stage 3 Score Total
73.02833333
42.31333333
63.86125
72.658333337
64.446666664
42.346666667
71.783333337
59.25041667
59.513333336
68.91208333
65.306666667
60.84666667
56.334583333
43.71333333
64.13458333
71.54791667
72.4
46.86666667
62.881250003
52.160416667
62.71875
71.766666663
31.027916667
53.412916663
64.848333336
65.628333336
67.233333336
55.330416666
62.372500003
60.378750003
56.883750003
61.475416663
69.014583336
58.28
75.771249997
67.355
71.37916667
81.22583333
62.409166667
75.316249997
82.566666663
65.647916667
62.081249997
77.425000003
63.713333336
65.817083337
60.729999997
71.53541667
51.87958333
61.08375
46.05083333
61.565833333
54.7325
63.9125
62.049583337
63.305833337
39.120416666
60.734583334
63.065833337
64.71708333
67.7925
74.505833337
65.25083333
70.036249997
83.941666667
76.436250003
78.069583336
57.039166663
63.37666667
56.746250003
65.264999997
70.75875
51.910416666
61.775833337
35.117499997
38.425000003
Stage 3 total w/ match increase
76.1623809490476
-4.28571428571429
-3.21428571428571
41.17333333
70.2810714285714
77.0452380989048
70.306666664
44.5400000003333
76.4380952417619
64.2194047652381
64.7066666693333
74.5294047585714
70.9533333336667
67.70666667
-0.538928571428571
63.9248809520476
44.9066666633333
-4.15125
-2.91053571428571
71.7248809490476
-0.549107142857143
0
-4.15125
77.57916667
74.1857142857143
45.0571428604762
70.1553571458571
60.0089285717619
67.1208333333333
70.814285710619
-1.93125
30.4477380955714
-2.14285714285714
-2.14285714285714
61.0824999963333
65.903333336
66.5719047645714
67.9476190502857
56.3546428564762
64.905000003
63.1294047649048
60.1336904791905
64.1360714249048
76.2886904788571
-3.19928571428571
63.14
-2.89285714285714
78.1182142827143
69.9757142857143
74.0202380985714
84.3030952347619
64.2269047622381
79.5377380922381
87.2761904725238
72.9220238098572
63.2982142827143
5.44630952380952
83.2928571458571
70.573333336
69.7860714322381
-0.484821428571429
62.9257142827143
75.2303571461905
58.8824999966667
64.3860714285714
48.4959523776191
-0.606428571428571
-0.66375
-0.725892857142857
65.9992857139524
58.4992857142857
60.5535714285714
-1.14
67.3901190512857
69.1002380989048
-2.14285714285714
36.5698809517143
66.3248809530476
66.8326190512857
-2.14285714285714
69.6241666633333
72.2030952380952
78.890714289381
-3.28178571428571
70.6959523776191
75.9977380922381
-1.23321428571429
-2.63839285714286
88.716666667
82.7310714315714
84.6977380979048
60.8335714249048
-2.19535714285714
-1.90821428571429
-1.14
-0.552857142857143
63.0371428604762
53.982500003
-0.538928571428571
-0.590892857142857
69.1985714255714
66.9836904761905
55.3184523802857
-0.552857142857143
-1.90821428571429
68.8888095274762
-0.92625
-0.680892857142857
-0.478392857142857
34.2292857112857
38.502380955381