1. 2017 BIA Providers Conference

2. Denali Commission – An independent Federal Agency
Created in 1998 – Denali Commission Act
Identify gaps where others are not operating
Complement, but not duplicate the work of others
The Denali Commission was created as a coordinating agency to bring the infrastructure in rural Alaska to standards of the rest of America.
The Commission is modeled after regional commissions in the lower 48. The Denali Commission is unique in many ways, foremost is that we serve 1 state. The Commission is comprised of seven Commissioners including a federal co-chair and a state co-chair.
The intent of the Denali Commission was to create a federal agency seemingly unlike other bureaucracies of the day – build an organization that was, above all, committed to coordination and convening. And within that framework, bring infrastructure to rural Alaska that had become standard throughout the rest of America.

3. Typical Commission Investments
Half of all projects and investments have been for energy.
Over $1.1 Billion in capital investments to projects

4. Historic Programming
Energy – bulk fuel, power generation, transmission
Health facilities – primary care clinics
Transportation – roads, waterfront
Sanitation – washeterias, solid waste
Housing – senior, teacher, domestic violence shelters
Training
Economic Development

5. Denali Commission’s Energy Program
Types of projects funded:
Bulk Fuel Storage
Rural Power System Upgrades (RPSU)
Distribution/Interties
Energy Cost Reduction Projects
Renewable, Alternative and Emerging Energy Technologies
Primary Program Partners:
Alaska Energy Authority
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium
Alaska Center for Energy & Power
Cold Climates Housing Research Center
Pilot Point RPSU
Buckland Bulk Fuel

6. Denali Commission’s Bulk Fuel Program
145 fuel storage facilities in 110 communities built over 18 years
Approximately $225 million of Commission funding spent
Projects originally prioritized based on condition list
Priority list updated in 2015
First Program established by the Commission
In 1998 virtually every tank farm in rural Alaska needed significant upgrades to be code-compliant
Letter report – Upgrade alternative selection – Design – Construction
Since Letter Reports
5 projects under design

7. Denali Commission’s Remote Power System Program
Nearly 100 projects since 1999
Approximately $240 million of Commission funding spent
Priority lists developed with partners
Power plants, interties, renewable energy, microgrids
Energy efficiency
AEA and AVEC primary partners for RPSU
ANTHC primary partner for Energy Efficiency
Emmonak Power Plant

8. Denali Commission’s Energy Program
Strategic Goals & Objectives:
Facilities Management: Invest in projects and initiatives that maintain, sustain, and protect existing rural infrastructure.
Energy: Continue to invest in projects and initiatives that improve the affordability, safety, and/or reliability of fuel storage, the production and storage of energy, electrical distribution systems, and heating the built environment.
Looking to the Future the Commission recently developed and published a Strategic Plan for FY 2018 – 2022
The plan has several goals and objectives here are two that are directly pertinent to the Energy program.
Invest in both capital and non-capital projects/initiatives that include data collection, energy planning, maintenance & improvement, and training.

9. As Funding Declines, Now What?
Funding for the Commission’s Programs has gone from a high of $140 million annually to about $20 million. This chart shows the annual funding amounts.
But our funding as decreased
From $140M in FY2006 to $19.6M for FY2017
$1.7M for Bulk Fuel
$7M for Energy Projects/Initiatives

10. Remaining Unmet Need
Power System Upgrades: $200 million (AEA)
Bulk Fuel Storage Upgrades: $170 million (AEA)
Electric Interties for Close Pair Villages: $250M (AVEC)
Main takeaway: There is still considerable need in rural Alaska communities for improved energy facilities.
Despite reduced funding tremendous need remains.

11. Difficulties Facing Energy Facilities
Operation and maintenance of existing facilities
Training for operators
Utility administration
Inactive and abandoned tank farms
Genset Emission Requirements
So far, we’ve focused on the physical problems these facilities are facing. Many of them are upwards of 30 or 40 years old and so that is to be expected in many ways.
The slide outlines some of the other problems that energy facilities operators/administrators are dealing with.
Regular operations and maintenance. Even as facilities age, they can be kept safe and functional with good operation. Making sure not to overfull tanks, following correct procedure for fuel delivery, keeping the workplace clean and safe, noting whether a liner appears to be holding water after it rains.
Training for operators. AVTEC does offer a two-week training course twice a year in Seward. The tank farm only needs to cover transportation costs to Seward to pay for this. It is a great program- very informative, but somewhat limited by the fact that it is in Seward, not in the operators’ communities.
Administration. Important that tank farm owners are setting aside money to pay for longer term repairs. As we’ve discussed- there are limited government funds available at this point, and so it is all the more important that communities are saving on their own. There is currently no tank farm specific training for administrators, although there are more general programs out there. Some specific topics like price setting might not be covered in those, however.
Inactive tanks. Many communities, as you know, have old tanks that are no longer in use. These tank present environmental and safety threats to a community and it can be expensive to remove them. RAFS provides this service at the cost of about $4,500 a tank, depending on capacity.
Climate change and erosion. In addition to all these factors, climate change and erosion can present problems for tank farms, especially older ones that were built without taking such concerns into consideration.
Tank farm operators participating in an AVTEC training in Seward

12. New Approaches to Funding
“Life-extension” projects as opposed to full replacements
So in light of these problems, where does the Commission spend it’s money in order to maximize impact and encourage sustainability?
One option- invest in smaller, “life-extension” projects, designed to extend a facility’s life for years at far less cost.
In these photos, the Commission partnered with AVEC to refurbish the tanks in Scammon Bay for a cost of about $900,000, rather than the several million dollars a full replacement would have cost.
Generally, these projects involve inspecting, cleaning and painting tanks, installing or fixing secondary containment, and installing safety features like fences and lighting.
Lets the Commission assist more communities. Projects would be between $500k and $1M approximately, depending on size, as opposed to several million.

13. Facilities Management Approach
Neglecting maintenance and operator training (red line) = failure before a properly maintained facility (green line)
Condition
Increase investments in Sustainability to include training, maintenance and improvement projects.
Promote preventative maintenance practices and inform owner/operators on how they can pay for these services.
The economic life cycle graph on the right shows how, in general, neglecting maintenance and operator training (red line) can cause a facility to fail well before a properly maintained facility (green line).
Time

14. Maintenance and Improvement (M&I)
Maintain, Sustain, Protect
Operator Training
Circuit Rider Program
DERA Program
Small M&I Projects
Another area the Commission is investing is on small maintenance and improvement and administrative O&M projects such as those listed here.
These are small fixes that are designed to make the facility safer, although not necessarily code-compliant.
AVEC has repaired tank farm fences in 5 communities.

15. Collaboration with Partners
Partner with the Alaska Energy Authority to provide local, one-on-one training to tank farm operators and power plant operator training
Partner with the State of Alaska Division of Community and Regional Affairs to expand the RUBA program to assist tank farm administrators and to add bulk fuel farm information to Community On-line database
Partner with the Alaska Community Foundation to make it simpler and more affordable for tank farm owners to save money to fund repairs to their own facilities
Partner with RAFS to provide bulk fuel farm operations assistance.

16. QUESTIONS?
Contact Information:
Tom Wolf:

17. •