Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA

Expand Messages
  • Matt Tritt
    Even though Heather is essentially correct, this program was so heavily bombarded with requests last time it came around that only the most tenacious and
    Message 1 of 10 , Mar 30, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Even though Heather is essentially correct, this program was so heavily
      bombarded with requests last time it came around that only the most
      tenacious and motivated applicants even had a shot at getting any
      funding. It doesn't apply to R&D equipment either, only approved systems
      will be eligible for submittal - or am I wrong Heather?

      Matt Tritt

      Donald A Plisco wrote:

      >
      > This bureaucratese needs to be translated....In simple English: How
      > does this slush money effect the average list member here?
      >
      > Don in Tulsa.
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver
      > To: awea-smallwind@yahoogroups.com ;
      > awea-small-turbine@yahoogroups.com ; awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 11:09 AM
      > Subject: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > >From: "Alexandra Morel" <amorel@...>
      > >Subject: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
      > >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:27:03 -0500
      > >
      > >NEWS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND
      > >ENERGY STUDY INSTITUTE
      > >
      > >122 C Street, N.W., Suite 630 < Washington, D.C., 20001 <
      > 202-628-1400 <
      > >www.eesi.org
      > >
      > >For Immediate
      > >Release
      > >For more information contact:
      > >March 29,
      > >2005
      > >Alexandra Morel, 202.662.1885
      > >
      > ><mailto:amorel@...>amorel@...
      > >
      > >USDA Releases FY05 Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for Renewable
      > >Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency Program
      > >
      > >USDA and NREL will host informational webcast, April 7
      > >(see below)
      > >On March 28, the USDA's Office of Rural Development released a
      > >solicitation of proposals for the Renewable Energy Systems and Energy
      > >Efficiency Improvements Program (Section 9006) authorized under
      > Title IX,
      > >of the 2002 Farm Bill.
      > >
      > >This year's NOFA makes $22.8 million available in competitive grant
      > funds
      > >for the purchase of renewable energy systems and energy efficiency
      > >improvements: $11.4 million will be set aside until August 31,
      > 2005 to be
      > >made available for guaranteed loans; after August 31 all non-obligated
      > >funds will be awarded through the competitive grant process.
      > Applications
      > >must be completed and submitted to the appropriate USDA State Rural
      > >Development Office postmarked no later than June 28, 2005, 90 days
      > after
      > >the publication of the Federal Register Notice on March 28. Grant
      > awards
      > >will be announced by September 30, 2005.
      > >
      > >Eligibility for grant applications is limited to agricultural
      > producers
      > >and rural small businesses. Grant awards will not exceed 25
      > percent of
      > >the eligible project costs. Of the 75 percent of project costs
      > applicants
      > >are expected to provide, 10 percent can be provided by third party
      > >"in-kind" contributions; however, applicant "in-kind" or other Federal
      > >grant awards will not be eligible.
      > >
      > >Due to the need for additional time to develop the program's final
      > rule,
      > >the Office of Rural Development has opted to issue a NOFA in order to
      > >provide ample time for grant applicants. USDA intends to post a final
      > >rule later this fiscal year that will provide guidance on the loan
      > >guarantee and grant programs.
      >
      > ><http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05navigate.htm>Click
      >
      > >here to view NOFA of the Renewable Energy Systems and
      >
      > ><http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05navigate.htm>Energy
      >
      > >Efficiency Improvements Program.
      > >Contact your State USDA Offices and State Energy Offices regarding
      > >potential assistance in developing applications or answering
      > questions.
      >
      > ><http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05addresses.htm>Click
      >
      > > here for list of contacts.
      > >
      >
      > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      > >
      > >Grant amounts
      > >
      > >. Awards for renewable energy systems will be between $2,500 and
      > $500,000.
      > >. Awards for energy efficiency improvements will be between $2,500 and
      > >$250,000.
      > >. The maximum grant award for an applicant of Renewable Energy
      > Systems and
      > >Energy Efficiency Improvements is $750,000.
      > >
      > >Evaluation Criteria
      > >. Renewable energy technologies being considered include: solar, wind,
      > >geothermal, biomass, and hydrogen (only if produced from renewable
      > sources).
      > >
      > >. Renewable energy proposals will be given priority based on the
      > quantity
      > >of energy to be replaced on-site (15 points for replacement of greater
      > >than 50 percent) or to be generated (10 points); if the anticipated
      > public
      > >health and sanitary benefits of the project will exceed applicable
      > >standards by at least 5 percent (2-5 points); if the system to be
      > used is
      > >commercially available, replicable, and provided with a 5 year
      > warranty
      > >(5-10 points); if the applicant can provided written commitments
      > for up to
      > >100 percent of the matching funds (5-15 points); and if the project
      > can
      > >return the cost of investment in at least 11years (1-5 points).
      > >
      > >. Energy efficiency improvements proposals will be given priority
      > based on
      > >anticipated energy savings preference will be given to projects that
      > >realize at least a 20 percent savings in energy (5-15 points).
      > >
      > >.Applications will receive a technical merit score for the first
      > time that
      > >will be maintained during the final stage of review. Criteria will
      > >include: qualifications of the project team, energy/resource
      > assessments,
      > >design and engineering, project development schedule, financial
      > >feasibility, etc.
      > >
      > >. Additional points will be awarded to small agricultural producers
      > with a
      > >gross market value of less than $1 million (5 points), less than
      > $600,000
      > >(10 points), and less than $200,000 (15 points).
      > >
      > >Eligibility
      > > . The applicant must also have demonstrated financial need and in
      > the
      > > case of a rural small business, the business headquarters must be
      > in a
      > > rural area. The applicant must control at least 51 percent of the
      > system
      > > and be managing the operation of the proposed project. Grant funds
      > are
      > > not for research and development; they will only be used for
      > commercial
      > > or pre-commercial technology.
      > >
      > > . The applicant will be responsible for performing a National
      > > Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)* review taking into account
      > environmental
      > > issues and safety concerns with emphasis on land use, air quality,
      > water
      > > quality, noise pollution, soil degradation, wildlife, habitat
      > > fragmentation, aesthetics, odor, and other construction and
      > installation
      > > issues applicable to this type of technology. The environmental
      > review
      > > must be completed with enough time for funds to be obligated by
      > September
      > > 30, 2005.
      > >
      > >
      > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Webcast~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      > >
      > >USDA and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory will be holding
      > an open,
      > >informational webcast on the 2005 NOFA on Thursday, April 7, 2005
      > at 3:00
      > >p.m. (Eastern Time).
      > >Webcast access information is provided below.
      > >
      > >AUDIO PARTICIPANT ACCESS
      > >
      > > CALL DATE: April 7, 2005 (Thursday)
      > > CALL TIME: 3 PM ET
      > > DURATION: 1 hr 30 min
      > > LEADER: Ms. Terri Walters
      > >
      > > USA Toll Free Number: 888-566-5773
      > > PASSCODE: 9006
      > >
      > > For security reasons, the passcode and the leader's
      > name will
      > > be required to join your call.
      > >
      > >NET CONFERENCING PARTICIPANT ACCESS INFORMATION
      > >
      > > URL:
      > >
      > <https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/>https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/
      > > CONFERENCE NUMBER: PG5446315
      > > AUDIENCE PASSCODE: 9006
      > >
      > > If you are a repeat user, you can join the event
      > directly at:
      > >
      > ><https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c
      > <https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c>>https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c
      > <https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c>
      > >
      > >
      > >Alexandra Morel
      > >Program Assistant
      > >Environmental and Energy Study Institute
      > >122 'C' Street, NW
      > >Washington DC, 20007
      > >(202) 662-1885
      > >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ==========================================================
      > THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE HOME ENERGY LIST.
      > ----------------------------------------------------------
      > . Please feel free to send your input to:
      > awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com
      > . Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
      > awea-wind-home-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > .. To view previous messages from the list,
      > subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
      > or stop receiving the list by e-mail
      > (and read it on the Web), go to
      > http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/awea-wind-home .
      > . An FAQ on small wind systems is located at
      > http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/klemen .
      > . This e-mail discussion list is managed by
      > the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA):
      > http://www.awea.org . AWEA maintains the Home
      > Energy list as an "open discussion space" for
      > those wishing to learn more about home energy
      > systems, and takes no responsibility for the
      > opinions or technical advice provided on the
      > list.
      > ----------------------------------------------------------
      > ical advice provided on the
      > list.
      > ----------------------------------------------------------
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      > ADVERTISEMENT
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/awea-wind-home/
      >
      > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > awea-wind-home-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
      > Service.
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ==========================================================
      > THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE HOME ENERGY LIST.
      > ----------------------------------------------------------
      > . Please feel free to send your input to:
      > awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com
      > . Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
      > awea-wind-home-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > .. To view previous messages from the list,
      > subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
      > or stop receiving the list by e-mail
      > (and read it on the Web), go to
      > http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/awea-wind-home .
      > . An FAQ on small wind systems is located at
      > http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/klemen .
      > . This e-mail discussion list is managed by
      > the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA):
      > http://www.awea.org . AWEA maintains the Home
      > Energy list as an "open discussion space" for
      > those wishing to learn more about home energy
      > systems, and takes no responsibility for the
      > opinions or technical advice provided on the
      > list.
      > ----------------------------------------------------------
      > ical advice provided on the
      > list.
      > ----------------------------------------------------------
      >
      >
      >
      > *Yahoo! Groups Sponsor*
      > ADVERTISEMENT
      > click here
      > <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=1294fuim7/M=298184.6018725.7038619.3001176/D=groups/S=1705083269:HM/EXP=1112326872/A=2593423/R=0/SIG=11el9gslf/*http://www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60190075>
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
      >
      > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/awea-wind-home/
      >
      > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > awea-wind-home-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:awea-wind-home-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
      >
      > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
      > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Heather Rhoads-Weaver
      Actually I don t think that very many small wind proposals were submitted the first two years, though it is true that each year the selection is becoming more
      Message 2 of 10 , Mar 30, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Actually I don't think that very many small wind proposals were submitted
        the first two years, though it is true that each year the selection is
        becoming more competitive. For smaller amounts of money if you follow the
        instructions carefully, meet all the requirements and provide all the
        required information, and find that your self-score is strong (check with
        your local USDA rep for the target) then you should have a good shot a
        getting funded. Also it helps to get support letters from members of
        congress and other politicians.

        It is true that R&D is not eligible for funding, but I don't think there is
        an "approved list" for equipment. Both commercial and pre-commercial
        systems are allowed, though a solid 5-year warranty is required.

        These are good questions for Charles - do you want to add anything?

        Thanks,
        Heather

        >At 08:05 PM 3/30/2005, Matt Tritt wrote:
        >>>Even though Heather is essentially correct, this program was so heavily
        >>>bombarded with requests last time it came around that only the most
        >>>tenacious and motivated applicants even had a shot at getting any
        >>>funding. It doesn't apply to R&D equipment either, only approved systems
        >>>will be eligible for submittal - or am I wrong Heather?
        >>>
        >>>Matt Tritt
        >
        >>Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:17:22 -0800
        >>To: "Donald A Plisco" <dplisco@...>
        >>From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver <smallwind@...>
        >>Subject: Re: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
        >>Cc: "awea" <awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com>
        >>
        >>Applications for small wind systems are strongly encouraged - the grants
        >>will reimburse up to 25% of project costs (including hardware) from
        >>$2,500 to $500,000; proposals are due June 28.
        >>
        >>If you are interested in applying feel free to dial-in to next week's
        >>webcast (see info below), or contact your state USDA official listed at
        >>http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05addresses.htm. I
        >>believe that a sample small wind application is available and will look
        >>into posting a link to it on this list.
        >>
        >>Let me know if you have further questions - I have helped assemble two
        >>successful Sec 9006 applications and although there is quite a bit of
        >>paperwork to wade through, the funding is worth it.
        >>
        >>-Heather
        >>smallwind@...
        >
        >Donald A Plisco wrote:
        >
        >>
        >>This bureaucratese needs to be translated....In simple English: How does
        >>this slush money effect the average list member here?
        >>
        >>Don in Tulsa.
        >> ----- Original Message -----
        >> From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver
        >> To: awea-smallwind@yahoogroups.com ;
        >> awea-small-turbine@yahoogroups.com ; awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com
        >> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 11:09 AM
        >> Subject: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> >From: "Alexandra Morel" <amorel@...>
        >> >Subject: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
        >> >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:27:03 -0500
        >> >
        >> >NEWS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND
        >> >ENERGY STUDY INSTITUTE
        >> >
        >> >122 C Street, N.W., Suite 630 < Washington, D.C., 20001 < 202-628-1400 <
        >> >www.eesi.org
        >> >
        >> >For Immediate
        >> >Release
        >> >For more information contact:
        >> >March 29,
        >> >2005
        >> >Alexandra Morel, 202.662.1885
        >> >
        >> ><mailto:amorel@...>amorel@...
        >> >
        >> >USDA Releases FY05 Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for Renewable
        >> >Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency Program
        >> >
        >> >USDA and NREL will host informational webcast, April 7
        >> >(see below)
        >> >On March 28, the USDA's Office of Rural Development released a
        >> >solicitation of proposals for the Renewable Energy Systems and Energy
        >> >Efficiency Improvements Program (Section 9006) authorized under Title IX,
        >> >of the 2002 Farm Bill.
        >> >
        >> >This year's NOFA makes $22.8 million available in competitive grant funds
        >> >for the purchase of renewable energy systems and energy efficiency
        >> >improvements: $11.4 million will be set aside until August 31, 2005
        >> to be
        >> >made available for guaranteed loans; after August 31 all non-obligated
        >> >funds will be awarded through the competitive grant process.
        >>Applications
        >> >must be completed and submitted to the appropriate USDA State Rural
        >> >Development Office postmarked no later than June 28, 2005, 90 days after
        >> >the publication of the Federal Register Notice on March 28. Grant awards
        >> >will be announced by September 30, 2005.
        >> >
        >> >Eligibility for grant applications is limited to agricultural producers
        >> >and rural small businesses. Grant awards will not exceed 25 percent of
        >> >the eligible project costs. Of the 75 percent of project costs
        >> applicants
        >> >are expected to provide, 10 percent can be provided by third party
        >> >"in-kind" contributions; however, applicant "in-kind" or other Federal
        >> >grant awards will not be eligible.
        >> >
        >> >Due to the need for additional time to develop the program's final rule,
        >> >the Office of Rural Development has opted to issue a NOFA in order to
        >> >provide ample time for grant applicants. USDA intends to post a final
        >> >rule later this fiscal year that will provide guidance on the loan
        >> >guarantee and grant programs.
        >>
        >> ><http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05navigate.htm>Click
        >> >here to view NOFA of the Renewable Energy Systems and
        >>
        >> ><http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05navigate.htm>Ene
        >> rgy
        >> >Efficiency Improvements Program.
        >> >Contact your State USDA Offices and State Energy Offices regarding
        >> >potential assistance in developing applications or answering questions.
        >>
        >> ><http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05addresses.htm>Cl
        >> ick
        >> > here for list of contacts.
        >> >
        >>
        >> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        >> ~~~~~
        >> >
        >> >Grant amounts
        >> >
        >> >. Awards for renewable energy systems will be between $2,500 and
        >> $500,000.
        >> >. Awards for energy efficiency improvements will be between $2,500 and
        >> >$250,000.
        >> >. The maximum grant award for an applicant of Renewable Energy
        >> Systems and
        >> >Energy Efficiency Improvements is $750,000.
        >> >
        >> >Evaluation Criteria
        >> >. Renewable energy technologies being considered include: solar, wind,
        >> >geothermal, biomass, and hydrogen (only if produced from renewable
        >> sources).
        >> >
        >> >. Renewable energy proposals will be given priority based on the quantity
        >> >of energy to be replaced on-site (15 points for replacement of greater
        >> >than 50 percent) or to be generated (10 points); if the anticipated
        >> public
        >> >health and sanitary benefits of the project will exceed applicable
        >> >standards by at least 5 percent (2-5 points); if the system to be used is
        >> >commercially available, replicable, and provided with a 5 year warranty
        >> >(5-10 points); if the applicant can provided written commitments for
        >> up to
        >> >100 percent of the matching funds (5-15 points); and if the project can
        >> >return the cost of investment in at least 11years (1-5 points).
        >> >
        >> >. Energy efficiency improvements proposals will be given priority
        >> based on
        >> >anticipated energy savings preference will be given to projects that
        >> >realize at least a 20 percent savings in energy (5-15 points).
        >> >
        >> >.Applications will receive a technical merit score for the first time
        >> that
        >> >will be maintained during the final stage of review. Criteria will
        >> >include: qualifications of the project team, energy/resource assessments,
        >> >design and engineering, project development schedule, financial
        >> >feasibility, etc.
        >> >
        >> >. Additional points will be awarded to small agricultural producers
        >> with a
        >> >gross market value of less than $1 million (5 points), less than $600,000
        >> >(10 points), and less than $200,000 (15 points).
        >> >
        >> >Eligibility
        >> > . The applicant must also have demonstrated financial need and in the
        >> > case of a rural small business, the business headquarters must be in a
        >> > rural area. The applicant must control at least 51 percent of the system
        >> > and be managing the operation of the proposed project. Grant funds are
        >> > not for research and development; they will only be used for commercial
        >> > or pre-commercial technology.
        >> >
        >> > . The applicant will be responsible for performing a National
        >> > Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)* review taking into account
        >> environmental
        >> > issues and safety concerns with emphasis on land use, air quality, water
        >> > quality, noise pollution, soil degradation, wildlife, habitat
        >> > fragmentation, aesthetics, odor, and other construction and installation
        >> > issues applicable to this type of technology. The environmental review
        >> > must be completed with enough time for funds to be obligated by
        >> September
        >> > 30, 2005.
        >> >
        >> >
        >> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Webcast~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        >> >
        >> >USDA and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory will be holding an
        >> open,
        >> >informational webcast on the 2005 NOFA on Thursday, April 7, 2005 at 3:00
        >> >p.m. (Eastern Time).
        >> >Webcast access information is provided below.
        >> >
        >> >AUDIO PARTICIPANT ACCESS
        >> >
        >> > CALL DATE: April 7, 2005 (Thursday)
        >> > CALL TIME: 3 PM ET
        >> > DURATION: 1 hr 30 min
        >> > LEADER: Ms. Terri Walters
        >> >
        >> > USA Toll Free Number: 888-566-5773
        >> > PASSCODE: 9006
        >> >
        >> > For security reasons, the passcode and the leader's name
        >> will
        >> > be required to join your call.
        >> >
        >> >NET CONFERENCING PARTICIPANT ACCESS INFORMATION
        >> >
        >> > URL:
        >> > <https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/>https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/
        >> > CONFERENCE NUMBER: PG5446315
        >> > AUDIENCE PASSCODE: 9006
        >> >
        >> > If you are a repeat user, you can join the event
        >> directly at:
        >> >
        >> ><https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c
        >> <https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c>>https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c
        >> <https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c>
        >> >
        >> >
        >> >Alexandra Morel
        >> >Program Assistant
        >> >Environmental and Energy Study Institute
        >> >122 'C' Street, NW
        >> >Washington DC, 20007
        >> >(202) 662-1885
        >> >
        >>
      • Donald A Plisco
        In my mind, the main benefit of flying a wind gen is to stop pissing away my limited income on fat cat utilities that couldn t care less about me. If it
        Message 3 of 10 , Apr 1 12:02 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          In my mind, the main benefit of flying a wind gen is to stop pissing away my
          limited income on fat cat utilities that couldn't care less about me. If it
          improves the ecology, that's a fringe benefit not worth my time and trouble
          to begin with, but I'll not complain about it if it does...I'm not a deluded
          tree hugger, but a practical person who eyes the bottom line.
          I want a wind generator that is going to actually start paying me back in a
          couple of years, not a couple of decades...if ever. That means it has to
          produce enough electricity from Day One to offset the inflated bank loan, or
          be so inexpensive in the first place to build and install, that I can
          realize my investment and effort quickly.
          Now we have this trumpeted Federal loan/grant program that is supposed to
          help the "little people"....Does this mean if I want to build a small 500
          watt working wind generator from scratch, and put it in the back yard of my
          house in Tulsa, that I would qualify for a loan/grant?
          Or perhaps if I take a broken down 10k Bergy wind gen, rebuild it, and
          install it, would the USDA will assist me in part of the cost?
          Or must I buy some new and overpriced $50,000 UL approved grid tie wind
          generator that will put my children's children in debt, just to fit some
          bureaucratic notions?

          I ask you, would one of Hugh Piggott's homebuilts qualify?

          What is the truth here, instead of the hype and hoopla? And I don't want to
          hear any typical bureaucratic "It all depends....."
          I want plain, honest answers, not cryptic evasion or overamped self
          importance.

          Don in Tulsa

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Newcomb, Charles" <Charles_Newcomb@...>
          To: "Heather Rhoads-Weaver" <smallwind@...>; "Matt Tritt"
          <solarone@...>; "Donald A Plisco" <dplisco@...>
          Cc: "awea" <awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com>; <terri_walters@...>
          Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 10:51 PM
          Subject: RE: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA


          Heather,

          You are correct that there wasn't a flood of small wind applications in
          the first couple of years. I think this lack of participation is in
          large part due to the complexity of the application process (which just
          hasn't seemed worth it for some folks, especially for a grant as small
          as $2,500). However, it is our hope that small projects will continue
          to become involved, taking advantage of the sample application that is
          beginning to circulate. Reports on how much effort is actually required
          to apply varies wildly, so I also wouldn't put too much stock in
          statements about this process being "impossibly difficult".

          I disagree with the statement below that the program's heavy enrollment
          caused eligible projects to be turned away. In actuality, last year
          only five (out of 172 eligible projects) were "turned away" because of a
          shortage of grant funds. However, I do also appreciate the sentiment
          that only the most "tenacious" of folks managed to weather the
          application process. The hope is that when the regulation comes into
          force, the application process for smaller projects will be further
          simplified, easing the strain on the these applicants.

          We should all keep in mind that with the (expected) advent of the
          guaranteed loan program, competition for the grant funds will only
          increase. As we all are now aware, the $'s allocated for grants this
          years is down to $11.4M (with the remainder of the $22.8M allocated to
          the guaranteed loan portion of the program), which is half of what it
          was last year. The expectation is that the guaranteed loan enrollment
          levels will be low this year, with the majority of those funds rolling
          over into the grant pool, but only time will tell.

          Heather, I (in the words of Bob Thresher) violently agree with you that
          if eligible applicants have an eligible project, and they dot their i's
          and cross their t's, they've got a very good shot at getting a small
          system grant, especially in light of the added priority points awarded
          to smaller projects. There are currently no lists of "approved"
          equipment. This approach was not chosen in deference to the recognition
          that maintaining such a list would likely create more work than it would
          save. Instead, the program relies on the expertise of "nationally
          recognized" small wind experts (typically at the National Laboratories)
          to ascertain the technical fitness/feasibility of proposed projects.

          Thanks,

          -Charles

          Charles Newcomb
          NREL/NWTC
          1617 Cole Blvd
          Golden, CO 80401

          -----Original Message-----
          From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver [mailto:smallwind@...]
          Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 11:10 PM
          To: Matt Tritt; Donald A Plisco
          Cc: awea; Newcomb, Charles
          Subject: Re: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA

          Actually I don't think that very many small wind proposals were
          submitted
          the first two years, though it is true that each year the selection is
          becoming more competitive. For smaller amounts of money if you follow
          the
          instructions carefully, meet all the requirements and provide all the
          required information, and find that your self-score is strong (check
          with
          your local USDA rep for the target) then you should have a good shot a
          getting funded. Also it helps to get support letters from members of
          congress and other politicians.

          It is true that R&D is not eligible for funding, but I don't think there
          is
          an "approved list" for equipment. Both commercial and pre-commercial
          systems are allowed, though a solid 5-year warranty is required.

          These are good questions for Charles - do you want to add anything?

          Thanks,
          Heather

          >At 08:05 PM 3/30/2005, Matt Tritt wrote:
          >>>Even though Heather is essentially correct, this program was so
          heavily
          >>>bombarded with requests last time it came around that only the most
          >>>tenacious and motivated applicants even had a shot at getting any
          >>>funding. It doesn't apply to R&D equipment either, only approved
          systems
          >>>will be eligible for submittal - or am I wrong Heather?
          >>>
          >>>Matt Tritt
          >
          >>Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:17:22 -0800
          >>To: "Donald A Plisco" <dplisco@...>
          >>From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver <smallwind@...>
          >>Subject: Re: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
          >>Cc: "awea" <awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com>
          >>
          >>Applications for small wind systems are strongly encouraged - the
          grants
          >>will reimburse up to 25% of project costs (including hardware) from
          >>$2,500 to $500,000; proposals are due June 28.
          >>
          >>If you are interested in applying feel free to dial-in to next week's
          >>webcast (see info below), or contact your state USDA official listed
          at
          >>http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05addresses.htm.
          I
          >>believe that a sample small wind application is available and will
          look
          >>into posting a link to it on this list.
          >>
          >>Let me know if you have further questions - I have helped assemble two

          >>successful Sec 9006 applications and although there is quite a bit of
          >>paperwork to wade through, the funding is worth it.
          >>
          >>-Heather
          >>smallwind@...
          >
          >Donald A Plisco wrote:
          >
          >>
          >>This bureaucratese needs to be translated....In simple English: How
          does
          >>this slush money effect the average list member here?
          >>
          >>Don in Tulsa.
          >> ----- Original Message -----
          >> From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver
          >> To: awea-smallwind@yahoogroups.com ;
          >> awea-small-turbine@yahoogroups.com ; awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com
          >> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 11:09 AM
          >> Subject: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >> >From: "Alexandra Morel" <amorel@...>
          >> >Subject: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
          >> >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:27:03 -0500
          >> >
          >> >NEWS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND
          >> >ENERGY STUDY INSTITUTE
          >> >
          >> >122 C Street, N.W., Suite 630 < Washington, D.C., 20001 <
          202-628-1400 <
          >> >www.eesi.org
          >> >
          >> >For Immediate
          >> >Release
          >> >For more information contact:
          >> >March 29,
          >> >2005
          >> >Alexandra Morel, 202.662.1885
          >> >
          >> ><mailto:amorel@...>amorel@...
          >> >
          >> >USDA Releases FY05 Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for
          Renewable
          >> >Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency Program
          >> >
          >> >USDA and NREL will host informational webcast, April 7
          >> >(see below)
          >> >On March 28, the USDA's Office of Rural Development released a
          >> >solicitation of proposals for the Renewable Energy Systems and
          Energy
          >> >Efficiency Improvements Program (Section 9006) authorized under
          Title IX,
          >> >of the 2002 Farm Bill.
          >> >
          >> >This year's NOFA makes $22.8 million available in competitive
          grant funds
          >> >for the purchase of renewable energy systems and energy efficiency
          >> >improvements: $11.4 million will be set aside until August 31,
          2005
          >> to be
          >> >made available for guaranteed loans; after August 31 all
          non-obligated
          >> >funds will be awarded through the competitive grant process.
          >>Applications
          >> >must be completed and submitted to the appropriate USDA State
          Rural
          >> >Development Office postmarked no later than June 28, 2005, 90 days
          after
          >> >the publication of the Federal Register Notice on March 28. Grant
          awards
          >> >will be announced by September 30, 2005.
          >> >
          >> >Eligibility for grant applications is limited to agricultural
          producers
          >> >and rural small businesses. Grant awards will not exceed 25
          percent of
          >> >the eligible project costs. Of the 75 percent of project costs
          >> applicants
          >> >are expected to provide, 10 percent can be provided by third party
          >> >"in-kind" contributions; however, applicant "in-kind" or other
          Federal
          >> >grant awards will not be eligible.
          >> >
          >> >Due to the need for additional time to develop the program's final
          rule,
          >> >the Office of Rural Development has opted to issue a NOFA in order
          to
          >> >provide ample time for grant applicants. USDA intends to post a
          final
          >> >rule later this fiscal year that will provide guidance on the loan
          >> >guarantee and grant programs.
          >>
          >>
          ><http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05navigate.htm>Cl
          ick
          >> >here to view NOFA of the Renewable Energy Systems and
          >>
          >>
          ><http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05navigate.htm>En
          e
          >> rgy
          >> >Efficiency Improvements Program.
          >> >Contact your State USDA Offices and State Energy Offices regarding
          >> >potential assistance in developing applications or answering
          questions.
          >>
          >>
          ><http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05addresses.htm>C
          l
          >> ick
          >> > here for list of contacts.
          >> >
          >>
          >>
          >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
          ~
          >> ~~~~~
          >> >
          >> >Grant amounts
          >> >
          >> >. Awards for renewable energy systems will be between $2,500 and
          >> $500,000.
          >> >. Awards for energy efficiency improvements will be between $2,500
          and
          >> >$250,000.
          >> >. The maximum grant award for an applicant of Renewable Energy
          >> Systems and
          >> >Energy Efficiency Improvements is $750,000.
          >> >
          >> >Evaluation Criteria
          >> >. Renewable energy technologies being considered include: solar,
          wind,
          >> >geothermal, biomass, and hydrogen (only if produced from renewable

          >> sources).
          >> >
          >> >. Renewable energy proposals will be given priority based on the
          quantity
          >> >of energy to be replaced on-site (15 points for replacement of
          greater
          >> >than 50 percent) or to be generated (10 points); if the
          anticipated
          >> public
          >> >health and sanitary benefits of the project will exceed applicable
          >> >standards by at least 5 percent (2-5 points); if the system to be
          used is
          >> >commercially available, replicable, and provided with a 5 year
          warranty
          >> >(5-10 points); if the applicant can provided written commitments
          for
          >> up to
          >> >100 percent of the matching funds (5-15 points); and if the
          project can
          >> >return the cost of investment in at least 11years (1-5 points).
          >> >
          >> >. Energy efficiency improvements proposals will be given priority
          >> based on
          >> >anticipated energy savings preference will be given to projects
          that
          >> >realize at least a 20 percent savings in energy (5-15 points).
          >> >
          >> >.Applications will receive a technical merit score for the first
          time
          >> that
          >> >will be maintained during the final stage of review. Criteria
          will
          >> >include: qualifications of the project team, energy/resource
          assessments,
          >> >design and engineering, project development schedule, financial
          >> >feasibility, etc.
          >> >
          >> >. Additional points will be awarded to small agricultural
          producers
          >> with a
          >> >gross market value of less than $1 million (5 points), less than
          $600,000
          >> >(10 points), and less than $200,000 (15 points).
          >> >
          >> >Eligibility
          >> > . The applicant must also have demonstrated financial need and
          in the
          >> > case of a rural small business, the business headquarters must be
          in a
          >> > rural area. The applicant must control at least 51 percent of the
          system
          >> > and be managing the operation of the proposed project. Grant
          funds are
          >> > not for research and development; they will only be used for
          commercial
          >> > or pre-commercial technology.
          >> >
          >> > . The applicant will be responsible for performing a National
          >> > Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)* review taking into account
          >> environmental
          >> > issues and safety concerns with emphasis on land use, air
          quality, water
          >> > quality, noise pollution, soil degradation, wildlife, habitat
          >> > fragmentation, aesthetics, odor, and other construction and
          installation
          >> > issues applicable to this type of technology. The environmental
          review
          >> > must be completed with enough time for funds to be obligated by
          >> September
          >> > 30, 2005.
          >> >
          >> >
          >>
          >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Webcast~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
          >> >
          >> >USDA and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory will be holding
          an
          >> open,
          >> >informational webcast on the 2005 NOFA on Thursday, April 7, 2005
          at 3:00
          >> >p.m. (Eastern Time).
          >> >Webcast access information is provided below.
          >> >
          >> >AUDIO PARTICIPANT ACCESS
          >> >
          >> > CALL DATE: April 7, 2005 (Thursday)
          >> > CALL TIME: 3 PM ET
          >> > DURATION: 1 hr 30 min
          >> > LEADER: Ms. Terri Walters
          >> >
          >> > USA Toll Free Number: 888-566-5773
          >> > PASSCODE: 9006
          >> >
          >> > For security reasons, the passcode and the leader's
          name
          >> will
          >> > be required to join your call.
          >> >
          >> >NET CONFERENCING PARTICIPANT ACCESS INFORMATION
          >> >
          >> > URL:
          >> >
          <https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/>https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/
          >> > CONFERENCE NUMBER: PG5446315
          >> > AUDIENCE PASSCODE: 9006
          >> >
          >> > If you are a repeat user, you can join the event
          >> directly at:
          >> >
          >> ><https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c
          >>
          <https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c>>https://
          www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c
          >> <https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c>
          >> >
          >> >
          >> >Alexandra Morel
          >> >Program Assistant
          >> >Environmental and Energy Study Institute
          >> >122 'C' Street, NW
          >> >Washington DC, 20007
          >> >(202) 662-1885
        • Heather Rhoads-Weaver
          The minimum award is $2,500 for 25% of project costs, meaning the minimum project size is $10,000. I would estimate a wind turbine would need to be about 3 kW
          Message 4 of 10 , Apr 1 7:42 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            The minimum award is $2,500 for 25% of project costs, meaning the minimum
            project size is $10,000. I would estimate a wind turbine would need to be
            about 3 kW to be competitive. Please read the program guidelines about what
            costs are eligible for the applicant to perform vs. what needs to be hired
            by the applicant (ie if you want to do the work yourself, you may need to
            find a fiscal host to apply for the grant). I expect that plans for
            remanufactured equipment will be reviewed carefully to ensure the equipment
            will be brought to "as new" standards, and that a firm warranty is provided.

            Please do contact your state USDA contact for detailed questions on turbine
            performance expectations etc. - they may need to forward your questions to
            the national office for a formal response, but that is the best way to be
            sure. Again, here is the link to look up your local program officer:
            http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05addresses.htm

            For Oklahoma it is:

            Jody Harris, USDA Rural Development
            100 USDA, Suite 108
            Stillwater, OK 74074-2654
            (405) 742-1036

            This is one of the few federal funding opportunities for small wind
            turbines, so I encourage anyone interested to look into preparing an
            application. The webcast next week is another good way to learn more about
            the program's requirements.

            Thanks,
            Heather


            At 12:02 AM 4/1/2005, Donald A Plisco wrote:
            >In my mind, the main benefit of flying a wind gen is to stop pissing away my
            >limited income on fat cat utilities that couldn't care less about me. If it
            >improves the ecology, that's a fringe benefit not worth my time and trouble
            >to begin with, but I'll not complain about it if it does...I'm not a deluded
            >tree hugger, but a practical person who eyes the bottom line.
            >I want a wind generator that is going to actually start paying me back in a
            >couple of years, not a couple of decades...if ever. That means it has to
            >produce enough electricity from Day One to offset the inflated bank loan, or
            >be so inexpensive in the first place to build and install, that I can
            >realize my investment and effort quickly.
            >Now we have this trumpeted Federal loan/grant program that is supposed to
            >help the "little people"....Does this mean if I want to build a small 500
            >watt working wind generator from scratch, and put it in the back yard of my
            >house in Tulsa, that I would qualify for a loan/grant?
            >Or perhaps if I take a broken down 10k Bergy wind gen, rebuild it, and
            >install it, would the USDA will assist me in part of the cost?
            >Or must I buy some new and overpriced $50,000 UL approved grid tie wind
            >generator that will put my children's children in debt, just to fit some
            >bureaucratic notions?
            >
            >I ask you, would one of Hugh Piggott's homebuilts qualify?
            >
            >What is the truth here, instead of the hype and hoopla? And I don't want to
            >hear any typical bureaucratic "It all depends....."
            >I want plain, honest answers, not cryptic evasion or overamped self
            >importance.
            >
            >Don in Tulsa
            >
            >----- Original Message -----
            >From: "Newcomb, Charles" <Charles_Newcomb@...>
            >To: "Heather Rhoads-Weaver" <smallwind@...>; "Matt Tritt"
            ><solarone@...>; "Donald A Plisco" <dplisco@...>
            >Cc: "awea" <awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com>; <terri_walters@...>
            >Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 10:51 PM
            >Subject: RE: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
            >
            >
            >Heather,
            >
            >You are correct that there wasn't a flood of small wind applications in
            >the first couple of years. I think this lack of participation is in
            >large part due to the complexity of the application process (which just
            >hasn't seemed worth it for some folks, especially for a grant as small
            >as $2,500). However, it is our hope that small projects will continue
            >to become involved, taking advantage of the sample application that is
            >beginning to circulate. Reports on how much effort is actually required
            >to apply varies wildly, so I also wouldn't put too much stock in
            >statements about this process being "impossibly difficult".
            >
            >I disagree with the statement below that the program's heavy enrollment
            >caused eligible projects to be turned away. In actuality, last year
            >only five (out of 172 eligible projects) were "turned away" because of a
            >shortage of grant funds. However, I do also appreciate the sentiment
            >that only the most "tenacious" of folks managed to weather the
            >application process. The hope is that when the regulation comes into
            >force, the application process for smaller projects will be further
            >simplified, easing the strain on the these applicants.
            >
            >We should all keep in mind that with the (expected) advent of the
            >guaranteed loan program, competition for the grant funds will only
            >increase. As we all are now aware, the $'s allocated for grants this
            >years is down to $11.4M (with the remainder of the $22.8M allocated to
            >the guaranteed loan portion of the program), which is half of what it
            >was last year. The expectation is that the guaranteed loan enrollment
            >levels will be low this year, with the majority of those funds rolling
            >over into the grant pool, but only time will tell.
            >
            >Heather, I (in the words of Bob Thresher) violently agree with you that
            >if eligible applicants have an eligible project, and they dot their i's
            >and cross their t's, they've got a very good shot at getting a small
            >system grant, especially in light of the added priority points awarded
            >to smaller projects. There are currently no lists of "approved"
            >equipment. This approach was not chosen in deference to the recognition
            >that maintaining such a list would likely create more work than it would
            >save. Instead, the program relies on the expertise of "nationally
            >recognized" small wind experts (typically at the National Laboratories)
            >to ascertain the technical fitness/feasibility of proposed projects.
            >
            >Thanks,
            >
            >-Charles
            >
            >Charles Newcomb
            >NREL/NWTC
            >1617 Cole Blvd
            >Golden, CO 80401
            >
            >-----Original Message-----
            >From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver [mailto:smallwind@...]
            >Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 11:10 PM
            >To: Matt Tritt; Donald A Plisco
            >Cc: awea; Newcomb, Charles
            >Subject: Re: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
            >
            >Actually I don't think that very many small wind proposals were
            >submitted
            >the first two years, though it is true that each year the selection is
            >becoming more competitive. For smaller amounts of money if you follow
            >the
            >instructions carefully, meet all the requirements and provide all the
            >required information, and find that your self-score is strong (check
            >with
            >your local USDA rep for the target) then you should have a good shot a
            >getting funded. Also it helps to get support letters from members of
            >congress and other politicians.
            >
            >It is true that R&D is not eligible for funding, but I don't think there
            >is
            >an "approved list" for equipment. Both commercial and pre-commercial
            >systems are allowed, though a solid 5-year warranty is required.
            >
            >These are good questions for Charles - do you want to add anything?
            >
            >Thanks,
            >Heather
            >
            > >At 08:05 PM 3/30/2005, Matt Tritt wrote:
            > >>>Even though Heather is essentially correct, this program was so
            >heavily
            > >>>bombarded with requests last time it came around that only the most
            > >>>tenacious and motivated applicants even had a shot at getting any
            > >>>funding. It doesn't apply to R&D equipment either, only approved
            >systems
            > >>>will be eligible for submittal - or am I wrong Heather?
            > >>>
            > >>>Matt Tritt
            > >
            > >>Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:17:22 -0800
            > >>To: "Donald A Plisco" <dplisco@...>
            > >>From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver <smallwind@...>
            > >>Subject: Re: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
            > >>Cc: "awea" <awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com>
            > >>
            > >>Applications for small wind systems are strongly encouraged - the
            >grants
            > >>will reimburse up to 25% of project costs (including hardware) from
            > >>$2,500 to $500,000; proposals are due June 28.
            > >>
            > >>If you are interested in applying feel free to dial-in to next week's
            > >>webcast (see info below), or contact your state USDA official listed
            >at
            > >>http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05addresses.htm.
            >I
            > >>believe that a sample small wind application is available and will
            >look
            > >>into posting a link to it on this list.
            > >>
            > >>Let me know if you have further questions - I have helped assemble two
            >
            > >>successful Sec 9006 applications and although there is quite a bit of
            > >>paperwork to wade through, the funding is worth it.
            > >>
            > >>-Heather
            > >>smallwind@...
            > >
            > >Donald A Plisco wrote:
            > >
            > >>
            > >>This bureaucratese needs to be translated....In simple English: How
            >does
            > >>this slush money effect the average list member here?
            > >>
            > >>Don in Tulsa.
            > >> ----- Original Message -----
            > >> From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver
            > >> To: awea-smallwind@yahoogroups.com ;
            > >> awea-small-turbine@yahoogroups.com ; awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com
            > >> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 11:09 AM
            > >> Subject: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >> >From: "Alexandra Morel" <amorel@...>
            > >> >Subject: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
            > >> >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:27:03 -0500
            > >> >
            > >> >NEWS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND
            > >> >ENERGY STUDY INSTITUTE
            > >> >
            > >> >122 C Street, N.W., Suite 630 < Washington, D.C., 20001 <
            >202-628-1400 <
            > >> >www.eesi.org
            > >> >
            > >> >For Immediate
            > >> >Release
            > >> >For more information contact:
            > >> >March 29,
            > >> >2005
            > >> >Alexandra Morel, 202.662.1885
            > >> >
            > >> ><mailto:amorel@...>amorel@...
            > >> >
            > >> >USDA Releases FY05 Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for
            >Renewable
            > >> >Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency Program
            > >> >
            > >> >USDA and NREL will host informational webcast, April 7
            > >> >(see below)
            > >> >On March 28, the USDA's Office of Rural Development released a
            > >> >solicitation of proposals for the Renewable Energy Systems and
            >Energy
            > >> >Efficiency Improvements Program (Section 9006) authorized under
            >Title IX,
            > >> >of the 2002 Farm Bill.
            > >> >
            > >> >This year's NOFA makes $22.8 million available in competitive
            >grant funds
            > >> >for the purchase of renewable energy systems and energy efficiency
            > >> >improvements: $11.4 million will be set aside until August 31,
            >2005
            > >> to be
            > >> >made available for guaranteed loans; after August 31 all
            >non-obligated
            > >> >funds will be awarded through the competitive grant process.
            > >>Applications
            > >> >must be completed and submitted to the appropriate USDA State
            >Rural
            > >> >Development Office postmarked no later than June 28, 2005, 90 days
            >after
            > >> >the publication of the Federal Register Notice on March 28. Grant
            >awards
            > >> >will be announced by September 30, 2005.
            > >> >
            > >> >Eligibility for grant applications is limited to agricultural
            >producers
            > >> >and rural small businesses. Grant awards will not exceed 25
            >percent of
            > >> >the eligible project costs. Of the 75 percent of project costs
            > >> applicants
            > >> >are expected to provide, 10 percent can be provided by third party
            > >> >"in-kind" contributions; however, applicant "in-kind" or other
            >Federal
            > >> >grant awards will not be eligible.
            > >> >
            > >> >Due to the need for additional time to develop the program's final
            >rule,
            > >> >the Office of Rural Development has opted to issue a NOFA in order
            >to
            > >> >provide ample time for grant applicants. USDA intends to post a
            >final
            > >> >rule later this fiscal year that will provide guidance on the loan
            > >> >guarantee and grant programs.
            > >>
            > >>
            > ><http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05navigate.htm>Cl
            >ick
            > >> >here to view NOFA of the Renewable Energy Systems and
            > >>
            > >>
            > ><http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05navigate.htm>En
            >e
            > >> rgy
            > >> >Efficiency Improvements Program.
            > >> >Contact your State USDA Offices and State Energy Offices regarding
            > >> >potential assistance in developing applications or answering
            >questions.
            > >>
            > >>
            > ><http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05addresses.htm>C
            >l
            > >> ick
            > >> > here for list of contacts.
            > >> >
            > >>
            > >>
            > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            >~
            > >> ~~~~~
            > >> >
            > >> >Grant amounts
            > >> >
            > >> >. Awards for renewable energy systems will be between $2,500 and
            > >> $500,000.
            > >> >. Awards for energy efficiency improvements will be between $2,500
            >and
            > >> >$250,000.
            > >> >. The maximum grant award for an applicant of Renewable Energy
            > >> Systems and
            > >> >Energy Efficiency Improvements is $750,000.
            > >> >
            > >> >Evaluation Criteria
            > >> >. Renewable energy technologies being considered include: solar,
            >wind,
            > >> >geothermal, biomass, and hydrogen (only if produced from renewable
            >
            > >> sources).
            > >> >
            > >> >. Renewable energy proposals will be given priority based on the
            >quantity
            > >> >of energy to be replaced on-site (15 points for replacement of
            >greater
            > >> >than 50 percent) or to be generated (10 points); if the
            >anticipated
            > >> public
            > >> >health and sanitary benefits of the project will exceed applicable
            > >> >standards by at least 5 percent (2-5 points); if the system to be
            >used is
            > >> >commercially available, replicable, and provided with a 5 year
            >warranty
            > >> >(5-10 points); if the applicant can provided written commitments
            >for
            > >> up to
            > >> >100 percent of the matching funds (5-15 points); and if the
            >project can
            > >> >return the cost of investment in at least 11years (1-5 points).
            > >> >
            > >> >. Energy efficiency improvements proposals will be given priority
            > >> based on
            > >> >anticipated energy savings preference will be given to projects
            >that
            > >> >realize at least a 20 percent savings in energy (5-15 points).
            > >> >
            > >> >.Applications will receive a technical merit score for the first
            >time
            > >> that
            > >> >will be maintained during the final stage of review. Criteria
            >will
            > >> >include: qualifications of the project team, energy/resource
            >assessments,
            > >> >design and engineering, project development schedule, financial
            > >> >feasibility, etc.
            > >> >
            > >> >. Additional points will be awarded to small agricultural
            >producers
            > >> with a
            > >> >gross market value of less than $1 million (5 points), less than
            >$600,000
            > >> >(10 points), and less than $200,000 (15 points).
            > >> >
            > >> >Eligibility
            > >> > . The applicant must also have demonstrated financial need and
            >in the
            > >> > case of a rural small business, the business headquarters must be
            >in a
            > >> > rural area. The applicant must control at least 51 percent of the
            >system
            > >> > and be managing the operation of the proposed project. Grant
            >funds are
            > >> > not for research and development; they will only be used for
            >commercial
            > >> > or pre-commercial technology.
            > >> >
            > >> > . The applicant will be responsible for performing a National
            > >> > Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)* review taking into account
            > >> environmental
            > >> > issues and safety concerns with emphasis on land use, air
            >quality, water
            > >> > quality, noise pollution, soil degradation, wildlife, habitat
            > >> > fragmentation, aesthetics, odor, and other construction and
            >installation
            > >> > issues applicable to this type of technology. The environmental
            >review
            > >> > must be completed with enough time for funds to be obligated by
            > >> September
            > >> > 30, 2005.
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >>
            > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Webcast~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            > >> >
            > >> >USDA and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory will be holding
            >an
            > >> open,
            > >> >informational webcast on the 2005 NOFA on Thursday, April 7, 2005
            >at 3:00
            > >> >p.m. (Eastern Time).
            > >> >Webcast access information is provided below.
            > >> >
            > >> >AUDIO PARTICIPANT ACCESS
            > >> >
            > >> > CALL DATE: April 7, 2005 (Thursday)
            > >> > CALL TIME: 3 PM ET
            > >> > DURATION: 1 hr 30 min
            > >> > LEADER: Ms. Terri Walters
            > >> >
            > >> > USA Toll Free Number: 888-566-5773
            > >> > PASSCODE: 9006
            > >> >
            > >> > For security reasons, the passcode and the leader's
            >name
            > >> will
            > >> > be required to join your call.
            > >> >
            > >> >NET CONFERENCING PARTICIPANT ACCESS INFORMATION
            > >> >
            > >> > URL:
            > >> >
            ><https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/>https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/
            > >> > CONFERENCE NUMBER: PG5446315
            > >> > AUDIENCE PASSCODE: 9006
            > >> >
            > >> > If you are a repeat user, you can join the event
            > >> directly at:
            > >> >
            > >> ><https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c>>
            ><https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c>>https://
            >www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c
            > >> <https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c>
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> >Alexandra Morel
            > >> >Program Assistant
            > >> >Environmental and Energy Study Institute
            > >> >122 'C' Street, NW
            > >> >Washington DC, 20007
            > >> >(202) 662-1885


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Donald A Plisco
            With all due respect, my questions were not answered. Please reexamine my questions again and leave out the bureaucratic It all depends ... Would Hugh
            Message 5 of 10 , Apr 1 9:31 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              With all due respect, my questions were not answered. Please reexamine my questions again and leave out the bureaucratic "It all depends"...

              Would Hugh Piggott's home made windgen qualify? If I found a broken down 10kw Bergey or other full-homesized windgen, and rebuilt it locally by myself and the local rewinding shop, would that qualify? If I built a 500 watt windgen from scratch and built the guyed tower out of used pipe and copper cable with own my welder, would that qualify?
              Why must I buy a new or factory "remanufactured" windgen to qualify? Is Hugh Piggott's windgen not legitimate? It certainly works as well or better than many commercial windgens...The big notable exception that the initial cost makes it a viable winner in reducing fuel costs for the maker/installer/owner who uses his own God-given talents and sweat to make it happen ...And not just for the commercial manufacturer.

              What I see so far is that this is an incentive to make money for windgen manufacturers and put the "little guy" in debt up to his nose. The owner/operator is not rewarded in cutting his overall costs, but put in debt. Even an idiot ought to figure out that if you save $200 a month in electricity, but pay finance charges of $400 a month to bankroll it, it's a losing proposition...Especially if the odds are that the commercial wind gen is going to die before the last payment is made. WHO BENEFITS HERE? The owner, who is faced with decades of payments?

              Now answer my direct questions in plain English....Have I been unclear here?

              And no "It all depends".

              Don in Tulsa
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver
              To: Donald A Plisco ; Newcomb, Charles
              Cc: awea ; Matt Tritt
              Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 9:42 AM
              Subject: Re: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA


              The minimum award is $2,500 for 25% of project costs, meaning the minimum project size is $10,000. I would estimate a wind turbine would need to be about 3 kW to be competitive. Please read the program guidelines about what costs are eligible for the applicant to perform vs. what needs to be hired by the applicant (ie if you want to do the work yourself, you may need to find a fiscal host to apply for the grant). I expect that plans for remanufactured equipment will be reviewed carefully to ensure the equipment will be brought to "as new" standards, and that a firm warranty is provided.

              Please do contact your state USDA contact for detailed questions on turbine performance expectations etc. - they may need to forward your questions to the national office for a formal response, but that is the best way to be sure. Again, here is the link to look up your local program officer: http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05addresses.htm

              For Oklahoma it is:

              Jody Harris, USDA Rural Development
              100 USDA, Suite 108
              Stillwater, OK 74074-2654
              (405) 742-1036

              This is one of the few federal funding opportunities for small wind turbines, so I encourage anyone interested to look into preparing an application. The webcast next week is another good way to learn more about the program's requirements.

              Thanks,
              Heather


              At 12:02 AM 4/1/2005, Donald A Plisco wrote:

              In my mind, the main benefit of flying a wind gen is to stop pissing away my
              limited income on fat cat utilities that couldn't care less about me. If it
              improves the ecology, that's a fringe benefit not worth my time and trouble
              to begin with, but I'll not complain about it if it does...I'm not a deluded
              tree hugger, but a practical person who eyes the bottom line.
              I want a wind generator that is going to actually start paying me back in a
              couple of years, not a couple of decades...if ever. That means it has to
              produce enough electricity from Day One to offset the inflated bank loan, or
              be so inexpensive in the first place to build and install, that I can
              realize my investment and effort quickly.
              Now we have this trumpeted Federal loan/grant program that is supposed to
              help the "little people"....Does this mean if I want to build a small 500
              watt working wind generator from scratch, and put it in the back yard of my
              house in Tulsa, that I would qualify for a loan/grant?
              Or perhaps if I take a broken down 10k Bergy wind gen, rebuild it, and
              install it, would the USDA will assist me in part of the cost?
              Or must I buy some new and overpriced $50,000 UL approved grid tie wind
              generator that will put my children's children in debt, just to fit some
              bureaucratic notions?

              I ask you, would one of Hugh Piggott's homebuilts qualify?

              What is the truth here, instead of the hype and hoopla? And I don't want to
              hear any typical bureaucratic "It all depends....."
              I want plain, honest answers, not cryptic evasion or overamped self
              importance.

              Don in Tulsa

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Newcomb, Charles" <Charles_Newcomb@...>
              To: "Heather Rhoads-Weaver" <smallwind@...>; "Matt Tritt"
              <solarone@...>; "Donald A Plisco" <dplisco@...>
              Cc: "awea" <awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com>; <terri_walters@...>
              Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 10:51 PM
              Subject: RE: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA


              Heather,

              You are correct that there wasn't a flood of small wind applications in
              the first couple of years. I think this lack of participation is in
              large part due to the complexity of the application process (which just
              hasn't seemed worth it for some folks, especially for a grant as small
              as $2,500). However, it is our hope that small projects will continue
              to become involved, taking advantage of the sample application that is
              beginning to circulate. Reports on how much effort is actually required
              to apply varies wildly, so I also wouldn't put too much stock in
              statements about this process being "impossibly difficult".

              I disagree with the statement below that the program's heavy enrollment
              caused eligible projects to be turned away. In actuality, last year
              only five (out of 172 eligible projects) were "turned away" because of a
              shortage of grant funds. However, I do also appreciate the sentiment
              that only the most "tenacious" of folks managed to weather the
              application process. The hope is that when the regulation comes into
              force, the application process for smaller projects will be further
              simplified, easing the strain on the these applicants.

              We should all keep in mind that with the (expected) advent of the
              guaranteed loan program, competition for the grant funds will only
              increase. As we all are now aware, the $'s allocated for grants this
              years is down to $11.4M (with the remainder of the $22.8M allocated to
              the guaranteed loan portion of the program), which is half of what it
              was last year. The expectation is that the guaranteed loan enrollment
              levels will be low this year, with the majority of those funds rolling
              over into the grant pool, but only time will tell.

              Heather, I (in the words of Bob Thresher) violently agree with you that
              if eligible applicants have an eligible project, and they dot their i's
              and cross their t's, they've got a very good shot at getting a small
              system grant, especially in light of the added priority points awarded
              to smaller projects. There are currently no lists of "approved"
              equipment. This approach was not chosen in deference to the recognition
              that maintaining such a list would likely create more work than it would
              save. Instead, the program relies on the expertise of "nationally
              recognized" small wind experts (typically at the National Laboratories)
              to ascertain the technical fitness/feasibility of proposed projects.

              Thanks,

              -Charles

              Charles Newcomb
              NREL/NWTC
              1617 Cole Blvd
              Golden, CO 80401

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver [ mailto:smallwind@...]
              Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 11:10 PM
              To: Matt Tritt; Donald A Plisco
              Cc: awea; Newcomb, Charles
              Subject: Re: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA

              Actually I don't think that very many small wind proposals were
              submitted
              the first two years, though it is true that each year the selection is
              becoming more competitive. For smaller amounts of money if you follow
              the
              instructions carefully, meet all the requirements and provide all the
              required information, and find that your self-score is strong (check
              with
              your local USDA rep for the target) then you should have a good shot a
              getting funded. Also it helps to get support letters from members of
              congress and other politicians.

              It is true that R&D is not eligible for funding, but I don't think there
              is
              an "approved list" for equipment. Both commercial and pre-commercial
              systems are allowed, though a solid 5-year warranty is required.

              These are good questions for Charles - do you want to add anything?

              Thanks,
              Heather

              >At 08:05 PM 3/30/2005, Matt Tritt wrote:
              >>>Even though Heather is essentially correct, this program was so
              heavily
              >>>bombarded with requests last time it came around that only the most
              >>>tenacious and motivated applicants even had a shot at getting any
              >>>funding. It doesn't apply to R&D equipment either, only approved
              systems
              >>>will be eligible for submittal - or am I wrong Heather?
              >>>
              >>>Matt Tritt
              >
              >>Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:17:22 -0800
              >>To: "Donald A Plisco" <dplisco@...>
              >>From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver <smallwind@...>
              >>Subject: Re: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
              >>Cc: "awea" <awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com>
              >>
              >>Applications for small wind systems are strongly encouraged - the
              grants
              >>will reimburse up to 25% of project costs (including hardware) from
              >>$2,500 to $500,000; proposals are due June 28.
              >>
              >>If you are interested in applying feel free to dial-in to next week's
              >>webcast (see info below), or contact your state USDA official listed
              at
              >> http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05addresses.htm .
              I
              >>believe that a sample small wind application is available and will
              look
              >>into posting a link to it on this list.
              >>
              >>Let me know if you have further questions - I have helped assemble two

              >>successful Sec 9006 applications and although there is quite a bit of
              >>paperwork to wade through, the funding is worth it.
              >>
              >>-Heather
              >>smallwind@...
              >
              >Donald A Plisco wrote:
              >
              >>
              >>This bureaucratese needs to be translated....In simple English: How
              does
              >>this slush money effect the average list member here?
              >>
              >>Don in Tulsa.
              >> ----- Original Message -----
              >> From: Heather Rhoads-Weaver
              >> To: awea-smallwind@yahoogroups.com ;
              >> awea-small-turbine@yahoogroups.com ; awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com
              >> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 11:09 AM
              >> Subject: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >> >From: "Alexandra Morel" <amorel@...>
              >> >Subject: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA
              >> >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:27:03 -0500
              >> >
              >> >NEWS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND
              >> >ENERGY STUDY INSTITUTE
              >> >
              >> >122 C Street, N.W., Suite 630 < Washington, D.C., 20001 <
              202-628-1400 <
              >> >www.eesi.org
              >> >
              >> >For Immediate
              >> >Release
              >> >For more information contact:
              >> >March 29,
              >> >2005
              >> >Alexandra Morel, 202.662.1885
              >> >
              >> >< mailto:amorel@...>amorel@...
              >> >
              >> >USDA Releases FY05 Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for
              Renewable
              >> >Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency Program
              >> >
              >> >USDA and NREL will host informational webcast, April 7
              >> >(see below)
              >> >On March 28, the USDA's Office of Rural Development released a
              >> >solicitation of proposals for the Renewable Energy Systems and
              Energy
              >> >Efficiency Improvements Program (Section 9006) authorized under
              Title IX,
              >> >of the 2002 Farm Bill.
              >> >
              >> >This year's NOFA makes $22.8 million available in competitive
              grant funds
              >> >for the purchase of renewable energy systems and energy efficiency
              >> >improvements: $11.4 million will be set aside until August 31,
              2005
              >> to be
              >> >made available for guaranteed loans; after August 31 all
              non-obligated
              >> >funds will be awarded through the competitive grant process.
              >>Applications
              >> >must be completed and submitted to the appropriate USDA State
              Rural
              >> >Development Office postmarked no later than June 28, 2005, 90 days
              after
              >> >the publication of the Federal Register Notice on March 28. Grant
              awards
              >> >will be announced by September 30, 2005.
              >> >
              >> >Eligibility for grant applications is limited to agricultural
              producers
              >> >and rural small businesses. Grant awards will not exceed 25
              percent of
              >> >the eligible project costs. Of the 75 percent of project costs
              >> applicants
              >> >are expected to provide, 10 percent can be provided by third party
              >> >"in-kind" contributions; however, applicant "in-kind" or other
              Federal
              >> >grant awards will not be eligible.
              >> >
              >> >Due to the need for additional time to develop the program's final
              rule,
              >> >the Office of Rural Development has opted to issue a NOFA in order
              to
              >> >provide ample time for grant applicants. USDA intends to post a
              final
              >> >rule later this fiscal year that will provide guidance on the loan
              >> >guarantee and grant programs.
              >>
              >>
              >< http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05navigate.htm>Cl
              ick
              >> >here to view NOFA of the Renewable Energy Systems and
              >>
              >>
              >< http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05navigate.htm >En
              e
              >> rgy
              >> >Efficiency Improvements Program.
              >> >Contact your State USDA Offices and State Energy Offices regarding
              >> >potential assistance in developing applications or answering
              questions.
              >>
              >>
              >< http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/farmbill/2005NOFA/nofa05addresses.htm>C
              l
              >> ick
              >> > here for list of contacts.
              >> >
              >>
              >>
              >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
              ~
              >> ~~~~~
              >> >
              >> >Grant amounts
              >> >
              >> >. Awards for renewable energy systems will be between $2,500 and
              >> $500,000.
              >> >. Awards for energy efficiency improvements will be between $2,500
              and
              >> >$250,000.
              >> >. The maximum grant award for an applicant of Renewable Energy
              >> Systems and
              >> >Energy Efficiency Improvements is $750,000.
              >> >
              >> >Evaluation Criteria
              >> >. Renewable energy technologies being considered include: solar,
              wind,
              >> >geothermal, biomass, and hydrogen (only if produced from renewable

              >> sources).
              >> >
              >> >. Renewable energy proposals will be given priority based on the
              quantity
              >> >of energy to be replaced on-site (15 points for replacement of
              greater
              >> >than 50 percent) or to be generated (10 points); if the
              anticipated
              >> public
              >> >health and sanitary benefits of the project will exceed applicable
              >> >standards by at least 5 percent (2-5 points); if the system to be
              used is
              >> >commercially available, replicable, and provided with a 5 year
              warranty
              >> >(5-10 points); if the applicant can provided written commitments
              for
              >> up to
              >> >100 percent of the matching funds (5-15 points); and if the
              project can
              >> >return the cost of investment in at least 11years (1-5 points).
              >> >
              >> >. Energy efficiency improvements proposals will be given priority
              >> based on
              >> >anticipated energy savings preference will be given to projects
              that
              >> >realize at least a 20 percent savings in energy (5-15 points).
              >> >
              >> >.Applications will receive a technical merit score for the first
              time
              >> that
              >> >will be maintained during the final stage of review. Criteria
              will
              >> >include: qualifications of the project team, energy/resource
              assessments,
              >> >design and engineering, project development schedule, financial
              >> >feasibility, etc.
              >> >
              >> >. Additional points will be awarded to small agricultural
              producers
              >> with a
              >> >gross market value of less than $1 million (5 points), less than
              $600,000
              >> >(10 points), and less than $200,000 (15 points).
              >> >
              >> >Eligibility
              >> > . The applicant must also have demonstrated financial need and
              in the
              >> > case of a rural small business, the business headquarters must be
              in a
              >> > rural area. The applicant must control at least 51 percent of the
              system
              >> > and be managing the operation of the proposed project. Grant
              funds are
              >> > not for research and development; they will only be used for
              commercial
              >> > or pre-commercial technology.
              >> >
              >> > . The applicant will be responsible for performing a National
              >> > Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)* review taking into account
              >> environmental
              >> > issues and safety concerns with emphasis on land use, air
              quality, water
              >> > quality, noise pollution, soil degradation, wildlife, habitat
              >> > fragmentation, aesthetics, odor, and other construction and
              installation
              >> > issues applicable to this type of technology. The environmental
              review
              >> > must be completed with enough time for funds to be obligated by
              >> September
              >> > 30, 2005.
              >> >
              >> >
              >>
              >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Webcast~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
              >> >
              >> >USDA and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory will be holding
              an
              >> open,
              >> >informational webcast on the 2005 NOFA on Thursday, April 7, 2005
              at 3:00
              >> >p.m. (Eastern Time).
              >> >Webcast access information is provided below.
              >> >
              >> >AUDIO PARTICIPANT ACCESS
              >> >
              >> > CALL DATE: April 7, 2005 (Thursday)
              >> > CALL TIME: 3 PM ET
              >> > DURATION: 1 hr 30 min
              >> > LEADER: Ms. Terri Walters
              >> >
              >> > USA Toll Free Number: 888-566-5773
              >> > PASSCODE: 9006
              >> >
              >> > For security reasons, the passcode and the leader's
              name
              >> will
              >> > be required to join your call.
              >> >
              >> >NET CONFERENCING PARTICIPANT ACCESS INFORMATION
              >> >
              >> > URL:
              >> >
              < https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/ > https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/
              >> > CONFERENCE NUMBER: PG5446315
              >> > AUDIENCE PASSCODE: 9006
              >> >
              >> > If you are a repeat user, you can join the event
              >> directly at:
              >> >
              >> >< https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c >>
              < https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c>>https://
              www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c
              >> < https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PG5446315&p=9006&t=c >
              >> >
              >> >
              >> >Alexandra Morel
              >> >Program Assistant
              >> >Environmental and Energy Study Institute
              >> >122 'C' Street, NW
              >> >Washington DC, 20007
              >> >(202) 662-1885

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • DJ MacIntyre
              ... Probably not. ... Probably not, unless you re a professional . [REPLY QUOTES IN SQUARE BRACKETS] [Please read the program guidelines about what costs are
              Message 6 of 10 , Apr 4 10:54 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                Donald A Plisco wrote:

                > Would Hugh Piggott's home made windgen qualify?

                Probably not.

                > If I found a broken down
                > 10kw Bergey or other full-homesized windgen, and rebuilt it locally by
                > myself and the local rewinding shop, would that qualify?

                Probably not, unless you're a "professional".

                [REPLY QUOTES IN SQUARE BRACKETS]

                [Please read the program guidelines about what costs are eligible for the applicant to
                perform vs. what needs to be hired by the applicant (ie if you want to do the work
                yourself, you may need to find a fiscal host to apply for the grant)]

                Sounds like a 'no' to me...

                > If I built a
                > 500 watt windgen from scratch and built the guyed tower out of used pipe
                > and copper cable with own my welder, would that qualify?

                Probably not, unless you're a "professional".

                [Please read the program guidelines about what costs are eligible for the applicant to
                perform vs. what needs to be hired by the applicant (ie if you want to do the work
                yourself, you may need to find a fiscal host to apply for the grant)]

                and as per a 500watt windgen:

                [The minimum award is $2,500 for 25% of project costs, meaning the minimum project size is
                $10,000. I would estimate a wind turbine would need to be about 3 kW to be competitive.]

                So even most home-scale commercial units wouldn't qualify.

                > Why must I buy a new or factory "remanufactured" windgen to qualify?

                Because "dem's the rules." I'd imagine it's so some monkey doesn't go out and attach a
                ceiling fan to an alternator and send them a receipt for 10 000$ ;-).

                [I expect that plans for remanufactured equipment will be reviewed carefully to ensure the
                equipment will be brought to "as new" standards, and that a firm warranty is provided.]

                "No Irish Need Apply" ;-).

                > Is
                > Hugh Piggott's windgen not legitimate? It certainly works as well or
                > better than many commercial windgens...The big notable exception that
                > the initial cost makes it a viable winner in reducing fuel costs for the
                > maker/installer/owner who uses his own God-given talents and sweat to
                > make it happen ...And not just for the commercial manufacturer.

                Are his commercial units with warranties and such, or sold "between friends"?

                > What I see so far is that this is an incentive to make money for windgen
                > manufacturers and put the "little guy" in debt up to his nose.

                Well, yeah, pretty much.

                > Now answer my direct questions in plain English....Have I been unclear here?
                >
                > And no "It all depends".

                Well, Don, hope my attempt at translation was of use to you ;-).

                I run a small shop that in addition to new, also relocates, reconditions, and re-installs
                used electrical generation equipment, like wind gennys. I think this is more geared
                towards my clients than towards you... but, of course, my clients are in Quebec, Canada,
                so they're out of luck ;-).

                DJ
              • Donald A Plisco
                Thanks to you and others for the replies...It s nice to hear it in plain English instead of government bureaucratese. It s a shame that this money is offered
                Message 7 of 10 , Apr 4 2:59 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Thanks to you and others for the replies...It's nice to hear it in plain
                  English instead of government bureaucratese.
                  It's a shame that this money is offered up under nearly impossible
                  conditions to qualify for. I get the feeling that this program was designed
                  so that the bureaucrats and politicians could crow and brag that they had a
                  wind energy program, instead of actually doing something about it.

                  Don in Tulsa
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "DJ MacIntyre" <dj@...>
                  To: "Donald A Plisco" <dplisco@...>
                  Cc: "awea" <awea-wind-home@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 12:54 PM
                  Subject: Re: [a-w-h] Fwd: USDA Releases Sec. 9006 NOFA


                  > Donald A Plisco wrote:
                  >
                  > > Would Hugh Piggott's home made windgen qualify?
                  >
                  > Probably not.
                  >
                  > > If I found a broken down
                  > > 10kw Bergey or other full-homesized windgen, and rebuilt it locally by
                  > > myself and the local rewinding shop, would that qualify?
                  >
                  > Probably not, unless you're a "professional".
                  >
                  > [REPLY QUOTES IN SQUARE BRACKETS]
                  >
                  > [Please read the program guidelines about what costs are eligible for the
                  applicant to
                  > perform vs. what needs to be hired by the applicant (ie if you want to do
                  the work
                  > yourself, you may need to find a fiscal host to apply for the grant)]
                  >
                  > Sounds like a 'no' to me...
                  >
                  > > If I built a
                  > > 500 watt windgen from scratch and built the guyed tower out of used pipe
                  > > and copper cable with own my welder, would that qualify?
                  >
                  > Probably not, unless you're a "professional".
                  >
                  > [Please read the program guidelines about what costs are eligible for the
                  applicant to
                  > perform vs. what needs to be hired by the applicant (ie if you want to do
                  the work
                  > yourself, you may need to find a fiscal host to apply for the grant)]
                  >
                  > and as per a 500watt windgen:
                  >
                  > [The minimum award is $2,500 for 25% of project costs, meaning the minimum
                  project size is
                  > $10,000. I would estimate a wind turbine would need to be about 3 kW to be
                  competitive.]
                  >
                  > So even most home-scale commercial units wouldn't qualify.
                  >
                  > > Why must I buy a new or factory "remanufactured" windgen to qualify?
                  >
                  > Because "dem's the rules." I'd imagine it's so some monkey doesn't go out
                  and attach a
                  > ceiling fan to an alternator and send them a receipt for 10 000$ ;-).
                  >
                  > [I expect that plans for remanufactured equipment will be reviewed
                  carefully to ensure the
                  > equipment will be brought to "as new" standards, and that a firm warranty
                  is provided.]
                  >
                  > "No Irish Need Apply" ;-).
                  >
                  > > Is
                  > > Hugh Piggott's windgen not legitimate? It certainly works as well or
                  > > better than many commercial windgens...The big notable exception that
                  > > the initial cost makes it a viable winner in reducing fuel costs for the
                  > > maker/installer/owner who uses his own God-given talents and sweat to
                  > > make it happen ...And not just for the commercial manufacturer.
                  >
                  > Are his commercial units with warranties and such, or sold "between
                  friends"?
                  >
                  > > What I see so far is that this is an incentive to make money for windgen
                  > > manufacturers and put the "little guy" in debt up to his nose.
                  >
                  > Well, yeah, pretty much.
                  >
                  > > Now answer my direct questions in plain English....Have I been unclear
                  here?
                  > >
                  > > And no "It all depends".
                  >
                  > Well, Don, hope my attempt at translation was of use to you ;-).
                  >
                  > I run a small shop that in addition to new, also relocates, reconditions,
                  and re-installs
                  > used electrical generation equipment, like wind gennys. I think this is
                  more geared
                  > towards my clients than towards you... but, of course, my clients are in
                  Quebec, Canada,
                  > so they're out of luck ;-).
                  >
                  > DJ
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • med Barnell
                  The grant in effect is a government equity, or an earnest of ownership on your labor and expense creating further obligation on your part. regards, MedB ...
                  Message 8 of 10 , Apr 12 8:40 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    The grant in effect is a government equity, or an
                    earnest of ownership on your labor and expense
                    creating further obligation on your part.

                    regards,

                    MedB
                    --- DJ MacIntyre <dj@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Donald A Plisco wrote:
                    >
                    > > Would Hugh Piggott's home made windgen qualify?
                    >
                    > Probably not.
                    >
                    > > If I found a broken down
                    > > 10kw Bergey or other full-homesized windgen, and
                    > rebuilt it locally by
                    > > myself and the local rewinding shop, would that
                    > qualify?
                    >
                    > Probably not, unless you're a "professional".
                    >
                    > [REPLY QUOTES IN SQUARE BRACKETS]
                    >
                    > [Please read the program guidelines about what costs
                    > are eligible for the applicant to
                    > perform vs. what needs to be hired by the applicant
                    > (ie if you want to do the work
                    > yourself, you may need to find a fiscal host to
                    > apply for the grant)]
                    >
                    > Sounds like a 'no' to me...
                    >
                    > > If I built a
                    > > 500 watt windgen from scratch and built the guyed
                    > tower out of used pipe
                    > > and copper cable with own my welder, would that
                    > qualify?
                    >
                    > Probably not, unless you're a "professional".
                    >
                    > [Please read the program guidelines about what costs
                    > are eligible for the applicant to
                    > perform vs. what needs to be hired by the applicant
                    > (ie if you want to do the work
                    > yourself, you may need to find a fiscal host to
                    > apply for the grant)]
                    >
                    > and as per a 500watt windgen:
                    >
                    > [The minimum award is $2,500 for 25% of project
                    > costs, meaning the minimum project size is
                    > $10,000. I would estimate a wind turbine would need
                    > to be about 3 kW to be competitive.]
                    >
                    > So even most home-scale commercial units wouldn't
                    > qualify.
                    >
                    > > Why must I buy a new or factory "remanufactured"
                    > windgen to qualify?
                    >
                    > Because "dem's the rules." I'd imagine it's so some
                    > monkey doesn't go out and attach a
                    > ceiling fan to an alternator and send them a receipt
                    > for 10 000$ ;-).
                    >
                    > [I expect that plans for remanufactured equipment
                    > will be reviewed carefully to ensure the
                    > equipment will be brought to "as new" standards, and
                    > that a firm warranty is provided.]
                    >
                    > "No Irish Need Apply" ;-).
                    >
                    > > Is
                    > > Hugh Piggott's windgen not legitimate? It
                    > certainly works as well or
                    > > better than many commercial windgens...The big
                    > notable exception that
                    > > the initial cost makes it a viable winner in
                    > reducing fuel costs for the
                    > > maker/installer/owner who uses his own God-given
                    > talents and sweat to
                    > > make it happen ...And not just for the commercial
                    > manufacturer.
                    >
                    > Are his commercial units with warranties and such,
                    > or sold "between friends"?
                    >
                    > > What I see so far is that this is an incentive to
                    > make money for windgen
                    > > manufacturers and put the "little guy" in debt up
                    > to his nose.
                    >
                    > Well, yeah, pretty much.
                    >
                    > > Now answer my direct questions in plain
                    > English....Have I been unclear here?
                    > >
                    > > And no "It all depends".
                    >
                    > Well, Don, hope my attempt at translation was of use
                    > to you ;-).
                    >
                    > I run a small shop that in addition to new, also
                    > relocates, reconditions, and re-installs
                    > used electrical generation equipment, like wind
                    > gennys. I think this is more geared
                    > towards my clients than towards you... but, of
                    > course, my clients are in Quebec, Canada,
                    > so they're out of luck ;-).
                    >
                    > DJ
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >



                    __________________________________
                    Do you Yahoo!?
                    Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
                    http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.