Topic/Matter Intersection

Topic:"Cost Deferral" in M03097

Matter: CI# 28098 - P-128.07 - NSPI WO - Authority to Overspend the Tufts Cove 6 Waste Heat Recovery Project - $8,699,864Approximate value for approval of $8.5 million.

4 passages 3 documents

Cost Deferral across all matters →

N-1Application 5/3/2010 1 passage

Consistent with this directive, NSPI has sought to compile the necessary cost information and economic analysis support to allow the Board to approve the enclosed ATO. The Company p. p. 0

Consistent with this directive, NSPI has sought to compile the necessary cost information and economic analysis support to allow the Board to approve the enclosed ATO. The Company respectfully suggests the Board seek written input from the...

AI summary NSPI has compiled cost information and economic analysis to support the Board's approval of the enclosed ATO. The Company highlights increased costs due to factors such as automation complexity, project management requirements, and overtime, while also noting delayed spending affecting AFUDC.

Open document →

N-3Redacted NSPI (NSUARB) IR-1 to IR-20 7/16/2010 1 passage

Original Submission ATO Submission p. p. 259

Original Submission ATO Submission AFUDC Base Rate per month AFUDC AFUDC Base Rate per month AFUDC Month ($ 000s) (%) ($ 000s) ($ 000s) (%) ($ 000s) July-08 153 0.66 1 - - - August-08 306 0.66 2 - - - September-08 1,356 0.66 9 - - - Octobe...

AI summary The document discusses the use of contingency funds in the May 2008 estimate for a project and the current ATO estimate. It confirms that the contingency in the May 2008 estimate was fully used, resulting in zero contingency in the ATO estimate. The document also requests clarification on the accuracy of the estimates and the process for obtaining additional funds if needed.

Open document →

04691Information Request IR-1 to IR-20 issued by Board Staff to NSPI 6/30/2010 2 passages

Request IR-5: Reference Pages 2 and 3 of the May 3, 2010 ATO. a. Please confirm that, as stated in the first paragraph on page 2, the cost increases are due to "..changes to specific project cost elements unforseen at the time of NSPI's original capital filing...". b. Please confirm ihat "original capital filing" refers to the May 2008 filing c. NSPI states that the cost increase is primarily due to three items and then lists the items. Please provide a breakdown of the amount of the increase attributable to each of the three items. Request IR-6: Reference Page 3 of May 3, 2010 ATD Application, the letter states: Assumptions were included in the original scope of the project, but final specification could not be determined until the project was initiated. a. Please identify the assumptions. b. Please explain why it was necessary to employ assumptions. c. Please identify the assumptions which changed, indicating when they changed, the reasons for the changes, and the impact of the changes on the Project. Request IR-7: Reference Page 3 of the May 3,2010 ATD, last paragraph on the page. a. Please confirm that NSPl's reference to the "original filing" is to the May 2008 filing. b. Please provide a breakdown of the impact on the npv of each of the three items listed, e.g. increased capital cost, additional operating costs and tax savings, so that the total of the three items is the total npv change from the original filing to the ATD. Request IR-8: Reference Page 4 of the May 3, 2010 ATD, first paragraph on the page. a. Please identify the types of additional resources expected to be required. b. Please explain why additional intermittent resources will likely increase the benefits of this project.

Request IR-5: Reference Pages 2 and 3 of the May 3, 2010 ATO. a. Please confirm that, as stated in the first paragraph on page 2, the cost increases are due to "..changes to specific project cost elements unforseen at the time of NSPI's or...

AI summary The document outlines several requests for clarification regarding the May 3, 2010 ATO and ATD filings by NSPI. The requests pertain to cost increases, assumptions, project changes, and the impact on NPV. The focus is on verifying the original capital filing, identifying assumptions, and quantifying the financial impacts of specific project changes.

Open document →

Request IR-16:

Request IR-16: 1 changes and what due to "underestimating the complexity of the combined cycle 2 process"? 3 c. Please explain why NSPI used a controls consultant that was not aware of the 4 "complexity of the combined cycle process" and w...

AI summary The text is a request (IR-16) asking Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI) to explain various cost increases related to a combined cycle process, including the use of a controls consultant, commissioning costs, and the overall increase in Engineering Design, Procurement, and Commissioning costs.

Open document →

Disclaimer: These summaries were generated by AI from the filings they describe. We take care to make them accurate, but errors are possible - and they aren't advice. Only the filings themselves are the record: if you're relying on something here, confirm it against the source documents or the Nova Scotia Energy Board's own record. Full disclaimer →