Topic:"Cost Effectiveness" in M11927

NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-1: 2 3 Reference: Page 2. 4 5 Option 4 was selected as the preferred alternative as it is the most cost 6 effective. Option 4 is approximately $500,000 less costly than the next closest 7 option. Option 4 also...

AI summary The document discusses a request to confirm whether NSPI has re-evaluated cost-effective options for a project that exceeded the original budget. It references NSUARB IR-7 for further details.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL WITH RESPECT TO ATTACHMENT 1 OF THE APPLICATION: With reference to Pages 1-3 of Attachment 1 of the Application: Please provide copies each of the seven DFO communications to NS Power listed in Attachment 1 of the Applicat...

AI summary The document requests copies of seven DFO communications to NS Power and asks for a description of alternatives considered when modifying the project in response to DFO requirements, including whether a cost-benefit analysis was conducted. NS Power evaluated options to avoid a lake level decrease, considering a cofferdam or bulkhead system.

racts, PPA, major maintenance and operating budgets and financial pro forma in support of project credit agreement. Monitored construction progress and QA/QC in support of periodic draw certification. SMITH CREEK (2014 to 2015) - A 38 MW r...

AI summary The text outlines various hydroelectric projects and the professional experience of an individual involved in their development, including due diligence, project assessments, and management of operations. Projects such as Smith Creek, Franklin River, and McNair Creek are highlighted, along with roles in financial analysis and project evaluations.

6.2.1 NS Power Submission - In the ATO Application and in response to IRs, NS Power has asserted that its currently estimated cost - estimate is a Class 1 estimate (as per AACE Standard 69R-12), with an expected accuracy range of -10% and...

AI summary NS Power submitted an ATO Application, asserting that its current cost estimate of $15.4 M for the project is reliable, based on quotes from contractors and consultants. The estimate is a Class 1 estimate with an accuracy range of -10% to +15%. NS Power expects no further delays and is awaiting FAA from DFO, contingent on additional information.

CI 50518 – HYD Ruth Falls Main Dam Refurbishment - $15,445,508 (ATO) (NSUARB M10632) Midgard Consulting Inc. Responses to Industrial Group Information Requests 1 Request IR-29: 2 Reference: N-9, page 53 lines 14-15. 3 4 Option 4 was ultima...

AI summary The document discusses the selection of Option 4 for the Ruth Falls Main Dam Refurbishment due to its cost-effectiveness and lower cost compared to other options. It also raises questions about whether Midgard Consulting Inc. reviewed a report from Kleinschmidt Associates Canada Inc. and whether there have been changes in the drawdown expectations for Option 4.

Dam Refurbishment Avoided Applicable Year Total Revenue Operating Costs Expenses Capital CCA UCC CFBT Taxes CFAT PV of CF Discount Factor CNPV 2024 - - - (3,866,380.3) - - (3,866,380.3) - (3,866,380.3) (3,866,380.3) 1.00 (3,866,380.3) 2025...

AI summary The document presents a financial analysis table for a dam refurbishment project from 2024 to 2033, including revenue, operating costs, capital expenditures, and net present value (NPV) calculations. It outlines the financial implications of the project over time.

on and will meet this condition of the FAA. As such, Midgard recommended that NS Power should provide an update on the status of this work and of the associated FAA condition in its reply submissions. Midgard's review of NS Power's Economi...

AI summary Midgard recommended that NS Power provide an update on the status of work related to the FAA condition. While Midgard found NS Power's Economic Analysis Model (EAM) to be robust, it noted that supporting cost information for decommissioning was not provided and that the scope of the decommissioning cost estimate was unclear.

Request IR-6: - With reference to Pages 1-3 of Attachment 1 of the Application: - a) Please provide copies each of the seven DFO communications to NS Power listed in Attachment 1 of the Application. - b) Please describe or summarize the al...

AI summary Request IR-6 asks for copies of seven DFO communications to NS Power, a description of alternatives considered during project modifications due to DFO requirements, whether a cost-benefit analysis was conducted, and whether options were considered to eliminate the need for a lake level decrease once permitting costs were known.

- 28 (f) How are offsetting measurements usually determined on hydro projects 29 such as this? (g) Has Midgard considered the DFO's concerns with respect to "high 2 administrative costs, unnecessary monitoring such as temperature 3 monitor...

AI summary The text includes questions regarding offsetting measurements on hydro projects, the administrative costs and monitoring concerns raised by the DFO, and the reasonableness of a proposed offsetting plan. It also references the selection of a cost-effective option for the project.

(1) There is insufficient evidence to assess the Project remains economically justified This is a foundational consideration. Having regard to the additional costs, the question is whether the Project remains economical. Here, the Board mu...

AI summary The document argues that there is insufficient evidence to determine if the Ruth Falls Main Dam refurbishment project remains economically justified. While the need for the project is acknowledged, the application lacks updated economic justification, and the ATO's justification section is identical to the original capital application.

5.2.2 Economic Analysis Results - Using NS Power's inputs, the economic analysis model concludes that the refurbishment alternative is - preferable to the decommissioning alternative by a significant margin ($50.4 M of NPV). Midgard's revi...

AI summary The economic analysis model, using NS Power's inputs, concludes that the refurbishment alternative is preferable to decommissioning by a significant margin of $50.4 M in NPV. The model's results are sensitive to the cost of decommissioning and the cost of replacement energy if the project is decommissioned. NS Power assigns a value of $176.9 M to the energy produced by Ruth Falls through 2064.

- results of the analysis show that even if these two extreme changes to the inputs occur in conjunction, both - of which serve to improve the prospects of the decommissioning alternative, the refurbishment alternative is - still preferabl...

AI summary The analysis indicates that even under extreme changes to input assumptions, the refurbishment alternative remains preferable by over $2 M in NPV. The analysis was rudimentary due to time constraints but suggests that NS Power's economic analysis is stable unless there are extreme deviations in replacement energy and decommissioning costs.

Economic Analysis Results Midgard indicatesthat its review of the EAM suggests the outcome is reasonable, given the inputs. Midgard also indicates that it completed a sensitivity analysis where it made extreme adjustments to the decommissi...

AI summary Midgard's economic analysis of the EAM concludes that the outcome is reasonable, and sensitivity analysis shows that refurbishment remains the preferred option even with extreme adjustments to decommissioning and replacement energy costs.