CI C0074130 – Robie Street Underground (NSEB M12456) NSPI Responses to NSEB Information Requests 1 Request IR-2: 2 3 (a) The cost today would be zero for the Company if NS Power chose not to pursue a cost 4 share option with the hospital d...
AI summary NSPI explains that deferring infrastructure investment would lead to higher future costs and disruption, while underground infrastructure is necessary for the hospital expansion on Robie Street due to the lack of feasible overhead capacity alternatives.
NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 (c) Following several iterations exploring potential overhead routes for the QEII supply, it was 2 determined that an underground solution was required to bring the two required feeders to 3 the hospital expansion area....
AI summary The Company decided to implement an underground solution for the QEII supply due to the high growth area and lack of existing 3-phase infrastructure. A cost-share arrangement was determined to be in the best interest of customers, leading to significant savings. The infrastructure installed during Phase 1 includes additional ductwork to facilitate future expansion.
REDACTED 1 Request IR-14: 2 3 With regards to page 8 of 10 of Attachment 1 of the application: 4 5 (a) Please identify which line items/work scopes are intended to solely serve the QEII. 6 7 (b) Please explain how the NS Power percentage c...
AI summary The response to IR-14 explains that costs for work solely serving the QEII were not included in the estimate, as only the company's portion of the cost share agreement was submitted. NS Power's cost share percentages are based on the additional capacity requested, such as doubling conduit capacity along Robie Street, leading to shared costs for material, labour, and other expenses.