|
<br />~ ('"'It,
<br />
<br />_~. r""y
<br />
<br />SEPTEMBER 11, 1978
<br />
<br />MONDAY
<br />
<br />e. The Martinsville Project Expansion would have an installed
<br />capacity of 4,000 kW. It would have a dependable capacity of 2,500
<br />kWand would generate on an average annual basis 7,300,000 kWh, all
<br />delivered at the load centers.
<br />
<br />f. The Ridgeway Project would have an installed capacity of
<br />17,250 kW consisting of 2 - 8,500 kW units, and 1 - 250 kW unit to
<br />generate during minimum flow releases. It would have a dependable
<br />capacity of 16,560 kW and will generate on an average annual basis
<br />30,508,000 kWh, all delivered at the load centers.
<br />
<br />g. For the scheduled on-line date of January 1985, considered
<br />to be the earliest practical date, the Total Investment Cost is
<br />estimated to be $1,936,000 for the Martinsville Project Rehabilitation,
<br />$8,763,000 for the Martinsville Project Expansion, and $36,407,000 for
<br />the Ridgeway Project, with Total Capital Requirements of $2,124,000,
<br />$9,580,000, and $39,762,000, respectively.
<br />
<br />h. Comparison of the cost of the Martinsville Project
<br />Rehabilitation with continued power purchases based on a 3D-year,
<br />6.25% economic analysis over the first 10 years of project operation
<br />shows a savings of $811,000 on a January 1985 present worth basis.
<br />The first year benefit-cost ratio is 1.20, which indicates a
<br />substantial degree of economic feasibility.
<br />
<br />i. Comparison of the cost of the Martinsville Project Expansion
<br />with continued power purchases based on a 30-year economic analysis
<br />with 6.25% interest over the first 10 years of project operation,
<br />shows a deficit of $790,000 on a January 1985 present worth basis.
<br />The Project is therefore infeasible for development at this time
<br />although economic analyses in the future may indicate feasibility.
<br />
<br />-
<br />
<br />j. Based on projected savings due to a reduction in the costs
<br />of power purchases for a 30-year economic analysis with 6.25% interest,
<br />the Ridgeway Project is estimated to provide savings of $2,423,000
<br />on a January 1985 present worth basis, over the first 10 years of
<br />operation. The first year benefit-cost ratio for the Ridgeway
<br />Project as compared to the projected cost of continued power purchases
<br />is 0.85 for the 3D-year term and its operation is expected to provide
<br />savings to the City and thus has economic feasibility. Based on a
<br />50-year economic analysis, (payment of debt service principal deferred
<br />for one year) the Ridgeway Project is estimated to provide savings of
<br />$5,155,000 on a January 1985 present worth basis and has a first year
<br />benefit-cost ration of 1.00. The Ridgeway Project therefore shows
<br />economic feasibility based on this analysis.
<br />
<br />k. The selected Development consists of the Martinsville
<br />Rehabilitation and Ridgeway Projects. It will be a peaking in-
<br />stallation, providing about 37% of the projected peaking capacity
<br />requirements and 16% of the average annual energy requirements of
<br />the City in 1985, the initial year of operation.
<br />
|