11/9/1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Morris stated that he would provide actual figures. In further discussion, it was noted that page 109 shows projected connections in 1983 based on 32 additional connections during the first quarter of 1983. Mr. Fancher confirmed that the number contained on page 109 is really a multiplication of actual connections as they were during the first quarter of this year. It projects things out to the end of 1983. There were 32 connections during the first quarter and that would mean approximately 75 additional customers connected up to this point in the year if that rate had been maintained. Commissioner Lyons commented that replacement of plants in order to bring them up to date had been mentioned, and he asked if that would come out of monies that had been accumu- lated or whether -it was a charge that shows up as expansion and would be carried by existing customers, i.e., were the rate payers asked to carry an additional load because the plants were replaced? Mr. Fancher replied that the plants were financed through a combination of debt and equity and there have been F. several expansions during the years and replacement of facilities as they wear out. The cost of that financing would show up in the cost of capital which does relate to the average cost of providing service. Commissioner Lyons discussed the segment of the rate that is for repair and replacement and wished to be sure that the replacement is not of larger capacity than needed for the existing customers. Mr. Fancher stated that the customers do not pay for additional capacity they do not use. GDU does have a repair and replacement program on-going with the facility to maintain its useful life. There are dollars in there that relate to the recovery of the capital cost of the facility 19 N 0V 9 1983 ai c 55 iiu,2554