9/18/1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

FF,_ SEP 18 1986 BOOK 65 u.1,1787 don't have any other wholesale customers; GDU is being charged $1.72, the County's water production charge. Chairman Scurlock asked if we can justify the $1.72 charge, and Director Pinto said it was based on a rate hearing under an analysis done by Arthur Young 8 Co. Commissioner Bird questioned why the County entered into the agreement to sell water to GDU at production/wholesale rates, and Director Pinto explained that at the time the County entered into the agreement, GDU either had to replace their plant or purchase their water from the County because the quality of their water was deplorable. Mr. Wheeling explained that an extensive economic analysis showed that it would have been significantly more costly to build a new plant than to purchase water from the County. The analysis clearly showed that it was in the best interests of the customers. Chairman Scurlock asked if any credit was given for the salvage value of the plant or the value of the land on which the original plant was located, and Mr. Wheeling stated there was not. Mr. Wheeling stated that Mr. Morris has indicated that salvage value and the removal costs would be very close amounts in terms of dollars, and he intends to continue using the land around the plant for operations. The other reason for not including salvage value for the plant is that the 69� facility charge covers a very small percentage of their non -plant treatment costs. Commissioner Bird asked if the increase that is shown is due to the increase in the base facility charge or the increase in the actual cost per gallon consumed, and Mr. Wheeling said it is a combination of both. Attorney Shandloff stated that the County's base facility charge of $5.34 is being passed through along with the $1.72 water production charge. 8