ML20078G052
| ML20078G052 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 01/12/1995 |
| From: | Townley D GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| OLA-3-I-051, OLA-3-I-51, NUDOCS 9502020387 | |
| Download: ML20078G052 (2) | |
Text
y-,
f--
p-F/
eorgia Power d DO EE Interoffice correspondence U
C v
'95 JAN 30 P3 :21 l
September 11, 1989 i
0FFICE M frPE MRy To:
Ghuck Whitney DOCKE TN s ':iRvicr BRAhui From:
Dave Townley Re:
Nuclear Cost Comparisons At your direction and for the purpose of providing Mr. Dahlberg a high-level comparison of nuclear costs among SONOPCO plants, the nuclear
- industry, and GPC coal
- plants, Is have assembled the following information.
The information is presented as millions of dollars, dollars per installed capacity (Kilowatt of net design rating), and dollars per unit of energy (Kwh).
Company budget projections and Utility Data Institute (UDI) data were the sources of information.
After working with the information f 6r only a short period, it became evident that' pracise comparisons to industry plants and even among SONOPCO plants is extremely difficult.
Differences in accounting and reporting O
oractices are common so differences in seemingly comparable numbers
(,
may not be as they appear.
For this comparison, I have at least tried to put SONOPCO plants on a comparable basis.
Mine was a brief effort and more could be done to increase the precision of the adjustments needed for comparisons.
However, for the stated purpose, this information should be useful.
For notes on the major assumptions or edjustments in this comparison, see the attached page.
The' numbers used for the 1990 Budget were those presented to Georgia Power during mid-August.
During the course of this work, I understand that bt:dget reviews are still underway and that reductions to the August SON 0PCO budgets will be presented.
I chose, at this time, to use budget numbers that had been shown to
" GPC.
- Overall, it appears from this comparison if the AuguGt proposal for 1990 budgets hold and the units operated as the 1989 Energy Budget projects, SONOPCO plants could be 5-30% or more above the comparable industry averages.
Of course, lower cudgets or bntter ooerating performance could improve this statistic.
- Also, excluding fuel, Georgia will reauire $400 million to operate 4000 MWs of nuclear capacity while $240 million will be required to operate over 12,000 MWs of coal capacity.
M Many thanks go to Mr. Don Procter for his assistance in assomoling
%~
the UDI data and to Mr. Tom Peacock for preparing the presentation
- t of the information (numerically and graphically).
For further.
1:,O.
questions regarding this data, Mr. Peacock (x.7350) can coordinate'.
Wl the response.
W gy.
' N", [ $*[
Exhibitbb.Page. d Of--
9502020387 950112 PDR ADOCK 05000424 I
A g