24.02.2013 Views

Transend - Appendix 5 Renewal capital expenditure - Australian ...

Transend - Appendix 5 Renewal capital expenditure - Australian ...

Transend - Appendix 5 Renewal capital expenditure - Australian ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

� defer replacement of remaining assets by up to two years.<br />

0BInvestment Evaluation Summary<br />

TNM-GS-809-0720<br />

The <strong>capital</strong> cost of this option includes an initial $4.86 million ($June 2007) to address the highest priority issues,<br />

followed by a deferred <strong>capital</strong> cost of $22.57 million ($June 2007) to replace the remaining assets two years later.<br />

7.1.2 BENEFITS<br />

The benefit for this option is the deferral of <strong>capital</strong> <strong>expenditure</strong>.<br />

7.1.3 DRAWBACKS<br />

The drawbacks for this option are that it:<br />

� does not address the performance, reliability and design issues identified in Section 4;<br />

� incurs increased ongoing operating <strong>expenditure</strong> due to increased maintenance, condition monitoring requirements<br />

and corrective maintenance requirements;<br />

� is not sustainable given the reliability issues associated with the 110 kV assets;<br />

� does not address the operational issues associated with the 110 kV ring bus arrangement;<br />

� incurs the longest, and most frequent outages due to maintenance regimes that are required to maintain the existing<br />

assets;<br />

� involves an increased risk of loss of supply events at Creek Road Substation; and<br />

� does not align with the recommendations made in the independent report by Ascension Consulting and APC-<br />

Worley. Knowingly operating existing assets with identified performance and condition issues potentially exposes<br />

<strong>Transend</strong> to litigation issues in the event of a supply disruption to Hobart’s CBD caused by an asset failure at Creek<br />

Road Substation.<br />

7.1.4 CONCLUSION<br />

Although option 1 has the least <strong>capital</strong> cost option in the short term, it is not the preferred option because it does not<br />

ensure the reliable operation of Creek Road Substation.<br />

7.2 OPTION 2 - REPLACE ASSETS IN SITU<br />

7.2.1 SCOPE<br />

The scope for this option includes:<br />

� in-situ replacement of the existing live tank circuit breakers with dead tank units with integral current transformers;<br />

� replacement of all 110 kV disconnectors with new motorised units in situ;<br />

� replacement of all bus bars with aluminium conductor and compression fittings;<br />

� replacement of protection and control schemes; and<br />

� implement revised maintenance practices.<br />

This option includes redeveloping the site using the existing ring-bus arrangement.<br />

The <strong>capital</strong> cost of this option is $27.27 million ($June 2007).<br />

7.2.2 BENEFITS<br />

The benefits for this option are that it:<br />

� addresses most of the asset issues in Section 4; and<br />

� reduces the ongoing maintenance requirements and costs associated with the site.<br />

© <strong>Transend</strong> Networks Pty Ltd 11 of 17

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!