The Martin-Beck Company operates a plant in St. Louis with an annual capacity of 30,000 units. Product is shipped to regional distribution centers located in Eloston, Atlants, and Houston. Because of an anticipated increase in demand, Martin peck plans to incrense capacity by constructing a new plant in one or more of the following coties: Detroit, Toledo, Derivet, or Kansas Oty. The estimated annual fixed cost and the annual capacity for the four proposed plants are as follows: The company's long range planning group developed forecasts of the antopated annual demand at the distribution centers as follows: The shipging cost per unat (in dollars) from each plant to each distribution center is as follows! Manogement wants to run a model that allows for any plant or set of plants to be open so that total cost is minimizod. The variable costs for the proposed plant locations are estrmated to be the folfowing: Detroit ($4.21), Toledo ($4,32), Denver ( $3.11), and Kansas Crty ($2.87), The foced and variable costs for St. Louis are estimated to be $337,785 and $4.18, respectively. The ogtimal solution is to keep St. Lous and add Toledo and Kansas Caty mth a totat annual cost of $1,532,035; Find the second best solution. Use equation 15.1. If required, round your answer to the nearest dollac, The second best solution has open with a totat annual cost of 4 How does it compare to the optimal solution? If required, round your answer to the neareat whble number: The total annual cost of this second best solution the total annual cost of the optimal solution by about Why might the second-best volution be prelerred? (i) Whth less plants from the second-best solution, the effect of a catastrophic event or a labor dispute at these plants would be slighthr mitigated in cornparison to the optimal solution. (ii) With more plants from the seciond-best solution, the elfect of a catastrophic event or a lobor dispute at these plants would be shightly mitigated in comparison to the eptemal solution. (iii) With the same number of plants from the second best solution, there is less probability of a catastrophic event or a Labor dispute at these plant sites in comparison to the equtimal solution. The Martin-Beck Company operates a plant in St. Louis with an annual capacity of 30,000 units. Product is shipped to regional distribution centers located in Eloston, Atlants, and Houston. Because of an anticipated increase in demand, Martin peck plans to incrense capacity by constructing a new plant in one or more of the following coties: Detroit, Toledo, Derivet, or Kansas Oty. The estimated annual fixed cost and the annual capacity for the four proposed plants are as follows: The company's long range planning group developed forecasts of the antopated annual demand at the distribution centers as follows: The shipging cost per unat (in dollars) from each plant to each distribution center is as follows! Manogement wants to run a model that allows for any plant or set of plants to be open so that total cost is minimizod. The variable costs for the proposed plant locations are estrmated to be the folfowing: Detroit ($4.21), Toledo ($4,32), Denver ( $3.11), and Kansas Crty ($2.87), The foced and variable costs for St. Louis are estimated to be $337,785 and $4.18, respectively. The ogtimal solution is to keep St. Lous and add Toledo and Kansas Caty mth a totat annual cost of $1,532,035; Find the second best solution. Use equation 15.1. If required, round your answer to the nearest dollac, The second best solution has open with a totat annual cost of 4 How does it compare to the optimal solution? If required, round your answer to the neareat whble number: The total annual cost of this second best solution the total annual cost of the optimal solution by about Why might the second-best volution be prelerred? (i) Whth less plants from the second-best solution, the effect of a catastrophic event or a labor dispute at these plants would be slighthr mitigated in cornparison to the optimal solution. (ii) With more plants from the seciond-best solution, the elfect of a catastrophic event or a lobor dispute at these plants would be shightly mitigated in comparison to the eptemal solution. (iii) With the same number of plants from the second best solution, there is less probability of a catastrophic event or a Labor dispute at these plant sites in comparison to the equtimal solution