Sooner units 1 & 2 BARTFollow-Up Report |
Previous | 1 of 4 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
|
This page
All
|
Oklahoma Gas & Electric Sooner Units 1 & 2, Muskogee Units 4 & 5 Dry FGD BART Analysis Follow-Up Report Prepared by: Sargent & Lundy LLC Chicago, Illinois December 28, 2009 Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report Project No. 11418-019 TOC-1 Table of Contents Page Table of Contents 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 2009 COST ESTIMATES AND COST EFFECTIVNESS UPDATE 4 2.1 2009 Conceptual Capital Cost Estimate 4 2.2 Methodology for Developing the Conceptual Cost Estimate 5 2.3 Comparison between 2008 and 2009 Cost Estimates 6 2.4 Updated Total Annual Costs and Cost Effectiveness 7 2.4.1 Capital Costs 8 2.4.2 Operating Costs 9 2.4.3 2009 Cost Effectiveness 11 2.5 Comparison of 2009 Capital Costs against Other Published Capital Cost Information 16 2.5.1 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Report 16 2.5.3 “Update: What’s That Scrubber Going to Cost” article 18 3.0 BART Report Comparisons 19 3.1 Comparison of Baseline SO2 Emissions 19 3.2 Comparison of Modeled Visibility Improvement 20 4.0 Conclusions 23 Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION In spring 2008, S&L completed Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) evaluations for Sooner Units 1 & 2, Muskogee Units 4 & 5, and Seminole Units 1, 2, & 3. The BART evaluations included an analysis of potentially feasible retrofit emission control technologies to control emissions of nitrogen oxide (NOX), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and particulate matter (PM10) from each unit. BART evaluations included in the 2008 reports followed the five-step BART determination process described in Appendix Y to 40 CFR Part 51 “Guidelines for BART Determinations under the Regional Haze Rule.” The five-step BART determination process includes: Step 1: Identify all available retrofit control technologies; Step 2: Eliminate technically infeasible options; Step 3: Evaluate the control effectiveness of the remaining control options; Step 4: Evaluate impacts and document the results; and Step 5: Evaluate visibility impacts. Step 4 of the process involves an evaluation of the potential environmental, energy, and economic impacts to the facility associated with the installation and operation of the technically feasible retrofit control options. To address economic impacts, S&L prepared a cost estimate for each technically feasible retrofit control option. To the extent possible, cost estimating methodologies described in the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Cost Control Manual (“OAQPS Cost Manual”) were used to estimate annual costs. Cost estimates were used to evaluate the cost effectiveness of each technology in terms of annual dollars per ton of pollutant removed. On November 13, 2009, the State of Oklahoma published its draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan Revision (“Regional Haze Implementation Plan”). The draft implementation plan required OG&E to control SO2 emissions from Sooner Units 1 & 2 and Muskogee Units 3 & 4 with dry flue gas desulfurization (DFGD) control systems as BART. In the draft implementation plan, the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) questioned the cost estimates included in OG&E’s 2008 BART evaluation, stating “OG&E’s estimated costs were found to be substantially higher than those reported for similar projects.” DEQ based its BART determination on revised cost estimates, both capital and operating and maintenance (O&M) costs, as well as a revised cost effectiveness evaluation. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 2 Specifically, DEQ questioned the following items in the OG&E DFGD cost estimates: a) The higher than expected DFGD capital costs when compared to other sources of information and the availability of back up information to support the cost estimates. b) The high cost effectiveness ($9,625 to $10,843 $/ton) compared to other BART evaluations. c) What the 2009 capital costs would be considering costs likely peaked in 2008 around the time of the original BART report and have likely fallen since then. d) The accuracy of using factors from the EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual to develop annual operating costs given the large escalation in capital costs over the last few years. The economic impact analysis included in the 2008 OG&E BART determinations calculated the cost effectiveness of DFGD control technology for Sooner Units 1 & 2 and Muskogee Units 4 & 5 on a dollar per ton of pollutant removed basis. Annual costs were calculated by adding annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs to the annualized capital cost of a DFGD control system. To the extent possible, methodologies described in the OAQPS Cost Manual were used to estimate capital and O&M costs. Cost effectiveness ($/ton) of a DFGD was calculated by dividing the total annual cost ($/yr) by the reduction in annual emissions (ton/yr). In addition to comments from DEQ, on December 4, 2009, the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), in consultation with the National Park Service (NPS) submitted comments to DEQ regarding the draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan. FWS/NPS agreed with DEQ that costs presented by OG&E for SO2 control were excessive. To respond to DEQ and FWS/NPS questions and concerns, S&L prepared the following: a) Updated 2009 Conceptual Capital Cost Estimates The original 2008 BART report capital cost estimates were study type +/-30% estimates based primarily on conceptual cost estimates prepared for similar projects that were scaled to account for major differences. The 2009 conceptual capital cost estimates (included herein) for all four OG&E coal fired BART-applicable units (i.e., Sooner Units 1 & 2 and Muskogee Units 4 & 5) are based on project-specific vendor quotations for certain major equipment items and inputs developed by performing preliminary project engineering. The 2009 conceptual capital cost estimates are in the +/-20% accuracy range. A comparison of the revised capital cost estimates against the sources cited by DEQ in the draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan is also included. The draft schedule included in Attachment A, assumes the Muskogee work will take place after the Sooner work; therefore, the Muskogee cost estimate has additional escalation costs included. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 3 b) Operating Cost Estimates Operating costs included in the original 2008 BART report were primarily based on default factors taken from the OAQPS Cost Manual and U.S.EPA’s Coal Utility Environmental Cost (CUECost) model. Updated operating costs included in this report were developed by S&L using OG&E supplied tax, wage, financial, and insurance information, as well as industry standards and vendor quotations. c) Updated Cost Effectiveness Estimates The updated conceptual capital cost and operating cost estimates were used to calculate revised cost effectiveness estimates. d) Alternative Methods for Calculating Reductions in Annual Emissions and Visibility Impacts FWS/NPS also questioned the methodology used by OG&E to calculate the amount of pollutant removed with DFGD controls. The amount of pollutant removed (tons/year) has a direct effect on the cost effectiveness of the pollution control system. To address the FWS/NPS comments, emission reductions from each of the OG&E units were calculated based on using two different baseline emission rates and three different post DFGD emission rates. This was done to show the effect on the cost effectiveness calculations, and to “envelope” the cost effectiveness calculations. Cost effectiveness in terms of modeled visibility improvements at affected Class I Areas ($/dV) were also revised to reflect the updated cost estimates. e) Comparison against BART submittals from similar projects Results of the OG&E BART cost effectiveness impacts ($/ton and $/dV) are compared against impacts reported in other BART evaluations. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 4 2.0 2009 COST ESTIMATES AND COST EFFECTIVNESS UPDATE 2.1 2009 CONCEPTUAL CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE The 2009 conceptual capital cost estimate and supporting information for all four OG&E coal-fired BART-applicable units are included in Attachment A. Table 1 provides a summary of the Sooner and Muskogee 2009 conceptual capital cost estimates. Cost estimates were prepared for each generating station, and divided evenly between the generating units. Table 1 2009 Capital Cost Estimates Item Sooner Unit 1 or Unit 2 2009 Cost Estimate Muskogee Unit 4 or Unit 5 2009 Cost Estimate Direct Costs $162,651,000 $167,572,100 Indirect Costs $24,045,000 $24,801,000 Escalation $23,301,000 $31,638,600 Sales Tax $0 $0 Contingency $29,337,000 $31,552,100 AFUDC & Bond Costs $52,960,000 $61,629,800 TOTAL CAPITAL COST $292,294,000 $317,193,600 Cost Per kw (gross) $514 $555 The conceptual cost estimates provided in Attachment A take into account the retrofit difficulty that can be expected from the existing site configurations. In degree of difficulty, the retrofits at Sooner and Muskogee could be described as average. At Sooner, the new DFGD locations are relatively clear but Unit 1 is tightly bounded on the east side by two coal conveyors that supply both units and on the west by high voltage ductbank, ash piping, and circulating water piping. This existing equipment creates a narrow construction corridor for installing the DFGD equipment. As a result, the Sooner DFGD has a long narrow configuration with relatively long ductwork runs. There is also some ash piping and supports near the existing chimney and ID fans that would have to be relocated to accommodate the new ductwork. The existing storm sewer system in the new DFGD area would have to be completely removed and reinstalled to accommodate the new equipment foundations. A main east-west underground piping run also goes through the new DFGD area and would have to be relocated. These site-specific retrofit challenges, including equipment relocations, have been taken into consideration in the Sooner conceptual cost estimate. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 5 At Muskogee, the new DFGD locations are also relatively clear except for a coal conveyor running in the east-west direction that supplies both units. This conveyor is only 330’ north of the Unit 4 and 5 chimneys and results in the new baghouses and ID booster fans being located north of the conveyor. Thus the new ductwork is required to straddle the conveyor and associated access road which creates longer than normal ductwork runs and piperacks. Another retrofit difficulty is the proximity of the existing ID fans to the chimney. In their current location, it’s not possible to modify the ID fan outlet ductwork to supply the new SDAs. As a result, the ID fans will have to be relocated during the tie-in outage as indicated on the Muskogee GA drawings. Like Sooner, the existing storm sewer system in the DFGD area would also have to be completely removed and reinstalled to accommodate the new equipment foundations. These equipment relocations have been taken into consideration in the Muskogee conceptual cost estimate. 2.2 METHODOLOGY FOR DEVELOPING THE CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE S&L developed the 2009 capital cost estimates using the following methodology: • Plant design data were used to develop datasheets to specify the dry FGD, baghouse, and ID booster fan operating conditions. The datasheets were issued to various manufacturers to obtain budgetary quotations. Costs obtained from these quotations were used to derive the pricing used in the capital cost estimate. The cost development for the spray dryer absorbers and baghouse used in the estimate is described in Attachment A. • A general arrangement (GA) drawing was developed using the information received in the budgetary quotations. The GA drawing was used to estimate the major installation quantities for the project including ductwork, structural steel, foundations, relocations, cable, and pipelines. • A motor list was assembled and used to develop the auxiliary power system sizing and quantities. • Mass balances were prepared and used to size the flue gas, material handling, material storage, and piping systems. • A schedule was developed to estimate escalation and AFUDC costs. It was assumed the new DFGDs would come on line at six month intervals with the last unit being completed at Muskogee near the end of 2015. • Range estimating techniques were used to identify the appropriate amount of contingency to obtain a 95% confidence level. The contingency level was approximately 14%. • A design and cost basis document was prepared to document the major assumptions and inputs for developing the cost estimate. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 6 • Labor cost estimates were developed using Oklahoma area wage rates, installation quantities, and installation rates taken from the S&L database. This methodology provides a conceptual capital cost estimate with accuracy in the range of ±20%. This methodology provides a better estimate of the capital costs associated with installing DFGD control systems, and a more accurate estimate of the actual costs that OG&E would incur to install DFGD at the Sooner and Muskogee Stations. 2.3 COMPARISON BETWEEN 2008 AND 2009 COST ESTIMATES A comparison of the 2008 and 2009 cost estimates for the Sooner and Muskogee Stations is provided in Table 2. Table 2 Sooner Unit 1 or Unit 2 2008 and 2009 Capital Cost Estimate Comparison(1) Sooner Unit 1 or Unit 2 Muskogee Unit 4 or Unit 5 Item 2008 Cost Estimate 2009 Cost Estimate 2008 Cost Estimate 2009 Cost Estimate Total Costs ($) $390,406,000 $292,294,000 $373,106,000 $317,193,600 Cost per kw-gross ($/kw) $686 $514 $652 $555 Cost Difference (%) Base -25% Base -15% Contingency ($) $56,598,000 $29,337,000 $54,089,000 $31,552,100 (1) Total Costs for DFGD summarized in this table are divided equally between the two units at each station. Total Costs for DFGD at the Sooner Station will be $584,588,000, and total costs at the Muskogee Station will be $634,387,200. Major factors contributing to the reduction of costs from 2008 to 2009 include: a) Direct Costs The 2008 estimate was prepared when the demand for DFGD systems was high and costs were near their peak. It is estimated that major equipment costs have dropped approximately 15% to 20% since this time. b) Contingency Costs The 2009 estimate was based on vendor quotations for major equipment and preliminary engineering to develop quantities. As a result of this additional cost certainty, the contingency factor in the 2009 estimate (14%) is approximately 6% lower than the 2008 estimate. The difference in contingency amounts between the two estimates is illustrated in Table 2-2. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 7 c) Escalation Costs The estimate of future escalation is lower in 2009 than it was in early 2008 when prices had been rapidly increasing over the previous three years. The difference in overall project escalation factors is about 10%. The cumulative effect of changes in the above three cost items, with all other things being equal, would be about a 20% to 30% reduction in pricing from 2008 to 2009. The actual decrease was about 25% which falls into this range. We believe this validates the capital costs provided in the 2008 estimate. 2.4 UPDATED TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS AND COST EFFECTIVENESS In general, total annual costs are the sum of the capital recovery costs and annual O&M costs. Cost effectiveness of a pollution control system is calculated by dividing the total annual cost of the control system ($/year) by the total annual quantity of pollutant removed by the system (tons/year); where: - Annual Cost (Reference Year $/year) = Annualized Capital Costs + Annual Operating Costs; - Annualized Capital Costs (Reference Year $/year) = Total Capital Requirement x Capital Recovery Factor; - Total Capital Requirement (Reference Year $) = All capitalized expenses as of the commercial operating date, including direct costs, indirect costs, and allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC); - Capital Recovery Factor = The factor that converts the Total Capital Requirement into equal annual costs over the depreciable life of the asset, accounting for OG&E returns on debt and equity and income taxes, expressed in real terms (i.e., inflation removed); and - Annual Operating Costs (Reference Year $/year) = Variable O&M Costs + Fixed O&M Costs + Indirect Operating Costs. The following sections describe the derivation of these components of the cost estimate. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 8 2.4.1 Capital Costs Conceptual capital costs for the DFGD control projects at each OG&E station were calculated using the methodology described in Section 2.2. The total capital requirement (TCR) is the sum of direct costs, indirect costs, contingency, escalation, and allowance for funds used during construction. Direct costs include equipment, material, labor, spare parts, special tools, consumables, and freight. Indirect costs include engineering, procurement, construction management, start-up, commissioning, operator training, and owner's costs. Escalation and AFUDC were calculated from the estimated distribution of cash flows during the construction period and OG&E's before-tax weighted average cost of capital of 8.66%/year. The 37-day tie-in outage for each unit is assumed to be coordinated with the normal 5-week scheduled outage such that incremental replacement cost is negligible. The TCR for each unit is summarized in Tables B-1 through B-4 in Attachment B. Capital Recovery Factor The capital recovery factor converts the TCR into equal annual costs over the depreciable life of the asset, accounting for OG&E returns on debt and equity and income taxes, expressed in real terms (i.e., inflation removed). These are also referred to as levelized capital charges. Property taxes and insurance are sometimes included with the capital charges, but are classified in this analysis as part of the Indirect Operating Costs to be consistent with the BART reports. The economic parameters used to derive the levelized capital charges are summarized in Table 3. Table 3 Economic Parameters to Derive Levelized Capital Charges Commercial Operation Date (Reference Year) Sooner 2014 Muskogee 2015 Depreciable Life 20 years Inflation Rate 2.50%/year Effective Income Tax Rate – Federal and State 38.12% Common Equity Fraction 0.557 Debt Fraction 0.443 Return on Common Equity Nominal 10.75%/year Real 8.05%/year Return on Debt Nominal 6.03%/year Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 9 Real 3.44%/year Discount Rate (after-tax cost of capital) Nominal 7.64%/year Real 5.43%/year Tax Depreciation 20-year straight line Levelized Capital Charges (real) 10.36%/year Based upon the above parameters, the real levelized capital charge rate (capital recovery factor) is 10.36%/year. The derivation of this value is shown in Table B-5 in Attachment B. The TCR multiplied by 10.36% thus determines the Annualized Capital Costs. 2.4.2 Operating Costs Annual operating costs for the DFGD system consist of variable O&M costs, fixed O&M costs, and indirect operating costs. The derivation of each cost component is described below. Variable O&M Variable O&M costs are items that generally vary in proportion to the plant capacity factor. These consist of lime reagent costs, water costs, FGD waste disposal costs, bag and cage replacement costs, ash disposal costs, and auxiliary power costs, which were derived as follows: - Lime Reagent. Based on material balances for the average fuel composition and 90% capacity factor. The first-year delivered cost of lime is $118.80/ton for Sooner and $105.53/ton for Muskogee based on budgetary lime quotations received for truck delivery. - Water. Based on 205,256 lb/hr at full load at Sooner, 219,839 lb/hr at full load at Muskogee, and 90% capacity factor. The first-year cost of water is $0.49/1000 gallons at Sooner and $2.57/1000 gallons at Muskogee. Water unit costs are based on information received from OG&E. The Muskogee water cost includes the cost of purchasing water. Sooner does not have any water purchase costs. - FGD Waste Disposal. Based on material balances for the average fuel composition and 90% capacity factor. The first year cost of on-site disposal is $39.60/ton at Sooner and $40.59/ton at Muskogee. Disposal cost only includes FGD by-products and does not include fly ash. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 10 - Bag and Cage Replacement. Based on the exhaust gas flow through the baghouse, air-to-cloth ratio of 3.5 for pulse jet baghouse, 4% contingency for bag cleaning, and 3-year bag life. The first year bag cost (including fabric and hangers) is $3.22/ft2 at Sooner and $3.31/ft2 at Muskogee. - Ash Disposal. Assumed no increase in ash disposal with the fabric filter due to the existing ESP remaining in service. - Auxiliary Power Cost. Based on auxiliary power calculations and 90% capacity factor. The first year auxiliary power cost is $83.83/MWh at Sooner and $85.92/MWh at Muskogee. Fixed O&M Fixed O&M costs are recurring annual costs that are generally independent of the plant capacity factor. These consist of operating labor, supervisor labor, maintenance materials, and maintenance labor, which were derived as follows: - Operating Labor. Based on three shifts/day 365 days/year. The first year labor rate (salary plus benefits) is $57.33/hour at Sooner and $58.76/hour at Muskogee. - Supervisory Labor. This was based on 15% of operating labor, according to the EPA Control Cost Manual, page 2-31. S&L determined that the EPA approach provides a reasonable estimate for this cost item. - Maintenance Materials. This was based on 0.6% of the total plant investment, based on Sargent & Lundy’s experience on other FGD projects. - Maintenance Labor. This was based on 110% of operating labor, according to the EPA Control Cost Manual, page 2-31. S&L determined that the EPA approach provides a reasonable estimate for this cost item. Indirect Operating Costs Indirect operating costs are recurring annual costs for the FGD system that are not part of the direct O&M. These consist of property taxes, insurance, and administration, which were derived as follows: Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 11 - Property Taxes. Calculated as 0.60 % of total capital investment at Sooner and 0.85% of total capital investment at Muskogee, according to OG&E property tax rates. These rates are significantly lower than those used in the EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual 6th Ed., page 2-34. - Insurance. Calculated as 0.0105 % of total capital investment at both Sooner and Muskogee, according to OG&E insurance rates. These rates are significantly lower than those used in the EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual 6th Ed., page 2-34. - Administration. These are calculated as 20% of the fixed O&M based on Sargent & Lundy’s experience on other projects. This results in significantly lower costs compared to those obtained using the methodology described in the EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual 6th Ed., page 2-34. Total Annual Operating Costs The total annual operating costs for each unit are calculated in Tables B-1 through B-4 in Attachment B and are approximately $29 to $32/kw per year. These costs compare favorably with industry O&M data for existing coal plants, and are within the normal range of expected O&M costs for dry FGD systems. The annual operating cost of approximately $29 to $32/kw is significantly lower than the $68/kw calculated in the 2008 BART report which was derived using OAQPS Cost Manual and CUECost default factors, and is lower than the $43 to $47/kw estimated by the DEQ in the draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan. 2.4.3 2009 Cost Effectiveness Total annual DFGD costs for each unit are summarized in Table 4. Detailed cost calculations are shown in Tables B-1 through B-4 in Attachment B. Total annual costs are divided by the annual tons of SO2 removed to calculate average control technology cost effectiveness. Annual emission reductions associated with DFGD control systems are summarized in Table 5 using the same basis as the September 2009 OG&E BART update. The SO2 control efficiency for each unit is summarized in Table 6 Table 4 DFGD Total Annual Cost Summary Unit Capital Recovery ($/year) Annual O&M ($/year) Total Annual Cost ($/year) Muskogee 4 $32,861,300 $18,438,900 $51,300,200 Muskogee 5 $32,861,300 $18,438,900 $51,300,200 Sooner 1 $30,281,800 $16,550,500 $46,832,300 Sooner 2 $30,281,800 $16,550,500 $46,832,300 Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 12 Table 5 BART Annual SO2 Emission Reductions with Dry FGD Unit Baseline Annual SO2 Emissions (1) (tpy) Projected Post- Control Annual Emissions (2) (tpy) Annual Emission Reductions (tpy) Muskogee 4 9,113 2,160 6,953 Muskogee 5 9,006 2,160 6,846 Sooner 1 9,394 2,017 7,377 Sooner 2 8,570 2,017 6,553 (1) In this table baseline SO2 emissions are calculated as the average actual SO2 emission rate during the baseline years of 2004 – 2006. (2) In this table projected post-control SO2 emissions are calculated based on a controlled SO2 emission rate of 0.10 lb/mmBtu and a 90% capacity factor. Table 6 Average Cost Effectiveness Unit Annual Cost ($/year) SO2 Removed (tons/year) Average Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) Muskogee 4 $51,300,200 6,953 $7,378 Muskogee 5 $51,300,200 6,846 $7,493 Sooner 1 $46,832,300 7,377 $6,348 Sooner 2 $46,832,300 6,553 $7,147 Cost effectiveness is a function of both the cost of a control system and the annual tons of pollutant removed. With respect to tons removed, various bases can be used to calculate both the baseline emission rate and the post-project controlled emission rate. Varying either the baseline calculation or the projected emissions calculation will result in a different cost effectiveness value. To account for this variability, the cost effectiveness of DFGD controls at Sooner and Muskogee were calculated using various baseline and projected SO2 emission rates. Emission rates were chosen to “envelope” the cost effectiveness of the DFGD control systems. For example, baseline SO2 emissions were based on the actual average SO2 emission rate during the 2004-2006 baseline period, as well as the highest annual SO2 emissions during the baseline period. Projected SO2 emissions were calculated using the presumptive SO2 emission rate of 0.15 lb/mmBtu, as well controlled SO2 emission rates of 0.10 and 0.08 lb/mmBtu. Finally, capacity factors of either 90% (which is more representative of actual operations) or 100% (which represents potential emissions but would represent actual operations) were also used. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 13 Although annual O&M costs will vary depending on the controlled SO2 emission rate (i.e., lower post-project SO2 emission rates will have a higher annual variable O&M cost), for this analysis total annual costs were held constant. Cost effectiveness calculations for two alternative scenarios are summarized in Tables 5a & 6a and 5b & 6b. Table 5a BART Annual SO2 Emission Reductions with Dry FGD (Scenario 2) Unit Baseline Annual SO2 Emissions (1) (tpy) Projected Post- Control Annual Emissions (2) (tpy) Annual Emission Reductions (tpy) Muskogee 4 9,775 3,600 6,175 Muskogee 5 10,224 3,600 6,624 Sooner 1 10,189 3,361 6,828 Sooner 2 8,746 3,361 5,385 (1) In this table baseline SO2 emissions reflect the highest annual SO2 emission rate during the baseline years of 2004 – 2006. (2) In this table projected post-control SO2 emissions are calculated based on a controlled SO2 emission rate of 0.15 lb/mmBtu (the presumptive BART emission rate) and a 100% capacity factor. Table 6a Average Cost Effectiveness (Scenario 2) Unit Annual Cost ($/year) SO2 Removed (tons/year) Average Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) Muskogee 4 $51,300,200 6,175 $8,308 Muskogee 5 $51,300,200 6,624 $7,745 Sooner 1 $46,832,300 6,828 $6,859 Sooner 2 $46,832,300 5,385 $8,697 Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 14 Table 5b BART Annual SO2 Emission Reductions with Dry FGD (Scenario 3) Unit Baseline Annual SO2 Emissions (1) (tpy) Projected Post- Control Annual Emissions (2) (tpy) Annual Emission Reductions (tpy) Muskogee 4 9,775 1,920 7,855 Muskogee 5 10,224 1,920 8,304 Sooner 1 10,189 1,793 8,396 Sooner 2 8,746 1,793 6,953 (1) In this table baseline SO2 emissions reflect the highest annual SO2 emission rate during the baseline years of 2004 – 2006. (2) In this table projected post-control SO2 emissions are calculated based on a controlled SO2 emission rate of 0.08 lb/mmBtu and a 100% capacity factor. A controlled SO2 emission rate of 0.08 lb/mmBtu represents the lowest SO2 emission rate that could reasonably be expected to be achieved on a large subbituminous coal-fired unit with a retrofit DFGD control system. Table 6b Average Cost Effectiveness (Scenario 3) Unit Annual Cost ($/year) SO2 Removed (tons/year) Average Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) Muskogee 4 $51,300,200 7,855 $6,531 Muskogee 5 $51,300,200 8,304 $6,178 Sooner 1 $46,832,300 8,396 $5,578 Sooner 2 $46,832,300 6,953 $6,736 Cost effectiveness varies depending on the baseline and controlled SO2 emission rates used in the evaluation. Under all scenarios, DFGD cost effectiveness on the OG&E units is greater than $5,550/ton. Based on the BART presumptive level of 0.15 lb/mmBtu, and assuming a 100% capacity factor, cost effectiveness of DFGD on the Muskogee and Sooner units would be in the range of $6,859 to $8,697/ton (see, Table 6a). Cost effective values calculated using the BART presumptive level should be used to compare cost effective at other BART applicable sources. In addition to calculating cost effectiveness on a $/ton basis, with respect to regional haze impacts, cost effectiveness can be calculated as a function of annual costs and modeled visibility improvements at the affected Class I Areas. Modeled visibility improvements will be a function of the proximity of the unit to the Class I Area, baseline and controlled emissions, and the pollutant being controlled. Table 7 provides a summary of the modeled reduction in visibility impairment (measured in deciview- dv) resulting from DFGD controls on the Muskogee and Sooner generating units. The cost effectiveness of DFGD controls as a function of modeled Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 15 reductions in visibility impairment (using two different impact criteria) is provided in Tables 8 and 8a. Table 7 Modeled Visibility Improvement at the Class I Areas (dv) Class I Area Muskogee Units 4 & 5 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Refuge 1.275 0.51 Caney Creek Wilderness Area 0.804 0.32 Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area 1.11 0.44 Hercules-Glades Wilderness Area 1.028 1.17 Total 4.217 2.44 Table 8 Average Cost Effectiveness ($/dv) Unit Annual Cost ($/year) Modeled Visibility Improvement(1) (dv) Average Cost Effectiveness ($/dv) Muskogee 4 & 5 $102,600,400 1.275 $80,470,902 Sooner 1 & 2 $93,664,600 1.17 $80,055,214 (1) The modeled reduction in visibility impairment used in this table represents the highest single modeled reduction at a single Class I Area. Table 8a Average Cost Effectiveness ($/dv) Unit Annual Cost ($/year) Modeled Visibility Improvement(1) (dv) Average Cost Effectiveness ($/dv) Muskogee 4 & 5 $102,600,400 4.217 $24,330,187 Sooner 1 & 2 $93,664,600 2.44 $38,387,131 (1) The modeled reduction in visibility impairment used in this table represents the cumulative reduction of all Class I Areas. Based on the cost effectiveness calculations summarized above, taking into considered modeled visibility improvements at all of the affected Class I areas, the cost effectiveness of DFGD on Sooner Units 1 & 2 will be in the range of $38,387,000/dv, and the cost effectiveness of DFGD on Muskogee Units 4 & 5 will be in the range of $24,330,000/dv. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 16 2.5 COMPARISON OF 2009 CAPITAL COSTS AGAINST OTHER PUBLISHED CAPITAL COST INFORMATION Appendix 6-4 of the November 13, 2009 Oklahoma draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan Revision includes DEQ’s BART analysis for each OG&E BART applicable unit. In each of the OG&E BART determinations, DEQ revised the cost estimates for retrofit DFGD control systems, including revisions to the capital costs and annual O&M costs. Although DEQ stated that, in general, the cost estimating methodology used by OG&E “followed guidance provided in the EPA Air Pollution Cost Control Manual,” DEQ concluded, based on a review of other BART submittals, that OG&E’s costs were substantially higher than those reported for similar projects. (Draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan, Appendix 6-4, page cliii). DEQ proceeded to revise the capital costs and O&M costs based on cost information provided in the following publications: (1) a Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment report titled “Summary of Research and Potential Control Options, Emission Reductions and Costs for Reducing SO2 and NOx from Existing Major Colorado Point Sources”; (2) a March 1, 2009 article in Power, on online industry magazine, titled “Update: What’s That Scrubber Going to Cost” written by George W. Sharp of American Electric Power; and (3) a report prepared by Sargent & Lundy for the National Lime Association titled “Flue Gas Desulfurization Technology Evaluation, Dry Lime vs. Wet Limestone FGD” dated March 2007. In its comments to DEQ regarding the draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan FWS/NPS agreed with DEQ that costs presented by OG&E for SO2 control were excessive. In addition, FWS/NPS provided an alternative lower cost analysis using capital costs “taken from the 2007 Flue Gas Desulfurization Technology Evaluation, Dry Lime vs. Wet Limestone FGD, prepared for National Lime Association.” We address each of the referenced documents below. 2.5.1 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Report The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment report included unit capital costs for retrofit dry scrubbers on 500 MW units burning PRB coal. The report was prepared by BBC Research and Consulting, and relied on cost data in a 2003 report prepared by Sargent & Lundy titled “Economics of Lime and Limestone for Control of Sulfur Dioxide” (the 2003 National Lime Report). As discussed in more detail below, capital costs included in the 2003 National Lime Report were intended to provide a comparison between lime-based and limestone-based scrubbing technologies, and were not intended to be used as the basis for a project-specific capital cost estimate. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 17 2.5.2 2007 National Lime Association Report Both DEQ and FWS reference the 2007 National Lime Report prepared by Sargent & Lundy as a basis for their capital cost revisions. In fact, the FWS’s alternative capital costs were based on numbers provided in the 2007 National Lime Report. However, the National Lime report was only intended to provide a comparative cost effectiveness evaluation of wet limestone-based FGD control systems and dry lime-based control systems. The report was not intended to provide an evaluation of total capital requirements for either type of control technology and was not intended to serve as the basis for a capital cost estimate. The 2007 report clearly states:1 FGD prices have seen a minimum of 25% inflation in the past year. Some recent contracts have been signed at prices over 300% higher than the market of 5 years ago. The costs [in this report] have been prepared on a consistent, uniform basis and show a level that some buyers achieved in mid-2006. Sargent & Lundy cautions the reader that the costs provided herein are not indicative of any cost you may actually achieve. However, we believe the costs are valid for comparative purposes. These costs should not be used for any of these purposes; • Planning the cost of a FGD project • Budget requests or allocations • Solicitation of pollution control bonds In today’s market place, it is impossible to determine capital cost of an FGD system until the contract is signed with the supplier. Capital costs in both the 2003 and 2007 National Lime Reports were developed for comparative purposes only. Furthermore, costs in the 2007 report were based on 2006 dollars and did not include escalation, which can add approximately 10% to 20% to the project cost. Nor do the reports take into consideration any site-specific retrofit challenges. Capital costs in the National Lime Reports were presented on a consistent basis for comparative purposes only. Cost estimates using the methodology described in Section 2.1 of this report provide a more accurate accounting of actual costs that will be incurred by OG&E to install and operate dry FGD control systems at the Sooner and Muskogee generating stations. 1 See, Sargent & Lundy, “Flue Gas Desulfurization Technology Evaluation, Dry Lime vs. Wet Limestone FGD,” prepared for the National Lime Association, March 2007, page 2 (emphasis in the original). Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 18 2.5.3 “Update: What’s That Scrubber Going to Cost” article DEQ also used capital cost estimates summarized in a March 1, 2009 article in “Power” an online industry magazine to adjust the capital costs for DFGD retrofit projects at the OG&E stations. The Power article provided a survey of FGD projects at large electric utility generating stations during the period of December 2007 through June 2008. The article summarized the average total installed costs of FGD control systems as reported by the survey respondents, noting that the reported costs “were expected to have wide variation, principally because of the peculiarities that exist at each project site, the retrofit project complexity, and the timing differences between projects.” Therefore, assigning a project-specific cost based on information summarized in the article would not be correct without taking into consideration project specific details. Furthermore, the 2009 OG&E conceptual capital costs of $514/kw (Sooner) and $555/kw (Muskogee) are reasonably close to the $359 to $471/kw taken from this article. The article reported that the 2008 cost surveys were 28% higher than those reported in the 2007 survey with an average of $359/kw for 600 to 900 MW plant range and $471/kw for 300 to 599 MW range. Note that these values are averages and include units with wide ranges of in-service dates. In fact, 55% of the units in the survey were expected to be in operation by 2009 whereas the OG&E units are not expected to be in operation until 2014 and 2015. The 55% of the units in operation by 2009 would have had their major equipment purchased prior to the 28% run up in pricing in 2008 from late 2006 and prior to the 22% run up in pricing from 2006 to 2007 referenced in the same article. The OG&E units would be subject to these escalated costs and future escalation. In addition, the OG&E units would also require a higher level of contingency since the projects are still in the early study phase. As a result, units going into service in the near future would be expected to be below the average cost while units going into service at later dates would be expected to be above the average cost. The article only provides an average cost and does not provide any information on the cost distribution about the average. A wide distribution is expected as indicated at the bottom of page 65 of the Power article, where it states that “average total installed costs reported by the survey respondents were expected to have wide variation” based partially on the “timing differences between projects.” Because of the expected wide variation in project costs, this report can be used to illustrate recent industry cost trends but should not be used to estimate the cost of specific units that will not go into service for another 5 to 7 years. Again, it is believed that the methodology described in Section 2.1 will provide more accurate results for a specific project than the cited article. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 19 3.0 BART Report Comparisons The cost effectiveness of a pollution control system is a function of the total annual cost of the system (taking into consideration capital recovery and annual O&M) and the amount of pollutant removed by the control system (tons per year). With respect to regional haze impacts, cost effectiveness can also be measured as a function of total annual costs divided by the modeled improvement in visibility at the nearby Class I Areas. This measure of cost effectiveness is reported in total annual dollars per deciview change in visibility impairment ($/dv). Thus, in addition to costs, two site-specific factors that impact cost effectiveness are the quantity of pollutant removed and the reduction in modeled visibility impairment. 3.1 COMPARISON OF BASELINE SO2 EMISSIONS Table 9 provides a summary of the baseline SO2 emission rates included in several BART evaluations. A more detailed comparison of some of the costs and cost effectiveness calculations included in various BART determinations is included in Attachment C. Table 9 Comparison of Baseline SO2 Emissions at Several BART Units Station Baseline SO2 Emission Rate (lb/mmBtu) Baseline SO2 Emissions (tpy) Muskogee Unit 4 0.507 9,113 Muskogee Unit 5 0.514 9,006 Sooner Unit 1 0.509 9,394 Sooner Unit 2 0.516 8,570 NPPD Gerald Gentleman Unit 1 0.749 24,254 NPPD Gerald Gentleman Unit 2 0.749 25,531 White Bluff Unit 1 0.915 31,806 White Bluff Unit 2 0.854 32,510 Boardman Unit 1 0.614 14,902 Northeastern Unit 3 0.900 16,000 Northeastern Unit 4 0.900 16,000 Naughton Unit 1 1.180 8,624 Naughton Unit 2 1.180 11,187 OPPD Nebraska City Unit 1 0.815 24,191 Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 20 Of the units listed in Table 9, the OG&E units have the lowest baseline SO2 emission rates, and among the lowest baseline annual SO2 emissions (tpy). Baseline emissions have a direct effect on the cost effectiveness of a pollution control system, as shown below: Cost Effectiveness = Total Annual Costs / (Baseline Emissions – Projected Emissions) Assuming total annual costs and projected emissions are similar, cost effectiveness will be a function of the baseline emissions. This holds true for units firing subbituminous coals with baseline SO2 emission rates in the range of 0.5 lb/mmBtu to approximately 2.0 lb/mmBtu because removal efficiencies achievable with DFGD control will vary based on inlet SO2 loading. In general, DFGD control systems are capable of achieving higher removal efficiencies on units with higher inlet SO2 loading.2 DFGD control systems will be more cost effective on units with higher baseline SO2 emissions because the control system will be capable of achieving higher removal efficiencies and remove more tons of SO2 per year for similar costs. Conversely, DFGD will be less cost effective, on a $/ton basis, on units with lower SO2 baseline emissions. The difference in baseline SO2 emissions summarized above accounts for some of the variability seen in the BART cost effectiveness calculations. On the basis of the baseline emission rates alone, with all other factors being equal, the cost effectiveness of the OG&E units would be about 55% to 185% higher than the other units listed in Table 9. 3.2 COMPARISON OF MODELED VISIBILITY IMPROVEMENT Finally, with respect to regional haze impacts, cost effectiveness can also be calculated as a function of modeled improvements in visibility at the Class I areas. This cost effectiveness measurement can be presented by dividing the total annual costs by the degree of visibility improvement at an individual Class I area, or by dividing total annual costs by the sum of visibility improvement across all affected Class I areas. Using either approach, control technologies installed on units with higher baseline emissions and located nearer a Class I area will be more cost effective. In its comments to DEQ, FWS/NPS argued that cost effectiveness should “consider both the degree of visibility improvement in a given Class I area as well as the cumulative effects of 2 Removal efficiencies achievable with DFGD will be a function of several unit-specific process parameters. Process parameters affecting removal efficiency include: inlet and outlet flue gas temperatures; reactant stoichiometric ratio; how close the DFGD is operated to saturation conditions; the amount of solids product recycled to the atomizer, and the inlet SO2 concentration. Chemical and physical limitations including flue gas temperature, Ca/S stoichiometry, approach to saturation, mixing and reaction time limit the control efficiency of the DFGD control systems. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 21 improving visibility across all of the Class I areas affected.”3 FWS/NPS reasoned that “[i]t is not appropriate to use the same metric to evaluate the effects of reducing emission from a BART source that impacts only one Class I area as for a BART source that impacts multiple Class I areas.”4 Taking the cumulative impact approach, cost effectiveness will also be a function of the number of Class I areas affected by an individual BART applicable unit. Controls would be more cost-effective on units in near proximity to a Class I area, as well as units located within 300 km of a number of Class I areas. Figure 1 shows the location of the Class I areas in the U.S. Figure 1 Class I Areas A majority of the Class I areas are located in the western part of the U.S. Simply due to the number of Class I areas in the west, it is likely that a BART applicable unit located in the western U.S. will be closer to a Class I area, and that emissions from the unit will affect visibility at more Class I areas. For example, the Boardman Generating Station located in north central Oregon approximately 150 miles east of Portland, is located within 300 km of 14 Class I areas. By 3 FWS/NPS Comments, page 3. 4 Id. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 22 comparison, the Sooner and Muskogee stations are located within 300 km of one and four Class I areas, respectively. Taking the cumulative impact approach, control technologies will be more cost effectiveness on units affecting a number of Class I areas. For example, modeled visibility improvement at each Class I areas affected by the Sooner, Muskogee, and Boardman stations are summarized in Table 10. Assuming the cost of retrofit controls are similar at all three stations, and assuming that each station achieves similar emission reductions, DFGD controls would be more cost effective at the Boardman Station (on a $/dv basis) simply due to the cumulative improvement in visibility improvement. Table 10 Comparison of Baseline SO2 Emissions at Several BART Units Muskogee Units 4 & 5 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Boardman Unit 1 1 1.275 0.51 0.777 2 0.804 0.32 0.439 3 1.11 0.44 0.802 4 1.028 1.17 0.544 5 na na 0.774 6 na na 0.655 7 na na 0.659 8 na na 0.969 9 na na 0.924 10 na na 0.614 11 na na 0.776 12 na na 0.354 13 na na 0.681 14 na na 0.874 Total 4.217 2.44 9.842 In its BART analysis submitted to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, total capital requirements and total annual costs for DFGD were estimated at $247,293,000 and $36,322,000, respectively. Using the sum of modeled visibility improvements at all 14 Class I areas, cost effectiveness of the DFGD control system would be $3,690,510/dv (e.g., $36,322,000 divided by 9.842 dv). By comparison, because the OG&E stations are located relatively far from a limited number of Class I areas, cost effectiveness at the Sooner and Muskogee stations would be $38,387,000/dV and $24,330,000/dv, respectively.5 5 Sooner = $93,664,600 ÷ 2.44 dv = $38,387,000/dv Muskogee = $102,600,400 ÷ 4.217 dv = $24,330,000/dv Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 23 4.0 Conclusions Sargent & Lundy updated the retrofit DFGD control system cost estimates for the Sooner and Muskogee Generating Stations. The 2009 conceptual cost estimate (included in this report) was based on project-specific vendor quotations for certain major equipment items and inputs developed by performing preliminary project engineering. The 2009 conceptual capital cost estimate is in the ±20% accuracy range. Total annual costs associated with the installation of DFGD, including capital recovery costs and annual O&M costs were also updated. Annual O&M costs were derived from preliminary engineering mass balance calculations and project-specific unit costs. The cost estimating methodology used herein to develop both capital and O&M costs provides a more accurate estimate of actual costs that OG&E would incur with the installation and operation of DFGD on the Sooner and Muskogee units. The 2009 conceptual capital cost estimates and supporting information for both generating stations are included in Attachment A. Detailed total annual cost summaries, including capital recovery, variable O&M, and fixed O&M calculations are included in Attachment B. Based on the cost estimates, the total capital requirements for DFGD controls on all four OG&E units will be in the range of $1.22 billion dollars. Total annual costs (including capital recovery and O&M) will be in the range of $93.6 million/year at Sooner and $102.6 million/year at Muskogee. Cost effectiveness of a pollution control system is a function of the total annual cost of the system and the quantity of pollutant removed (tons/year). Because of the relatively low baseline SO2 emission rates at both Muskogee and Sooner (see, Table 9), DFGD will be less cost effective on these units than on similarly sized units with higher baseline SO2 emissions. Based on expected reductions in actual annual SO2 emissions, the cost effectiveness of DFGD on the OG&E units will be in the range of $6,348 to $7,493/ton (see, Table 6). In addition to calculating cost effectiveness on a $/ton basis, with respect to regional haze impacts, cost effectiveness can be calculated as a function of annual costs and modeled visibility improvements at the affected Class I Areas. Modeled visibility improvements will be a function of the proximity of the unit to the Class I Area, baseline and controlled emissions, and the pollutant being controlled. Because the OG&E stations are located relatively far from a limited number of Class I areas, DFGD will be less cost effective (on a $/dv basis) on the OG&E units than on similarly sized units located closer to a Class I area or within 300 km of several Class I areas. Based on modeled visibility improvements, the cost effectiveness at the Sooner and Muskogee stations would be $38,387,000/dV and $24,330,000/dv, respectively. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Attachment A Sooner Units 1 & 2 Conceptual Cost Estimate OG&E Sooner Units 1&2 DFGD System Cost Estimate Account Summary Date: 12/11/2009 Account Description Cost Dry FGD System $86,859,600 Fabric Filter $46,335,000 Ash Recycling System - DFGD Contractor's Scope $12,072,500 Waste Ash and Fly Ash Handling System $14,265,600 Flue Gas System $42,463,000 Mechanical - Balance of Plant $6,891,300 Electrical - Auxiliary Power and Balance of Plant Electrical Work $41,935,100 Controls & Instrumentation $5,088,500 Civil Work $3,597,400 Removal and Relocation of Existing Equipment and Infrastructure $2,047,600 Other Costs $63,746,900 Total Indirect Costs $48,090,100 Escalation $46,602,900 Contingency $58,673,400 Bond Cost $4,786,700 Interest During Construction (AFUDC) $101,133,800 Total Project Cost $584,589,400 Page 1 of 1 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost Dry FGD System 46,462,100 8,209,500 508,270 32,188,000 86,859,600 31-45-25 Dry FGD System Q 2 LT 15,917,133 0.00 31,834,300 0 136,400 272,800 313,720 MECH 61.53 19,303,200 51,137,500 31-45-35 Reagent Handling / Preparation Est 0 0 0 31-45-35 Reagent Handling / Preparation - Mechanical Q 2 LT 3,969,614 0.00 7,939,200 0 33600 67,200 77,280 MECH 61.53 4,755,000 12,694,200 26-13-99 Lime Storage Silo with piping for pneumatic unloading (truck) Concrete Silo - Subcontract price Q 1 LT 3,200,000 0.00 3,200,000 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 3,200,000 24-17-15 Elevator for lime silo four person rack and pinion maintenance elevator - subcontract price includes labor Est 1 LT 290,000 0.00 290,000 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 290,000 22-13-27 Concrete pit for the elevator Est 10 CY 0 210.00 0 2,100 7.5 75 86 CONP 51.69 4,500 6,600 41-99-99 Electrical work for the elevator allowance Est 1 LT 0 20,000.00 0 20,000 175 175 201 WIRE 66.93 13,500 33,500 33-43-15 Pneumatic lime transfer equipment/piping including blowers, piping, and valves Q 1 EA 400,000 0.00 400,000 0 3500 3,500 4,025 MECH 61.53 247,700 647,700 23-17-23 Access Gallery Est 2,000 SF 0.00 35.00 0 70,000 0.40 800 920 GALL 67.14 61,800 131,800 0 Dry FGD System - Civil / Structural Work 0 Foundations for SDA's Quantities are total for 2 units 21-23-15 Excavation Est 2,140 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 428 492 EXFD 63.95 31,500 31,500 21-17-25 Backfill Est 140 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 42 48 EXFD 63.95 3,100 3,100 22-13-37 Concrete Est 2,000 CY 0.00 105.00 0 210,000 1.50 3,000 3,450 CONP 51.69 178,300 388,300 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 180 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 207,000 20.00 3,600 4,140 REIN 61.48 254,500 461,500 22-17-25 Formwork Est 6,000 SF 0.00 2.50 0 15,000 0.14 810 932 FORM 71.62 66,700 81,700 22-15-25 Embedded steel Est 5.00 TN 0.00 5,000.00 0 25,000 120.00 600 690 CARP 46.37 32,000 57,000 SDA Superstructure Quantities are total for 2 units 0 23-25-75 Common Penthouse for SDA's support steel, roof steel, girts and purlins Est 152 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 402,500 35.00 5,316 6,113 STST 87.33 533,800 936,300 24-37-43 SDA Roof Insulation between penthouse floor and SDA roof total for 2 SDAs Est 12,070 SF 0.00 15.00 0 181,100 0.30 3,621 4,164 ROOF 45.55 189,700 370,800 24-37-47 Roofing for common SDA Penthouse standing seam type. Est 8,100 SF 0.00 18 0 145,800 0.22 1,782 2,049 ROOF 45.55 93,300 239,100 24-41-25 Siding for common SDA Penthouse insulated metal siding Est 16,200 SF 0.00 12 0 194,400 0.11 1,782 2,049 SDNG 63.02 129,100 323,500 36-13-23 Shell Insulation subcontract cost Est 61,688 SF 30.00 0 1,850,600 0 0 0 DINS 52.16 0 1,850,600 22-13-23 Concrete bottom floor for common SDA Penthouse includes metal decking and formwork Est 99 CY 210 0 20,800 7.5 743 854 CONP 51.69 44,100 64,900 41-37-99 Common Penthouse Building Services H&V and Lighting Est 8,100 SF 0.00 30.00 0 243,000 0.30 2,430 2,795 WIRE 66.93 187,000 430,000 31-41-77 Fire Protection for Penthouse Standpipe & hose stations. Est 2 LS 80,000 160,000 500.00 1,000 1,150 MECH 61.53 70,800 230,800 24-17-15 Elevator For SDA - four person rack and pinion elevator. Suncontract price includes labor Est 1 LT 290,000 0.00 290,000 0 0.00 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 290,000 22-13-37 Concrete pit for the elevator Est 10 CY 0 210.00 0 2,100 7.5 75 86 CONP 51.69 4,500 6,600 41-99-99 Electrical work for the elevator allowance Est 1 LT 0 20,000.00 0 20,000 175 175 201 WIRE 66.93 13,500 33,500 Page 1 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost SDA - Support Steel and Access Gallery 23-25-75 Support Steel Included in DFGD equip. Est 300 TN 0 0 0 0 20 6,000 6,900 STST 87.33 602,600 602,600 23-17-23 Walkway from U1 SDA's to U2 SDA's Est 20 TN 0 0 0 0 35 700 805 STST 87.33 70,300 70,300 23-17-23 Access Gallery Est 1,500 SF 0.00 35.00 0 52,500 0.40 600 690 GALL 67.14 46,300 98,800 27-17-99 Touch-up painting Est 2 LT 0.00 45,000.00 0 90,000 1800.00 3,600 4,140 PNTR 56.92 235,600 325,600 Reagent Handling / Preparation- Civil / Structural Work One common for both units 0 Foundations for Lime Storage Silo 21-23-15 Excavation Est 280 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 56 64 EXFD 63.95 4,100 4,100 21-17-25 Backfill Est 80 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 24 28 EXFD 63.95 1,800 1,800 22-13-37 Concrete Est 200 CY 0.00 105.00 0 21,000 1.50 300 345 CONP 51.69 17,800 38,800 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 18 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 20,700 20.00 360 414 REIN 61.48 25,500 46,200 22-17-25 Formwork Est 600 SF 0.00 2.50 0 1,500 0.14 81 93 FORM 71.62 6,700 8,200 22-15-25 Embedded steel Est 0.50 TN 0.00 5,000.00 0 2,500 120.00 60 69 CARP 46.37 3,200 5,700 23-25-75 Support Steel for lime Storage Silo Not required - concrete silo 23-17-23 Galleries Est 1,800 SF 0.00 35.00 0 63,000 0.40 720 828 GALL 67.14 55,600 118,600 23-17-53 Stair Tower for Lime Storage Silo Est 120 TN 2,650 0 318,000 0 25 3,000 3,450 STST 87.33 301,300 619,300 31-41-77 Fire Protection Standpipe & hose stations Est 1 LS 60,000.00 60,000 0 400.00 400 460 YDPP 63.15 29,000 89,000 Lime Preparation / Recycle Building (55' x 100' x 125'H) Quantities shown are total for 2 buildings, 1/unit 22 Substructure 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 1,070 CY 0.00 0 0 0.20 214 246 EXFD 63.95 15,700 15,700 21-17-25 Backfill Est 70 CY 0.00 0 0 0.30 21 24 EXFD 63.95 1,500 1,500 22-13-37 Concrete Est 1,000 CY 105.00 0 105,000 1.50 1,500 1,725 CONP 51.69 89,200 194,200 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 75 TN 1,150.00 0 86,300 20.00 1,500 1,725 REIN 61.48 106,100 192,400 22-17-25 Formwork Est 3,000 SF 2.50 0 7,500 0.14 405 466 FORM 71.62 33,400 40,900 22-15-25 Embedded steel Est 2.50 TN 5,000.00 0 12,500 120.00 300 345 CARP 46.37 16,000 28,500 Superstructure 23-25-75 Structural Steel Est 900 TN 2650 0 2,384,400 16 14,396 16,556 STST 87.33 1,445,800 3,830,200 24-41-25 Insulated Metal Siding Est 80,000 SF 12 0 960,000 0.11 8,800 10,120 SDNG 63.02 637,800 1,597,800 24-15-15 Rolling Overhead Door one for each building Est 640 SF 27 0 17,300 0.25 160 184 CARP 46.37 8,500 25,800 23-23-23 Metal Roof Decking Est 11,000 SF 2.7 0 29,700 0.06 660 759 STST 87.33 66,300 96,000 24-37-43 Rigid Roof Insulation, 2" Thick Est 11,000 SF 2.4 0 26,400 0.015 165 190 ROOF 45.55 8,600 35,000 24-37-17 Cant Strips, Treated Est 620 LF 1.32 0 800 0.035 22 25 ROOF 45.55 1,100 1,900 24-37-73 Roofing ( 4-Ply Tar & Gravel) Est 11,000 SF 1.55 0 17,100 0.04 440 506 ROOF 45.55 23,000 40,100 22-13-43 Lightweight Concrete Fill 1" Est 247 CY 100 0 24,700 1.3 321 369 ROOF 45.55 16,800 41,500 24-37-27 Roof Flashing Est 620 LF 14.45 0 9,000 0.12 74 86 ROOF 45.55 3,900 12,900 35-13-31 Roof Drains Est 2 LT 20000 0 40,000 250 500 575 PLMB 47.74 27,500 67,500 35-13-31 Floor Drains Est 2 LT 25000 0 50,000 300 600 690 PLMB 47.74 32,900 82,900 22-13-23 Floor Slabs includes metal decking and formwork Est 101 CY 210 0 21,200 7.5 756 870 CONP 51.69 45,000 66,200 22-13-23 Floor Finishes Est 8,250 SF 2.5 0 20,600 0.05 413 474 CONP 51.69 24,500 45,100 24-25-25 Louvers/Windows/Doors Est 8,000 SF 40 0 320,000 0.5 4,000 4,600 CONP 51.69 237,800 557,800 34-41-99 Roof Ventilators Est 8 EA 15000 0 120,000 24 192 221 HVAC 51.91 11,500 131,500 23-17-23 Galleries & Landings Est 800 SF 45 0 36,000 0.4 320 368 GALL 67.14 24,700 60,700 34-55-99 H&V Est 11,000 SF 16.7 0 183,300 0.17 1,833 2,108 HVAC 51.91 109,400 292,700 41-37-99 Electrical Service & Lighting Est 11,000 SF 20.0 0 220,000 0.20 2,200 2,530 WIRE 66.93 169,300 389,300 31-41-77 Fire Protection Standpipe & hose stations Est 2 LS 60,000.00 120,000 0 400.00 800 920 YDPP 63.15 58,100 178,100 23 Pipe Rack For Lime Handling, Waste Ash Handling and misc Mechanical Piping Quantities shown are total for 2 units 23-25-75 Structure and Support Steel Est 330 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 874,500 20.00 6,600 7,590 STST 87.33 662,800 1,537,300 22 Foundations for support steel 0 0 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 1,292 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 258 297 EXFD 63.95 19,000 19,000 21-17-25 Backfill Est 342 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 103 118 EXFD 63.95 7,500 7,500 22-13-37 Concrete Est 950 CY 0.00 105.00 0 99,800 1.50 1,425 1,639 CONP 51.69 84,700 184,500 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 71 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 81,900 20.00 1,425 1,639 REIN 61.48 100,800 182,700 22-17-25 Formwork Est 9,500 SF 0.00 2.50 0 23,800 0.14 1,283 1,475 FORM 71.62 105,600 129,400 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 4,750 LB 0.00 2.50 0 11,900 0.05 238 273 CARP 46.37 12,700 24,600 22 Foundations for Misc. Support Steel Quantities shown are total for 2 units 0 0 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 272 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 54 63 EXFD 63.95 4,000 4,000 21-17-25 Backfill Est 72 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 22 25 EXFD 63.95 1,600 1,600 22-13-37 Concrete Est 200 CY 0.00 105.00 0 21,000 1.50 300 345 CONP 51.69 17,800 38,800 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 15 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 17,300 20.00 300 345 REIN 61.48 21,200 38,500 22-17-25 Formwork Est 2,000 SF 0.00 2.50 0 5,000 0.14 270 311 FORM 71.62 22,200 27,200 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 1,000 LB 0.00 2.50 0 2,500 0.05 50 58 CARP 46.37 2,700 5,200 Page 2 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 23-25-75 Misc. Support Steel not included elsewhere Quantities shown are total for 2 units Est 100 TN 0 2,650 0 265,000 20 2,000 2,300 STST 87.33 200,900 465,900 23-17-23 Misc. Galleries Quantities shown are total for 2 units Est 3,000 SF 0.00 35.00 0 105,000 0.40 1,200 1,380 GALL 67.14 92,700 197,700 Fabric Filter 24,079,500 4,622,500 279,365 17,633,000 46,335,000 31-57-15 Fabric Filter System Q 2 LT 9,912,416 0.00 19,824,800 0 80,500 161,000 185,150 MECH 61.53 11,392,300 31,217,100 31-17-45 Fabric Filter Baghouse Air Compressor System Q 2 LT 2,027,372 0.00 4,054,700 0 17,900 35,800 41,170 MECH 61.53 2,533,200 6,587,900 35-13-15 Fabric Filter Baghouse Compressor System Piping Included in air compressor system pricing Est 2 LT 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-27-35 Fabric Filter Bypass Dampers Included in Fabric Filter System Price Est 2 LT 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-57-99 Hopper Heaters Included in Fabric Filter System Price Est 2 LT 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-57-99 Vent Fan Included in Fabric Filter System Price Est 2 LT 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-25-35 Hoist & Trolley Beam Included in Fabric Filter System Price Est 2 LT 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 36-13-23 Insulation for Baghouse subcontract cost Est 65,111 SF 0.00 30.00 0 1,953,300 0 0 0 DINS 52.16 0 1,953,300 23-25-75 Penthouse steel for baghouses Support steel, roof steel, girts and purlins. Est 79 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 209,300 35.00 2,765 3,179 STST 87.33 277,600 486,900 24-41-25 Siding for baghouse penthouse insulated metal siding Est 12,960 SF 0.00 12 0 155,500 0.11 1,426 1,639 SDNG 63.02 103,300 258,800 24-37-47 Roofing for baghouse penthouse standing seam type Est 5,751 SF 0.00 18 0 103,500 0.22 1,265 1,455 ROOF 45.55 66,300 169,800 22-13-23 Concrete bottom floor for baghouse penthouse includes metal decking and formwork Est 70 CY 210 0 14,800 7.5 527 606 CONP 51.69 31,300 46,100 41-37-99 Building Services H&V and Lighting Est 5,751 SF 0.00 22.00 0 126,500 0.20 1,150 1,323 WIRE 66.93 88,500 215,000 31-41-77 Fire Protection for Penthouse Standpipe & hose stations Est 2 LS 60,000.00 120,000 400.00 800 920 MECH 61.53 56,600 176,600 23-25-75 Bottom Enclosure steel Support steel, girts and purlins. Total for Units 1&2 Est 171 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 453,900 20 3,426 3,939 STST 87.33 344,000 797,900 41-37-99 Building Services H&V and Lighting Est 19,880 SF 0.00 22.00 0 437,400 0.20 3,976 4,572 WIRE 66.93 306,000 743,400 24-41-25 Siding for baghouse bottom enclosure insulated metal siding, support steel and girts included in Alstom pricing Est 17,976 SF 0.00 12 0 215,700 0.11 1,977 2,274 SDNG 63.02 143,300 359,000 31-41-77 Fire Protection for bottom enclosure Standpipe & hose stations Est 2 LS 40,000.00 0.00 80,000 0 300.00 600 690 MECH 61.53 42,500 122,500 Fabric Filter System - Structural 0 Foundations for Fabric Filter Baghouse Quantities shown are total for 2 units 21-23-15 Excavation Est 3,852 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.20 770 886 EXFD 63.95 56,700 56,700 21-17-25 Backfill Est 252 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.30 76 87 EXFD 63.95 5,600 5,600 22-13-37 Concrete Est 3,600 CY 0.00 105.00 0 378,000 1.50 5,400 6,210 CONP 51.69 321,000 699,000 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 324 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 372,600 20.00 6,480 7,452 REIN 61.48 458,100 830,700 22-17-25 Formwork Est 10,800 SF 0.00 2.50 0 27,000 0.14 1,458 1,677 FORM 71.62 120,100 147,100 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 9.00 TN 0.00 5,000.00 45,000 120.00 1,080 1,242 CARP 46.37 57,600 102,600 Support Steel and Access Gallery 0 23-25-75 Support Steel Included in Baghouse equip price Q 420 TN 0.00 0 0 0 25 10,500 12,075 STST 87.33 1,054,500 1,054,500 23-17-23 Access Gallery Q 3,000 SF 0.00 35.00 0 105,000 0.40 1,200 1,380 GALL 67.14 92,700 197,700 27-17-99 Touch-up painting Est 1 LT 0.00 25,000.00 0 25,000 1250.00 1,250 1,438 PNTR 56.92 81,800 106,800 0 Ash Recycling System - DFGD Contractor's Scope 6,843,000 0 69,460 4,273,900 11,116,900 Page 3 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 31-45-99 Ash Recycling System - Mechanical 2 LT 3,421,528 6,843,000 30200 60,400 69,460 MECH 61.53 4,273,900 11,116,900 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Storage Silo Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Silo Bin Vent Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Fluidizing Air Blower Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Fluidizing Air Heater Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Silo Discharge Rotary Feeder Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Slurry Vibrating Screen Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Prep Area Sump Tank Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Prep Area Sump Tank Agitator Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Slurry Mix Tank Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Slurry Mix Tank Agitator Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Slurry Storage Tank Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Slurry Storage Tank Agitator Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Slurry Feed Pumps Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 Ash Recycling System - BOP Scope 60,000 534,800 4,583 360,800 955,600 Ash Reagent Recycle Building Included with Lime Preparation Building 24-35 Ash Handling Blower Building (25' x 50' x 25'H) Quantities shown are total for 2 buildings, 1/unit 22-13 Substructure 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 214 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 43 49 EXFD 63.95 3,100 3,100 21-17-25 Backfill Est 14 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 4 5 EXFD 63.95 300 300 22-13-37 Concrete Est 200 CY 0.00 105.00 0 21,000 1.50 300 345 CONP 51.69 17,800 38,800 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 15 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 17,300 20.00 300 345 REIN 61.48 21,200 38,500 22-17-25 Formwork Est 800 SF 0.00 2.50 0 2,000 0.14 108 124 FORM 71.62 8,900 10,900 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 1,600 LB 0.00 2.50 0 4,000 0.05 80 92 CARP 46.37 4,300 8,300 24-35-25 Pre-engineered building Includes H&V and Lighting Est 2,500 SF 0.00 175.00 0 437,500 0.90 2,250 2,588 STST 87.33 226,000 663,500 23-25-75 Additional Support Steel for Waste Ash Pipes outside of pipe rack Est 20 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 53,000 25.00 500 575 STST 87.33 50,200 103,200 31-41-77 Fire Protection Standpipe & hose stations Est 2 LS 30,000 60,000 200.00 400 460 YDPP 63.15 29,000 89,000 0 Waste Ash and Fly Ash Handling System 10,131,300 339,300 60,951 3,795,000 14,265,600 33 Waste Ash Handling System - Mechanical 0 26-13-15 Waste Ash silo Concrete silo - subcontract price Q 1 LT 1,550,000 0.00 1,550,000 0 0.00 0 0 CONP 51.69 0 1,550,000 24-17-15 Elevator for waste ash silo maintenance elvator - subcontract price Est 1 LT 290,000 0.00 290,000 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 290,000 22-13-27 Concrete pit for the elevator total for 2 silo elevators Est 10 CY 0 210.00 0 2,100 7.5 75 86 CONP 51.69 4,500 6,600 41-99-99 Electrical work for the elevator allowance Est 1 LT 0 20,000.00 0 20,000 175 175 201 WIRE 66.93 13,500 33,500 33-13-45 Waste Handling Systsem Includes blowers, ash valves, and ash piping Q 1 LT 5,300,000 0.00 5,300,000 0 30,000 30,000 34,500 MECH 61.53 2,122,800 7,422,800 33-13-45 Mechanical Equipment Est 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 33-13-45 Mechanical Blowers Included in Waste Handling System Price Est 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 Page 4 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 33-13-45 Waste Ash Silo Unloading Equipment including Fluidizing Blowers Included in Waste Handling System Handling Price Est 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 33-13-45 Waste Ash Vacuum Pipes from FF hoppers to Filter Separators Included in Waste Handling System Handling Price Est 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 33-13-45 Motor Operated Butterfly Valves Included in Waste Handling System Handling Price Est 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 22-13-75 Fly Ash Silo Field erected steel silo. Pricing includes mechanical equipment and ash piping Est 75 TN 4,000 0.00 300,000 0 70 5,250 6,038 TANK 61.57 371,700 671,700 33-13-45 Mechanical equipment for ash handling system and silo fly ash unloading equipment Est 1 LT 2,500,000 0.00 2,500,000 0 10,000 10,000 11,500 MECH 61.53 707,600 3,207,600 Foundations for Fly Ash Silo 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 80 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.20 16 18 EXFD 63.95 1,200 1,200 21-17-25 Backfill Est 30 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.30 9 10 EXFD 63.95 700 700 22-13-37 Concrete Est 50 CY 0.00 105.00 0 5,300 1.50 75 86 CONP 51.69 4,500 9,800 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 5 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 5,200 20.00 90 104 REIN 61.48 6,400 11,600 22-17-25 Formwork Est 150 SF 0.00 2.50 0 400 0.14 20 23 FORM 71.62 1,700 2,100 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 0.13 TN 0.00 5,000.00 600 120.00 15 17 CARP 46.37 800 1,400 23-25-75 Support Steel for Fly Ash Storage Silo Est 50 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 132,500 35.00 1,750 2,013 STST 87.33 175,800 308,300 23-17-23 Access Gallery for fly ash silo Included with Misc Galleries. 0 SF 0 35 0 0 0.40 0 0 GALL 67.14 0 0 33-57-65 Truck Scale Est 1 LT 125,000 0 125,000 0 900 900 1,035 MECH 61.53 63,700 188,700 22-13-37 Concrete foundation and approach for truck scale Est 350 CY 0 210 0 73,500 7.50 2,625 3,019 CONP 51.69 156,000 229,500 41-99-99 Electrical allowance for truck scale Est 1 LT 0 15,000 0 15,000 200.00 200 230 WIRE 66.93 15,400 30,400 Foundations for Waste Ash Silo 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 176 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.20 35 40 EXFD 63.95 2,600 2,600 21-17-25 Backfill Est 66 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.30 20 23 EXFD 63.95 1,500 1,500 22-13-37 Concrete Est 110 CY 0.00 105.00 0 11,600 1.50 165 190 CONP 51.69 9,800 21,400 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 10 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 11,400 20.00 198 228 REIN 61.48 14,000 25,400 22-17-25 Formwork Est 330 SF 0.00 2.50 0 800 0.14 45 51 FORM 71.62 3,700 4,500 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 0.28 TN 0.00 5,000.00 1,400 120.00 33 38 CARP 46.37 1,800 3,200 23-25-75 Support Steel for Waste Ash Storage Silo concrete silo Est 0 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 0 35.00 0 0 STST 87.33 0 0 23-17-53 Stair Tower for Waste Ash Silo Est 25 TN 2,650 0 66,300 0 25 625 719 STST 87.33 62,800 129,100 23-17-23 Access Gallery for waste ash silo Est 1,700 SF 0 35 0 59,500 0.40 680 782 GALL 67.14 52,500 112,000 0 Flue Gas System 5,558,000 14,067,000 338,089 22,838,000 42,463,000 Spray Dryer Absorber Inlet Duct (from Existing ID Fan Outlet) Quantities are total for 2 units 0 23-15-35 Ductwork Steel, including plate, stiffeners, internal bracing, turning vanes and walkway grating Est 1,600 TN 0.00 3,250.00 0 5,200,000 60.00 96,000 110,400 FLDU 77.18 8,520,700 13,720,700 36-13-57 Insulation & Lagging Est 152,000 SF 0.00 12.00 0 1,824,000 0.26 39,520 45,448 DINS 52.16 2,370,600 4,194,600 31-33-15 Expansion Joints Est 3,200 LF 0.00 230.00 0 736,000 2.50 8,000 9,200 MECH 61.53 566,100 1,302,100 31-27-35 Dampers Not Required 44-21-99 Dry FGD Inlet Ductwork Instrumentation Est 4 LS 30,000.00 0.00 120,000 0 200 800 920 INEL 54.22 49,900 169,900 Spray Dryer Absorber Outlet to Fabric Filter Inlet Quantities are total for 2 units 0 23-15-35 Ductwork Steel, including plate, stiffeners, internal bracing, turning vanes and walkway grating included in DFGD equipment supply pricing 36-13-57 Insulation & Lagging Allow 50,000 SF 0.00 12.00 0 600,000 0.26 13,000 14,950 DINS 52.16 779,800 1,379,800 31-33-15 Expansion Joints Material price is included in DFGD contract cost Est 275 LF 0.00 0.00 0 0 2.50 688 791 MECH 61.53 48,600 48,600 44-21-99 Dry FGD Outlet Ductwork Instrumentation Material price is included in DFGD contract cost Est 1 LS 0.00 0.00 0 0 200 200 230 INEL 54.22 12,500 12,500 31-27-35 Dampers Not required Est 0 SF 450.00 0.00 0 0 3.00 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 Fabric Filter Outlet Duct to Booster Fans and Booster ID Fans to existing chimney breeching Quantities are total for 2 units 0 Page 5 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 23-15-35 Ductwork Steel, including plate, stiffeners, internal bracing, turning vanes and walkway grating Est 560 TN 0.00 3,250.00 0 1,820,000 60.00 33,600 38,640 FLDU 77.18 2,982,200 4,802,200 36-13-57 Insulation & Lagging Est 56,000 SF 0.00 12.00 0 672,000 0.26 14,560 16,744 DINS 52.16 873,400 1,545,400 31-33-15 Expansion Joints Est 1,800 LF 0.00 230.00 0 414,000 2.50 4,500 5,175 MECH 61.53 318,400 732,400 31-27-35 Dampers Not required Est 0 SF 450.00 0.00 0 0 2.50 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 44-21-99 Fabric Filter Outlet Ductwork Instrumentation Est 4 LS 30,000.00 0.00 120,000 0 200 800 920 INEL 54.22 49,900 169,900 Booster ID Fans Quantities are total for 2 units 0 31-35-15 New Booster ID Fans Axial fan, 2 x 50% per unit, 882,450 cfm, includes fan auxiliary equipment Est 4 EA 775,000 0.00 3,100,000 0 3000.00 12,000 13,800 MECH 61.53 849,100 3,949,100 41-43-35 Motors for Booster ID Fans 3300 HP Est 4 EA 247,000 0.00 988,000 0 1000.00 4,000 4,600 MECH 61.53 283,000 1,271,000 31-25-35 Hoist & trolleys for Booster ID Fans 5-ton cap Est 4 EA 15,000 0.00 60,000 0 150.00 600 690 MECH 61.53 42,500 102,500 36-13-23 Fan Insulation & Lagging total for two fans Est 6,000 SF 0.00 12.00 0 72,000 0.28 1,680 1,932 DINS 52.16 100,800 172,800 31-27-35 Booster ID Fans Isolation Dampers Single Louver type damper assembly Est 2,400 SF 450.00 0.00 1,080,000 0 2.50 6,000 6,900 MECH 61.53 424,600 1,504,600 Flue Gas System - Structural Ductwork Support Foundations Total for all ductwork for 2 units 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 2,140 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.20 428 492 EXFD 63.95 31,500 31,500 21-17-25 Backfill Est 140 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.30 42 48 EXFD 63.95 3,100 3,100 22-13-37 Concrete Est 2,000 CY 0.00 105.00 0 210,000 1.50 3,000 3,450 CONP 51.69 178,300 388,300 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 150 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 172,500 20.00 3,000 3,450 REIN 61.48 212,100 384,600 22-17-25 Formwork Est 6,000 SF 0.00 2.50 0 15,000 0.14 810 932 FORM 71.62 66,700 81,700 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 5.00 TN 0.00 5,000.00 25,000 120.00 600 690 CARP 46.37 32,000 57,000 23-25-75 Structural Steel Duct Supports Est 580 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 1,537,000 35.00 20,300 23,345 STST 87.33 2,038,700 3,575,700 ID Fan Foundations Quantities are total for 2 units 0 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 2,033 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.20 407 468 EXFD 63.95 29,900 29,900 21-17-25 Backfill Est 133 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.30 40 46 EXFD 63.95 2,900 2,900 22-13-37 Concrete Est 1,900 CY 0.00 105.00 0 199,500 1.50 2,850 3,278 CONP 51.69 169,400 368,900 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 143 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 163,900 20.00 2,850 3,278 REIN 61.48 201,500 365,400 22-17-25 Formwork Est 15,200 SF 0.00 2.50 0 38,000 0.14 2,052 2,360 FORM 71.62 169,000 207,000 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 9.50 TN 0.00 5,000.00 0 47,500 120.00 1,140 1,311 CARP 46.37 60,800 108,300 23-17-23 Access Gallery for all inlet and outlet ductwork Est 3,000 SF 0 35.00 0 105,000 0.40 1,200 1,380 GALL 67.14 92,700 197,700 41-37-43 Lighting for access galleries and Booster Fan area Est 6,000 SF 0.00 15.00 0 90,000 0.15 900 1,035 WIRE 66.93 69,300 159,300 Stack Coating Acid resistant coating - top 50 ft of liner. Assumed chimney liner 20Ft dia x 500 ft high 61-23-35 Suspended Motorized Modular Platform Rental 90 day rental, each stack Est. 2 LT 45,000.00 0.00 90,000 0 300.00 600 690 CARP 46.37 32,000 122,000 27-15-35 Prep and clean top 50ft of two flues (inside only) to white metal (SSPC-SP 5) Quantities shown are for 2 stacks. Includes misc. repairs Est. 6,400 SF 0.00 0.00 0 0 1.33 8,512 9,789 PNTR 56.92 557,200 557,200 27-13-99 Apply acid resistant coating Quantities shown are for 2 stacks. Est. 6,400 SF 0.00 16.50 0 105,600 1.33 8,512 9,789 PNTR 56.92 557,200 662,800 61-17-43 Temporary Power, Light and Ventilation Est. 2 LT 0.00 10,000.00 0 20,000 400.00 800 920 WIRE 66.93 61,600 81,600 Mechanical - Balance of Plant 0 2,913,900 60,105 3,977,400 6,891,300 Piping Vacuum Conveying 35-13-99 Vacuum conveying to lime silo Est LF 0.00 57.60 0 0 1.50 0 0 SPNG 67.64 0 0 Makeup Water 35-13-15 8" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings, underground Raw water to reagent prep Est 1,130 LF 0.00 130.20 0 147,100 1.88 2,124 2,443 YDPP 63.15 154,300 301,400 35-13-15 6" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings, underground Raw water to reagent prep Est 120 LF 0.00 89.50 0 10,700 1.60 192 221 YDPP 63.15 13,900 24,600 21-25-15 Excavation for Underground Piping Est 628 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 126 144 EXFD 63.95 9,200 9,200 21-17-15 Bedding for Underground Piping Est 94 CY 0.00 40.00 0 3,800 0.30 28 32 EXFD 63.95 2,100 5,900 Page 6 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 21-17-25 Backfill for Underground Piping Est 534 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 160 184 EXFD 63.95 11,800 11,800 35-13-15 2.5" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Slaker water and dilution water Est 320 LF 0.00 35.60 0 11,400 1.28 410 471 SPNG 67.64 31,900 43,300 35-13-15 2.5" CS, SCH 80, includes fittings Slaker water and dilution water Est 320 LF 0.00 55.50 0 17,800 1.44 461 530 SPNG 67.64 35,800 53,600 35-13-15 4" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Recycle water Est 1,190 LF 0.00 57.60 0 68,500 1.50 1,785 2,053 SPNG 67.64 138,800 207,300 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Makeup Water piping Est 2.58 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 6,800 40.00 103 119 STST 87.33 10,400 17,200 Service Water 35-13-15 6" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings, underground Extend existing service water line to new lime unloading area Est 810 LF 0.00 89.50 0 72,500 1.60 1,296 1,490 YDPP 63.15 94,100 166,600 35-13-15 3" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings, underground Reagent prep building abd fly ash silos Est 1,520 LF 0.00 48.80 0 74,200 1.37 2,082 2,395 YDPP 63.15 151,200 225,400 21-25-15 Excavation for Underground Piping Est 1,294 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 259 298 EXFD 63.95 19,000 19,000 21-17-15 Bedding for Underground Piping Est 194 CY 0.00 40.00 0 7,800 0.30 58 67 EXFD 63.95 4,300 12,100 21-17-25 Backfill for Underground Piping Est 1,100 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 330 380 EXFD 63.95 24,300 24,300 35-13-15 3" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Absorbers (penthouse) Est 680 LF 0.00 48.80 0 33,200 1.37 932 1,071 SPNG 67.64 72,500 105,700 35-15-15 2" CS, SCH 80, includes fittings Reagent prep building, absorbers (penthouse), fly ash silos Est 600 LF 0.00 39.80 0 23,900 1.36 816 938 SPNG 67.64 63,500 87,400 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Service Water piping Est 1.51 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 4,000 40.00 60 69 STST 87.33 6,100 10,100 Lime Slurry Pipe 35-13-15 2.5" CS, SCH 80, includes fittings Reagent prep to atomizer head tank in SDA Est 1,200 LF 0.00 55.50 0 66,600 1.44 1,728 1,987 SPNG 67.64 134,400 201,000 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Service Water piping Est 1.76 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 4,700 40.00 70 81 STST 87.33 7,100 11,800 Ash Pipe 35-13-99 10" Ashcolite, flanged Supports included with pipe rack Est 1,440 LF 0.00 165.00 0 237,600 1.75 2,520 2,898 YDPP 63.15 183,000 420,600 35-13-33 Pipe supports within building boundaries Est 10 EA 0.00 125.00 0 1,300 3.00 30 35 STST 87.33 3,000 4,300 Recycle Slurry Pipe 35-13-15 6" CS, SCH 80, includes fittings, underground Recycle ash silo to atomizer head tank Est 1,200 LF 0.00 135.20 0 162,200 1.94 2,328 2,677 YDPP 63.15 169,100 331,300 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Recycle Slurry piping Est 4.28 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 11,400 40.00 171 197 STST 87.33 17,200 28,600 Slurry Return Pipe 35-13-15 6" CS, SCH 80, includes fittings, underground SDA to reagent prep Est 1,200 LF 0.00 135.20 0 162,200 1.94 2,328 2,677 YDPP 63.15 169,100 331,300 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Recycle Slurry piping Est 4.28 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 11,400 40.00 171 197 STST 87.33 17,200 28,600 Sump Discharge / Drains 35-13-15 2.5" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Absorber and Prep Building Est 260 LF 0.00 35.60 0 9,300 1.28 333 383 SPNG 67.64 25,900 35,200 35-13-15 4" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Reagent prep building Est 3,250 LF 0.00 57.60 0 187,200 1.50 4,875 5,606 SPNG 67.64 379,200 566,400 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Sump Discharge and Drains Est 5.19 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 13,800 40.00 208 239 STST 87.33 20,900 34,700 35-13-21 3" HDPE includes fittings Undeground. Absorber Sumps Est 580 LF 0.00 4.80 0 2,800 1.37 795 914 SPNG 67.64 61,800 64,600 35-13-21 4" HDPE includes fittings Fly Ash Silos, Lime Silos Est 3,620 LF 0.00 4.80 0 17,400 1.48 5,358 6,161 SPNG 67.64 416,700 434,100 21-25-15 Excavation for Underground Piping Est 1,556 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 311 358 EXFD 63.95 22,900 22,900 21-17-15 Bedding for Underground Piping Est 233 CY 0.00 40.00 0 9,300 0.30 70 81 EXFD 63.95 5,100 14,400 21-17-25 Backfill for Underground Piping Est 1,322 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 397 456 EXFD 63.95 29,200 29,200 Fire Protection 35-13-35 6" HDPE, includes fittings Extend existing and new for Absorber, Reagent Prep, Fly Ash Silos and Lime Silos Est 1,640 LF 0.00 8.50 0 13,900 0.60 984 1,132 SPNG 67.64 76,500 90,400 21-25-15 Excavation for Underground Piping Est 759 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 152 175 EXFD 63.95 11,200 11,200 21-17-15 Bedding for Underground Piping Est 114 CY 0.00 40.00 0 4,600 0.30 34 39 EXFD 63.95 2,500 7,100 21-17-25 Backfill for Underground Piping Est 645 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 194 223 EXFD 63.95 14,200 14,200 35-13-15 3" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Absorber, Reagent Prep, Fly Ash Silos and Lime Silos Est 1,120 LF 0.00 48.80 0 54,700 1.37 1,534 1,765 SPNG 67.64 119,400 174,100 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Fire Protection Est 1.44 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 3,800 40.00 58 66 STST 87.33 5,800 9,600 Service Air Page 7 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 35-13-15 3" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Absorber, Reagent Prep, Fly Ash Silos and Lime Silos Est 2,980 LF 0.00 48.80 0 145,400 1.37 4,083 4,695 SPNG 67.64 317,600 463,000 35-15-15 2" CS, SCH 80, includes fittings Reagent prep building, absorbers (penthouse), fly ash silos Est 1,000 LF 0.00 39.80 0 39,800 1.36 1,360 1,564 SPNG 67.64 105,800 145,600 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Service Air Est 4.89 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 13,000 40.00 196 225 STST 87.33 19,700 32,700 Instrument Air 35-15-13 2" 304SS, SCH 80, welded Absorber, Reagent Prep, Fly Ash Silos and Lime Silos Est 2,300 LF 0.00 101.42 0 233,300 1.63 3,743 4,305 SPNG 67.64 291,200 524,500 35-15-13 1.5" 304SS, SCH 80, welded Fly Ash Silos and Lime Silos Est 680 LF 0.00 73.37 0 49,900 1.51 1,028 1,182 SPNG 67.64 80,000 129,900 35-15-13 1" 304SS, SCH 80, welded Absorber, Reagent Prep, Fly Ash Silos and Lime Silos Est 1,140 LF 0.00 44.22 0 50,400 1.46 1,664 1,913 SPNG 67.64 129,400 179,800 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Instrument Air Est 8.81 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 23,400 40.00 352 405 STST 87.33 35,400 58,800 Valves 31-41-47 Hydrants Est 4 EA 0.00 1,500.00 0 6,000 6.00 24 28 YDPP 63.15 1,700 7,700 35-13-41 Valves with PIVS 6", CI Est 6 EA 0.00 575.00 0 3,500 6.00 36 41 YDPP 63.15 2,600 6,100 35-15-41 1" CS Ball Est 4 EA 0.00 150.00 0 600 3.00 12 14 SPNG 67.64 900 1,500 35-15-41 2" Bronze, Ball Est 4 EA 0.00 750.00 0 3,000 4.00 16 18 SPNG 67.64 1,200 4,200 35-13-41 3" CS, Globe, welded Est 32 EA 0.00 1,800.00 0 57,600 4.00 128 147 SPNG 67.64 10,000 67,600 35-13-41 6" CS Knifegate, welded Est 4 EA 0.00 3,200.00 0 12,800 8.00 32 37 SPNG 67.64 2,500 15,300 35-13-41 8" CS Knifegate, welded Est 20 EA 0.00 4,800.00 0 96,000 10.00 200 230 SPNG 67.64 15,600 111,600 35-13-41 12" CS Knifegate, welded Est 8 EA 0.00 7,200.00 0 57,600 14.00 112 129 SPNG 67.64 8,700 66,300 35-15-41 Small bore valves, CS wededl Allowance Est 1 LT 0.00 10,000.00 0 10,000 60.00 60 69 SPNG 67.64 4,700 14,700 31-75-17 Makeup Water pumps 1000 gpm, 200 ft TDH Est 2 EA 0.00 30,000.00 0 60,000 40.00 80 92 MECH 61.53 5,700 65,700 31-75-93 Sump Pumps 440 gpm, 220 TDH Est 8 EA 0.00 25,000.00 0 200,000 30.00 240 276 MECH 61.53 17,000 217,000 31-17-45 Air compressors 250 SCFM, 100 psig Est 2 EA 0.00 45,000.00 0 90,000 60.00 120 138 MECH 61.53 8,500 98,500 31-17-65 Air receivers 1000 Gal Est 2 EA 0.00 7,000.00 0 14,000 20.00 40 46 MECH 61.53 2,800 16,800 31-17-55 Air dryers 250 net SCFM, 100 psig Est 2 EA 0.00 15,000.00 0 30,000 30.00 60 69 MECH 61.53 4,200 34,200 31-65-99 In-line electric water heaters (boilers) 475 kW Est 2 EA 0.00 17,200.00 0 34,400 80.00 160 184 MECH 61.53 11,300 45,700 41-99-99 Allowance for electrical work for the electric boiler Allow 2 EA 0.00 5,000.00 0 10,000 20.00 40 46 WIRE 66.93 3,100 13,100 41 Heat Tracing for Instrumentation Piping 0 41-33-65 Heat tracing cable Allow. 5,700 LF 0.00 10.35 0 59,000 0.05 285 328 WIRE 66.93 21,900 80,900 36-15 Insulation for heat traced piping Assumed nominal 4" pipe size Allow. 5,976 SF 0.00 10.00 0 59,800 0.25 1,494 1,718 INSL 45.09 77,500 137,300 41-33-65 Power connector and other accessories including thermostats for heat tracing (by zones) Allow. 104 LS 0.00 950.00 98,500 8.00 829 953 WIRE 66.93 63,800 162,300 0 Electrical - Auxiliary Power and Balance of Plant Electrical Work 16,124,300 5,615,000 266,631 20,195,800 41,935,100 41 Auxiliary Power Modifications Quantities are total for Unit 1&2 41-51-15 Rserve Aux. Transformer 230kV - 4.16kV, 34/45 MVA, 3phase Est 1 EA 544,000.00 0.00 544,000 0 1,500 1,500 1,725 EHEA 67.88 117,100 661,100 41-51-15 Unit Aux. Transformers 24kV - 4.16kV, 15/20 MVA, 3 phase Est 2 EA 490,000.00 0.00 980,000 0 1,200 2,400 2,760 EHEA 67.88 187,300 1,167,300 41-51-15 Transformer, 480 V Substation 4.16KV-480V,3phase, 2000/2666KVA Est 4 EA 85,000.00 0.00 340,000 0 950.00 3,800 4,370 EHEA 67.88 296,600 636,600 41-51-15 Transformer, 480 V Substation 4.16KV-480V,3phase, 1500/2000KVA Est 4 EA 77,000.00 0.00 308,000 0 950.00 3,800 4,370 EHEA 67.88 296,600 604,600 Page 8 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 41-41-99 FGD/FF Power Control Centers (one for each unit) (30'x60') building, includes: Enclosure with HVAC and Lighting/electric service 4160V swgr 480V swgr MCCs UPS Batteries / Chargers Room/Area designated for DCS Phone Jack Est 2 EA 2,103,000.00 0.00 4,206,000 0 500.00 1,000 1,150 EHEA 67.88 78,100 4,284,100 23-17-23 Platforms around elevated PCC quantities are total for Unit 1&2 PCCs Est 2,850 SF 35.00 0.00 99,800 0 0.40 1,140 1,311 GALL 84.98 111,400 211,200 23-25-75 Support steel for PCC platforms Est 20 TN 2,650.00 0.00 52,900 0 60.00 1,197 1,377 STST 105.69 145,500 198,400 41-41-99 UAT Power Control Centers (one for each unit). (15'x20') building, includes: Enclosure with HVAC and Lighting/electric service 4160V swgr Est 2 EA 300,000.00 0.00 600,000 0 200.00 400 460 EHEA 67.88 31,200 631,200 23-25-75 Auxiliary Steel Modifications for UAT PCC's to be located on turbine floor of each unit Est 7 TN 2,650.00 0.00 18,600 0 60.00 420 483 STST 105.69 51,000 69,600 41-13-15 5KV Cable Bus duct 3000A Est 14,700 FT 550.00 0.00 8,085,000 0 2.50 36,750 42,263 WIRE 85.64 3,619,400 11,704,400 23-25-75 Support steel for cable bus duct Est 84 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 222,600 16.00 1,344 1,546 STST 87.33 135,000 357,600 43-21-15 Cable Bus Terminations 750 KCM Est 288 EA 0.00 100.00 0 28,800 3.00 864 994 WIRE 85.64 85,100 113,900 41-47-25 Relay Panels Est 6 EA 40,000.00 0.00 240,000 0 120.00 720 828 WIRE 85.64 70,900 310,900 41-51-99 Lighting transformers 45KVA, 480V, 3 Phase Low voltage XFMR Est 16 EA 15,000.00 250.00 240,000 4,000 80.00 1,280 1,472 WIRE 85.64 126,100 370,100 41-47-15 Lighting Distribution panel, 200A, 208-120V, 3 Phase Low voltage panel Est 16 EA 10,000.00 200.00 160,000 3,200 60.00 960 1,104 WIRE 85.64 94,500 257,700 22-13-17 Duct Bank- Swgr Bldg to Truck Scale 24"x24", 4x4" cells (includes embedded conduit) Est 2,100 LF 0.00 125 0 262,500 1.60 3,360 3,864 ECND 64.88 250,700 513,200 42-13-47 Cable Trays 36" Trays Est 2,100 LF 0.00 30.00 0 63,000 1.00 2,100 2,415 ECND 64.88 156,700 219,700 42-13-47 Cable Trays 24" Control, & 24" Instrument Est 2,100 LF 0.00 25.00 0 1.00 2,100 2,415 ECND 64.88 156,700 156,700 42-15-37 Conduits misc sizes Est 2,100 LF 0.00 10.00 0 21,000 0.35 735 845 ECND 64.88 54,800 75,800 Miscellaneous Electrical System 0 41-15-15 Cathodic Protection Allowance Allow. 2 LS 75,000.00 0.00 150,000 0 700.00 1,400 1,610 WIRE 85.64 137,900 287,900 41-25-55 Upgrade Fire detection system Allowance Allow. 2 LS 50,000.00 0.00 100,000 0 250.00 500 575 INEL 73.2 42,100 142,100 CABLES 43-21-15 Cables 5kV 3/C, 500 kcmil Est 9,000 LF 0.00 29.11 0 262,000 0.69 6,210 7,142 WIRE 85.64 611,600 873,600 43-21-15 Cables 5kV 3/C, 250 kcmil Est 1,050 LF 0.00 16.77 0 17,600 0.69 725 833 WIRE 85.64 71,400 89,000 43-21-15 Cables 5kV 3/C, #4/0 Est 6,300 LF 0.00 9.78 0 61,600 0.35 2,205 2,536 WIRE 85.64 217,200 278,800 43-21-35 Cables 5kV Terminations Est 91 EA 0.00 50.00 0 4,600 1.25 114 131 WIRE 85.64 11,200 15,800 480 V FGD Unit Substation FGD (SDA, Fabric Filter) 43-17-15 Power Feeder Cable, 600 V, from Unit Sub FGD to MCCs Power Feed to all MCC's (1/C 750 MCM) Est 31,500 LF 0.00 9.82 0 309,300 0.18 5,670 6,521 WIRE 85.64 558,400 867,700 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #10 Est 21,000 LF 0.00 0.87 0 18,300 0.06 1,260 1,449 WIRE 85.64 124,100 142,400 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #6 Est 18,900 LF 0.00 1.92 0 36,300 0.10 1,890 2,174 WIRE 85.64 186,100 222,400 Page 9 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #4 Est 7,770 LF 0.00 2.55 0 19,800 0.35 2,720 3,127 WIRE 85.64 267,800 287,600 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #2 Est 1,890 LF 0.00 4.40 0 8,300 0.35 662 761 WIRE 85.64 65,100 73,400 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #1/0 Est 2,100 LF 0.00 6.33 0 13,300 0.52 1,092 1,256 WIRE 85.64 107,500 120,800 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #4/0 Est 2,730 LF 0.00 13.35 0 36,400 0.52 1,420 1,633 WIRE 85.64 139,800 176,200 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, 350KCMIL Est 2,100 LF 0.00 17.98 0 37,800 0.69 1,449 1,666 WIRE 85.64 142,700 180,500 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, 500KCMIL Est 2,100 LF 0.00 26.41 0 55,500 0.69 1,449 1,666 WIRE 85.64 142,700 198,200 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (for VFD's) 4/C, #10 SHLD Est 2,100 LF 0.00 1.20 0 2,500 0.07 147 169 WIRE 85.64 14,500 17,000 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (for VFD's) 4/C, #6 SHLD Est 840 LF 0.00 2.70 0 2,300 0.10 84 97 WIRE 85.64 8,300 10,600 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (for VFD's) 4/C, #4 SHLD Est 630 LF 0.00 3.65 0 2,300 0.35 221 254 WIRE 85.64 21,700 24,000 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (for VFD's) 3/C, 350KCMIL, SHLD Est 2,100 LF 0.00 16.52 0 34,700 0.69 1,449 1,666 WIRE 85.64 142,700 177,400 43-13-17 Control Cable, 600 V 5/C, #10 Est 6,300 LF 0.00 1.30 0 8,200 0.08 504 580 WIRE 85.64 49,600 57,800 43-13-17 Control Cable, 600 V 2/C, #14 Est 31,500 LF 0.00 0.37 0 11,700 0.03 945 1,087 WIRE 85.64 93,100 104,800 43-13-17 Control Cable, 600 V 3/C, #14 Est 14,700 LF 0.00 0.42 0 6,200 0.03 441 507 WIRE 85.64 43,400 49,600 43-13-17 Control Cable, 600 V 5/C, #14 Est 6,300 LF 0.00 0.68 0 4,300 0.03 189 217 WIRE 85.64 18,600 22,900 43-13-17 Control Cable, 600 V 7/C, #14 Est 2,100 LF 0.00 0.95 0 2,000 0.04 84 97 WIRE 85.64 8,300 10,300 43-13-17 Control Cable, 600 V 9/C, #14 Est 2,100 LF 0.00 1.17 0 2,500 0.05 105 121 WIRE 85.64 10,300 12,800 43-17-35 Power & Control Cable Terminations Power: 600, Control:1200 Est 3,780 EA 0.00 1.00 0 3,800 0.30 1,134 1,304 WIRE 85.64 111,700 115,500 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 2 pr, #16 TW SHLD Est 63,000 LF 0.00 0.32 0 20,200 0.03 2,016 2,318 WIRE 85.64 198,500 218,700 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 2 tr, #16 TW SHLD Est 14,700 LF 0.00 0.43 0 6,300 0.03 470 541 WIRE 85.64 46,300 52,600 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 2 pr, #16 SHLD type E Est 14,700 LF 0.00 0.35 0 5,100 0.03 470 541 WIRE 85.64 46,300 51,400 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 2 strand Est 2,100 LF 0.00 0.50 0 1,100 0.03 63 72 WIRE 85.64 6,200 7,300 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 6 strand Est 5,250 LF 0.00 0.96 0 5,000 0.03 158 181 WIRE 85.64 15,500 20,500 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 12 strand Est 1,260 LF 0.00 1.46 0 1,800 0.03 38 43 WIRE 85.64 3,700 5,500 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 24 strand Est 2,730 LF 0.00 2.21 0 6,000 0.05 137 157 WIRE 85.64 13,400 19,400 43-13-99 Profibus DP Cable Est 8,400 LF 0.00 1.50 0 12,600 0.05 420 483 WIRE 85.64 41,400 54,000 43-13-27 Cat 5E Est 3,150 LF 0.00 1.40 0 4,400 0.05 158 181 WIRE 85.64 15,500 19,900 43-13-43 Instrumentation Cable Terminations Est 6,300 EA 0.00 1.00 0 6,300 0.25 1,575 1,811 WIRE 85.64 155,100 161,400 42-17-15 Misc. Junction Boxes & Pull Boxes Est 2 LT 0.00 154,000.00 0 308,000 900.00 1,800 2,070 WIRE 85.64 177,300 485,300 42-13-47 Cable Trays 36" Trays Est 8,400 LF 0.00 30.00 0 252,000 1.00 8,400 9,660 ECND 64.88 626,700 878,700 42-13-47 Cable Trays 24" Control, & 24" Instrument Est 12,600 LF 0.00 25.00 0 1.00 12,600 14,490 ECND 64.88 940,100 940,100 42-15-37 Conduits misc sizes Est 73,500 LF 0.00 10.00 0 735,000 0.35 25,725 29,584 ECND 64.88 1,919,400 2,654,400 41-31-15 Grounding Includes ground grid, rods, bolted connections & cadwelds. Future installation only Est 2 LT 0.00 50,000.00 0 100,000 800.00 1,600 1,840 WIRE 85.64 157,600 257,600 41-17-25 PA / Page Party Extension System Allow. 2 LT 0.00 20,000.00 0 40,000 300.00 600 690 WIRE 85.64 59,100 99,100 41-17-35 Data COM Extension System Allow. 2 LT 0.00 5,000.00 0 10,000 120.00 240 276 WIRE 85.64 23,600 33,600 41-17-35 Telephone Extension System Allow. 2 LT 0.00 5,000.00 0 10,000 140.00 280 322 WIRE 85.64 27,600 37,600 41-53-17 Security System Allow. 2 LT 0.00 100,000.00 0 200,000 600.00 1,200 1,380 WIRE 85.64 118,200 318,200 480 V Lime/Ash Handling Unit Sub (Lime Handling, Reagent Prep, Ash Handl Area) 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #10 Est 18,900 LF 0.00 0.87 0 16,400 0.06 1,134 1,304 WIRE 85.64 111,700 128,100 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #6 Est 18,900 LF 0.00 1.92 0 36,300 0.10 1,890 2,174 WIRE 85.64 186,100 222,400 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #4 Est 6,300 LF 0.00 2.55 0 16,100 0.35 2,205 2,536 WIRE 85.64 217,200 233,300 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #1/0 Est 2,100 LF 0.00 6.33 0 13,300 0.52 1,092 1,256 WIRE 85.64 107,500 120,800 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #4/0 Est 2,310 LF 0.00 11.53 0 26,600 0.52 1,201 1,381 WIRE 85.64 118,300 144,900 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, 350KCMIL Est 2,100 LF 0.00 17.98 0 37,800 0.69 1,449 1,666 WIRE 85.64 142,700 180,500 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, 500KCMIL Est 6,300 LF 0.00 26.41 0 166,400 0.69 4,347 4,999 WIRE 85.64 428,100 594,500 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V 4/C, #10 SHLD Est 2,100 LF 0.00 1.20 0 2,500 0.07 147 169 WIRE 85.64 14,500 17,000 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V 4/C, #6 SHLD Est 1,260 LF 0.00 2.70 0 3,400 0.10 126 145 WIRE 85.64 12,400 15,800 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V 3/C, 350KCMIL, SHLD Est 1,260 LF 0.00 17.98 0 22,700 0.69 869 1,000 WIRE 85.64 85,600 108,300 43-17-15 Control Cable, 600 V 2/C, #10 Est 12,600 LF 0.00 0.70 0 8,800 0.03 378 435 WIRE 85.64 37,200 46,000 43-17-15 Control Cable, 600 V 7/C, #10 Est 5,250 LF 0.00 1.60 0 8,400 0.12 630 725 WIRE 85.64 62,000 70,400 43-17-15 Control Cable, 600 V 2/C, #14 Est 29,400 LF 0.00 0.37 0 10,900 0.03 882 1,014 WIRE 85.64 86,900 97,800 43-17-15 Control Cable, 600 V 3/C, #14 Est 10,500 LF 0.00 0.42 0 4,400 0.03 315 362 WIRE 85.64 31,000 35,400 43-17-15 Control Cable, 600 V 5/C, #14 Est 9,450 LF 0.00 0.68 0 6,400 0.03 284 326 WIRE 85.64 27,900 34,300 43-17-15 Control Cable, 600 V 7/C, #14 Est 2,100 LF 0.00 0.95 0 2,000 0.04 84 97 WIRE 85.64 8,300 10,300 43-17-35 Power & Control Cable Terminations Power: 510, Control: 1000 Est 3,171 EA 0.00 1.00 0 3,200 0.30 951 1,094 WIRE 85.64 93,700 96,900 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 1 pr, #16 TW SHLD Est 10,500 LF 0.00 0.18 0 1,900 0.03 315 362 WIRE 85.64 31,000 32,900 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 1 tr, #16 TW SHLD Est 2,100 LF 0.00 0.29 0 600 0.03 63 72 WIRE 85.64 6,200 6,800 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 2 pr, #16 TW SHLD Est 21,000 LF 0.00 0.32 0 6,700 0.03 630 725 WIRE 85.64 62,000 68,700 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 2 tr, #16 TW SHLD Est 4,200 LF 0.00 0.43 0 1,800 0.03 126 145 WIRE 85.64 12,400 14,200 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 8 pr, #16 TW SHLD Est 4,200 LF 0.00 0.86 0 3,600 0.10 420 483 WIRE 85.64 41,400 45,000 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 2 pr, #16 SHLD type E Est 12,600 LF 0.00 0.35 0 4,400 0.03 403 464 WIRE 85.64 39,700 44,100 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 2 strand Est 2,100 LF 0.00 0.50 0 1,100 0.03 63 72 WIRE 85.64 6,200 7,300 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 6 strand Est 5,250 LF 0.00 0.96 0 5,000 0.03 158 181 WIRE 85.64 15,500 20,500 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 12 strand Est 1,260 LF 0.00 1.46 0 1,800 0.03 38 43 WIRE 85.64 3,700 5,500 Page 10 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 24 strand Est 2,730 LF 0.00 2.21 0 6,000 0.05 137 157 WIRE 85.64 13,400 19,400 43-13-99 Profibus DP Cable Est 8,400 LF 0.00 1.50 0 12,600 0.05 420 483 WIRE 85.64 41,400 54,000 43-13-27 Cat 5E Est 3,150 LF 0.00 1.40 0 4,400 0.05 158 181 WIRE 85.64 15,500 19,900 43-13-43 Instrumentation Cable Terminations Est 6,300 EA 0.00 1.00 0 6,300 0.25 1,575 1,811 WIRE 85.64 155,100 161,400 42-17-15 Misc. Junction Boxes & Pull Boxes Est 2 LT 0.00 100,000.00 0 200,000 600.00 1,200 1,380 WIRE 85.64 118,200 318,200 42-13-47 Cable Trays 36" Trays Est 8,400 LF 0.00 30.00 0 252,000 1.00 8,400 9,660 ECND 64.88 626,700 878,700 42-13-47 Cable Trays 24" Control, & 24" Instrument Est 12,600 LF 0.00 25.00 0 315,000 1.00 12,600 14,490 ECND 64.88 940,100 1,255,100 42-15-37 Conduits misc sizes Est 52,500 LF 0.00 10.00 0 525,000 0.35 18,375 21,131 ECND 64.88 1,371,000 1,896,000 41-31-15 Grounding Includes ground grid, rods, bolted connections & cadwelds. Future installation only Est 2 LT 0.00 50,000.00 0 100,000 800.00 1,600 1,840 WIRE 85.64 157,600 257,600 41-17-25 PA / Page Party Extension System Est 2 LT 0.00 20,000.00 0 40,000 300.00 600 690 WIRE 85.64 59,100 99,100 41-17-35 Data COM Extension System Est 2 LT 0.00 5,000.00 0 10,000 120.00 240 276 WIRE 85.64 23,600 33,600 41-17-35 Telephone Extension System Est 2 LT 0.00 5,000.00 0 10,000 140.00 280 322 WIRE 85.64 27,600 37,600 41-53-17 Lightning Protection Est 2 LT 0.00 30,000.00 0 60,000 300.00 600 690 WIRE 85.64 59,100 119,100 Electrical Aux Power Structural Work 0 Foundations for FGD/FF PCC's Quantities shown are total for 2 buildings, 1/unit 21-23-15 Excavation Est 963 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 193 221 EXFD 63.95 14,200 14,200 21-17-25 Backfill Est 63 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 19 22 EXFD 63.95 1,400 1,400 22-13-37 Concrete Est 900 CY 0.00 105.00 0 94,500 1.50 1,350 1,553 CONP 51.69 80,200 174,700 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 68 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 77,600 20.00 1,350 1,553 REIN 61.48 95,400 173,000 22-17-25 Formwork Est 3,600 SF 0.00 2.50 0 9,000 0.14 486 559 FORM 71.62 40,000 49,000 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 7,200 LB 0.00 2.50 0 18,000 0.05 360 414 CARP 46.37 19,200 37,200 22-13-67 Transformer Firewalls 2700 SF Est 100 CY 0.00 225.00 0 22,500 12.00 1,200 1,380 CONP 74.7 103,100 125,600 Transformer Foundations Total for UAT and RAT with containments 0 0 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 621 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 124 143 EXFD 81.96 11,700 11,700 21-17-25 Backfill Est 41 CY 0 0.30 12 14 EXFD 81.96 1,100 1,100 22-13-37 Concrete Est 580 CY 0.00 105.00 0 60,900 1.50 870 1,001 CONP 74.7 74,700 135,600 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 44 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 50,000 20.00 870 1,001 REIN 79.19 79,200 129,200 22-17-25 Formwork Est 2,320 SF 0.00 2.50 0 5,800 0.14 313 360 FORM 90.9 32,700 38,500 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 2,900 LB 0.00 2.50 0 7,300 0.06 174 200 CARP 64.41 12,900 20,200 23-25-75 Structural Steel Basin Gallery Steel for containments 4.50 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 11,900 25.00 113 129 STST 105.69 13,700 25,600 23-17-23 1 1/4" Grating (Galv) Basin Grating 750 SF 0.00 18.00 0 13,500 0.20 150 173 GALL 84.98 14,700 28,200 Controls & Instrumentation 4,125,000 75,000 16,388 888,500 5,088,500 44-13-15 DCS 4500 I/O points Est 1 LS 2,925,000.00 0.00 2,925,000 0 6,750 6,750 7,763 INEL 54.22 420,900 3,345,900 71-55-45 DCS - Vendor Field Support 200 mandays @ $1500/day Est 200 DAYS 1,500.00 0.00 300,000 0 0.00 0 0 INEL 54.22 0 300,000 44-24-43 Locally Mounted Instruments Est 300 EA 3,000.00 0.00 900,000 0 20 6,000 6,900 INEL 54.22 374,100 1,274,100 44-17-15 Instrument Racks included with instruments 35-15-13 Instrument Tubing Allow 1 LT 0.00 75,000 0 75,000 1,500 1,500 1,725 INEL 54.22 93,500 168,500 Modifications / Installation of CEM system Not required Est Civil Work 0 1,482,700 26,717 2,114,700 3,597,400 21 Laydown Area Approx 4 Acre 21-13-25 Cut and strip Topsoil stripping Est 38720 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.030 1,162 1,336 ETWK 152.54 203,800 203,800 21-13-45 Topsoil storage stockpile assumes on site stockpiling Est 38720 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.010 387 445 ETWK 152.54 67,900 67,900 21-51-27 Geotextile membrane 10 oz/sy Est 19360 SY 0.00 1.80 0 34,800 0.010 0.010 194 223 LAND 30.15 6,700 41,500 21-57-55 Aggregate surfacing 4" thick over entire area Est 19360 SY 0.00 5.65 0 109,400 0.010 0.020 387 445 BCSE 82.08 36,500 145,900 21-47-25 Grass seeding over stockplie area Est 4 ACRE 0.00 1,000 0 4,000 0.010 60 240 276 LAND 30.15 8,300 12,300 21-41-65 Silt Fence Total for stockplie and laydown area Est 1,820 LF 0.00 1 0 1,800 0.02 36 42 LAND 30.15 1,300 3,100 21-43-25 Fencing with one 3-strand barbed wire unit Fabric, posts on 10ft centers Est 1,760 LF 0.00 40 0 70,400 0.28 493 567 LAND 30.15 17,100 87,500 21-43-45 Gates 50ft wide double swing Est 2 EA 0.00 3,500.00 0 7,000 40 80 92 LAND 30.15 2,800 9,800 21 Restoration of Laydown Area Est 0 ACRE 0.00 15.00 0 0 35 0 0 ETWK 152.54 0 0 21-21-25 Remove and dispose of aggregate Est 2,215 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.007 16 18 BCSE 82.08 1,500 1,500 11-21-99 Removal of Geotextile membrane Est 19360 SY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.003 58 67 LAND 30.15 2,000 2,000 21-23-15 Earthwork to restore - Cut Est 2,462 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.030 74 85 EXFD 63.95 5,400 5,400 21-23-45 Earthwork to restore - Fill Est 2,462 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.050 123 142 EXFD 63.95 9,100 9,100 21-23-45 Place topsoil - previously stockpiled Est 70000 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.050 3,500 4,025 EXFD 63.95 257,400 257,400 21-47-25 Grass seeding - mulch and fertilizer Est 4 ACRE 0.00 1,500 0 6,000 0.010 90 360 414 LAND 30.15 12,500 18,500 21 DFGD Area Approx 4 Acre 21-13-25 Cut and strip Topsoil stripping Est 43560 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.030 1,307 1,503 ETWK 152.54 229,200 229,200 21-13-45 Topsoil storage stockpile assumes on site stockpiling Est 43560 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.010 436 501 ETWK 152.54 76,400 76,400 21-51-27 Geotextile membrane 10 oz/sy Est 21780 SY 0.00 1.80 0 39,200 0.010 0.010 218 250 LAND 30.15 7,600 46,800 Page 11 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 21-57-55 Aggregate surfacing 4" thick over entire area Est 24200 SY 0.00 5.65 0 136,700 0.010 0.020 484 557 BCSE 82.08 45,700 182,400 Plant Drainage 21-25-15 Excavation Est 600 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.200 120 138 EXFD 63.95 8,800 8,800 21-57-55 Crushed rock surfacing 12" Est 240 CY 0.00 54.00 0 13,000 0.14 34 39 BCSE 82.08 3,200 16,200 Storm Sewer 22-23-65 4ft Manholes Est 6 EA 0.00 1,575.00 0 9,500 20.00 120 138 YDPP 63.15 8,700 18,200 22-23-65 6ft Manholes Est 5 EA 0.00 3,000.00 0 15,000 30.00 150 173 YDPP 63.15 10,900 25,900 22-23-65 24"x24" Catch Basin 3 ft deep Est 10 EA 0.00 500.00 0 5,000 6.00 60 69 YDPP 63.15 4,400 9,400 35-13-35 18" CHDPE Est 750 LF 0.00 30.00 0 22,500 0.30 225 259 YDPP 63.15 16,300 38,800 35-13-35 24" CHDPE Est 750 LF 0.00 40.00 0 30,000 0.40 300 345 YDPP 63.15 21,800 51,800 35-13-35 36" CHDPE Est 750 LF 0.00 70.00 0 52,500 0.65 488 561 YDPP 63.15 35,400 87,900 21 Oily Water Sewer System 22-23-65 4ft Manholes Est 7 EA 0.00 1,575.00 0 11,000 20.00 140 161 YDPP 63.15 10,200 21,200 35-13-23 6" CISP Est 1,650 LF 0.00 28.00 0 46,200 1.05 1,733 1,992 YDPP 63.15 125,800 172,000 35-13-23 6" Post indicator valve Est 6 EA 0.00 450.00 0 2,700 6.00 36 41 YDPP 63.15 2,600 5,300 31-93-53 Oil Water Separator with Lift Station 3,000 gal Est 1 EA 0.00 100,000.00 0 100,000 1130.00 1,130 1,300 YDPP 63.15 82,100 182,100 21 Sanitary Sewer 22-23-65 4ft Manholes Est 7 EA 0.00 1,575.00 0 11,000 20.00 140 161 YDPP 63.15 10,200 21,200 22-23-65 Cleanouts Est 5 EA 0.00 690.00 0 3,500 8.00 40 46 YDPP 63.15 2,900 6,400 35-13-23 6" CISP Est 1,600 LF 0.00 28.00 0 44,800 1.05 1,680 1,932 YDPP 63.15 122,000 166,800 21-25-15 Excavation for all drainage and sewer piping Est 2,222 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.200 444 511 EXFD 63.95 32,700 32,700 21-17-15 Bedding / backfill for all drainage and sewer piping Est 556 CY 0.00 40.00 0 22,200 0.010 0.300 167 192 EXFD 63.95 12,300 34,500 Interior Plant Roads and Surfacing 21-13-25 Cut and strip Topsoil stripping Est 2,889 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.030 87 100 ETWK 152.54 15,200 15,200 21-13-25 Cut Est 722 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.030 22 25 ETWK 152.54 3,800 3,800 21-17-55 Fill Est 722 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.050 36 42 ETWK 152.54 6,300 6,300 21-51-27 Geotextile membrane 10 oz/sy Est 8,667 SY 0.00 1.80 0 15,600 0.010 0.010 87 100 LAND 30.15 3,000 18,600 21-57-55 Aggregate surfacing 6" thick over entire area Est 8,667 SY 0.00 8.50 0 73,700 0.010 0.020 173 199 BCSE 82.08 16,400 90,100 21-57-35 Concrete road 9" thick, 24ft W x 2600 L Est 1,733 CY 0.00 17.52 0 30,400 0.29 503 578 PBIT 64.44 37,300 67,700 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 173 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 199,300 20.00 3,467 3,987 REIN 79.19 315,700 515,000 22-17-25 Formwork Est 5,200 SF 0.00 2.50 0 13,000 0.14 702 807 FORM 90.9 73,400 86,400 21-57-55 Contractor Trailer Area Surfacing Includes: 9" aggregate surfacing 12" subgrade prep Est 14520 SY 0.00 22.48 0 326,400 0.10 1,452 1,670 BCSE 82.08 137,100 463,500 21-51-27 Geotextile membrane - entire area 10 oz/sy Est 14520 SY 0.00 1.80 0 26,100 0.010 0.010 145 167 LAND 30.15 5,000 31,100 Removal and Relocation of Existing Equipment and Infrastructure 0 859,300 16,890 1,188,300 2,047,600 Miscellaneous Pipe Relocation - Underground Quantities are total for Units 1&2 35-13-15 14" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Fuel oil and chemical drains Est 938 LF 0.00 259.50 0 243,400 2.94 2,758 3,171 YDPP 63.15 200,300 443,700 35-13-15 12" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Chemical drains and service water Est 375 LF 0.00 246.30 0 92,400 2.88 1,080 1,242 YDPP 63.15 78,400 170,800 35-13-15 8" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Oil drains Est 375 LF 0.00 89.50 0 33,600 1.60 600 690 YDPP 63.15 43,600 77,200 35-13-15 6" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Fuel oil and service water Est 563 LF 0.00 130.20 0 73,300 1.88 1,058 1,217 YDPP 63.15 76,900 150,200 21-25-15 Excavation for Underground Piping Est 834 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 167 192 EXFD 63.95 12,300 12,300 21-17-15 Bedding for Underground Piping Est 125 CY 0.00 40.00 0 5,000 0.30 38 43 EXFD 63.95 2,800 7,800 21-17-25 Backfill for Underground Piping Est 709 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 213 244 EXFD 63.95 15,600 15,600 Miscellaneous Pipe Relocation - Above Ground Quantities are total for Units 1&2 Allow. 1 LT 0.00 200,000 0 200,000 3000.00 3,000 3,450 WIRE 66.93 230,900 430,900 35-13-15 12" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Ash water, Unit 1&2 Est 250 LF 0.00 246.30 0 61,600 2.88 720 828 YDPP 63.15 52,300 113,900 35-13-15 10" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Ash water Est 250 LF 0.00 196.80 0 49,200 2.32 580 667 YDPP 63.15 42,100 91,300 35-13-15 8" Ashcolite, flanged Ash sluice line Est 500 LF 0.00 145.20 0 72,600 1.54 770 886 YDPP 63.15 55,900 128,500 35-13-15 4" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Service water Est 250 LF 0.00 57.60 0 14,400 1.50 375 431 YDPP 63.15 27,200 41,600 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for relocated piping Est 5.22 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 13,800 40.00 209 240 STST 87.33 21,000 34,800 Miscellaneous Structures Building Demolition Unit 1 11-26-99 Ductwork Est 120 TN 0.00 0 0 0 15.00 1,800 2,070 WRKG 91.68 189,800 189,800 11-23-99 Steel Est 25 TN 0.00 0 0 0 12.00 300 345 WRKG 91.68 31,600 31,600 11-22-99 Concrete Assumed existing foundations to be left in place Miscellaneous Structures Building Demolition Unit 2 Page 12 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 11-26-99 Ductwork Est 60 TN 0.00 0 0 0 15.00 900 1,035 WRKG 91.68 94,900 94,900 11-23-99 Steel Est 10 TN 0.00 0 0 0 12.00 120 138 WRKG 91.68 12,700 12,700 11-22-99 Concrete Assumed existing foundations to be left in place : Sub-Total of Equipment Material and Labor Costs 113,383,200 38,719,000 1,647,446 109,453,400 261,555,600 Other Costs 61,016,900 81-13-45 Additional Crane Rental Allowance 4.00 % 0 4,378,136 4,378,136 61-27-25 Mobilization/Demobilization Est 2.00 % 2,189,068 2,189,100 61-23-35 Scaffolding Est 2.50 % 967,975 2,736,335 3,704,300 61-17-43 Temporary Facilities and Construction Utilities (Elect, Water, etc.) During Construction 1.00 % 0 1,094,534 1,094,500 Allowance for Premium Time Labor Five (5) days per week Ten (10) hours per day. Est 1 LS 0 61-21-45 Cost due to overtime inefficiency working 5x10's 8.00 % 143,256 66 9,518,000 9,518,000 61-21-65 Per Diem Expense @ $10/HR 10 hr 17,907,025 17,907,000 91-13-15 BOP Contractor's General & Administrative Costs Based on BOP Materials & Labor Costs at 5% (not incl. Equipment Costs ) Est 5.00 % 1,935,950 5,472,670 7,408,600 91-15-25 BOP Contractor's Profit Based on BOP Materials & Labor Costs at 10% (not incl. Equipment Costs ) Est 10.00 % 3,871,900 10,945,340 14,817,240 Total Equipment, Material and Labor Costs 113,383,200 45,494,800 1,790,700 163,694,500 322,572,500 Spare Parts, Special Tools and Consumables 794,000 81-27-75 Mandatory Spare Parts (first year of operation) 0.00 % 0 0 0 81-25-35 Special Tools Included w\Equipment Costs 81-25-25 Consumables (0.5% of Equipment/Material Cost) 0.5 % 567,000 227,000 794,000 Freight, Duties, Taxes, Etc. 1,936,000 71-27-35 Freight-ExWorks To Site For material costs only. Freight for Equipment included with equipment costs. 5 % 1,935,950 1,936,000 71-47-45 Taxes - Sales/Use/VAT/Business/Etc. Not Included 0 Total Direct Costs 113,950,200 47,657,800 163,694,500 325,302,500 Total Indirect Costs 0 0 48,090,100 71-13-15 Engineering / Procurement 6.50 % 21,144,700 21,144,700 71-23-15 Construction Management 2.00 % 6,506,100 6,506,100 71-45-57 Start-up & Commissioning Craft Support 2.00 % 3,273,900 3,273,900 71-53-15 Operator Training & Manuals 0.55 % 900,300 900,300 71-21-15 Owner's Cost 5.00 % 16,265,125 16,265,125 Page 13 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost Total Project Cost without Escalation / Contingency 373,392,600 95-95-95 Escalation 46,602,900 Equipment.00% 11,964,800 11,964,800 Material.00% 5,718,900 5,718,900 Labor.00% 23,244,600 23,244,600 Indirects.00% 5,674,600 5,674,600 93-93-93 Contingency 13.970 % 58,673,400 Total Project Cost with Escalation / Contingency 478,668,900 97-97-97 Bond Cost 1.00 % 4,786,700 97-97-97 Interest During Construction (AFUDC) 8.66 % 101,133,800 Total Project Cost 584,589,400 123456789 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Page 14 of 14 OG&E Muskogee Units 4&5 DFGD System Cost Estimate Account Summary Date: 12/23/2009 Account Description Cost Dry FGD System $86,741,200 Fabric Filter $45,872,900 Ash Recycling System - DFGD Contractor's Scope $12,102,900 Waste Ash and Fly Ash Handling System $14,311,500 Flue Gas System $52,238,200 Mechanical - Balance of Plant $6,201,400 Electrical - Auxiliary Power and Balance of Plant Electrical Work $37,923,600 Controls & Instrumentation $5,088,500 Civil Work $3,597,400 Removal and Relocation of Existing Equipment and Infrastructure $4,134,800 Other Costs $66,931,700 Total Indirect Costs $49,601,900 Escalation $63,277,100 Contingency $63,104,100 Bond Cost $5,111,300 Interest During Construction (AFUDC) $118,148,300 Total Project Cost $634,386,800 Page 1 of 1 OG & E Estimate No.: 30352 A Muskogee Units 4 & 5 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/23/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost Dry FGD System 46,462,100 8,387,700 503,589 31,891,400 86,741,200 31-45-25 Dry FGD System Q 2 LT 15,917,133 0.00 31,834,300 0 136,400 272,800 313,720 MECH 61.53 19,303,200 51,137,500 31-45-35 Reagent Handling / Preparation Est 0 0 0 31-45-35 Reagent Handling / Preparation - Mechanical Q 2 LT 3,969,614 0.00 7,939,200 0 33600 67,200 77,280 MECH 61.53 4,755,000 12,694,200 26-13-99 Lime Storage Silo with piping for pneumatic unloading (truck) Concrete Silo - Subcontract price Q 1 LT 3,200,000 0.00 3,200,000 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 3,200,000 24-17-15 Elevator for lime silo four person rack and pinion maintenance elevator - subcontract price includes labor Est 1 LT 290,000 0.00 290,000 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 290,000 22-13-27 Concrete pit for the elevator Est 10 CY 0 210.00 0 2,100 7.5 75 86 CONP 51.69 4,500 6,600 41-99-99 Electrical work for the elevator allowance Est 1 LT 0 20,000.00 0 20,000 175 175 201 WIRE 66.93 13,500 33,500 33-43-15 Pneumatic lime transfer equipment/piping including blowers, piping, and valves Q 1 EA 400,000 0.00 400,000 0 3500 3,500 4,025 MECH 61.53 247,700 647,700 23-17-23 Access Gallery Est 2,000 SF 0.00 35.00 0 70,000 0.40 800 920 GALL 67.14 61,800 131,800 0 Dry FGD System - Civil / Structural Work 0 Foundations for SDA's Quantities are total for 2 units 21-53-13 Piles 16" dia X 60' deep, auger cast Est 14,400 LF 0.00 12.65 0 182,200 0.35 5,040 0 PILE 86.18 0 182,200 21-23-15 Excavation Est 1,498 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 300 345 EXFD 63.95 22,000 22,000 21-17-25 Backfill Est 98 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 29 34 EXFD 63.95 2,200 2,200 22-13-37 Concrete Est 1,400 CY 0.00 105.00 0 147,000 1.50 2,100 2,415 CONP 51.69 124,800 271,800 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 126 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 144,900 20.00 2,520 2,898 REIN 61.48 178,200 323,100 22-17-25 Formwork Est 4,200 SF 0.00 2.50 0 10,500 0.14 567 652 FORM 71.62 46,700 57,200 22-15-25 Embedded steel Est 3.50 TN 0.00 5,000.00 0 17,500 120.00 420 483 CARP 46.37 22,400 39,900 SDA Superstructure Quantities are total for 2 units 0 23-25-75 Common Penthouse for SDA's support steel, roof steel, girts and purlins Est 152 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 402,500 35.00 5,316 6,113 STST 87.33 533,800 936,300 24-37-43 SDA Roof Insulation between penthouse floor and SDA roof total for 2 SDAs Est 12,070 SF 0.00 15.00 0 181,100 0.30 3,621 4,164 ROOF 45.55 189,700 370,800 24-37-47 Roofing for common SDA Penthouse standing seam type. Est 8,100 SF 0.00 18 0 145,800 0.22 1,782 2,049 ROOF 45.55 93,300 239,100 24-41-25 Siding for common SDA Penthouse insulated metal siding Est 16,200 SF 0.00 12 0 194,400 0.11 1,782 2,049 SDNG 63.02 129,100 323,500 36-13-23 Shell Insulation subcontract cost Est 61,688 SF 30.00 0 1,850,600 0 0 0 DINS 52.16 0 1,850,600 22-13-23 Concrete bottom floor for common SDA Penthouse includes metal decking and formwork Est 99 CY 210 0 20,800 7.5 743 854 CONP 51.69 44,100 64,900 41-37-99 Common Penthouse Building Services H&V and Lighting Est 8,100 SF 0.00 30.00 0 243,000 0.30 2,430 2,795 WIRE 66.93 187,000 430,000 31-41-77 Fire Protection for Penthouse Standpipe & hose stations. Est 2 LS 80,000 160,000 500.00 1,000 1,150 MECH 61.53 70,800 230,800 24-17-15 Ele
Object Description
Description
Title | Sooner units 1 & 2 BARTFollow-Up Report |
OkDocs Class# | E4850.3 S711u 2009 |
Digital Format | PDF, Adobe Reader required |
ODL electronic copy | Downloaded from agency website: http://www.deq.state.ok.us/aqdnew/permitting/applications/2005-271-TVR_M-1/BART_%20FollowUpReport_recd_122809.pdf |
Rights and Permissions | This Oklahoma state government publication is provided for educational purposes under U.S. copyright law. Other usage requires permission of copyright holders. |
Language | English |
Full text | Oklahoma Gas & Electric Sooner Units 1 & 2, Muskogee Units 4 & 5 Dry FGD BART Analysis Follow-Up Report Prepared by: Sargent & Lundy LLC Chicago, Illinois December 28, 2009 Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report Project No. 11418-019 TOC-1 Table of Contents Page Table of Contents 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 2009 COST ESTIMATES AND COST EFFECTIVNESS UPDATE 4 2.1 2009 Conceptual Capital Cost Estimate 4 2.2 Methodology for Developing the Conceptual Cost Estimate 5 2.3 Comparison between 2008 and 2009 Cost Estimates 6 2.4 Updated Total Annual Costs and Cost Effectiveness 7 2.4.1 Capital Costs 8 2.4.2 Operating Costs 9 2.4.3 2009 Cost Effectiveness 11 2.5 Comparison of 2009 Capital Costs against Other Published Capital Cost Information 16 2.5.1 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Report 16 2.5.3 “Update: What’s That Scrubber Going to Cost” article 18 3.0 BART Report Comparisons 19 3.1 Comparison of Baseline SO2 Emissions 19 3.2 Comparison of Modeled Visibility Improvement 20 4.0 Conclusions 23 Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION In spring 2008, S&L completed Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) evaluations for Sooner Units 1 & 2, Muskogee Units 4 & 5, and Seminole Units 1, 2, & 3. The BART evaluations included an analysis of potentially feasible retrofit emission control technologies to control emissions of nitrogen oxide (NOX), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and particulate matter (PM10) from each unit. BART evaluations included in the 2008 reports followed the five-step BART determination process described in Appendix Y to 40 CFR Part 51 “Guidelines for BART Determinations under the Regional Haze Rule.” The five-step BART determination process includes: Step 1: Identify all available retrofit control technologies; Step 2: Eliminate technically infeasible options; Step 3: Evaluate the control effectiveness of the remaining control options; Step 4: Evaluate impacts and document the results; and Step 5: Evaluate visibility impacts. Step 4 of the process involves an evaluation of the potential environmental, energy, and economic impacts to the facility associated with the installation and operation of the technically feasible retrofit control options. To address economic impacts, S&L prepared a cost estimate for each technically feasible retrofit control option. To the extent possible, cost estimating methodologies described in the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Cost Control Manual (“OAQPS Cost Manual”) were used to estimate annual costs. Cost estimates were used to evaluate the cost effectiveness of each technology in terms of annual dollars per ton of pollutant removed. On November 13, 2009, the State of Oklahoma published its draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan Revision (“Regional Haze Implementation Plan”). The draft implementation plan required OG&E to control SO2 emissions from Sooner Units 1 & 2 and Muskogee Units 3 & 4 with dry flue gas desulfurization (DFGD) control systems as BART. In the draft implementation plan, the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) questioned the cost estimates included in OG&E’s 2008 BART evaluation, stating “OG&E’s estimated costs were found to be substantially higher than those reported for similar projects.” DEQ based its BART determination on revised cost estimates, both capital and operating and maintenance (O&M) costs, as well as a revised cost effectiveness evaluation. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 2 Specifically, DEQ questioned the following items in the OG&E DFGD cost estimates: a) The higher than expected DFGD capital costs when compared to other sources of information and the availability of back up information to support the cost estimates. b) The high cost effectiveness ($9,625 to $10,843 $/ton) compared to other BART evaluations. c) What the 2009 capital costs would be considering costs likely peaked in 2008 around the time of the original BART report and have likely fallen since then. d) The accuracy of using factors from the EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual to develop annual operating costs given the large escalation in capital costs over the last few years. The economic impact analysis included in the 2008 OG&E BART determinations calculated the cost effectiveness of DFGD control technology for Sooner Units 1 & 2 and Muskogee Units 4 & 5 on a dollar per ton of pollutant removed basis. Annual costs were calculated by adding annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs to the annualized capital cost of a DFGD control system. To the extent possible, methodologies described in the OAQPS Cost Manual were used to estimate capital and O&M costs. Cost effectiveness ($/ton) of a DFGD was calculated by dividing the total annual cost ($/yr) by the reduction in annual emissions (ton/yr). In addition to comments from DEQ, on December 4, 2009, the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), in consultation with the National Park Service (NPS) submitted comments to DEQ regarding the draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan. FWS/NPS agreed with DEQ that costs presented by OG&E for SO2 control were excessive. To respond to DEQ and FWS/NPS questions and concerns, S&L prepared the following: a) Updated 2009 Conceptual Capital Cost Estimates The original 2008 BART report capital cost estimates were study type +/-30% estimates based primarily on conceptual cost estimates prepared for similar projects that were scaled to account for major differences. The 2009 conceptual capital cost estimates (included herein) for all four OG&E coal fired BART-applicable units (i.e., Sooner Units 1 & 2 and Muskogee Units 4 & 5) are based on project-specific vendor quotations for certain major equipment items and inputs developed by performing preliminary project engineering. The 2009 conceptual capital cost estimates are in the +/-20% accuracy range. A comparison of the revised capital cost estimates against the sources cited by DEQ in the draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan is also included. The draft schedule included in Attachment A, assumes the Muskogee work will take place after the Sooner work; therefore, the Muskogee cost estimate has additional escalation costs included. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 3 b) Operating Cost Estimates Operating costs included in the original 2008 BART report were primarily based on default factors taken from the OAQPS Cost Manual and U.S.EPA’s Coal Utility Environmental Cost (CUECost) model. Updated operating costs included in this report were developed by S&L using OG&E supplied tax, wage, financial, and insurance information, as well as industry standards and vendor quotations. c) Updated Cost Effectiveness Estimates The updated conceptual capital cost and operating cost estimates were used to calculate revised cost effectiveness estimates. d) Alternative Methods for Calculating Reductions in Annual Emissions and Visibility Impacts FWS/NPS also questioned the methodology used by OG&E to calculate the amount of pollutant removed with DFGD controls. The amount of pollutant removed (tons/year) has a direct effect on the cost effectiveness of the pollution control system. To address the FWS/NPS comments, emission reductions from each of the OG&E units were calculated based on using two different baseline emission rates and three different post DFGD emission rates. This was done to show the effect on the cost effectiveness calculations, and to “envelope” the cost effectiveness calculations. Cost effectiveness in terms of modeled visibility improvements at affected Class I Areas ($/dV) were also revised to reflect the updated cost estimates. e) Comparison against BART submittals from similar projects Results of the OG&E BART cost effectiveness impacts ($/ton and $/dV) are compared against impacts reported in other BART evaluations. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 4 2.0 2009 COST ESTIMATES AND COST EFFECTIVNESS UPDATE 2.1 2009 CONCEPTUAL CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE The 2009 conceptual capital cost estimate and supporting information for all four OG&E coal-fired BART-applicable units are included in Attachment A. Table 1 provides a summary of the Sooner and Muskogee 2009 conceptual capital cost estimates. Cost estimates were prepared for each generating station, and divided evenly between the generating units. Table 1 2009 Capital Cost Estimates Item Sooner Unit 1 or Unit 2 2009 Cost Estimate Muskogee Unit 4 or Unit 5 2009 Cost Estimate Direct Costs $162,651,000 $167,572,100 Indirect Costs $24,045,000 $24,801,000 Escalation $23,301,000 $31,638,600 Sales Tax $0 $0 Contingency $29,337,000 $31,552,100 AFUDC & Bond Costs $52,960,000 $61,629,800 TOTAL CAPITAL COST $292,294,000 $317,193,600 Cost Per kw (gross) $514 $555 The conceptual cost estimates provided in Attachment A take into account the retrofit difficulty that can be expected from the existing site configurations. In degree of difficulty, the retrofits at Sooner and Muskogee could be described as average. At Sooner, the new DFGD locations are relatively clear but Unit 1 is tightly bounded on the east side by two coal conveyors that supply both units and on the west by high voltage ductbank, ash piping, and circulating water piping. This existing equipment creates a narrow construction corridor for installing the DFGD equipment. As a result, the Sooner DFGD has a long narrow configuration with relatively long ductwork runs. There is also some ash piping and supports near the existing chimney and ID fans that would have to be relocated to accommodate the new ductwork. The existing storm sewer system in the new DFGD area would have to be completely removed and reinstalled to accommodate the new equipment foundations. A main east-west underground piping run also goes through the new DFGD area and would have to be relocated. These site-specific retrofit challenges, including equipment relocations, have been taken into consideration in the Sooner conceptual cost estimate. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 5 At Muskogee, the new DFGD locations are also relatively clear except for a coal conveyor running in the east-west direction that supplies both units. This conveyor is only 330’ north of the Unit 4 and 5 chimneys and results in the new baghouses and ID booster fans being located north of the conveyor. Thus the new ductwork is required to straddle the conveyor and associated access road which creates longer than normal ductwork runs and piperacks. Another retrofit difficulty is the proximity of the existing ID fans to the chimney. In their current location, it’s not possible to modify the ID fan outlet ductwork to supply the new SDAs. As a result, the ID fans will have to be relocated during the tie-in outage as indicated on the Muskogee GA drawings. Like Sooner, the existing storm sewer system in the DFGD area would also have to be completely removed and reinstalled to accommodate the new equipment foundations. These equipment relocations have been taken into consideration in the Muskogee conceptual cost estimate. 2.2 METHODOLOGY FOR DEVELOPING THE CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE S&L developed the 2009 capital cost estimates using the following methodology: • Plant design data were used to develop datasheets to specify the dry FGD, baghouse, and ID booster fan operating conditions. The datasheets were issued to various manufacturers to obtain budgetary quotations. Costs obtained from these quotations were used to derive the pricing used in the capital cost estimate. The cost development for the spray dryer absorbers and baghouse used in the estimate is described in Attachment A. • A general arrangement (GA) drawing was developed using the information received in the budgetary quotations. The GA drawing was used to estimate the major installation quantities for the project including ductwork, structural steel, foundations, relocations, cable, and pipelines. • A motor list was assembled and used to develop the auxiliary power system sizing and quantities. • Mass balances were prepared and used to size the flue gas, material handling, material storage, and piping systems. • A schedule was developed to estimate escalation and AFUDC costs. It was assumed the new DFGDs would come on line at six month intervals with the last unit being completed at Muskogee near the end of 2015. • Range estimating techniques were used to identify the appropriate amount of contingency to obtain a 95% confidence level. The contingency level was approximately 14%. • A design and cost basis document was prepared to document the major assumptions and inputs for developing the cost estimate. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 6 • Labor cost estimates were developed using Oklahoma area wage rates, installation quantities, and installation rates taken from the S&L database. This methodology provides a conceptual capital cost estimate with accuracy in the range of ±20%. This methodology provides a better estimate of the capital costs associated with installing DFGD control systems, and a more accurate estimate of the actual costs that OG&E would incur to install DFGD at the Sooner and Muskogee Stations. 2.3 COMPARISON BETWEEN 2008 AND 2009 COST ESTIMATES A comparison of the 2008 and 2009 cost estimates for the Sooner and Muskogee Stations is provided in Table 2. Table 2 Sooner Unit 1 or Unit 2 2008 and 2009 Capital Cost Estimate Comparison(1) Sooner Unit 1 or Unit 2 Muskogee Unit 4 or Unit 5 Item 2008 Cost Estimate 2009 Cost Estimate 2008 Cost Estimate 2009 Cost Estimate Total Costs ($) $390,406,000 $292,294,000 $373,106,000 $317,193,600 Cost per kw-gross ($/kw) $686 $514 $652 $555 Cost Difference (%) Base -25% Base -15% Contingency ($) $56,598,000 $29,337,000 $54,089,000 $31,552,100 (1) Total Costs for DFGD summarized in this table are divided equally between the two units at each station. Total Costs for DFGD at the Sooner Station will be $584,588,000, and total costs at the Muskogee Station will be $634,387,200. Major factors contributing to the reduction of costs from 2008 to 2009 include: a) Direct Costs The 2008 estimate was prepared when the demand for DFGD systems was high and costs were near their peak. It is estimated that major equipment costs have dropped approximately 15% to 20% since this time. b) Contingency Costs The 2009 estimate was based on vendor quotations for major equipment and preliminary engineering to develop quantities. As a result of this additional cost certainty, the contingency factor in the 2009 estimate (14%) is approximately 6% lower than the 2008 estimate. The difference in contingency amounts between the two estimates is illustrated in Table 2-2. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 7 c) Escalation Costs The estimate of future escalation is lower in 2009 than it was in early 2008 when prices had been rapidly increasing over the previous three years. The difference in overall project escalation factors is about 10%. The cumulative effect of changes in the above three cost items, with all other things being equal, would be about a 20% to 30% reduction in pricing from 2008 to 2009. The actual decrease was about 25% which falls into this range. We believe this validates the capital costs provided in the 2008 estimate. 2.4 UPDATED TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS AND COST EFFECTIVENESS In general, total annual costs are the sum of the capital recovery costs and annual O&M costs. Cost effectiveness of a pollution control system is calculated by dividing the total annual cost of the control system ($/year) by the total annual quantity of pollutant removed by the system (tons/year); where: - Annual Cost (Reference Year $/year) = Annualized Capital Costs + Annual Operating Costs; - Annualized Capital Costs (Reference Year $/year) = Total Capital Requirement x Capital Recovery Factor; - Total Capital Requirement (Reference Year $) = All capitalized expenses as of the commercial operating date, including direct costs, indirect costs, and allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC); - Capital Recovery Factor = The factor that converts the Total Capital Requirement into equal annual costs over the depreciable life of the asset, accounting for OG&E returns on debt and equity and income taxes, expressed in real terms (i.e., inflation removed); and - Annual Operating Costs (Reference Year $/year) = Variable O&M Costs + Fixed O&M Costs + Indirect Operating Costs. The following sections describe the derivation of these components of the cost estimate. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 8 2.4.1 Capital Costs Conceptual capital costs for the DFGD control projects at each OG&E station were calculated using the methodology described in Section 2.2. The total capital requirement (TCR) is the sum of direct costs, indirect costs, contingency, escalation, and allowance for funds used during construction. Direct costs include equipment, material, labor, spare parts, special tools, consumables, and freight. Indirect costs include engineering, procurement, construction management, start-up, commissioning, operator training, and owner's costs. Escalation and AFUDC were calculated from the estimated distribution of cash flows during the construction period and OG&E's before-tax weighted average cost of capital of 8.66%/year. The 37-day tie-in outage for each unit is assumed to be coordinated with the normal 5-week scheduled outage such that incremental replacement cost is negligible. The TCR for each unit is summarized in Tables B-1 through B-4 in Attachment B. Capital Recovery Factor The capital recovery factor converts the TCR into equal annual costs over the depreciable life of the asset, accounting for OG&E returns on debt and equity and income taxes, expressed in real terms (i.e., inflation removed). These are also referred to as levelized capital charges. Property taxes and insurance are sometimes included with the capital charges, but are classified in this analysis as part of the Indirect Operating Costs to be consistent with the BART reports. The economic parameters used to derive the levelized capital charges are summarized in Table 3. Table 3 Economic Parameters to Derive Levelized Capital Charges Commercial Operation Date (Reference Year) Sooner 2014 Muskogee 2015 Depreciable Life 20 years Inflation Rate 2.50%/year Effective Income Tax Rate – Federal and State 38.12% Common Equity Fraction 0.557 Debt Fraction 0.443 Return on Common Equity Nominal 10.75%/year Real 8.05%/year Return on Debt Nominal 6.03%/year Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 9 Real 3.44%/year Discount Rate (after-tax cost of capital) Nominal 7.64%/year Real 5.43%/year Tax Depreciation 20-year straight line Levelized Capital Charges (real) 10.36%/year Based upon the above parameters, the real levelized capital charge rate (capital recovery factor) is 10.36%/year. The derivation of this value is shown in Table B-5 in Attachment B. The TCR multiplied by 10.36% thus determines the Annualized Capital Costs. 2.4.2 Operating Costs Annual operating costs for the DFGD system consist of variable O&M costs, fixed O&M costs, and indirect operating costs. The derivation of each cost component is described below. Variable O&M Variable O&M costs are items that generally vary in proportion to the plant capacity factor. These consist of lime reagent costs, water costs, FGD waste disposal costs, bag and cage replacement costs, ash disposal costs, and auxiliary power costs, which were derived as follows: - Lime Reagent. Based on material balances for the average fuel composition and 90% capacity factor. The first-year delivered cost of lime is $118.80/ton for Sooner and $105.53/ton for Muskogee based on budgetary lime quotations received for truck delivery. - Water. Based on 205,256 lb/hr at full load at Sooner, 219,839 lb/hr at full load at Muskogee, and 90% capacity factor. The first-year cost of water is $0.49/1000 gallons at Sooner and $2.57/1000 gallons at Muskogee. Water unit costs are based on information received from OG&E. The Muskogee water cost includes the cost of purchasing water. Sooner does not have any water purchase costs. - FGD Waste Disposal. Based on material balances for the average fuel composition and 90% capacity factor. The first year cost of on-site disposal is $39.60/ton at Sooner and $40.59/ton at Muskogee. Disposal cost only includes FGD by-products and does not include fly ash. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 10 - Bag and Cage Replacement. Based on the exhaust gas flow through the baghouse, air-to-cloth ratio of 3.5 for pulse jet baghouse, 4% contingency for bag cleaning, and 3-year bag life. The first year bag cost (including fabric and hangers) is $3.22/ft2 at Sooner and $3.31/ft2 at Muskogee. - Ash Disposal. Assumed no increase in ash disposal with the fabric filter due to the existing ESP remaining in service. - Auxiliary Power Cost. Based on auxiliary power calculations and 90% capacity factor. The first year auxiliary power cost is $83.83/MWh at Sooner and $85.92/MWh at Muskogee. Fixed O&M Fixed O&M costs are recurring annual costs that are generally independent of the plant capacity factor. These consist of operating labor, supervisor labor, maintenance materials, and maintenance labor, which were derived as follows: - Operating Labor. Based on three shifts/day 365 days/year. The first year labor rate (salary plus benefits) is $57.33/hour at Sooner and $58.76/hour at Muskogee. - Supervisory Labor. This was based on 15% of operating labor, according to the EPA Control Cost Manual, page 2-31. S&L determined that the EPA approach provides a reasonable estimate for this cost item. - Maintenance Materials. This was based on 0.6% of the total plant investment, based on Sargent & Lundy’s experience on other FGD projects. - Maintenance Labor. This was based on 110% of operating labor, according to the EPA Control Cost Manual, page 2-31. S&L determined that the EPA approach provides a reasonable estimate for this cost item. Indirect Operating Costs Indirect operating costs are recurring annual costs for the FGD system that are not part of the direct O&M. These consist of property taxes, insurance, and administration, which were derived as follows: Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 11 - Property Taxes. Calculated as 0.60 % of total capital investment at Sooner and 0.85% of total capital investment at Muskogee, according to OG&E property tax rates. These rates are significantly lower than those used in the EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual 6th Ed., page 2-34. - Insurance. Calculated as 0.0105 % of total capital investment at both Sooner and Muskogee, according to OG&E insurance rates. These rates are significantly lower than those used in the EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual 6th Ed., page 2-34. - Administration. These are calculated as 20% of the fixed O&M based on Sargent & Lundy’s experience on other projects. This results in significantly lower costs compared to those obtained using the methodology described in the EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual 6th Ed., page 2-34. Total Annual Operating Costs The total annual operating costs for each unit are calculated in Tables B-1 through B-4 in Attachment B and are approximately $29 to $32/kw per year. These costs compare favorably with industry O&M data for existing coal plants, and are within the normal range of expected O&M costs for dry FGD systems. The annual operating cost of approximately $29 to $32/kw is significantly lower than the $68/kw calculated in the 2008 BART report which was derived using OAQPS Cost Manual and CUECost default factors, and is lower than the $43 to $47/kw estimated by the DEQ in the draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan. 2.4.3 2009 Cost Effectiveness Total annual DFGD costs for each unit are summarized in Table 4. Detailed cost calculations are shown in Tables B-1 through B-4 in Attachment B. Total annual costs are divided by the annual tons of SO2 removed to calculate average control technology cost effectiveness. Annual emission reductions associated with DFGD control systems are summarized in Table 5 using the same basis as the September 2009 OG&E BART update. The SO2 control efficiency for each unit is summarized in Table 6 Table 4 DFGD Total Annual Cost Summary Unit Capital Recovery ($/year) Annual O&M ($/year) Total Annual Cost ($/year) Muskogee 4 $32,861,300 $18,438,900 $51,300,200 Muskogee 5 $32,861,300 $18,438,900 $51,300,200 Sooner 1 $30,281,800 $16,550,500 $46,832,300 Sooner 2 $30,281,800 $16,550,500 $46,832,300 Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 12 Table 5 BART Annual SO2 Emission Reductions with Dry FGD Unit Baseline Annual SO2 Emissions (1) (tpy) Projected Post- Control Annual Emissions (2) (tpy) Annual Emission Reductions (tpy) Muskogee 4 9,113 2,160 6,953 Muskogee 5 9,006 2,160 6,846 Sooner 1 9,394 2,017 7,377 Sooner 2 8,570 2,017 6,553 (1) In this table baseline SO2 emissions are calculated as the average actual SO2 emission rate during the baseline years of 2004 – 2006. (2) In this table projected post-control SO2 emissions are calculated based on a controlled SO2 emission rate of 0.10 lb/mmBtu and a 90% capacity factor. Table 6 Average Cost Effectiveness Unit Annual Cost ($/year) SO2 Removed (tons/year) Average Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) Muskogee 4 $51,300,200 6,953 $7,378 Muskogee 5 $51,300,200 6,846 $7,493 Sooner 1 $46,832,300 7,377 $6,348 Sooner 2 $46,832,300 6,553 $7,147 Cost effectiveness is a function of both the cost of a control system and the annual tons of pollutant removed. With respect to tons removed, various bases can be used to calculate both the baseline emission rate and the post-project controlled emission rate. Varying either the baseline calculation or the projected emissions calculation will result in a different cost effectiveness value. To account for this variability, the cost effectiveness of DFGD controls at Sooner and Muskogee were calculated using various baseline and projected SO2 emission rates. Emission rates were chosen to “envelope” the cost effectiveness of the DFGD control systems. For example, baseline SO2 emissions were based on the actual average SO2 emission rate during the 2004-2006 baseline period, as well as the highest annual SO2 emissions during the baseline period. Projected SO2 emissions were calculated using the presumptive SO2 emission rate of 0.15 lb/mmBtu, as well controlled SO2 emission rates of 0.10 and 0.08 lb/mmBtu. Finally, capacity factors of either 90% (which is more representative of actual operations) or 100% (which represents potential emissions but would represent actual operations) were also used. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 13 Although annual O&M costs will vary depending on the controlled SO2 emission rate (i.e., lower post-project SO2 emission rates will have a higher annual variable O&M cost), for this analysis total annual costs were held constant. Cost effectiveness calculations for two alternative scenarios are summarized in Tables 5a & 6a and 5b & 6b. Table 5a BART Annual SO2 Emission Reductions with Dry FGD (Scenario 2) Unit Baseline Annual SO2 Emissions (1) (tpy) Projected Post- Control Annual Emissions (2) (tpy) Annual Emission Reductions (tpy) Muskogee 4 9,775 3,600 6,175 Muskogee 5 10,224 3,600 6,624 Sooner 1 10,189 3,361 6,828 Sooner 2 8,746 3,361 5,385 (1) In this table baseline SO2 emissions reflect the highest annual SO2 emission rate during the baseline years of 2004 – 2006. (2) In this table projected post-control SO2 emissions are calculated based on a controlled SO2 emission rate of 0.15 lb/mmBtu (the presumptive BART emission rate) and a 100% capacity factor. Table 6a Average Cost Effectiveness (Scenario 2) Unit Annual Cost ($/year) SO2 Removed (tons/year) Average Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) Muskogee 4 $51,300,200 6,175 $8,308 Muskogee 5 $51,300,200 6,624 $7,745 Sooner 1 $46,832,300 6,828 $6,859 Sooner 2 $46,832,300 5,385 $8,697 Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 14 Table 5b BART Annual SO2 Emission Reductions with Dry FGD (Scenario 3) Unit Baseline Annual SO2 Emissions (1) (tpy) Projected Post- Control Annual Emissions (2) (tpy) Annual Emission Reductions (tpy) Muskogee 4 9,775 1,920 7,855 Muskogee 5 10,224 1,920 8,304 Sooner 1 10,189 1,793 8,396 Sooner 2 8,746 1,793 6,953 (1) In this table baseline SO2 emissions reflect the highest annual SO2 emission rate during the baseline years of 2004 – 2006. (2) In this table projected post-control SO2 emissions are calculated based on a controlled SO2 emission rate of 0.08 lb/mmBtu and a 100% capacity factor. A controlled SO2 emission rate of 0.08 lb/mmBtu represents the lowest SO2 emission rate that could reasonably be expected to be achieved on a large subbituminous coal-fired unit with a retrofit DFGD control system. Table 6b Average Cost Effectiveness (Scenario 3) Unit Annual Cost ($/year) SO2 Removed (tons/year) Average Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) Muskogee 4 $51,300,200 7,855 $6,531 Muskogee 5 $51,300,200 8,304 $6,178 Sooner 1 $46,832,300 8,396 $5,578 Sooner 2 $46,832,300 6,953 $6,736 Cost effectiveness varies depending on the baseline and controlled SO2 emission rates used in the evaluation. Under all scenarios, DFGD cost effectiveness on the OG&E units is greater than $5,550/ton. Based on the BART presumptive level of 0.15 lb/mmBtu, and assuming a 100% capacity factor, cost effectiveness of DFGD on the Muskogee and Sooner units would be in the range of $6,859 to $8,697/ton (see, Table 6a). Cost effective values calculated using the BART presumptive level should be used to compare cost effective at other BART applicable sources. In addition to calculating cost effectiveness on a $/ton basis, with respect to regional haze impacts, cost effectiveness can be calculated as a function of annual costs and modeled visibility improvements at the affected Class I Areas. Modeled visibility improvements will be a function of the proximity of the unit to the Class I Area, baseline and controlled emissions, and the pollutant being controlled. Table 7 provides a summary of the modeled reduction in visibility impairment (measured in deciview- dv) resulting from DFGD controls on the Muskogee and Sooner generating units. The cost effectiveness of DFGD controls as a function of modeled Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 15 reductions in visibility impairment (using two different impact criteria) is provided in Tables 8 and 8a. Table 7 Modeled Visibility Improvement at the Class I Areas (dv) Class I Area Muskogee Units 4 & 5 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Refuge 1.275 0.51 Caney Creek Wilderness Area 0.804 0.32 Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area 1.11 0.44 Hercules-Glades Wilderness Area 1.028 1.17 Total 4.217 2.44 Table 8 Average Cost Effectiveness ($/dv) Unit Annual Cost ($/year) Modeled Visibility Improvement(1) (dv) Average Cost Effectiveness ($/dv) Muskogee 4 & 5 $102,600,400 1.275 $80,470,902 Sooner 1 & 2 $93,664,600 1.17 $80,055,214 (1) The modeled reduction in visibility impairment used in this table represents the highest single modeled reduction at a single Class I Area. Table 8a Average Cost Effectiveness ($/dv) Unit Annual Cost ($/year) Modeled Visibility Improvement(1) (dv) Average Cost Effectiveness ($/dv) Muskogee 4 & 5 $102,600,400 4.217 $24,330,187 Sooner 1 & 2 $93,664,600 2.44 $38,387,131 (1) The modeled reduction in visibility impairment used in this table represents the cumulative reduction of all Class I Areas. Based on the cost effectiveness calculations summarized above, taking into considered modeled visibility improvements at all of the affected Class I areas, the cost effectiveness of DFGD on Sooner Units 1 & 2 will be in the range of $38,387,000/dv, and the cost effectiveness of DFGD on Muskogee Units 4 & 5 will be in the range of $24,330,000/dv. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 16 2.5 COMPARISON OF 2009 CAPITAL COSTS AGAINST OTHER PUBLISHED CAPITAL COST INFORMATION Appendix 6-4 of the November 13, 2009 Oklahoma draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan Revision includes DEQ’s BART analysis for each OG&E BART applicable unit. In each of the OG&E BART determinations, DEQ revised the cost estimates for retrofit DFGD control systems, including revisions to the capital costs and annual O&M costs. Although DEQ stated that, in general, the cost estimating methodology used by OG&E “followed guidance provided in the EPA Air Pollution Cost Control Manual,” DEQ concluded, based on a review of other BART submittals, that OG&E’s costs were substantially higher than those reported for similar projects. (Draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan, Appendix 6-4, page cliii). DEQ proceeded to revise the capital costs and O&M costs based on cost information provided in the following publications: (1) a Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment report titled “Summary of Research and Potential Control Options, Emission Reductions and Costs for Reducing SO2 and NOx from Existing Major Colorado Point Sources”; (2) a March 1, 2009 article in Power, on online industry magazine, titled “Update: What’s That Scrubber Going to Cost” written by George W. Sharp of American Electric Power; and (3) a report prepared by Sargent & Lundy for the National Lime Association titled “Flue Gas Desulfurization Technology Evaluation, Dry Lime vs. Wet Limestone FGD” dated March 2007. In its comments to DEQ regarding the draft Regional Haze Implementation Plan FWS/NPS agreed with DEQ that costs presented by OG&E for SO2 control were excessive. In addition, FWS/NPS provided an alternative lower cost analysis using capital costs “taken from the 2007 Flue Gas Desulfurization Technology Evaluation, Dry Lime vs. Wet Limestone FGD, prepared for National Lime Association.” We address each of the referenced documents below. 2.5.1 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Report The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment report included unit capital costs for retrofit dry scrubbers on 500 MW units burning PRB coal. The report was prepared by BBC Research and Consulting, and relied on cost data in a 2003 report prepared by Sargent & Lundy titled “Economics of Lime and Limestone for Control of Sulfur Dioxide” (the 2003 National Lime Report). As discussed in more detail below, capital costs included in the 2003 National Lime Report were intended to provide a comparison between lime-based and limestone-based scrubbing technologies, and were not intended to be used as the basis for a project-specific capital cost estimate. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 17 2.5.2 2007 National Lime Association Report Both DEQ and FWS reference the 2007 National Lime Report prepared by Sargent & Lundy as a basis for their capital cost revisions. In fact, the FWS’s alternative capital costs were based on numbers provided in the 2007 National Lime Report. However, the National Lime report was only intended to provide a comparative cost effectiveness evaluation of wet limestone-based FGD control systems and dry lime-based control systems. The report was not intended to provide an evaluation of total capital requirements for either type of control technology and was not intended to serve as the basis for a capital cost estimate. The 2007 report clearly states:1 FGD prices have seen a minimum of 25% inflation in the past year. Some recent contracts have been signed at prices over 300% higher than the market of 5 years ago. The costs [in this report] have been prepared on a consistent, uniform basis and show a level that some buyers achieved in mid-2006. Sargent & Lundy cautions the reader that the costs provided herein are not indicative of any cost you may actually achieve. However, we believe the costs are valid for comparative purposes. These costs should not be used for any of these purposes; • Planning the cost of a FGD project • Budget requests or allocations • Solicitation of pollution control bonds In today’s market place, it is impossible to determine capital cost of an FGD system until the contract is signed with the supplier. Capital costs in both the 2003 and 2007 National Lime Reports were developed for comparative purposes only. Furthermore, costs in the 2007 report were based on 2006 dollars and did not include escalation, which can add approximately 10% to 20% to the project cost. Nor do the reports take into consideration any site-specific retrofit challenges. Capital costs in the National Lime Reports were presented on a consistent basis for comparative purposes only. Cost estimates using the methodology described in Section 2.1 of this report provide a more accurate accounting of actual costs that will be incurred by OG&E to install and operate dry FGD control systems at the Sooner and Muskogee generating stations. 1 See, Sargent & Lundy, “Flue Gas Desulfurization Technology Evaluation, Dry Lime vs. Wet Limestone FGD,” prepared for the National Lime Association, March 2007, page 2 (emphasis in the original). Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 18 2.5.3 “Update: What’s That Scrubber Going to Cost” article DEQ also used capital cost estimates summarized in a March 1, 2009 article in “Power” an online industry magazine to adjust the capital costs for DFGD retrofit projects at the OG&E stations. The Power article provided a survey of FGD projects at large electric utility generating stations during the period of December 2007 through June 2008. The article summarized the average total installed costs of FGD control systems as reported by the survey respondents, noting that the reported costs “were expected to have wide variation, principally because of the peculiarities that exist at each project site, the retrofit project complexity, and the timing differences between projects.” Therefore, assigning a project-specific cost based on information summarized in the article would not be correct without taking into consideration project specific details. Furthermore, the 2009 OG&E conceptual capital costs of $514/kw (Sooner) and $555/kw (Muskogee) are reasonably close to the $359 to $471/kw taken from this article. The article reported that the 2008 cost surveys were 28% higher than those reported in the 2007 survey with an average of $359/kw for 600 to 900 MW plant range and $471/kw for 300 to 599 MW range. Note that these values are averages and include units with wide ranges of in-service dates. In fact, 55% of the units in the survey were expected to be in operation by 2009 whereas the OG&E units are not expected to be in operation until 2014 and 2015. The 55% of the units in operation by 2009 would have had their major equipment purchased prior to the 28% run up in pricing in 2008 from late 2006 and prior to the 22% run up in pricing from 2006 to 2007 referenced in the same article. The OG&E units would be subject to these escalated costs and future escalation. In addition, the OG&E units would also require a higher level of contingency since the projects are still in the early study phase. As a result, units going into service in the near future would be expected to be below the average cost while units going into service at later dates would be expected to be above the average cost. The article only provides an average cost and does not provide any information on the cost distribution about the average. A wide distribution is expected as indicated at the bottom of page 65 of the Power article, where it states that “average total installed costs reported by the survey respondents were expected to have wide variation” based partially on the “timing differences between projects.” Because of the expected wide variation in project costs, this report can be used to illustrate recent industry cost trends but should not be used to estimate the cost of specific units that will not go into service for another 5 to 7 years. Again, it is believed that the methodology described in Section 2.1 will provide more accurate results for a specific project than the cited article. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 19 3.0 BART Report Comparisons The cost effectiveness of a pollution control system is a function of the total annual cost of the system (taking into consideration capital recovery and annual O&M) and the amount of pollutant removed by the control system (tons per year). With respect to regional haze impacts, cost effectiveness can also be measured as a function of total annual costs divided by the modeled improvement in visibility at the nearby Class I Areas. This measure of cost effectiveness is reported in total annual dollars per deciview change in visibility impairment ($/dv). Thus, in addition to costs, two site-specific factors that impact cost effectiveness are the quantity of pollutant removed and the reduction in modeled visibility impairment. 3.1 COMPARISON OF BASELINE SO2 EMISSIONS Table 9 provides a summary of the baseline SO2 emission rates included in several BART evaluations. A more detailed comparison of some of the costs and cost effectiveness calculations included in various BART determinations is included in Attachment C. Table 9 Comparison of Baseline SO2 Emissions at Several BART Units Station Baseline SO2 Emission Rate (lb/mmBtu) Baseline SO2 Emissions (tpy) Muskogee Unit 4 0.507 9,113 Muskogee Unit 5 0.514 9,006 Sooner Unit 1 0.509 9,394 Sooner Unit 2 0.516 8,570 NPPD Gerald Gentleman Unit 1 0.749 24,254 NPPD Gerald Gentleman Unit 2 0.749 25,531 White Bluff Unit 1 0.915 31,806 White Bluff Unit 2 0.854 32,510 Boardman Unit 1 0.614 14,902 Northeastern Unit 3 0.900 16,000 Northeastern Unit 4 0.900 16,000 Naughton Unit 1 1.180 8,624 Naughton Unit 2 1.180 11,187 OPPD Nebraska City Unit 1 0.815 24,191 Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 20 Of the units listed in Table 9, the OG&E units have the lowest baseline SO2 emission rates, and among the lowest baseline annual SO2 emissions (tpy). Baseline emissions have a direct effect on the cost effectiveness of a pollution control system, as shown below: Cost Effectiveness = Total Annual Costs / (Baseline Emissions – Projected Emissions) Assuming total annual costs and projected emissions are similar, cost effectiveness will be a function of the baseline emissions. This holds true for units firing subbituminous coals with baseline SO2 emission rates in the range of 0.5 lb/mmBtu to approximately 2.0 lb/mmBtu because removal efficiencies achievable with DFGD control will vary based on inlet SO2 loading. In general, DFGD control systems are capable of achieving higher removal efficiencies on units with higher inlet SO2 loading.2 DFGD control systems will be more cost effective on units with higher baseline SO2 emissions because the control system will be capable of achieving higher removal efficiencies and remove more tons of SO2 per year for similar costs. Conversely, DFGD will be less cost effective, on a $/ton basis, on units with lower SO2 baseline emissions. The difference in baseline SO2 emissions summarized above accounts for some of the variability seen in the BART cost effectiveness calculations. On the basis of the baseline emission rates alone, with all other factors being equal, the cost effectiveness of the OG&E units would be about 55% to 185% higher than the other units listed in Table 9. 3.2 COMPARISON OF MODELED VISIBILITY IMPROVEMENT Finally, with respect to regional haze impacts, cost effectiveness can also be calculated as a function of modeled improvements in visibility at the Class I areas. This cost effectiveness measurement can be presented by dividing the total annual costs by the degree of visibility improvement at an individual Class I area, or by dividing total annual costs by the sum of visibility improvement across all affected Class I areas. Using either approach, control technologies installed on units with higher baseline emissions and located nearer a Class I area will be more cost effective. In its comments to DEQ, FWS/NPS argued that cost effectiveness should “consider both the degree of visibility improvement in a given Class I area as well as the cumulative effects of 2 Removal efficiencies achievable with DFGD will be a function of several unit-specific process parameters. Process parameters affecting removal efficiency include: inlet and outlet flue gas temperatures; reactant stoichiometric ratio; how close the DFGD is operated to saturation conditions; the amount of solids product recycled to the atomizer, and the inlet SO2 concentration. Chemical and physical limitations including flue gas temperature, Ca/S stoichiometry, approach to saturation, mixing and reaction time limit the control efficiency of the DFGD control systems. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 21 improving visibility across all of the Class I areas affected.”3 FWS/NPS reasoned that “[i]t is not appropriate to use the same metric to evaluate the effects of reducing emission from a BART source that impacts only one Class I area as for a BART source that impacts multiple Class I areas.”4 Taking the cumulative impact approach, cost effectiveness will also be a function of the number of Class I areas affected by an individual BART applicable unit. Controls would be more cost-effective on units in near proximity to a Class I area, as well as units located within 300 km of a number of Class I areas. Figure 1 shows the location of the Class I areas in the U.S. Figure 1 Class I Areas A majority of the Class I areas are located in the western part of the U.S. Simply due to the number of Class I areas in the west, it is likely that a BART applicable unit located in the western U.S. will be closer to a Class I area, and that emissions from the unit will affect visibility at more Class I areas. For example, the Boardman Generating Station located in north central Oregon approximately 150 miles east of Portland, is located within 300 km of 14 Class I areas. By 3 FWS/NPS Comments, page 3. 4 Id. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 22 comparison, the Sooner and Muskogee stations are located within 300 km of one and four Class I areas, respectively. Taking the cumulative impact approach, control technologies will be more cost effectiveness on units affecting a number of Class I areas. For example, modeled visibility improvement at each Class I areas affected by the Sooner, Muskogee, and Boardman stations are summarized in Table 10. Assuming the cost of retrofit controls are similar at all three stations, and assuming that each station achieves similar emission reductions, DFGD controls would be more cost effective at the Boardman Station (on a $/dv basis) simply due to the cumulative improvement in visibility improvement. Table 10 Comparison of Baseline SO2 Emissions at Several BART Units Muskogee Units 4 & 5 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Boardman Unit 1 1 1.275 0.51 0.777 2 0.804 0.32 0.439 3 1.11 0.44 0.802 4 1.028 1.17 0.544 5 na na 0.774 6 na na 0.655 7 na na 0.659 8 na na 0.969 9 na na 0.924 10 na na 0.614 11 na na 0.776 12 na na 0.354 13 na na 0.681 14 na na 0.874 Total 4.217 2.44 9.842 In its BART analysis submitted to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, total capital requirements and total annual costs for DFGD were estimated at $247,293,000 and $36,322,000, respectively. Using the sum of modeled visibility improvements at all 14 Class I areas, cost effectiveness of the DFGD control system would be $3,690,510/dv (e.g., $36,322,000 divided by 9.842 dv). By comparison, because the OG&E stations are located relatively far from a limited number of Class I areas, cost effectiveness at the Sooner and Muskogee stations would be $38,387,000/dV and $24,330,000/dv, respectively.5 5 Sooner = $93,664,600 ÷ 2.44 dv = $38,387,000/dv Muskogee = $102,600,400 ÷ 4.217 dv = $24,330,000/dv Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Page 23 4.0 Conclusions Sargent & Lundy updated the retrofit DFGD control system cost estimates for the Sooner and Muskogee Generating Stations. The 2009 conceptual cost estimate (included in this report) was based on project-specific vendor quotations for certain major equipment items and inputs developed by performing preliminary project engineering. The 2009 conceptual capital cost estimate is in the ±20% accuracy range. Total annual costs associated with the installation of DFGD, including capital recovery costs and annual O&M costs were also updated. Annual O&M costs were derived from preliminary engineering mass balance calculations and project-specific unit costs. The cost estimating methodology used herein to develop both capital and O&M costs provides a more accurate estimate of actual costs that OG&E would incur with the installation and operation of DFGD on the Sooner and Muskogee units. The 2009 conceptual capital cost estimates and supporting information for both generating stations are included in Attachment A. Detailed total annual cost summaries, including capital recovery, variable O&M, and fixed O&M calculations are included in Attachment B. Based on the cost estimates, the total capital requirements for DFGD controls on all four OG&E units will be in the range of $1.22 billion dollars. Total annual costs (including capital recovery and O&M) will be in the range of $93.6 million/year at Sooner and $102.6 million/year at Muskogee. Cost effectiveness of a pollution control system is a function of the total annual cost of the system and the quantity of pollutant removed (tons/year). Because of the relatively low baseline SO2 emission rates at both Muskogee and Sooner (see, Table 9), DFGD will be less cost effective on these units than on similarly sized units with higher baseline SO2 emissions. Based on expected reductions in actual annual SO2 emissions, the cost effectiveness of DFGD on the OG&E units will be in the range of $6,348 to $7,493/ton (see, Table 6). In addition to calculating cost effectiveness on a $/ton basis, with respect to regional haze impacts, cost effectiveness can be calculated as a function of annual costs and modeled visibility improvements at the affected Class I Areas. Modeled visibility improvements will be a function of the proximity of the unit to the Class I Area, baseline and controlled emissions, and the pollutant being controlled. Because the OG&E stations are located relatively far from a limited number of Class I areas, DFGD will be less cost effective (on a $/dv basis) on the OG&E units than on similarly sized units located closer to a Class I area or within 300 km of several Class I areas. Based on modeled visibility improvements, the cost effectiveness at the Sooner and Muskogee stations would be $38,387,000/dV and $24,330,000/dv, respectively. Oklahoma Gas & Electric December 28, 2009 BART Analysis Follow-Up Report (Rev. 1) Project No. 11418-019 Attachment A Sooner Units 1 & 2 Conceptual Cost Estimate OG&E Sooner Units 1&2 DFGD System Cost Estimate Account Summary Date: 12/11/2009 Account Description Cost Dry FGD System $86,859,600 Fabric Filter $46,335,000 Ash Recycling System - DFGD Contractor's Scope $12,072,500 Waste Ash and Fly Ash Handling System $14,265,600 Flue Gas System $42,463,000 Mechanical - Balance of Plant $6,891,300 Electrical - Auxiliary Power and Balance of Plant Electrical Work $41,935,100 Controls & Instrumentation $5,088,500 Civil Work $3,597,400 Removal and Relocation of Existing Equipment and Infrastructure $2,047,600 Other Costs $63,746,900 Total Indirect Costs $48,090,100 Escalation $46,602,900 Contingency $58,673,400 Bond Cost $4,786,700 Interest During Construction (AFUDC) $101,133,800 Total Project Cost $584,589,400 Page 1 of 1 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost Dry FGD System 46,462,100 8,209,500 508,270 32,188,000 86,859,600 31-45-25 Dry FGD System Q 2 LT 15,917,133 0.00 31,834,300 0 136,400 272,800 313,720 MECH 61.53 19,303,200 51,137,500 31-45-35 Reagent Handling / Preparation Est 0 0 0 31-45-35 Reagent Handling / Preparation - Mechanical Q 2 LT 3,969,614 0.00 7,939,200 0 33600 67,200 77,280 MECH 61.53 4,755,000 12,694,200 26-13-99 Lime Storage Silo with piping for pneumatic unloading (truck) Concrete Silo - Subcontract price Q 1 LT 3,200,000 0.00 3,200,000 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 3,200,000 24-17-15 Elevator for lime silo four person rack and pinion maintenance elevator - subcontract price includes labor Est 1 LT 290,000 0.00 290,000 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 290,000 22-13-27 Concrete pit for the elevator Est 10 CY 0 210.00 0 2,100 7.5 75 86 CONP 51.69 4,500 6,600 41-99-99 Electrical work for the elevator allowance Est 1 LT 0 20,000.00 0 20,000 175 175 201 WIRE 66.93 13,500 33,500 33-43-15 Pneumatic lime transfer equipment/piping including blowers, piping, and valves Q 1 EA 400,000 0.00 400,000 0 3500 3,500 4,025 MECH 61.53 247,700 647,700 23-17-23 Access Gallery Est 2,000 SF 0.00 35.00 0 70,000 0.40 800 920 GALL 67.14 61,800 131,800 0 Dry FGD System - Civil / Structural Work 0 Foundations for SDA's Quantities are total for 2 units 21-23-15 Excavation Est 2,140 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 428 492 EXFD 63.95 31,500 31,500 21-17-25 Backfill Est 140 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 42 48 EXFD 63.95 3,100 3,100 22-13-37 Concrete Est 2,000 CY 0.00 105.00 0 210,000 1.50 3,000 3,450 CONP 51.69 178,300 388,300 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 180 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 207,000 20.00 3,600 4,140 REIN 61.48 254,500 461,500 22-17-25 Formwork Est 6,000 SF 0.00 2.50 0 15,000 0.14 810 932 FORM 71.62 66,700 81,700 22-15-25 Embedded steel Est 5.00 TN 0.00 5,000.00 0 25,000 120.00 600 690 CARP 46.37 32,000 57,000 SDA Superstructure Quantities are total for 2 units 0 23-25-75 Common Penthouse for SDA's support steel, roof steel, girts and purlins Est 152 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 402,500 35.00 5,316 6,113 STST 87.33 533,800 936,300 24-37-43 SDA Roof Insulation between penthouse floor and SDA roof total for 2 SDAs Est 12,070 SF 0.00 15.00 0 181,100 0.30 3,621 4,164 ROOF 45.55 189,700 370,800 24-37-47 Roofing for common SDA Penthouse standing seam type. Est 8,100 SF 0.00 18 0 145,800 0.22 1,782 2,049 ROOF 45.55 93,300 239,100 24-41-25 Siding for common SDA Penthouse insulated metal siding Est 16,200 SF 0.00 12 0 194,400 0.11 1,782 2,049 SDNG 63.02 129,100 323,500 36-13-23 Shell Insulation subcontract cost Est 61,688 SF 30.00 0 1,850,600 0 0 0 DINS 52.16 0 1,850,600 22-13-23 Concrete bottom floor for common SDA Penthouse includes metal decking and formwork Est 99 CY 210 0 20,800 7.5 743 854 CONP 51.69 44,100 64,900 41-37-99 Common Penthouse Building Services H&V and Lighting Est 8,100 SF 0.00 30.00 0 243,000 0.30 2,430 2,795 WIRE 66.93 187,000 430,000 31-41-77 Fire Protection for Penthouse Standpipe & hose stations. Est 2 LS 80,000 160,000 500.00 1,000 1,150 MECH 61.53 70,800 230,800 24-17-15 Elevator For SDA - four person rack and pinion elevator. Suncontract price includes labor Est 1 LT 290,000 0.00 290,000 0 0.00 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 290,000 22-13-37 Concrete pit for the elevator Est 10 CY 0 210.00 0 2,100 7.5 75 86 CONP 51.69 4,500 6,600 41-99-99 Electrical work for the elevator allowance Est 1 LT 0 20,000.00 0 20,000 175 175 201 WIRE 66.93 13,500 33,500 Page 1 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost SDA - Support Steel and Access Gallery 23-25-75 Support Steel Included in DFGD equip. Est 300 TN 0 0 0 0 20 6,000 6,900 STST 87.33 602,600 602,600 23-17-23 Walkway from U1 SDA's to U2 SDA's Est 20 TN 0 0 0 0 35 700 805 STST 87.33 70,300 70,300 23-17-23 Access Gallery Est 1,500 SF 0.00 35.00 0 52,500 0.40 600 690 GALL 67.14 46,300 98,800 27-17-99 Touch-up painting Est 2 LT 0.00 45,000.00 0 90,000 1800.00 3,600 4,140 PNTR 56.92 235,600 325,600 Reagent Handling / Preparation- Civil / Structural Work One common for both units 0 Foundations for Lime Storage Silo 21-23-15 Excavation Est 280 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 56 64 EXFD 63.95 4,100 4,100 21-17-25 Backfill Est 80 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 24 28 EXFD 63.95 1,800 1,800 22-13-37 Concrete Est 200 CY 0.00 105.00 0 21,000 1.50 300 345 CONP 51.69 17,800 38,800 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 18 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 20,700 20.00 360 414 REIN 61.48 25,500 46,200 22-17-25 Formwork Est 600 SF 0.00 2.50 0 1,500 0.14 81 93 FORM 71.62 6,700 8,200 22-15-25 Embedded steel Est 0.50 TN 0.00 5,000.00 0 2,500 120.00 60 69 CARP 46.37 3,200 5,700 23-25-75 Support Steel for lime Storage Silo Not required - concrete silo 23-17-23 Galleries Est 1,800 SF 0.00 35.00 0 63,000 0.40 720 828 GALL 67.14 55,600 118,600 23-17-53 Stair Tower for Lime Storage Silo Est 120 TN 2,650 0 318,000 0 25 3,000 3,450 STST 87.33 301,300 619,300 31-41-77 Fire Protection Standpipe & hose stations Est 1 LS 60,000.00 60,000 0 400.00 400 460 YDPP 63.15 29,000 89,000 Lime Preparation / Recycle Building (55' x 100' x 125'H) Quantities shown are total for 2 buildings, 1/unit 22 Substructure 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 1,070 CY 0.00 0 0 0.20 214 246 EXFD 63.95 15,700 15,700 21-17-25 Backfill Est 70 CY 0.00 0 0 0.30 21 24 EXFD 63.95 1,500 1,500 22-13-37 Concrete Est 1,000 CY 105.00 0 105,000 1.50 1,500 1,725 CONP 51.69 89,200 194,200 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 75 TN 1,150.00 0 86,300 20.00 1,500 1,725 REIN 61.48 106,100 192,400 22-17-25 Formwork Est 3,000 SF 2.50 0 7,500 0.14 405 466 FORM 71.62 33,400 40,900 22-15-25 Embedded steel Est 2.50 TN 5,000.00 0 12,500 120.00 300 345 CARP 46.37 16,000 28,500 Superstructure 23-25-75 Structural Steel Est 900 TN 2650 0 2,384,400 16 14,396 16,556 STST 87.33 1,445,800 3,830,200 24-41-25 Insulated Metal Siding Est 80,000 SF 12 0 960,000 0.11 8,800 10,120 SDNG 63.02 637,800 1,597,800 24-15-15 Rolling Overhead Door one for each building Est 640 SF 27 0 17,300 0.25 160 184 CARP 46.37 8,500 25,800 23-23-23 Metal Roof Decking Est 11,000 SF 2.7 0 29,700 0.06 660 759 STST 87.33 66,300 96,000 24-37-43 Rigid Roof Insulation, 2" Thick Est 11,000 SF 2.4 0 26,400 0.015 165 190 ROOF 45.55 8,600 35,000 24-37-17 Cant Strips, Treated Est 620 LF 1.32 0 800 0.035 22 25 ROOF 45.55 1,100 1,900 24-37-73 Roofing ( 4-Ply Tar & Gravel) Est 11,000 SF 1.55 0 17,100 0.04 440 506 ROOF 45.55 23,000 40,100 22-13-43 Lightweight Concrete Fill 1" Est 247 CY 100 0 24,700 1.3 321 369 ROOF 45.55 16,800 41,500 24-37-27 Roof Flashing Est 620 LF 14.45 0 9,000 0.12 74 86 ROOF 45.55 3,900 12,900 35-13-31 Roof Drains Est 2 LT 20000 0 40,000 250 500 575 PLMB 47.74 27,500 67,500 35-13-31 Floor Drains Est 2 LT 25000 0 50,000 300 600 690 PLMB 47.74 32,900 82,900 22-13-23 Floor Slabs includes metal decking and formwork Est 101 CY 210 0 21,200 7.5 756 870 CONP 51.69 45,000 66,200 22-13-23 Floor Finishes Est 8,250 SF 2.5 0 20,600 0.05 413 474 CONP 51.69 24,500 45,100 24-25-25 Louvers/Windows/Doors Est 8,000 SF 40 0 320,000 0.5 4,000 4,600 CONP 51.69 237,800 557,800 34-41-99 Roof Ventilators Est 8 EA 15000 0 120,000 24 192 221 HVAC 51.91 11,500 131,500 23-17-23 Galleries & Landings Est 800 SF 45 0 36,000 0.4 320 368 GALL 67.14 24,700 60,700 34-55-99 H&V Est 11,000 SF 16.7 0 183,300 0.17 1,833 2,108 HVAC 51.91 109,400 292,700 41-37-99 Electrical Service & Lighting Est 11,000 SF 20.0 0 220,000 0.20 2,200 2,530 WIRE 66.93 169,300 389,300 31-41-77 Fire Protection Standpipe & hose stations Est 2 LS 60,000.00 120,000 0 400.00 800 920 YDPP 63.15 58,100 178,100 23 Pipe Rack For Lime Handling, Waste Ash Handling and misc Mechanical Piping Quantities shown are total for 2 units 23-25-75 Structure and Support Steel Est 330 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 874,500 20.00 6,600 7,590 STST 87.33 662,800 1,537,300 22 Foundations for support steel 0 0 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 1,292 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 258 297 EXFD 63.95 19,000 19,000 21-17-25 Backfill Est 342 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 103 118 EXFD 63.95 7,500 7,500 22-13-37 Concrete Est 950 CY 0.00 105.00 0 99,800 1.50 1,425 1,639 CONP 51.69 84,700 184,500 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 71 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 81,900 20.00 1,425 1,639 REIN 61.48 100,800 182,700 22-17-25 Formwork Est 9,500 SF 0.00 2.50 0 23,800 0.14 1,283 1,475 FORM 71.62 105,600 129,400 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 4,750 LB 0.00 2.50 0 11,900 0.05 238 273 CARP 46.37 12,700 24,600 22 Foundations for Misc. Support Steel Quantities shown are total for 2 units 0 0 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 272 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 54 63 EXFD 63.95 4,000 4,000 21-17-25 Backfill Est 72 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 22 25 EXFD 63.95 1,600 1,600 22-13-37 Concrete Est 200 CY 0.00 105.00 0 21,000 1.50 300 345 CONP 51.69 17,800 38,800 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 15 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 17,300 20.00 300 345 REIN 61.48 21,200 38,500 22-17-25 Formwork Est 2,000 SF 0.00 2.50 0 5,000 0.14 270 311 FORM 71.62 22,200 27,200 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 1,000 LB 0.00 2.50 0 2,500 0.05 50 58 CARP 46.37 2,700 5,200 Page 2 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 23-25-75 Misc. Support Steel not included elsewhere Quantities shown are total for 2 units Est 100 TN 0 2,650 0 265,000 20 2,000 2,300 STST 87.33 200,900 465,900 23-17-23 Misc. Galleries Quantities shown are total for 2 units Est 3,000 SF 0.00 35.00 0 105,000 0.40 1,200 1,380 GALL 67.14 92,700 197,700 Fabric Filter 24,079,500 4,622,500 279,365 17,633,000 46,335,000 31-57-15 Fabric Filter System Q 2 LT 9,912,416 0.00 19,824,800 0 80,500 161,000 185,150 MECH 61.53 11,392,300 31,217,100 31-17-45 Fabric Filter Baghouse Air Compressor System Q 2 LT 2,027,372 0.00 4,054,700 0 17,900 35,800 41,170 MECH 61.53 2,533,200 6,587,900 35-13-15 Fabric Filter Baghouse Compressor System Piping Included in air compressor system pricing Est 2 LT 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-27-35 Fabric Filter Bypass Dampers Included in Fabric Filter System Price Est 2 LT 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-57-99 Hopper Heaters Included in Fabric Filter System Price Est 2 LT 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-57-99 Vent Fan Included in Fabric Filter System Price Est 2 LT 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-25-35 Hoist & Trolley Beam Included in Fabric Filter System Price Est 2 LT 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 36-13-23 Insulation for Baghouse subcontract cost Est 65,111 SF 0.00 30.00 0 1,953,300 0 0 0 DINS 52.16 0 1,953,300 23-25-75 Penthouse steel for baghouses Support steel, roof steel, girts and purlins. Est 79 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 209,300 35.00 2,765 3,179 STST 87.33 277,600 486,900 24-41-25 Siding for baghouse penthouse insulated metal siding Est 12,960 SF 0.00 12 0 155,500 0.11 1,426 1,639 SDNG 63.02 103,300 258,800 24-37-47 Roofing for baghouse penthouse standing seam type Est 5,751 SF 0.00 18 0 103,500 0.22 1,265 1,455 ROOF 45.55 66,300 169,800 22-13-23 Concrete bottom floor for baghouse penthouse includes metal decking and formwork Est 70 CY 210 0 14,800 7.5 527 606 CONP 51.69 31,300 46,100 41-37-99 Building Services H&V and Lighting Est 5,751 SF 0.00 22.00 0 126,500 0.20 1,150 1,323 WIRE 66.93 88,500 215,000 31-41-77 Fire Protection for Penthouse Standpipe & hose stations Est 2 LS 60,000.00 120,000 400.00 800 920 MECH 61.53 56,600 176,600 23-25-75 Bottom Enclosure steel Support steel, girts and purlins. Total for Units 1&2 Est 171 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 453,900 20 3,426 3,939 STST 87.33 344,000 797,900 41-37-99 Building Services H&V and Lighting Est 19,880 SF 0.00 22.00 0 437,400 0.20 3,976 4,572 WIRE 66.93 306,000 743,400 24-41-25 Siding for baghouse bottom enclosure insulated metal siding, support steel and girts included in Alstom pricing Est 17,976 SF 0.00 12 0 215,700 0.11 1,977 2,274 SDNG 63.02 143,300 359,000 31-41-77 Fire Protection for bottom enclosure Standpipe & hose stations Est 2 LS 40,000.00 0.00 80,000 0 300.00 600 690 MECH 61.53 42,500 122,500 Fabric Filter System - Structural 0 Foundations for Fabric Filter Baghouse Quantities shown are total for 2 units 21-23-15 Excavation Est 3,852 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.20 770 886 EXFD 63.95 56,700 56,700 21-17-25 Backfill Est 252 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.30 76 87 EXFD 63.95 5,600 5,600 22-13-37 Concrete Est 3,600 CY 0.00 105.00 0 378,000 1.50 5,400 6,210 CONP 51.69 321,000 699,000 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 324 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 372,600 20.00 6,480 7,452 REIN 61.48 458,100 830,700 22-17-25 Formwork Est 10,800 SF 0.00 2.50 0 27,000 0.14 1,458 1,677 FORM 71.62 120,100 147,100 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 9.00 TN 0.00 5,000.00 45,000 120.00 1,080 1,242 CARP 46.37 57,600 102,600 Support Steel and Access Gallery 0 23-25-75 Support Steel Included in Baghouse equip price Q 420 TN 0.00 0 0 0 25 10,500 12,075 STST 87.33 1,054,500 1,054,500 23-17-23 Access Gallery Q 3,000 SF 0.00 35.00 0 105,000 0.40 1,200 1,380 GALL 67.14 92,700 197,700 27-17-99 Touch-up painting Est 1 LT 0.00 25,000.00 0 25,000 1250.00 1,250 1,438 PNTR 56.92 81,800 106,800 0 Ash Recycling System - DFGD Contractor's Scope 6,843,000 0 69,460 4,273,900 11,116,900 Page 3 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 31-45-99 Ash Recycling System - Mechanical 2 LT 3,421,528 6,843,000 30200 60,400 69,460 MECH 61.53 4,273,900 11,116,900 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Storage Silo Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Silo Bin Vent Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Fluidizing Air Blower Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Fluidizing Air Heater Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Silo Discharge Rotary Feeder Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Slurry Vibrating Screen Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Prep Area Sump Tank Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Prep Area Sump Tank Agitator Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Slurry Mix Tank Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Ash Slurry Mix Tank Agitator Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Slurry Storage Tank Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Slurry Storage Tank Agitator Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 31-45-99 Recycle Slurry Feed Pumps Included in Ash Recycling System Price Q 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 Ash Recycling System - BOP Scope 60,000 534,800 4,583 360,800 955,600 Ash Reagent Recycle Building Included with Lime Preparation Building 24-35 Ash Handling Blower Building (25' x 50' x 25'H) Quantities shown are total for 2 buildings, 1/unit 22-13 Substructure 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 214 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 43 49 EXFD 63.95 3,100 3,100 21-17-25 Backfill Est 14 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 4 5 EXFD 63.95 300 300 22-13-37 Concrete Est 200 CY 0.00 105.00 0 21,000 1.50 300 345 CONP 51.69 17,800 38,800 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 15 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 17,300 20.00 300 345 REIN 61.48 21,200 38,500 22-17-25 Formwork Est 800 SF 0.00 2.50 0 2,000 0.14 108 124 FORM 71.62 8,900 10,900 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 1,600 LB 0.00 2.50 0 4,000 0.05 80 92 CARP 46.37 4,300 8,300 24-35-25 Pre-engineered building Includes H&V and Lighting Est 2,500 SF 0.00 175.00 0 437,500 0.90 2,250 2,588 STST 87.33 226,000 663,500 23-25-75 Additional Support Steel for Waste Ash Pipes outside of pipe rack Est 20 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 53,000 25.00 500 575 STST 87.33 50,200 103,200 31-41-77 Fire Protection Standpipe & hose stations Est 2 LS 30,000 60,000 200.00 400 460 YDPP 63.15 29,000 89,000 0 Waste Ash and Fly Ash Handling System 10,131,300 339,300 60,951 3,795,000 14,265,600 33 Waste Ash Handling System - Mechanical 0 26-13-15 Waste Ash silo Concrete silo - subcontract price Q 1 LT 1,550,000 0.00 1,550,000 0 0.00 0 0 CONP 51.69 0 1,550,000 24-17-15 Elevator for waste ash silo maintenance elvator - subcontract price Est 1 LT 290,000 0.00 290,000 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 290,000 22-13-27 Concrete pit for the elevator total for 2 silo elevators Est 10 CY 0 210.00 0 2,100 7.5 75 86 CONP 51.69 4,500 6,600 41-99-99 Electrical work for the elevator allowance Est 1 LT 0 20,000.00 0 20,000 175 175 201 WIRE 66.93 13,500 33,500 33-13-45 Waste Handling Systsem Includes blowers, ash valves, and ash piping Q 1 LT 5,300,000 0.00 5,300,000 0 30,000 30,000 34,500 MECH 61.53 2,122,800 7,422,800 33-13-45 Mechanical Equipment Est 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 33-13-45 Mechanical Blowers Included in Waste Handling System Price Est 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 Page 4 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 33-13-45 Waste Ash Silo Unloading Equipment including Fluidizing Blowers Included in Waste Handling System Handling Price Est 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 33-13-45 Waste Ash Vacuum Pipes from FF hoppers to Filter Separators Included in Waste Handling System Handling Price Est 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 33-13-45 Motor Operated Butterfly Valves Included in Waste Handling System Handling Price Est 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 22-13-75 Fly Ash Silo Field erected steel silo. Pricing includes mechanical equipment and ash piping Est 75 TN 4,000 0.00 300,000 0 70 5,250 6,038 TANK 61.57 371,700 671,700 33-13-45 Mechanical equipment for ash handling system and silo fly ash unloading equipment Est 1 LT 2,500,000 0.00 2,500,000 0 10,000 10,000 11,500 MECH 61.53 707,600 3,207,600 Foundations for Fly Ash Silo 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 80 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.20 16 18 EXFD 63.95 1,200 1,200 21-17-25 Backfill Est 30 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.30 9 10 EXFD 63.95 700 700 22-13-37 Concrete Est 50 CY 0.00 105.00 0 5,300 1.50 75 86 CONP 51.69 4,500 9,800 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 5 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 5,200 20.00 90 104 REIN 61.48 6,400 11,600 22-17-25 Formwork Est 150 SF 0.00 2.50 0 400 0.14 20 23 FORM 71.62 1,700 2,100 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 0.13 TN 0.00 5,000.00 600 120.00 15 17 CARP 46.37 800 1,400 23-25-75 Support Steel for Fly Ash Storage Silo Est 50 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 132,500 35.00 1,750 2,013 STST 87.33 175,800 308,300 23-17-23 Access Gallery for fly ash silo Included with Misc Galleries. 0 SF 0 35 0 0 0.40 0 0 GALL 67.14 0 0 33-57-65 Truck Scale Est 1 LT 125,000 0 125,000 0 900 900 1,035 MECH 61.53 63,700 188,700 22-13-37 Concrete foundation and approach for truck scale Est 350 CY 0 210 0 73,500 7.50 2,625 3,019 CONP 51.69 156,000 229,500 41-99-99 Electrical allowance for truck scale Est 1 LT 0 15,000 0 15,000 200.00 200 230 WIRE 66.93 15,400 30,400 Foundations for Waste Ash Silo 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 176 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.20 35 40 EXFD 63.95 2,600 2,600 21-17-25 Backfill Est 66 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.30 20 23 EXFD 63.95 1,500 1,500 22-13-37 Concrete Est 110 CY 0.00 105.00 0 11,600 1.50 165 190 CONP 51.69 9,800 21,400 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 10 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 11,400 20.00 198 228 REIN 61.48 14,000 25,400 22-17-25 Formwork Est 330 SF 0.00 2.50 0 800 0.14 45 51 FORM 71.62 3,700 4,500 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 0.28 TN 0.00 5,000.00 1,400 120.00 33 38 CARP 46.37 1,800 3,200 23-25-75 Support Steel for Waste Ash Storage Silo concrete silo Est 0 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 0 35.00 0 0 STST 87.33 0 0 23-17-53 Stair Tower for Waste Ash Silo Est 25 TN 2,650 0 66,300 0 25 625 719 STST 87.33 62,800 129,100 23-17-23 Access Gallery for waste ash silo Est 1,700 SF 0 35 0 59,500 0.40 680 782 GALL 67.14 52,500 112,000 0 Flue Gas System 5,558,000 14,067,000 338,089 22,838,000 42,463,000 Spray Dryer Absorber Inlet Duct (from Existing ID Fan Outlet) Quantities are total for 2 units 0 23-15-35 Ductwork Steel, including plate, stiffeners, internal bracing, turning vanes and walkway grating Est 1,600 TN 0.00 3,250.00 0 5,200,000 60.00 96,000 110,400 FLDU 77.18 8,520,700 13,720,700 36-13-57 Insulation & Lagging Est 152,000 SF 0.00 12.00 0 1,824,000 0.26 39,520 45,448 DINS 52.16 2,370,600 4,194,600 31-33-15 Expansion Joints Est 3,200 LF 0.00 230.00 0 736,000 2.50 8,000 9,200 MECH 61.53 566,100 1,302,100 31-27-35 Dampers Not Required 44-21-99 Dry FGD Inlet Ductwork Instrumentation Est 4 LS 30,000.00 0.00 120,000 0 200 800 920 INEL 54.22 49,900 169,900 Spray Dryer Absorber Outlet to Fabric Filter Inlet Quantities are total for 2 units 0 23-15-35 Ductwork Steel, including plate, stiffeners, internal bracing, turning vanes and walkway grating included in DFGD equipment supply pricing 36-13-57 Insulation & Lagging Allow 50,000 SF 0.00 12.00 0 600,000 0.26 13,000 14,950 DINS 52.16 779,800 1,379,800 31-33-15 Expansion Joints Material price is included in DFGD contract cost Est 275 LF 0.00 0.00 0 0 2.50 688 791 MECH 61.53 48,600 48,600 44-21-99 Dry FGD Outlet Ductwork Instrumentation Material price is included in DFGD contract cost Est 1 LS 0.00 0.00 0 0 200 200 230 INEL 54.22 12,500 12,500 31-27-35 Dampers Not required Est 0 SF 450.00 0.00 0 0 3.00 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 Fabric Filter Outlet Duct to Booster Fans and Booster ID Fans to existing chimney breeching Quantities are total for 2 units 0 Page 5 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 23-15-35 Ductwork Steel, including plate, stiffeners, internal bracing, turning vanes and walkway grating Est 560 TN 0.00 3,250.00 0 1,820,000 60.00 33,600 38,640 FLDU 77.18 2,982,200 4,802,200 36-13-57 Insulation & Lagging Est 56,000 SF 0.00 12.00 0 672,000 0.26 14,560 16,744 DINS 52.16 873,400 1,545,400 31-33-15 Expansion Joints Est 1,800 LF 0.00 230.00 0 414,000 2.50 4,500 5,175 MECH 61.53 318,400 732,400 31-27-35 Dampers Not required Est 0 SF 450.00 0.00 0 0 2.50 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 0 44-21-99 Fabric Filter Outlet Ductwork Instrumentation Est 4 LS 30,000.00 0.00 120,000 0 200 800 920 INEL 54.22 49,900 169,900 Booster ID Fans Quantities are total for 2 units 0 31-35-15 New Booster ID Fans Axial fan, 2 x 50% per unit, 882,450 cfm, includes fan auxiliary equipment Est 4 EA 775,000 0.00 3,100,000 0 3000.00 12,000 13,800 MECH 61.53 849,100 3,949,100 41-43-35 Motors for Booster ID Fans 3300 HP Est 4 EA 247,000 0.00 988,000 0 1000.00 4,000 4,600 MECH 61.53 283,000 1,271,000 31-25-35 Hoist & trolleys for Booster ID Fans 5-ton cap Est 4 EA 15,000 0.00 60,000 0 150.00 600 690 MECH 61.53 42,500 102,500 36-13-23 Fan Insulation & Lagging total for two fans Est 6,000 SF 0.00 12.00 0 72,000 0.28 1,680 1,932 DINS 52.16 100,800 172,800 31-27-35 Booster ID Fans Isolation Dampers Single Louver type damper assembly Est 2,400 SF 450.00 0.00 1,080,000 0 2.50 6,000 6,900 MECH 61.53 424,600 1,504,600 Flue Gas System - Structural Ductwork Support Foundations Total for all ductwork for 2 units 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 2,140 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.20 428 492 EXFD 63.95 31,500 31,500 21-17-25 Backfill Est 140 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.30 42 48 EXFD 63.95 3,100 3,100 22-13-37 Concrete Est 2,000 CY 0.00 105.00 0 210,000 1.50 3,000 3,450 CONP 51.69 178,300 388,300 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 150 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 172,500 20.00 3,000 3,450 REIN 61.48 212,100 384,600 22-17-25 Formwork Est 6,000 SF 0.00 2.50 0 15,000 0.14 810 932 FORM 71.62 66,700 81,700 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 5.00 TN 0.00 5,000.00 25,000 120.00 600 690 CARP 46.37 32,000 57,000 23-25-75 Structural Steel Duct Supports Est 580 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 1,537,000 35.00 20,300 23,345 STST 87.33 2,038,700 3,575,700 ID Fan Foundations Quantities are total for 2 units 0 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 2,033 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.20 407 468 EXFD 63.95 29,900 29,900 21-17-25 Backfill Est 133 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0.30 40 46 EXFD 63.95 2,900 2,900 22-13-37 Concrete Est 1,900 CY 0.00 105.00 0 199,500 1.50 2,850 3,278 CONP 51.69 169,400 368,900 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 143 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 163,900 20.00 2,850 3,278 REIN 61.48 201,500 365,400 22-17-25 Formwork Est 15,200 SF 0.00 2.50 0 38,000 0.14 2,052 2,360 FORM 71.62 169,000 207,000 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 9.50 TN 0.00 5,000.00 0 47,500 120.00 1,140 1,311 CARP 46.37 60,800 108,300 23-17-23 Access Gallery for all inlet and outlet ductwork Est 3,000 SF 0 35.00 0 105,000 0.40 1,200 1,380 GALL 67.14 92,700 197,700 41-37-43 Lighting for access galleries and Booster Fan area Est 6,000 SF 0.00 15.00 0 90,000 0.15 900 1,035 WIRE 66.93 69,300 159,300 Stack Coating Acid resistant coating - top 50 ft of liner. Assumed chimney liner 20Ft dia x 500 ft high 61-23-35 Suspended Motorized Modular Platform Rental 90 day rental, each stack Est. 2 LT 45,000.00 0.00 90,000 0 300.00 600 690 CARP 46.37 32,000 122,000 27-15-35 Prep and clean top 50ft of two flues (inside only) to white metal (SSPC-SP 5) Quantities shown are for 2 stacks. Includes misc. repairs Est. 6,400 SF 0.00 0.00 0 0 1.33 8,512 9,789 PNTR 56.92 557,200 557,200 27-13-99 Apply acid resistant coating Quantities shown are for 2 stacks. Est. 6,400 SF 0.00 16.50 0 105,600 1.33 8,512 9,789 PNTR 56.92 557,200 662,800 61-17-43 Temporary Power, Light and Ventilation Est. 2 LT 0.00 10,000.00 0 20,000 400.00 800 920 WIRE 66.93 61,600 81,600 Mechanical - Balance of Plant 0 2,913,900 60,105 3,977,400 6,891,300 Piping Vacuum Conveying 35-13-99 Vacuum conveying to lime silo Est LF 0.00 57.60 0 0 1.50 0 0 SPNG 67.64 0 0 Makeup Water 35-13-15 8" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings, underground Raw water to reagent prep Est 1,130 LF 0.00 130.20 0 147,100 1.88 2,124 2,443 YDPP 63.15 154,300 301,400 35-13-15 6" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings, underground Raw water to reagent prep Est 120 LF 0.00 89.50 0 10,700 1.60 192 221 YDPP 63.15 13,900 24,600 21-25-15 Excavation for Underground Piping Est 628 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 126 144 EXFD 63.95 9,200 9,200 21-17-15 Bedding for Underground Piping Est 94 CY 0.00 40.00 0 3,800 0.30 28 32 EXFD 63.95 2,100 5,900 Page 6 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 21-17-25 Backfill for Underground Piping Est 534 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 160 184 EXFD 63.95 11,800 11,800 35-13-15 2.5" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Slaker water and dilution water Est 320 LF 0.00 35.60 0 11,400 1.28 410 471 SPNG 67.64 31,900 43,300 35-13-15 2.5" CS, SCH 80, includes fittings Slaker water and dilution water Est 320 LF 0.00 55.50 0 17,800 1.44 461 530 SPNG 67.64 35,800 53,600 35-13-15 4" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Recycle water Est 1,190 LF 0.00 57.60 0 68,500 1.50 1,785 2,053 SPNG 67.64 138,800 207,300 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Makeup Water piping Est 2.58 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 6,800 40.00 103 119 STST 87.33 10,400 17,200 Service Water 35-13-15 6" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings, underground Extend existing service water line to new lime unloading area Est 810 LF 0.00 89.50 0 72,500 1.60 1,296 1,490 YDPP 63.15 94,100 166,600 35-13-15 3" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings, underground Reagent prep building abd fly ash silos Est 1,520 LF 0.00 48.80 0 74,200 1.37 2,082 2,395 YDPP 63.15 151,200 225,400 21-25-15 Excavation for Underground Piping Est 1,294 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 259 298 EXFD 63.95 19,000 19,000 21-17-15 Bedding for Underground Piping Est 194 CY 0.00 40.00 0 7,800 0.30 58 67 EXFD 63.95 4,300 12,100 21-17-25 Backfill for Underground Piping Est 1,100 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 330 380 EXFD 63.95 24,300 24,300 35-13-15 3" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Absorbers (penthouse) Est 680 LF 0.00 48.80 0 33,200 1.37 932 1,071 SPNG 67.64 72,500 105,700 35-15-15 2" CS, SCH 80, includes fittings Reagent prep building, absorbers (penthouse), fly ash silos Est 600 LF 0.00 39.80 0 23,900 1.36 816 938 SPNG 67.64 63,500 87,400 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Service Water piping Est 1.51 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 4,000 40.00 60 69 STST 87.33 6,100 10,100 Lime Slurry Pipe 35-13-15 2.5" CS, SCH 80, includes fittings Reagent prep to atomizer head tank in SDA Est 1,200 LF 0.00 55.50 0 66,600 1.44 1,728 1,987 SPNG 67.64 134,400 201,000 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Service Water piping Est 1.76 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 4,700 40.00 70 81 STST 87.33 7,100 11,800 Ash Pipe 35-13-99 10" Ashcolite, flanged Supports included with pipe rack Est 1,440 LF 0.00 165.00 0 237,600 1.75 2,520 2,898 YDPP 63.15 183,000 420,600 35-13-33 Pipe supports within building boundaries Est 10 EA 0.00 125.00 0 1,300 3.00 30 35 STST 87.33 3,000 4,300 Recycle Slurry Pipe 35-13-15 6" CS, SCH 80, includes fittings, underground Recycle ash silo to atomizer head tank Est 1,200 LF 0.00 135.20 0 162,200 1.94 2,328 2,677 YDPP 63.15 169,100 331,300 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Recycle Slurry piping Est 4.28 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 11,400 40.00 171 197 STST 87.33 17,200 28,600 Slurry Return Pipe 35-13-15 6" CS, SCH 80, includes fittings, underground SDA to reagent prep Est 1,200 LF 0.00 135.20 0 162,200 1.94 2,328 2,677 YDPP 63.15 169,100 331,300 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Recycle Slurry piping Est 4.28 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 11,400 40.00 171 197 STST 87.33 17,200 28,600 Sump Discharge / Drains 35-13-15 2.5" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Absorber and Prep Building Est 260 LF 0.00 35.60 0 9,300 1.28 333 383 SPNG 67.64 25,900 35,200 35-13-15 4" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Reagent prep building Est 3,250 LF 0.00 57.60 0 187,200 1.50 4,875 5,606 SPNG 67.64 379,200 566,400 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Sump Discharge and Drains Est 5.19 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 13,800 40.00 208 239 STST 87.33 20,900 34,700 35-13-21 3" HDPE includes fittings Undeground. Absorber Sumps Est 580 LF 0.00 4.80 0 2,800 1.37 795 914 SPNG 67.64 61,800 64,600 35-13-21 4" HDPE includes fittings Fly Ash Silos, Lime Silos Est 3,620 LF 0.00 4.80 0 17,400 1.48 5,358 6,161 SPNG 67.64 416,700 434,100 21-25-15 Excavation for Underground Piping Est 1,556 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 311 358 EXFD 63.95 22,900 22,900 21-17-15 Bedding for Underground Piping Est 233 CY 0.00 40.00 0 9,300 0.30 70 81 EXFD 63.95 5,100 14,400 21-17-25 Backfill for Underground Piping Est 1,322 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 397 456 EXFD 63.95 29,200 29,200 Fire Protection 35-13-35 6" HDPE, includes fittings Extend existing and new for Absorber, Reagent Prep, Fly Ash Silos and Lime Silos Est 1,640 LF 0.00 8.50 0 13,900 0.60 984 1,132 SPNG 67.64 76,500 90,400 21-25-15 Excavation for Underground Piping Est 759 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 152 175 EXFD 63.95 11,200 11,200 21-17-15 Bedding for Underground Piping Est 114 CY 0.00 40.00 0 4,600 0.30 34 39 EXFD 63.95 2,500 7,100 21-17-25 Backfill for Underground Piping Est 645 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 194 223 EXFD 63.95 14,200 14,200 35-13-15 3" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Absorber, Reagent Prep, Fly Ash Silos and Lime Silos Est 1,120 LF 0.00 48.80 0 54,700 1.37 1,534 1,765 SPNG 67.64 119,400 174,100 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Fire Protection Est 1.44 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 3,800 40.00 58 66 STST 87.33 5,800 9,600 Service Air Page 7 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 35-13-15 3" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Absorber, Reagent Prep, Fly Ash Silos and Lime Silos Est 2,980 LF 0.00 48.80 0 145,400 1.37 4,083 4,695 SPNG 67.64 317,600 463,000 35-15-15 2" CS, SCH 80, includes fittings Reagent prep building, absorbers (penthouse), fly ash silos Est 1,000 LF 0.00 39.80 0 39,800 1.36 1,360 1,564 SPNG 67.64 105,800 145,600 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Service Air Est 4.89 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 13,000 40.00 196 225 STST 87.33 19,700 32,700 Instrument Air 35-15-13 2" 304SS, SCH 80, welded Absorber, Reagent Prep, Fly Ash Silos and Lime Silos Est 2,300 LF 0.00 101.42 0 233,300 1.63 3,743 4,305 SPNG 67.64 291,200 524,500 35-15-13 1.5" 304SS, SCH 80, welded Fly Ash Silos and Lime Silos Est 680 LF 0.00 73.37 0 49,900 1.51 1,028 1,182 SPNG 67.64 80,000 129,900 35-15-13 1" 304SS, SCH 80, welded Absorber, Reagent Prep, Fly Ash Silos and Lime Silos Est 1,140 LF 0.00 44.22 0 50,400 1.46 1,664 1,913 SPNG 67.64 129,400 179,800 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for Instrument Air Est 8.81 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 23,400 40.00 352 405 STST 87.33 35,400 58,800 Valves 31-41-47 Hydrants Est 4 EA 0.00 1,500.00 0 6,000 6.00 24 28 YDPP 63.15 1,700 7,700 35-13-41 Valves with PIVS 6", CI Est 6 EA 0.00 575.00 0 3,500 6.00 36 41 YDPP 63.15 2,600 6,100 35-15-41 1" CS Ball Est 4 EA 0.00 150.00 0 600 3.00 12 14 SPNG 67.64 900 1,500 35-15-41 2" Bronze, Ball Est 4 EA 0.00 750.00 0 3,000 4.00 16 18 SPNG 67.64 1,200 4,200 35-13-41 3" CS, Globe, welded Est 32 EA 0.00 1,800.00 0 57,600 4.00 128 147 SPNG 67.64 10,000 67,600 35-13-41 6" CS Knifegate, welded Est 4 EA 0.00 3,200.00 0 12,800 8.00 32 37 SPNG 67.64 2,500 15,300 35-13-41 8" CS Knifegate, welded Est 20 EA 0.00 4,800.00 0 96,000 10.00 200 230 SPNG 67.64 15,600 111,600 35-13-41 12" CS Knifegate, welded Est 8 EA 0.00 7,200.00 0 57,600 14.00 112 129 SPNG 67.64 8,700 66,300 35-15-41 Small bore valves, CS wededl Allowance Est 1 LT 0.00 10,000.00 0 10,000 60.00 60 69 SPNG 67.64 4,700 14,700 31-75-17 Makeup Water pumps 1000 gpm, 200 ft TDH Est 2 EA 0.00 30,000.00 0 60,000 40.00 80 92 MECH 61.53 5,700 65,700 31-75-93 Sump Pumps 440 gpm, 220 TDH Est 8 EA 0.00 25,000.00 0 200,000 30.00 240 276 MECH 61.53 17,000 217,000 31-17-45 Air compressors 250 SCFM, 100 psig Est 2 EA 0.00 45,000.00 0 90,000 60.00 120 138 MECH 61.53 8,500 98,500 31-17-65 Air receivers 1000 Gal Est 2 EA 0.00 7,000.00 0 14,000 20.00 40 46 MECH 61.53 2,800 16,800 31-17-55 Air dryers 250 net SCFM, 100 psig Est 2 EA 0.00 15,000.00 0 30,000 30.00 60 69 MECH 61.53 4,200 34,200 31-65-99 In-line electric water heaters (boilers) 475 kW Est 2 EA 0.00 17,200.00 0 34,400 80.00 160 184 MECH 61.53 11,300 45,700 41-99-99 Allowance for electrical work for the electric boiler Allow 2 EA 0.00 5,000.00 0 10,000 20.00 40 46 WIRE 66.93 3,100 13,100 41 Heat Tracing for Instrumentation Piping 0 41-33-65 Heat tracing cable Allow. 5,700 LF 0.00 10.35 0 59,000 0.05 285 328 WIRE 66.93 21,900 80,900 36-15 Insulation for heat traced piping Assumed nominal 4" pipe size Allow. 5,976 SF 0.00 10.00 0 59,800 0.25 1,494 1,718 INSL 45.09 77,500 137,300 41-33-65 Power connector and other accessories including thermostats for heat tracing (by zones) Allow. 104 LS 0.00 950.00 98,500 8.00 829 953 WIRE 66.93 63,800 162,300 0 Electrical - Auxiliary Power and Balance of Plant Electrical Work 16,124,300 5,615,000 266,631 20,195,800 41,935,100 41 Auxiliary Power Modifications Quantities are total for Unit 1&2 41-51-15 Rserve Aux. Transformer 230kV - 4.16kV, 34/45 MVA, 3phase Est 1 EA 544,000.00 0.00 544,000 0 1,500 1,500 1,725 EHEA 67.88 117,100 661,100 41-51-15 Unit Aux. Transformers 24kV - 4.16kV, 15/20 MVA, 3 phase Est 2 EA 490,000.00 0.00 980,000 0 1,200 2,400 2,760 EHEA 67.88 187,300 1,167,300 41-51-15 Transformer, 480 V Substation 4.16KV-480V,3phase, 2000/2666KVA Est 4 EA 85,000.00 0.00 340,000 0 950.00 3,800 4,370 EHEA 67.88 296,600 636,600 41-51-15 Transformer, 480 V Substation 4.16KV-480V,3phase, 1500/2000KVA Est 4 EA 77,000.00 0.00 308,000 0 950.00 3,800 4,370 EHEA 67.88 296,600 604,600 Page 8 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 41-41-99 FGD/FF Power Control Centers (one for each unit) (30'x60') building, includes: Enclosure with HVAC and Lighting/electric service 4160V swgr 480V swgr MCCs UPS Batteries / Chargers Room/Area designated for DCS Phone Jack Est 2 EA 2,103,000.00 0.00 4,206,000 0 500.00 1,000 1,150 EHEA 67.88 78,100 4,284,100 23-17-23 Platforms around elevated PCC quantities are total for Unit 1&2 PCCs Est 2,850 SF 35.00 0.00 99,800 0 0.40 1,140 1,311 GALL 84.98 111,400 211,200 23-25-75 Support steel for PCC platforms Est 20 TN 2,650.00 0.00 52,900 0 60.00 1,197 1,377 STST 105.69 145,500 198,400 41-41-99 UAT Power Control Centers (one for each unit). (15'x20') building, includes: Enclosure with HVAC and Lighting/electric service 4160V swgr Est 2 EA 300,000.00 0.00 600,000 0 200.00 400 460 EHEA 67.88 31,200 631,200 23-25-75 Auxiliary Steel Modifications for UAT PCC's to be located on turbine floor of each unit Est 7 TN 2,650.00 0.00 18,600 0 60.00 420 483 STST 105.69 51,000 69,600 41-13-15 5KV Cable Bus duct 3000A Est 14,700 FT 550.00 0.00 8,085,000 0 2.50 36,750 42,263 WIRE 85.64 3,619,400 11,704,400 23-25-75 Support steel for cable bus duct Est 84 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 222,600 16.00 1,344 1,546 STST 87.33 135,000 357,600 43-21-15 Cable Bus Terminations 750 KCM Est 288 EA 0.00 100.00 0 28,800 3.00 864 994 WIRE 85.64 85,100 113,900 41-47-25 Relay Panels Est 6 EA 40,000.00 0.00 240,000 0 120.00 720 828 WIRE 85.64 70,900 310,900 41-51-99 Lighting transformers 45KVA, 480V, 3 Phase Low voltage XFMR Est 16 EA 15,000.00 250.00 240,000 4,000 80.00 1,280 1,472 WIRE 85.64 126,100 370,100 41-47-15 Lighting Distribution panel, 200A, 208-120V, 3 Phase Low voltage panel Est 16 EA 10,000.00 200.00 160,000 3,200 60.00 960 1,104 WIRE 85.64 94,500 257,700 22-13-17 Duct Bank- Swgr Bldg to Truck Scale 24"x24", 4x4" cells (includes embedded conduit) Est 2,100 LF 0.00 125 0 262,500 1.60 3,360 3,864 ECND 64.88 250,700 513,200 42-13-47 Cable Trays 36" Trays Est 2,100 LF 0.00 30.00 0 63,000 1.00 2,100 2,415 ECND 64.88 156,700 219,700 42-13-47 Cable Trays 24" Control, & 24" Instrument Est 2,100 LF 0.00 25.00 0 1.00 2,100 2,415 ECND 64.88 156,700 156,700 42-15-37 Conduits misc sizes Est 2,100 LF 0.00 10.00 0 21,000 0.35 735 845 ECND 64.88 54,800 75,800 Miscellaneous Electrical System 0 41-15-15 Cathodic Protection Allowance Allow. 2 LS 75,000.00 0.00 150,000 0 700.00 1,400 1,610 WIRE 85.64 137,900 287,900 41-25-55 Upgrade Fire detection system Allowance Allow. 2 LS 50,000.00 0.00 100,000 0 250.00 500 575 INEL 73.2 42,100 142,100 CABLES 43-21-15 Cables 5kV 3/C, 500 kcmil Est 9,000 LF 0.00 29.11 0 262,000 0.69 6,210 7,142 WIRE 85.64 611,600 873,600 43-21-15 Cables 5kV 3/C, 250 kcmil Est 1,050 LF 0.00 16.77 0 17,600 0.69 725 833 WIRE 85.64 71,400 89,000 43-21-15 Cables 5kV 3/C, #4/0 Est 6,300 LF 0.00 9.78 0 61,600 0.35 2,205 2,536 WIRE 85.64 217,200 278,800 43-21-35 Cables 5kV Terminations Est 91 EA 0.00 50.00 0 4,600 1.25 114 131 WIRE 85.64 11,200 15,800 480 V FGD Unit Substation FGD (SDA, Fabric Filter) 43-17-15 Power Feeder Cable, 600 V, from Unit Sub FGD to MCCs Power Feed to all MCC's (1/C 750 MCM) Est 31,500 LF 0.00 9.82 0 309,300 0.18 5,670 6,521 WIRE 85.64 558,400 867,700 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #10 Est 21,000 LF 0.00 0.87 0 18,300 0.06 1,260 1,449 WIRE 85.64 124,100 142,400 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #6 Est 18,900 LF 0.00 1.92 0 36,300 0.10 1,890 2,174 WIRE 85.64 186,100 222,400 Page 9 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #4 Est 7,770 LF 0.00 2.55 0 19,800 0.35 2,720 3,127 WIRE 85.64 267,800 287,600 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #2 Est 1,890 LF 0.00 4.40 0 8,300 0.35 662 761 WIRE 85.64 65,100 73,400 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #1/0 Est 2,100 LF 0.00 6.33 0 13,300 0.52 1,092 1,256 WIRE 85.64 107,500 120,800 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #4/0 Est 2,730 LF 0.00 13.35 0 36,400 0.52 1,420 1,633 WIRE 85.64 139,800 176,200 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, 350KCMIL Est 2,100 LF 0.00 17.98 0 37,800 0.69 1,449 1,666 WIRE 85.64 142,700 180,500 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, 500KCMIL Est 2,100 LF 0.00 26.41 0 55,500 0.69 1,449 1,666 WIRE 85.64 142,700 198,200 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (for VFD's) 4/C, #10 SHLD Est 2,100 LF 0.00 1.20 0 2,500 0.07 147 169 WIRE 85.64 14,500 17,000 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (for VFD's) 4/C, #6 SHLD Est 840 LF 0.00 2.70 0 2,300 0.10 84 97 WIRE 85.64 8,300 10,600 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (for VFD's) 4/C, #4 SHLD Est 630 LF 0.00 3.65 0 2,300 0.35 221 254 WIRE 85.64 21,700 24,000 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (for VFD's) 3/C, 350KCMIL, SHLD Est 2,100 LF 0.00 16.52 0 34,700 0.69 1,449 1,666 WIRE 85.64 142,700 177,400 43-13-17 Control Cable, 600 V 5/C, #10 Est 6,300 LF 0.00 1.30 0 8,200 0.08 504 580 WIRE 85.64 49,600 57,800 43-13-17 Control Cable, 600 V 2/C, #14 Est 31,500 LF 0.00 0.37 0 11,700 0.03 945 1,087 WIRE 85.64 93,100 104,800 43-13-17 Control Cable, 600 V 3/C, #14 Est 14,700 LF 0.00 0.42 0 6,200 0.03 441 507 WIRE 85.64 43,400 49,600 43-13-17 Control Cable, 600 V 5/C, #14 Est 6,300 LF 0.00 0.68 0 4,300 0.03 189 217 WIRE 85.64 18,600 22,900 43-13-17 Control Cable, 600 V 7/C, #14 Est 2,100 LF 0.00 0.95 0 2,000 0.04 84 97 WIRE 85.64 8,300 10,300 43-13-17 Control Cable, 600 V 9/C, #14 Est 2,100 LF 0.00 1.17 0 2,500 0.05 105 121 WIRE 85.64 10,300 12,800 43-17-35 Power & Control Cable Terminations Power: 600, Control:1200 Est 3,780 EA 0.00 1.00 0 3,800 0.30 1,134 1,304 WIRE 85.64 111,700 115,500 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 2 pr, #16 TW SHLD Est 63,000 LF 0.00 0.32 0 20,200 0.03 2,016 2,318 WIRE 85.64 198,500 218,700 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 2 tr, #16 TW SHLD Est 14,700 LF 0.00 0.43 0 6,300 0.03 470 541 WIRE 85.64 46,300 52,600 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 2 pr, #16 SHLD type E Est 14,700 LF 0.00 0.35 0 5,100 0.03 470 541 WIRE 85.64 46,300 51,400 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 2 strand Est 2,100 LF 0.00 0.50 0 1,100 0.03 63 72 WIRE 85.64 6,200 7,300 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 6 strand Est 5,250 LF 0.00 0.96 0 5,000 0.03 158 181 WIRE 85.64 15,500 20,500 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 12 strand Est 1,260 LF 0.00 1.46 0 1,800 0.03 38 43 WIRE 85.64 3,700 5,500 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 24 strand Est 2,730 LF 0.00 2.21 0 6,000 0.05 137 157 WIRE 85.64 13,400 19,400 43-13-99 Profibus DP Cable Est 8,400 LF 0.00 1.50 0 12,600 0.05 420 483 WIRE 85.64 41,400 54,000 43-13-27 Cat 5E Est 3,150 LF 0.00 1.40 0 4,400 0.05 158 181 WIRE 85.64 15,500 19,900 43-13-43 Instrumentation Cable Terminations Est 6,300 EA 0.00 1.00 0 6,300 0.25 1,575 1,811 WIRE 85.64 155,100 161,400 42-17-15 Misc. Junction Boxes & Pull Boxes Est 2 LT 0.00 154,000.00 0 308,000 900.00 1,800 2,070 WIRE 85.64 177,300 485,300 42-13-47 Cable Trays 36" Trays Est 8,400 LF 0.00 30.00 0 252,000 1.00 8,400 9,660 ECND 64.88 626,700 878,700 42-13-47 Cable Trays 24" Control, & 24" Instrument Est 12,600 LF 0.00 25.00 0 1.00 12,600 14,490 ECND 64.88 940,100 940,100 42-15-37 Conduits misc sizes Est 73,500 LF 0.00 10.00 0 735,000 0.35 25,725 29,584 ECND 64.88 1,919,400 2,654,400 41-31-15 Grounding Includes ground grid, rods, bolted connections & cadwelds. Future installation only Est 2 LT 0.00 50,000.00 0 100,000 800.00 1,600 1,840 WIRE 85.64 157,600 257,600 41-17-25 PA / Page Party Extension System Allow. 2 LT 0.00 20,000.00 0 40,000 300.00 600 690 WIRE 85.64 59,100 99,100 41-17-35 Data COM Extension System Allow. 2 LT 0.00 5,000.00 0 10,000 120.00 240 276 WIRE 85.64 23,600 33,600 41-17-35 Telephone Extension System Allow. 2 LT 0.00 5,000.00 0 10,000 140.00 280 322 WIRE 85.64 27,600 37,600 41-53-17 Security System Allow. 2 LT 0.00 100,000.00 0 200,000 600.00 1,200 1,380 WIRE 85.64 118,200 318,200 480 V Lime/Ash Handling Unit Sub (Lime Handling, Reagent Prep, Ash Handl Area) 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #10 Est 18,900 LF 0.00 0.87 0 16,400 0.06 1,134 1,304 WIRE 85.64 111,700 128,100 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #6 Est 18,900 LF 0.00 1.92 0 36,300 0.10 1,890 2,174 WIRE 85.64 186,100 222,400 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #4 Est 6,300 LF 0.00 2.55 0 16,100 0.35 2,205 2,536 WIRE 85.64 217,200 233,300 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #1/0 Est 2,100 LF 0.00 6.33 0 13,300 0.52 1,092 1,256 WIRE 85.64 107,500 120,800 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, #4/0 Est 2,310 LF 0.00 11.53 0 26,600 0.52 1,201 1,381 WIRE 85.64 118,300 144,900 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, 350KCMIL Est 2,100 LF 0.00 17.98 0 37,800 0.69 1,449 1,666 WIRE 85.64 142,700 180,500 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V (to equipment) 3/C, 500KCMIL Est 6,300 LF 0.00 26.41 0 166,400 0.69 4,347 4,999 WIRE 85.64 428,100 594,500 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V 4/C, #10 SHLD Est 2,100 LF 0.00 1.20 0 2,500 0.07 147 169 WIRE 85.64 14,500 17,000 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V 4/C, #6 SHLD Est 1,260 LF 0.00 2.70 0 3,400 0.10 126 145 WIRE 85.64 12,400 15,800 43-17-15 Power Cable, 600 V 3/C, 350KCMIL, SHLD Est 1,260 LF 0.00 17.98 0 22,700 0.69 869 1,000 WIRE 85.64 85,600 108,300 43-17-15 Control Cable, 600 V 2/C, #10 Est 12,600 LF 0.00 0.70 0 8,800 0.03 378 435 WIRE 85.64 37,200 46,000 43-17-15 Control Cable, 600 V 7/C, #10 Est 5,250 LF 0.00 1.60 0 8,400 0.12 630 725 WIRE 85.64 62,000 70,400 43-17-15 Control Cable, 600 V 2/C, #14 Est 29,400 LF 0.00 0.37 0 10,900 0.03 882 1,014 WIRE 85.64 86,900 97,800 43-17-15 Control Cable, 600 V 3/C, #14 Est 10,500 LF 0.00 0.42 0 4,400 0.03 315 362 WIRE 85.64 31,000 35,400 43-17-15 Control Cable, 600 V 5/C, #14 Est 9,450 LF 0.00 0.68 0 6,400 0.03 284 326 WIRE 85.64 27,900 34,300 43-17-15 Control Cable, 600 V 7/C, #14 Est 2,100 LF 0.00 0.95 0 2,000 0.04 84 97 WIRE 85.64 8,300 10,300 43-17-35 Power & Control Cable Terminations Power: 510, Control: 1000 Est 3,171 EA 0.00 1.00 0 3,200 0.30 951 1,094 WIRE 85.64 93,700 96,900 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 1 pr, #16 TW SHLD Est 10,500 LF 0.00 0.18 0 1,900 0.03 315 362 WIRE 85.64 31,000 32,900 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 1 tr, #16 TW SHLD Est 2,100 LF 0.00 0.29 0 600 0.03 63 72 WIRE 85.64 6,200 6,800 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 2 pr, #16 TW SHLD Est 21,000 LF 0.00 0.32 0 6,700 0.03 630 725 WIRE 85.64 62,000 68,700 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 2 tr, #16 TW SHLD Est 4,200 LF 0.00 0.43 0 1,800 0.03 126 145 WIRE 85.64 12,400 14,200 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 8 pr, #16 TW SHLD Est 4,200 LF 0.00 0.86 0 3,600 0.10 420 483 WIRE 85.64 41,400 45,000 43-13-13 Instrumentation Cable, 300 V 2 pr, #16 SHLD type E Est 12,600 LF 0.00 0.35 0 4,400 0.03 403 464 WIRE 85.64 39,700 44,100 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 2 strand Est 2,100 LF 0.00 0.50 0 1,100 0.03 63 72 WIRE 85.64 6,200 7,300 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 6 strand Est 5,250 LF 0.00 0.96 0 5,000 0.03 158 181 WIRE 85.64 15,500 20,500 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 12 strand Est 1,260 LF 0.00 1.46 0 1,800 0.03 38 43 WIRE 85.64 3,700 5,500 Page 10 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 43-13-33 Fiber Optic Cable 24 strand Est 2,730 LF 0.00 2.21 0 6,000 0.05 137 157 WIRE 85.64 13,400 19,400 43-13-99 Profibus DP Cable Est 8,400 LF 0.00 1.50 0 12,600 0.05 420 483 WIRE 85.64 41,400 54,000 43-13-27 Cat 5E Est 3,150 LF 0.00 1.40 0 4,400 0.05 158 181 WIRE 85.64 15,500 19,900 43-13-43 Instrumentation Cable Terminations Est 6,300 EA 0.00 1.00 0 6,300 0.25 1,575 1,811 WIRE 85.64 155,100 161,400 42-17-15 Misc. Junction Boxes & Pull Boxes Est 2 LT 0.00 100,000.00 0 200,000 600.00 1,200 1,380 WIRE 85.64 118,200 318,200 42-13-47 Cable Trays 36" Trays Est 8,400 LF 0.00 30.00 0 252,000 1.00 8,400 9,660 ECND 64.88 626,700 878,700 42-13-47 Cable Trays 24" Control, & 24" Instrument Est 12,600 LF 0.00 25.00 0 315,000 1.00 12,600 14,490 ECND 64.88 940,100 1,255,100 42-15-37 Conduits misc sizes Est 52,500 LF 0.00 10.00 0 525,000 0.35 18,375 21,131 ECND 64.88 1,371,000 1,896,000 41-31-15 Grounding Includes ground grid, rods, bolted connections & cadwelds. Future installation only Est 2 LT 0.00 50,000.00 0 100,000 800.00 1,600 1,840 WIRE 85.64 157,600 257,600 41-17-25 PA / Page Party Extension System Est 2 LT 0.00 20,000.00 0 40,000 300.00 600 690 WIRE 85.64 59,100 99,100 41-17-35 Data COM Extension System Est 2 LT 0.00 5,000.00 0 10,000 120.00 240 276 WIRE 85.64 23,600 33,600 41-17-35 Telephone Extension System Est 2 LT 0.00 5,000.00 0 10,000 140.00 280 322 WIRE 85.64 27,600 37,600 41-53-17 Lightning Protection Est 2 LT 0.00 30,000.00 0 60,000 300.00 600 690 WIRE 85.64 59,100 119,100 Electrical Aux Power Structural Work 0 Foundations for FGD/FF PCC's Quantities shown are total for 2 buildings, 1/unit 21-23-15 Excavation Est 963 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 193 221 EXFD 63.95 14,200 14,200 21-17-25 Backfill Est 63 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 19 22 EXFD 63.95 1,400 1,400 22-13-37 Concrete Est 900 CY 0.00 105.00 0 94,500 1.50 1,350 1,553 CONP 51.69 80,200 174,700 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 68 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 77,600 20.00 1,350 1,553 REIN 61.48 95,400 173,000 22-17-25 Formwork Est 3,600 SF 0.00 2.50 0 9,000 0.14 486 559 FORM 71.62 40,000 49,000 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 7,200 LB 0.00 2.50 0 18,000 0.05 360 414 CARP 46.37 19,200 37,200 22-13-67 Transformer Firewalls 2700 SF Est 100 CY 0.00 225.00 0 22,500 12.00 1,200 1,380 CONP 74.7 103,100 125,600 Transformer Foundations Total for UAT and RAT with containments 0 0 0 21-23-15 Excavation Est 621 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 124 143 EXFD 81.96 11,700 11,700 21-17-25 Backfill Est 41 CY 0 0.30 12 14 EXFD 81.96 1,100 1,100 22-13-37 Concrete Est 580 CY 0.00 105.00 0 60,900 1.50 870 1,001 CONP 74.7 74,700 135,600 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 44 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 50,000 20.00 870 1,001 REIN 79.19 79,200 129,200 22-17-25 Formwork Est 2,320 SF 0.00 2.50 0 5,800 0.14 313 360 FORM 90.9 32,700 38,500 22-15-25 Embedded Steel Est 2,900 LB 0.00 2.50 0 7,300 0.06 174 200 CARP 64.41 12,900 20,200 23-25-75 Structural Steel Basin Gallery Steel for containments 4.50 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 11,900 25.00 113 129 STST 105.69 13,700 25,600 23-17-23 1 1/4" Grating (Galv) Basin Grating 750 SF 0.00 18.00 0 13,500 0.20 150 173 GALL 84.98 14,700 28,200 Controls & Instrumentation 4,125,000 75,000 16,388 888,500 5,088,500 44-13-15 DCS 4500 I/O points Est 1 LS 2,925,000.00 0.00 2,925,000 0 6,750 6,750 7,763 INEL 54.22 420,900 3,345,900 71-55-45 DCS - Vendor Field Support 200 mandays @ $1500/day Est 200 DAYS 1,500.00 0.00 300,000 0 0.00 0 0 INEL 54.22 0 300,000 44-24-43 Locally Mounted Instruments Est 300 EA 3,000.00 0.00 900,000 0 20 6,000 6,900 INEL 54.22 374,100 1,274,100 44-17-15 Instrument Racks included with instruments 35-15-13 Instrument Tubing Allow 1 LT 0.00 75,000 0 75,000 1,500 1,500 1,725 INEL 54.22 93,500 168,500 Modifications / Installation of CEM system Not required Est Civil Work 0 1,482,700 26,717 2,114,700 3,597,400 21 Laydown Area Approx 4 Acre 21-13-25 Cut and strip Topsoil stripping Est 38720 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.030 1,162 1,336 ETWK 152.54 203,800 203,800 21-13-45 Topsoil storage stockpile assumes on site stockpiling Est 38720 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.010 387 445 ETWK 152.54 67,900 67,900 21-51-27 Geotextile membrane 10 oz/sy Est 19360 SY 0.00 1.80 0 34,800 0.010 0.010 194 223 LAND 30.15 6,700 41,500 21-57-55 Aggregate surfacing 4" thick over entire area Est 19360 SY 0.00 5.65 0 109,400 0.010 0.020 387 445 BCSE 82.08 36,500 145,900 21-47-25 Grass seeding over stockplie area Est 4 ACRE 0.00 1,000 0 4,000 0.010 60 240 276 LAND 30.15 8,300 12,300 21-41-65 Silt Fence Total for stockplie and laydown area Est 1,820 LF 0.00 1 0 1,800 0.02 36 42 LAND 30.15 1,300 3,100 21-43-25 Fencing with one 3-strand barbed wire unit Fabric, posts on 10ft centers Est 1,760 LF 0.00 40 0 70,400 0.28 493 567 LAND 30.15 17,100 87,500 21-43-45 Gates 50ft wide double swing Est 2 EA 0.00 3,500.00 0 7,000 40 80 92 LAND 30.15 2,800 9,800 21 Restoration of Laydown Area Est 0 ACRE 0.00 15.00 0 0 35 0 0 ETWK 152.54 0 0 21-21-25 Remove and dispose of aggregate Est 2,215 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.007 16 18 BCSE 82.08 1,500 1,500 11-21-99 Removal of Geotextile membrane Est 19360 SY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.003 58 67 LAND 30.15 2,000 2,000 21-23-15 Earthwork to restore - Cut Est 2,462 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.030 74 85 EXFD 63.95 5,400 5,400 21-23-45 Earthwork to restore - Fill Est 2,462 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.050 123 142 EXFD 63.95 9,100 9,100 21-23-45 Place topsoil - previously stockpiled Est 70000 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.050 3,500 4,025 EXFD 63.95 257,400 257,400 21-47-25 Grass seeding - mulch and fertilizer Est 4 ACRE 0.00 1,500 0 6,000 0.010 90 360 414 LAND 30.15 12,500 18,500 21 DFGD Area Approx 4 Acre 21-13-25 Cut and strip Topsoil stripping Est 43560 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.030 1,307 1,503 ETWK 152.54 229,200 229,200 21-13-45 Topsoil storage stockpile assumes on site stockpiling Est 43560 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.010 436 501 ETWK 152.54 76,400 76,400 21-51-27 Geotextile membrane 10 oz/sy Est 21780 SY 0.00 1.80 0 39,200 0.010 0.010 218 250 LAND 30.15 7,600 46,800 Page 11 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 21-57-55 Aggregate surfacing 4" thick over entire area Est 24200 SY 0.00 5.65 0 136,700 0.010 0.020 484 557 BCSE 82.08 45,700 182,400 Plant Drainage 21-25-15 Excavation Est 600 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.200 120 138 EXFD 63.95 8,800 8,800 21-57-55 Crushed rock surfacing 12" Est 240 CY 0.00 54.00 0 13,000 0.14 34 39 BCSE 82.08 3,200 16,200 Storm Sewer 22-23-65 4ft Manholes Est 6 EA 0.00 1,575.00 0 9,500 20.00 120 138 YDPP 63.15 8,700 18,200 22-23-65 6ft Manholes Est 5 EA 0.00 3,000.00 0 15,000 30.00 150 173 YDPP 63.15 10,900 25,900 22-23-65 24"x24" Catch Basin 3 ft deep Est 10 EA 0.00 500.00 0 5,000 6.00 60 69 YDPP 63.15 4,400 9,400 35-13-35 18" CHDPE Est 750 LF 0.00 30.00 0 22,500 0.30 225 259 YDPP 63.15 16,300 38,800 35-13-35 24" CHDPE Est 750 LF 0.00 40.00 0 30,000 0.40 300 345 YDPP 63.15 21,800 51,800 35-13-35 36" CHDPE Est 750 LF 0.00 70.00 0 52,500 0.65 488 561 YDPP 63.15 35,400 87,900 21 Oily Water Sewer System 22-23-65 4ft Manholes Est 7 EA 0.00 1,575.00 0 11,000 20.00 140 161 YDPP 63.15 10,200 21,200 35-13-23 6" CISP Est 1,650 LF 0.00 28.00 0 46,200 1.05 1,733 1,992 YDPP 63.15 125,800 172,000 35-13-23 6" Post indicator valve Est 6 EA 0.00 450.00 0 2,700 6.00 36 41 YDPP 63.15 2,600 5,300 31-93-53 Oil Water Separator with Lift Station 3,000 gal Est 1 EA 0.00 100,000.00 0 100,000 1130.00 1,130 1,300 YDPP 63.15 82,100 182,100 21 Sanitary Sewer 22-23-65 4ft Manholes Est 7 EA 0.00 1,575.00 0 11,000 20.00 140 161 YDPP 63.15 10,200 21,200 22-23-65 Cleanouts Est 5 EA 0.00 690.00 0 3,500 8.00 40 46 YDPP 63.15 2,900 6,400 35-13-23 6" CISP Est 1,600 LF 0.00 28.00 0 44,800 1.05 1,680 1,932 YDPP 63.15 122,000 166,800 21-25-15 Excavation for all drainage and sewer piping Est 2,222 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.200 444 511 EXFD 63.95 32,700 32,700 21-17-15 Bedding / backfill for all drainage and sewer piping Est 556 CY 0.00 40.00 0 22,200 0.010 0.300 167 192 EXFD 63.95 12,300 34,500 Interior Plant Roads and Surfacing 21-13-25 Cut and strip Topsoil stripping Est 2,889 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.030 87 100 ETWK 152.54 15,200 15,200 21-13-25 Cut Est 722 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.030 22 25 ETWK 152.54 3,800 3,800 21-17-55 Fill Est 722 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.010 0.050 36 42 ETWK 152.54 6,300 6,300 21-51-27 Geotextile membrane 10 oz/sy Est 8,667 SY 0.00 1.80 0 15,600 0.010 0.010 87 100 LAND 30.15 3,000 18,600 21-57-55 Aggregate surfacing 6" thick over entire area Est 8,667 SY 0.00 8.50 0 73,700 0.010 0.020 173 199 BCSE 82.08 16,400 90,100 21-57-35 Concrete road 9" thick, 24ft W x 2600 L Est 1,733 CY 0.00 17.52 0 30,400 0.29 503 578 PBIT 64.44 37,300 67,700 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 173 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 199,300 20.00 3,467 3,987 REIN 79.19 315,700 515,000 22-17-25 Formwork Est 5,200 SF 0.00 2.50 0 13,000 0.14 702 807 FORM 90.9 73,400 86,400 21-57-55 Contractor Trailer Area Surfacing Includes: 9" aggregate surfacing 12" subgrade prep Est 14520 SY 0.00 22.48 0 326,400 0.10 1,452 1,670 BCSE 82.08 137,100 463,500 21-51-27 Geotextile membrane - entire area 10 oz/sy Est 14520 SY 0.00 1.80 0 26,100 0.010 0.010 145 167 LAND 30.15 5,000 31,100 Removal and Relocation of Existing Equipment and Infrastructure 0 859,300 16,890 1,188,300 2,047,600 Miscellaneous Pipe Relocation - Underground Quantities are total for Units 1&2 35-13-15 14" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Fuel oil and chemical drains Est 938 LF 0.00 259.50 0 243,400 2.94 2,758 3,171 YDPP 63.15 200,300 443,700 35-13-15 12" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Chemical drains and service water Est 375 LF 0.00 246.30 0 92,400 2.88 1,080 1,242 YDPP 63.15 78,400 170,800 35-13-15 8" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Oil drains Est 375 LF 0.00 89.50 0 33,600 1.60 600 690 YDPP 63.15 43,600 77,200 35-13-15 6" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Fuel oil and service water Est 563 LF 0.00 130.20 0 73,300 1.88 1,058 1,217 YDPP 63.15 76,900 150,200 21-25-15 Excavation for Underground Piping Est 834 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 167 192 EXFD 63.95 12,300 12,300 21-17-15 Bedding for Underground Piping Est 125 CY 0.00 40.00 0 5,000 0.30 38 43 EXFD 63.95 2,800 7,800 21-17-25 Backfill for Underground Piping Est 709 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 213 244 EXFD 63.95 15,600 15,600 Miscellaneous Pipe Relocation - Above Ground Quantities are total for Units 1&2 Allow. 1 LT 0.00 200,000 0 200,000 3000.00 3,000 3,450 WIRE 66.93 230,900 430,900 35-13-15 12" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Ash water, Unit 1&2 Est 250 LF 0.00 246.30 0 61,600 2.88 720 828 YDPP 63.15 52,300 113,900 35-13-15 10" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Ash water Est 250 LF 0.00 196.80 0 49,200 2.32 580 667 YDPP 63.15 42,100 91,300 35-13-15 8" Ashcolite, flanged Ash sluice line Est 500 LF 0.00 145.20 0 72,600 1.54 770 886 YDPP 63.15 55,900 128,500 35-13-15 4" CS, SCH 40, includes fittings Service water Est 250 LF 0.00 57.60 0 14,400 1.50 375 431 YDPP 63.15 27,200 41,600 35-13-33 Pipe Supports for relocated piping Est 5.22 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 13,800 40.00 209 240 STST 87.33 21,000 34,800 Miscellaneous Structures Building Demolition Unit 1 11-26-99 Ductwork Est 120 TN 0.00 0 0 0 15.00 1,800 2,070 WRKG 91.68 189,800 189,800 11-23-99 Steel Est 25 TN 0.00 0 0 0 12.00 300 345 WRKG 91.68 31,600 31,600 11-22-99 Concrete Assumed existing foundations to be left in place Miscellaneous Structures Building Demolition Unit 2 Page 12 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost 11-26-99 Ductwork Est 60 TN 0.00 0 0 0 15.00 900 1,035 WRKG 91.68 94,900 94,900 11-23-99 Steel Est 10 TN 0.00 0 0 0 12.00 120 138 WRKG 91.68 12,700 12,700 11-22-99 Concrete Assumed existing foundations to be left in place : Sub-Total of Equipment Material and Labor Costs 113,383,200 38,719,000 1,647,446 109,453,400 261,555,600 Other Costs 61,016,900 81-13-45 Additional Crane Rental Allowance 4.00 % 0 4,378,136 4,378,136 61-27-25 Mobilization/Demobilization Est 2.00 % 2,189,068 2,189,100 61-23-35 Scaffolding Est 2.50 % 967,975 2,736,335 3,704,300 61-17-43 Temporary Facilities and Construction Utilities (Elect, Water, etc.) During Construction 1.00 % 0 1,094,534 1,094,500 Allowance for Premium Time Labor Five (5) days per week Ten (10) hours per day. Est 1 LS 0 61-21-45 Cost due to overtime inefficiency working 5x10's 8.00 % 143,256 66 9,518,000 9,518,000 61-21-65 Per Diem Expense @ $10/HR 10 hr 17,907,025 17,907,000 91-13-15 BOP Contractor's General & Administrative Costs Based on BOP Materials & Labor Costs at 5% (not incl. Equipment Costs ) Est 5.00 % 1,935,950 5,472,670 7,408,600 91-15-25 BOP Contractor's Profit Based on BOP Materials & Labor Costs at 10% (not incl. Equipment Costs ) Est 10.00 % 3,871,900 10,945,340 14,817,240 Total Equipment, Material and Labor Costs 113,383,200 45,494,800 1,790,700 163,694,500 322,572,500 Spare Parts, Special Tools and Consumables 794,000 81-27-75 Mandatory Spare Parts (first year of operation) 0.00 % 0 0 0 81-25-35 Special Tools Included w\Equipment Costs 81-25-25 Consumables (0.5% of Equipment/Material Cost) 0.5 % 567,000 227,000 794,000 Freight, Duties, Taxes, Etc. 1,936,000 71-27-35 Freight-ExWorks To Site For material costs only. Freight for Equipment included with equipment costs. 5 % 1,935,950 1,936,000 71-47-45 Taxes - Sales/Use/VAT/Business/Etc. Not Included 0 Total Direct Costs 113,950,200 47,657,800 163,694,500 325,302,500 Total Indirect Costs 0 0 48,090,100 71-13-15 Engineering / Procurement 6.50 % 21,144,700 21,144,700 71-23-15 Construction Management 2.00 % 6,506,100 6,506,100 71-45-57 Start-up & Commissioning Craft Support 2.00 % 3,273,900 3,273,900 71-53-15 Operator Training & Manuals 0.55 % 900,300 900,300 71-21-15 Owner's Cost 5.00 % 16,265,125 16,265,125 Page 13 of 14 OG & E Estimate No.: 30228 A1 Sooner Units 1 & 2 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/11/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Cost Development Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost Total Project Cost without Escalation / Contingency 373,392,600 95-95-95 Escalation 46,602,900 Equipment.00% 11,964,800 11,964,800 Material.00% 5,718,900 5,718,900 Labor.00% 23,244,600 23,244,600 Indirects.00% 5,674,600 5,674,600 93-93-93 Contingency 13.970 % 58,673,400 Total Project Cost with Escalation / Contingency 478,668,900 97-97-97 Bond Cost 1.00 % 4,786,700 97-97-97 Interest During Construction (AFUDC) 8.66 % 101,133,800 Total Project Cost 584,589,400 123456789 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Page 14 of 14 OG&E Muskogee Units 4&5 DFGD System Cost Estimate Account Summary Date: 12/23/2009 Account Description Cost Dry FGD System $86,741,200 Fabric Filter $45,872,900 Ash Recycling System - DFGD Contractor's Scope $12,102,900 Waste Ash and Fly Ash Handling System $14,311,500 Flue Gas System $52,238,200 Mechanical - Balance of Plant $6,201,400 Electrical - Auxiliary Power and Balance of Plant Electrical Work $37,923,600 Controls & Instrumentation $5,088,500 Civil Work $3,597,400 Removal and Relocation of Existing Equipment and Infrastructure $4,134,800 Other Costs $66,931,700 Total Indirect Costs $49,601,900 Escalation $63,277,100 Contingency $63,104,100 Bond Cost $5,111,300 Interest During Construction (AFUDC) $118,148,300 Total Project Cost $634,386,800 Page 1 of 1 OG & E Estimate No.: 30352 A Muskogee Units 4 & 5 Project No.: 11418-019 Dry FGD Systems Date: 12/23/2009 Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared by: MNO Cost Type: Reviewed by: RK Est=Estimated Approved by: PEF Allow.=Allowance Wage Rates Based on: 9NUR06 C= Contract Labor Productivity = 1.15 Q=Vendor Quote Code of Accounts Item Description Scope Definition Cost Type Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Equip.Cost Unit Material Cost Total Equipment Cost Total Material Cost Unit Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours (Base) Total Man-hours, Prod = 1.15 Crew Code Crew Wage Rate Total Construction & Erection Cost Total Projected Cost Dry FGD System 46,462,100 8,387,700 503,589 31,891,400 86,741,200 31-45-25 Dry FGD System Q 2 LT 15,917,133 0.00 31,834,300 0 136,400 272,800 313,720 MECH 61.53 19,303,200 51,137,500 31-45-35 Reagent Handling / Preparation Est 0 0 0 31-45-35 Reagent Handling / Preparation - Mechanical Q 2 LT 3,969,614 0.00 7,939,200 0 33600 67,200 77,280 MECH 61.53 4,755,000 12,694,200 26-13-99 Lime Storage Silo with piping for pneumatic unloading (truck) Concrete Silo - Subcontract price Q 1 LT 3,200,000 0.00 3,200,000 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 3,200,000 24-17-15 Elevator for lime silo four person rack and pinion maintenance elevator - subcontract price includes labor Est 1 LT 290,000 0.00 290,000 0 0 0 0 MECH 61.53 0 290,000 22-13-27 Concrete pit for the elevator Est 10 CY 0 210.00 0 2,100 7.5 75 86 CONP 51.69 4,500 6,600 41-99-99 Electrical work for the elevator allowance Est 1 LT 0 20,000.00 0 20,000 175 175 201 WIRE 66.93 13,500 33,500 33-43-15 Pneumatic lime transfer equipment/piping including blowers, piping, and valves Q 1 EA 400,000 0.00 400,000 0 3500 3,500 4,025 MECH 61.53 247,700 647,700 23-17-23 Access Gallery Est 2,000 SF 0.00 35.00 0 70,000 0.40 800 920 GALL 67.14 61,800 131,800 0 Dry FGD System - Civil / Structural Work 0 Foundations for SDA's Quantities are total for 2 units 21-53-13 Piles 16" dia X 60' deep, auger cast Est 14,400 LF 0.00 12.65 0 182,200 0.35 5,040 0 PILE 86.18 0 182,200 21-23-15 Excavation Est 1,498 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.20 300 345 EXFD 63.95 22,000 22,000 21-17-25 Backfill Est 98 CY 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.30 29 34 EXFD 63.95 2,200 2,200 22-13-37 Concrete Est 1,400 CY 0.00 105.00 0 147,000 1.50 2,100 2,415 CONP 51.69 124,800 271,800 22-25-35 Reinforcing Est 126 TN 0.00 1,150.00 0 144,900 20.00 2,520 2,898 REIN 61.48 178,200 323,100 22-17-25 Formwork Est 4,200 SF 0.00 2.50 0 10,500 0.14 567 652 FORM 71.62 46,700 57,200 22-15-25 Embedded steel Est 3.50 TN 0.00 5,000.00 0 17,500 120.00 420 483 CARP 46.37 22,400 39,900 SDA Superstructure Quantities are total for 2 units 0 23-25-75 Common Penthouse for SDA's support steel, roof steel, girts and purlins Est 152 TN 0.00 2,650.00 0 402,500 35.00 5,316 6,113 STST 87.33 533,800 936,300 24-37-43 SDA Roof Insulation between penthouse floor and SDA roof total for 2 SDAs Est 12,070 SF 0.00 15.00 0 181,100 0.30 3,621 4,164 ROOF 45.55 189,700 370,800 24-37-47 Roofing for common SDA Penthouse standing seam type. Est 8,100 SF 0.00 18 0 145,800 0.22 1,782 2,049 ROOF 45.55 93,300 239,100 24-41-25 Siding for common SDA Penthouse insulated metal siding Est 16,200 SF 0.00 12 0 194,400 0.11 1,782 2,049 SDNG 63.02 129,100 323,500 36-13-23 Shell Insulation subcontract cost Est 61,688 SF 30.00 0 1,850,600 0 0 0 DINS 52.16 0 1,850,600 22-13-23 Concrete bottom floor for common SDA Penthouse includes metal decking and formwork Est 99 CY 210 0 20,800 7.5 743 854 CONP 51.69 44,100 64,900 41-37-99 Common Penthouse Building Services H&V and Lighting Est 8,100 SF 0.00 30.00 0 243,000 0.30 2,430 2,795 WIRE 66.93 187,000 430,000 31-41-77 Fire Protection for Penthouse Standpipe & hose stations. Est 2 LS 80,000 160,000 500.00 1,000 1,150 MECH 61.53 70,800 230,800 24-17-15 Ele |
Date created | 2011-09-09 |
Date modified | 2011-10-28 |
Tags
Add tags for Sooner units 1 & 2 BARTFollow-Up Report