Sooner units 1 & 2, Muskogee units 4 & 5 dry FGD BART analysis follow-up report.

              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