# Appendix H.3 Control Option Costs

# Table of Contents

Costs of Implementing North Carolina’s Clean Smoke Stacks Act ....................................2
Costs of Coal Washing (SCANA Corporation)...................................................................5

# Costs of Implementing North Carolina’s Clean Smoke Stacks ActDuke Energy and Progress Energy SO2 reduction cost per ton calculations based on 2006 Compliance PlanProgress Energy 2013 SO2 (tons) Uncontroled (MBTU) Rate Uncontroled(tons) Reduced(Tons) Capcost($000) omcost($000) tcost($000) Cost($/ton) AirCN cost($/ton_mAsheville 1-21778.00 23706666.67 1.2~1.314864.00 13086.00 166,344 6892.00 25155.741922.341006.68Mayo 13203.00 42706666.67 1.10 23488.67 20285.67 221,869 9191.00 33551.111653.931339.00Roxboro 1-410184.00 135786666.67 1.0~1.694170.00 83986.00 547,381 30511.00 90610.701078.88939.81Cape Fear 5-61443.00 19240000.00 1.40 13468.00 12025.00 177,874 2089.00 21618.681797.811546.50Sutton 31823.00 24306666.67 1.20 14584.00 12761.00 194,227 3185.00 24510.151920.711265.00Progress System 18431.00 245746666.67160574.67 142143.67 1307695.00 48683.00 195446.371374.99Duke2013 SO2 (tons) Uncontroled (MBTU) Rate Uncontroled(tons) Reduced(Tons) Capcost($000) omcost($000) tcost($000) Cost($/ton) AirCN cost($/ton)Allen 1-54905.00 65400000.00 1.50 49050.00 44145.00 427256.60 25655.15 72565.791643.811843.05Belews Creek 1-2 10151.00 135346666.67 1.40 94742.67 84591.67 536311.30 48929.07 107813.371274.52983.00Cliffside 52755.00 36733333.33 1.50 27550.00 24795.00 252176.30 12180.86 39868.561607.931085.00Marshall 1-410470.00 139600000.00 1.55 108190.00 97720.00 423434.40 42587.15 89078.13911.561052.21Duke System28281.00 377080000.00279532.67 251251.67 1639178.60 129352.23 309325.841231.14Notes:capcost: all the capital costs from 2006 Smokestacks Act reportomcost: calculated by the data provided from Duke & Progress.tcost: total cost per year ( capital cost portion is calculated by 15 year loan with 7% interest rate)AirCN cost: costs from AirControlNet for that facility

## August 10,2007

Ms. Renee Shealy,Asst. Bureau Chief Bureau ofAir Quality SCDept. ofHealth & 

## Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina29201
Re: Coal Washing

Dear Ms. Shealy:

Several weeks ago you had requested information oncoal washing and how SCANA Corporation utilized this technology. SCANAburns eastern bituminous coal and utilizes the coal washing technology on approximately 80% ofthe coalthat is delivered to our power plants. The washing takes place at the coal mine before it is transportedto South Carolinafrom eastern Kentucky and West Virginia. SCE&G's fuel procurement group currently specifiesto the mines that the sulfurcontent in coal shipped to our plants be 1.0 %

## or less ofthe total coal weight on a system wide basis.

Thewashing process removes primarily pyritic sulfur which is more dense than other forms of sulfur and is removed by gravity during the washing process. Thepyritic sulfur which arrives at our plants istypically less than 0.5% ofthe total weight ofthe coal. This type of sulfur is normally in the form of ferric disulfide which isvery hard. Because of its hardness, the remainder ofthe pyritic sulfur is rejected by the crushing process before the coal enters the boiler. Thecoal must have a "face powder" consistency in order to burn properly, therefore, thepyritic sulfur has to be rejected because it can't be 

## pulverized to that fineness.

Please find attached a fewpages out oftext book describing the washing process and

some coal data on recent trains received at our Urquhart and Canadys Stations.

## Ifyou need more information or have any questions,please call me at (803) 217-9849. Sincerely, 

# d@

- /I. 

## W.Preston, Jr.

Cc: 

## G. Haimberger 

# M.D. Shinn 

# AUG 

# 1 A 

# ?On7

: 

## 0 AIH O~JAL'-~


### SCANA 

### Corporofion 

# I Columbia,South

### Carolina 2921

## 8 wwwWWW~~ono.~orn

# --

1-48 COAL PREPARATION PROPERTIES OF COAL 149
organic sulfur ranged from 20.8 to 83.6 pucent of the total sulfur and had
amean value of51.2percentof the total sulfur.

Opinions conflict regarding the correlation between organic and pyritic suhr in coal. Several workers reported no correlation between the two major fonnsof sulfur, whereas others conctuded rhat organic sulfur varies directlywith pyritic sulfur in coals that they have studied. Gray, Schapiro and Coe 

## '' of the Applied Research Laboratoryof the U.S. Steel Corporation found a significant positive correlation between pyritic and organic sulfur in Pittsburgh seam coel in size fractions coarser &an 10-mesh. It
was pointed out, however, rhat since organic sulfur is determined in the chemical analysis by difference, some of tbc apparent correlation may be duetothemethodof analysis.

Dfslribolion of sulfur It is generally accepted that there may be much vertical and lateral variation in pyritic sulfur in a coal. The higher concentration of pyritic sulfur may 

### often be in the uppermost and lowennost benches of a coal seam,81, 

### *' a fact that may, in some instances, be taken into consideration during the miningof the coal so that benches especially high in sulfur can be eliminated by selective miniig.

The variation in organic sulfur from top to bottom of the ooal seam.is generally agreed to be relatively slight compared with the large vertical variation in pyritic sulfur.g'.

"'- 6s However, there is some diaerence of opinion about the lateral variation in organic sulfur within a single seam. Yancey and Fraser 

### '' concluded that distribution of the organic sulfur is uniform in only very limited areas of the coal seams they studied in Illinois and Kentucky. Cady observed, however, that for Illinois coals the local variation 

### in organic sulfur is rarely more than 1 percent and generally not more than 0.5 

### percent, and that the organic sulfur content 

### is regionally consistent for each coal. Similarly, Wandless concluded that many British coal seams show a iairly constant organic suhrcontent throughoutwide areas.

Cady studied the sulfur iorms in the banded ingredients of codvitrain, clarain, and fusain. Fusain may have eitherlarge or small amounts of pyritic sulfur, depending on whether or not tbe cavities are tilled with pyrite, and it is the only banded ingredientin which more than 2.5 percent pyirjtic sulfur has been found. Vitrain aod clarain contain relatively mon organic sulfur than does fusain. 

### The organic to pyritic ratio for vitrain and clarain is usuaUy greater than 1.0. The organic sulfur content of vitrain is generally lower than that of clarain from the same 

### coal.

Removal of suh As sbown by the random sampling of American coals in table 1-12, the completely inaccessible organic sulfur makes up from 20.8 to 83.6percent ofthe total sulfur in the coal. Theoretically, all thepyritic sulfur, which occun as iron disulfide,can be separated from the 

## 1 coal and removed because pyrite 

### and marcsite have specidc gravities from 4.89 to 5.03. Assuming a range in specific gravity for coal 

### of 1.2 to 1.8, then the pyrite has fmrn three to four times the specik gravity of coal. In practice, Bowever, the actual amount of the pyrite that can be removed varies greatly from one coal to another and meaningful generalizationsconcerningthe quantity of pyrite that can be removed from coals
aredifficulttomake.

Table 1-13, taken from Chapman and 

### Rhys Jones;' is an example of [be variation of varieties of sulfur in different density fractions of a relatively high-sulfur American coal. The pyritic sulfur content increases steadilyfrom the lower to higher density fractions. However, there is also
a very definite trend of decreasing organic sulfur in the higher density fractions.

Coals have been studied that show no regular increase in total sdfw in the higher specific gravity fractions. Gandrud, Coe, 

### and Thomas " reported on a coal from AIabama that had a total sulfur content of 0.78 percent. When the coal was treated at 1.90 specific graviry, the sink fraction contained only 0.45 percent sulfur. Yancey and Parr

### ** reported similar resulrs from a study of tbe lower bench of a North Carolina coal


### seam that showed a 7.2 percent increase of sulfur (2.08 percent to 2.23 percent) in the coal after it was cleaned on an air table. The impurities removed in cleaning these coals contained less sulfur than the clean coal.

The wide variation in rhe amount of removable pyritic sulfur, and conversely 

### in the amount of finely-disseminated pyrite in several coals, is shown in figure 1-6. The data were obtained 

### by specific gravity analyses

Table 1-13
DISTRIBUTION OF SULFUR IN FRACKONS OF RAW COAL OF DIFFERENT DENSITIES

-- ----- ,

# . Specific gravity Weight, Ad, pemr pcrccnt Pf'ritic Or.Q~nic SulJofr Told

Rrlnvv I ?n 1.0 5.8 1.06 1.33 0.01 2.40COAL PREPAMTIOM



### om. 6ed1C adD

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 REOUCT4OH IN PYRITE SULPHUR, percent 

### Fignre 1-6. 

### Variebility 

### of possible

### redaction 

### h pyritic sulfur 

### fordifferent coabby 

### floritand~ mrlhd



## on coal crushed 

### to 

## he sizes with 

### determination of pyritic sulfur 

### on eacb gravity 

### fraction. Pyritic sulfur reduction ranged 

### from 

## abut 86 

### percent in 

### a Cambria County Pennsylvania coal 

## as contrasted to 

### a concentration 

### in the 

### cod 

## from North Carolina 

### at normal yields 

### of 

### float 

## coal. Tbe amount by 

### which the 

### sulfur content of coal 

### may 

## be reduced by gravity 

### separation is 

### primarily dependent 

## on the mode 

### of occurrence 

### of the 

## sulfur. 

## For a given 

### situation, 

### the re~ovable sulfur 

## is 

## tbcn the total sulfur 

### Iess 

## the spm 

### of 

### the organic sulfur 

## and @at

## portion of 

### the finely dis

### seminated pyrie 

### which cannot 

### k 

## remo~ed by the techniques

## being used. The amount of pyrite that can 

# be remoyec! can be 

### varied by 

### the 

## prepara

## tion methods, increasing 

## as the padclc 

## 8ize of .the coal decreases and 

### as 

## the effective 

## specific gravity at 

### which the coal 

### is cleaned 

## decreases The economics of 

### each 

## piactid situation wiU 

### dictate these conditions. FMb 

### flotation Coal has 

### surface 

### properties that 

### permit 

### it to be 

### carried by 

### bubbles to the surface of a froth-flotation bath. 

### Impurities such

as 

### clays are 

### more easily wetted

### than 

### the coal and 

## remain below

### the surface. Unfortunately, the 

### surfacid properties of ma1 

### and 

### pyrite do not 

### Meer

# !b July 30, 2007



### SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & 

### GAS 111 

### RESEARCH DRIVE COLUMBIA, SC 29203 

### MICHAEL SHINN

Kind of sample 

### MECHANICAL SAMPLE reported to us 

### COAL
Sample taken at 

### KOPPER GLO FUELS
Sample taken by 

### KOPPER GLO FUELS/SGS

Date sampled July 16, 2007



### Date received July 16, 2007 

### Sample identification by 

### KOPPER GLO FUELS/SGS

SGS OBSERVED MECHANICAL SAMPLE BEECH ISLAND, SC TMIN NO. C264 75 

### MILCARS 7637.78 

### TONS

Analysis Report No. 49-322343



### PROXIMATE ANALYSIS ULTIMATE ANALYSIS As Received Dry Basis As Received Dry Basis

% 

### Moisture % 

### Ash % 

### Volatile % 

### Fixed Carbon

Btu/lb % 

### Sulfur

MAF Btu SO2 lb/mill Btu @ 

### 100%

Alk. as 

### Sodium Oxide

FORMS OF SULFUR % 

### Pyritic % 

### Sulfate % 

### Organic(diff)

WATER SOLUBLE ALK. % 

### Sodium oxide % 

### Potassium oxide XXXXXX
XXXXXX XXXXX 8.21 37.04

XXXXXX
XXXXXX % 

### Moisture 4.86 % 

### Carbon 72.48 % 

### Hydrogen 4.88 % 

### Nitrogen 1.67 % 

### Sulfur 1.46 % 

### Ash 7.81 % 

### Oxygen(diff) 6.84 100.00 XXXXX 76.18

5.13 1.76 1.53 8.21 7.19 100.00



### FUSION TEMPERATURE OF ASH, 

### (ga Reducinq Oxidizinq

Initial Deformation (IT) 2505 xxxx 

### Softening (ST) 2539 xxxx 

### Hemispherical (HT) 2626 

### xxxx Fluid (FT) 2700+ 

### xxxx

ReS~ectfullv submitted'

Mlddlesboro Laboratory SGS NcrtC ,\rne:lca Inc Mlnerals Services Dlvls~on 

# 1
Route2. Box I62A. M~ddlesboroKY 40965 116061248-4205 f ,606) 248-0014 

### www us sgs com/m~neraIs I
GENERAL CONDITIONS OF SERVICE ON REVERSE Mrm~btlr ullhe SGS Grou~

# b July 30, 2007



### SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & 

### GAS 111 

### RESEARCH DRIVE COLUMBIA, SC 29203 

### MICHAEL SHINN

Kind of sample 

### MECHANICAL SAMPLE reported to us 

### COAL

Sample taken at 

### KOPPER GLO FUELS

Sample taken 

### by 

### KOPPER GLO FUELS/SGS

Date sampled 

### July 16, 

### 2007

Date received 

### July 16, 2007 Sample identification 

### by 

### KOPPER GLO FUELS/SGS

SGS OBSERVED MECHANICAL SAMPLE BEECH ISLAND, SC TRAIN NO. C264 75 

### RAILCARS 7637.78 

### TONS

Analysis Report No. 49-322343

ANALYSIS OF ASH WEIGHT %, 

### IGNITED BASIS

Silicon dioxide

Aluminum oxide Titanium dioxide

Iron oxide Calcium oxide Magnesium oxide Potassium oxide Sodium oxide

Sulfur trioxide Phosphorus pentoxide Strontium oxide Barium oxide Manganese oxide Undetermined

Silica Value 

### = 73.64 Base:Acid Ratio 

### = 0.27 T250 Temperature 

### = 2610 OF Type of Ash 

### = 

### BITUMINOUS Fouling Index 

### = 0.07 Slagging Index 

### = 0.41

Respectfully submitted, SGS NORTHAMERICA INC

SGS Ncrt" Anerlca Inc M~nerals Servlces Dlv~s~on 

# 1 Route2, Bn l62A M~ddlesboroKY 40965 t 16061248-4205 f 1606)248-0044 WWQI us sgs com/m~nerals I
GENERAL CONDITIONS OF SERVICE ON REVERSE Member oftlie SGS Gruup

### July 30, 2007 

# DP- SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & 

### GAS 111 

### RESEARCH DRIVE COLUMBIA, SC 29203 

### MICHAEL SHINN

Kind of sample 

### MECHANICAL SAMPLE reported to us 

### COAL
Sample taken at 

### KOPPER GLO FUELS
Sample taken by 

### KOPPER GLO FUELS/SGS

Date sampled July 16, 2007



### Date received July 16, 2007 

### Sample identification by 

### KOPPER GLO FUELS/SGS

SGS OBSERVED MECHANICAL SAMPLE BEECH ISLAND, SC TRAIN NO. C264 75 

### RAILCARS 7637.78 

### TONS

Analysis report no. 49-322343



### TRACE ELEMENTS 

### IN COAL
Antimony, Sb c2.00 

### ppm



### Arsenic, As 22.00 

### ppm



### Barium, Ba 58.00 

### ppm 

### Beryllium, Be c2.00 

### ppm 

### Cadmium, Cd c2.00 

### ppm 

### Chromium, Cr 13.00 

### pprn 

### Copper, Cu 16.00 

### ppm 

### Lead, Pb 9.00 

### ppm 

### Manganese, 

### Mn 16.00 

### pprn 

### Mercury, Hg 0.19 

### ppm



### Silver, Ag c2.00 

### ppm 

### Thallium, T1 c2.00 

### ppm



### Vanadium, 

### V 44.00 

### ppm 

### Zinc, Zn 18.00 

### ppm

Procedure: The sample was prepared accordir~gto ASTM, Part 05.05, Method D 3683. The sample was analyzed for trace elements by inductively coupled Plasma Emission Spect-roscopy.

Mercury was determined by Direct Combustion

Results: Results are reported in parts per million (ppm).

Middlesboro Laboratory

Route2 Box '62A M~ddlesboro KY 40965 i(606)248 4205 f (606)248-0044 www us sqs com/m~nerals
Member of the SGS Group
GENERAL CONDITIONS OF SERVICE ON REVERSEJuly 30, 2007

SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC

### 8 GAS PO BOX 11849 COLUMBIA SC 29211 Page 1of 2

Client Sample ID: C304 Date Sampled: Jul 18,2007 Date Received: Jul 18, 2007 Product Description: COAL Sample ID By SGS Minerals Services Sample Taken At Consol (Jones Fork) Sample Taken By Mechanical Plant Canadys Unit Train C304 No.of Cars 93 Total Tons 9203.15
SGS Minerals Sample ID: 

### 521-0701821-001

As Received 6.04 9.67 36.99 47.30

1.05 12506 70.31 4.75 1.41 6.77 co.01 0.35 0.69 %TotalMoisture %Ash %Volatile Matter % FixedCarbon %Sulfur Gross Calorific Value, Btullb %Carbon %Hydrogen %Nitrogen %Oxygen %SulfateSulfur Pyritic Sulfur Organic Sulfur Mercury, 

### ppm [ASTM D33021 [ASTM D3174(Modlfied)] [ASTM D31751 [ASTMD3172(Calc)] [ASTM D4239 Method

### C] [ASTMD58651 [ASTM D53731 [ASTM 1353731 [ASTM D53731 [ASTM D5373(Calc)] [ASTMD24921 [ASTM D24921 [ASTM I324921 [ASTMD6722j

Result Method

Ib. of SO2 I Million Btu 

### @ 100% ANALYSIS OFASH Silicon dioxide ASTM D5865

ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 Aluminum oxide Titanium dioxide Ironoxide Calcium oxide Magnesium oxide Potassium oxide Sodium oxide Sulfur trioxide Phosphorus pentoxide Strontium oxide Barium oxide Manganese oxide MAA T250 MAA Sum Undetermined Minerals Services Division SGS North America In'. 1815 Island Creek Road Pikeville KY 41501 t (606)-432-2511 f (606)-437-4657 www.ags.corn/minerals 

## I Member olthe SGS GroupJuly 30, 2007

SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC

### 8 GAS PO BOX 1 1849 COLUMBIA SC 29211

Client Sample ID: C304 Date Sampled: Jul 18, 2007 Date Received: Jul 18, 2007 Product Description: COAL Sample ID By Sample Taken At Sample Taken By Plant Unit Train No.of Cars Total Tons
SGS Minerals Sample ID: 521-0701821-001 Analyte ANALYSIS OF ASH (continued) MAA Basis MAA Type of Ash MAA Silica Value MAA Base Acid Ratio Fouling lndex Stagging lndex FUSION TEMPERATURE OF ASH, REDUCING Initial Deformation Softening Hemispherical Fluid Result

IGNITEDs. u. BITUMINOUSs, u. 81.87 

### %

0.19

### % 0.10 

### % 0.21 

### % Page 2 of 2

SGS Minerals Services Consol (Jones Fork) Mechanical Canadys C304 93 9203.1 5

Method

ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682

ASTM Dl 857 ASTM Dl 857 ASTM Dl 857 ASTM Dl 857

SGS North Inc Minerals Services Division 1815 Island Creek Road Pikeville KY 41501 t (606)-432-2511 f (606)-437-4657 www.sgs.com/minerals

Member olthe SGS Group

# b July 30, 2007



### SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & 

### GAS 111 

### RESEARCH DRIVE COLUMBIA, SC 29203 

### MICHAEL SHINN

Kind of sample reported to us 

### COAL
Sample taken at 

### LYNCH 3 

### Sample identification by 

### BLACK MOUNTAIN RESOURCES

SGS OBSERVED MECHANICAL SAMPLE NORTH WATEREE C281 

### PERMIT NO. C281 93 

### RAILCARS 10331.90 

### TONS
Sample taken by 

### BLACK MOUNTAIN RESOURCES SEE ATTACHED SHEET FOR RAILCAR NUMBERS:

Date sampled July 24, 2007



### Date received July 24, 2007



### Analysis Report No. 49-323345



### PROXIMATE ANALYSIS ULTIMATE ANALYSIS As Received Dry Basis As Received Dry Basis

% 

### Moisture % 

### Ash % 

### Volatile % 

### Fixed Carbon

Btu/lb % 

### Sulfur



### MAF Btu SO2 lb/mill Btu @ 

### 100% Alk. as Sodium Oxide

FORMS OF SULFUR % 

### Pyritic % 

### Sulfate % 

### Organic (dif f)

WATER SOLUBLE ALK. % 

### Sodium oxide % 

### Potassium oxide XXXXXX
XXXXXX XXXXX 

### 11.42 35.78 52.80 100.00

XXXXXX
XXXXXX % 

### Moisture 5.58 % 

### Carbon 71.03 % 

### Hydrogen 4.63 % 

### Nitrogen 1.37 % 

### Sulfur 0.91 % 

### Ash 10.78 % 

### Oxygen(diff) 5.70 100.00 XXXXX 

### 75.23

4.90 1.45 0.96 11.42

6.04 100.00



### FUSION TEMPERATURE OF ASH, (gfi Reducinq Oxidizinq ! 

### Initial Deformation (IT) 2700+ 

### xxxx Softening (ST) 2700+ 

### xxxx Hemispherical 

### (HT) 2700+ 

### xxxx Fluid (FT) 2700+ 

### xxxx

Respectfully submitted, SGS NORTHAMERICMNC

SGS NorthAmsrica Inc Minerals Services Dlvis~on 

# 1 Route 2, Box l62A,Middlesbo~o, KY 40965 t 16061248-4205 116061248-0044 ~vw~.us.sps.com/m~ner~s

F-465 I Memberof the SGS Group

ccrncon, r-nrtnlTInh#cnc CFE)\II~Fnh! E)F~IFE)SF

# b July 30, 2007



### SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & 

### GAS 111 

### RESEARCH DRIVE COLUMBIA, SC 29203 

### MICHAEL SHINN

Kind of sample reported to 

### ua 

### COAL

Sample taken at 

### LYNCH 3

Sample taken by 

### BLACK MOUNTAIN RESOURCES Sample identification by 

### BLACK MOUNTAIN RESOURCES

SGS OBSERVED MECHANICAL SAMPLE NORTH WATEREE C281 

### PERMIT NO. C281 93 

### RAILCARS 10331.90 

### TONS

SEE ATTACHED SHEET FOR RAILCAR NUMBERS:

Date sampled 

### July 24, 2007

Date received 

### July 24, 2007

halysis Report No. 49-323345

ANALYSIS 

### OF ASH WEIGHT %, 

### IGNITED BASIS

Silicon dioxide

Aluminum oxide Titanium dioxide

Iron oxide Calcium oxide Magnesium oxide Potassium oxide Sodium oxide

Sulfur trioxide Phosphorus pentoxide Strontium oxide Barium oxide Manganese oxide Undetermined

Silica Value 

### = 86.73 Base:Acid Ratio = 

### 0.14 T250 Temperature 

### = 2880 OF Type of Ash 

### = 

### BITUMINOUS Fouling Index 

### = 0.08 Slagging Index 

### = 0.13

M~ddlesboro Laboratory SiGS Nonh 41ner1rd li,r M~nerals Se~~ces D~vis~on Route2, Box 162A, M~ddiesboro, KY 40965 t (606)240-4205 f 16061248 OD44 wwwussgs com/m~nerals

Member of the SGS Group
GENERAL CONDITIONSOF SERVICE ON REVERSE

### July 30, 2007

SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & 

### GAS 111 RESEARCH DRIVE COLUMBIA, SC 29203 MICHAEL SHINN



### Kind of sample reported to us COAL


### Sample taken at LYNCH 3


### Sample taken by BLACK MOUNTAIN RESOURCES



### Date sampled July 24, 2007



### Date received July 24, 2007 

### Sample identification by BLACK MOUNTAIN RESOURCES

SGS OBSERVED MECHANICAL SAMPLE NORTH WATEREE C28 1 PERMIT NO. C281 93 RAILCARS 10331.90 TONS

SEE ATTACHED SHEET FOR RAILCAR NUMBERS:



### Analysis report no. 49-323345



### TRACE ELEMENTS 

### IN COAL
Antimony, Sb

Arsenic, As

Barium, Ba Beryllium, Be Cadmium, Cd Chromium, Cr Copper, Cu Lead, Pb Manganese, 

### Mn Mercury, Kg

Silver, Ag Thallium, T1

Vanadium, V Zinc, Zn

Procedure: The sample was prepared according to ASTM, Part 05.05, Method D 3683. The sample was analyzed for trace elements by inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Spectroscopy.

Mercury was determined by Direct Combustion.

Results: Results are reported in parts per million (ppm).

Middlesboro Laboratory SGS horth bmer~ca Inc M~nerals Serv~ces Dlv~s~on Route 2, Box 162A M~ddlesboro KY 40965 t (606)248-4205 f(606)248 0044 ww us sgs coni/m~nerals

Member ollhe SGSGroup GENERAL CONDITIONS OF SERVICEON REVERSEJuly 30, 2007

SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS PO BOX 11849 COLUMBIA SC 29211

Client Sample ID: C307 Date Sampled: Jul 18,2007 Date Received: Jul 18, 2007 Product Description: COAL

%Total Moisture %Ash %VolatileMatter % FixedCarbon %Sulfur Gross Calorific Value, Blullb %Carbon %Hydrogen % Nitrogen %Oxygen %SulfateSulfur PyriticSulfur OrganicSulfur Mercury,ppm Sample ID By SGS Minerals Services Sample Taken At Black Diamond Sample Taken By Mechanical Plant Canadys Unit Train C307 No.of Cars 90 Total Tons 9068.95

Ib.of SO2 1 Million Btu 

### @ 100% ANALYSIS OF ASH Silicon dioxide Aluminum oxide Titanium dioxide Iron oxide Calcium oxide Magnesium oxide Potassium oxide Sodium oxide Sulfur trioxide Phosphorus pentoxide Strontium oxide Barium oxide Manganese oxide MAA T250 MAA Sum Undetermined Page 1of 2

SGS Minerals Sample 

### ID: 521-0701811-001

[ASTM D33021 [ASTM D3174(Modified)] [ASTM D31751 [ASTMD3172(Calc)] [ASTM D4239 MethodC] [ASTMD58651 [ASTM D53731 [ASTM D53731 [ASTM D53731 [ASTM D5373(Calc)] [ASTM D24921 [ASTM D24921 [ASTMD24921 [ASTMD67221 As 

### Received 5.95 10.00 35.12 48.93 0.88 12445 69.69 4.93 1.39 7.16 (0.01 0.21 0.66

Result Method 

# -- BY - MAF

ASTM D5865

ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682

SGS America lnc. Minerals Services Division 1815 Island Creek Road Pikeville KY 41501 t (606)-432-2511 f (606)-437-4657 www sgs.comlminerals

Member ofthe SGS GroupJuly 30, 2007

SOUTH CAROI-INA ELECTRIC

### & GAS PO BOX 11 849 COLUMBIA SC 29211

Client Sample ID: C307 Date Sampled: Jul18,2007 Date Received: Jul 18,2007 Product Description: COAL Sample ID By Sample Taken At Sample Taken By Plant Unit Train No.of Cars Total Tons SGS Minerals Sample ID: 521 -0701 811-001
Analvte ANALYSIS OF ASH (continued) MAA Basis MAA Type of Ash MAA Silica Value MAA Base Acid Ratio Fouling lndex Slagging lndex FUSION TEMPERATURE OF ASH, REDUCING Initial Deformation Softening Hemispherical Fluid Result

IGNITED s. u. BITUMINOUS s. u. 86.27 

### %

0.14 % 0.04% 0.13 % Page 2 of 2

SGS Minerals Services Black Diamond Mechanical Canadys C307 90 9068.95

Method

ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682 ASTM D3682

ASTM Dl857 ASTM Dl857 ASTM Dl857 ASTM Dl 857

Minerals Services Division SGS NorthAmerica In'. 1815 IslandCreek Road Pikeville KY 41501 t (606)-432-2511 f (606)-437-4657 www sgs comlminerals 

### I Memberof lhe SGS Group