10/08/10 

B&V E-21 

1

Discussion of OAQPS Cost Manual Method for AQCS Estimation 

Appx. C 

Details of Cost Calculation Using OAQPS Cost Manual 

Question 1: 

What was the total capital cost (in 2007 dollars and $/kW) for the SCR project(s) in 

Appendix C used to scale costs for San Juan in the 7/11/07 cost estimate? 

Response: 

The quotes in Appendix C are from the SJRPP SCR project. The original estimate for the 

two units at SJRPP was $228 million in 2006 dollars. The two units are 670 MW each, 

resulting in estimated cost of 170 $/kW. The final cost of the project was $232 million. 

Question 2: 

What is the design basis for the SCR project(s) in Appendix C used to scale costs for San 

Juan in the 7/11/07 cost estimate? Please include the catalyst pitch, catalyst volume, 

catalyst wall thickness, initial oxidation rate per layer, guaranteed NOx outlet, NOx 

reduction percentage, design coal, and guaranteed catalyst life. 

Response: 

Attachment 1 has been provided to give the design basis for the SJRPP project. This is 

from the catalyst contract. This is being provided because it is a good summary design 

basis. However, the catalyst for San Juan was not scaled from SJRPP because the SJRPP 

catalyst was designed for petcoke firing and would not be applicable to San Juan. An 

explanation of the catalyst sizing will be provided separately. 

Note: the crossed out and included text within Attachment 1 are the conformed contract 

changes between the specification and the final contract.

Question 3: 

Are all of the vendor quotes in Appendix C for the same project? 

Response: 

All the quotations included in Appendix C are from SJRPP. 

The air heater modifications and the balance draft conversion were taken from other 

projects. Those quotes are not public record and are not provided in the document. 

Question 4: 

Some of the vendor quotes in Appendix C include installation and freight, which are 

added on top of costs based on vendor quotes in the 7/11/07 cost estimate. Was any 

adjustment made for this in the 7/11/07 cost estimates? If yes, please explain. 
10/08/10 

B&V E-21 

2

Response: 

Each line item was handled slightly differently. Given the complexity of this discussion, 

it will be more easily addressed during the line by line discussion scheduled on October 

14. 

Question 5: 

What ammonia flow rates were used to extrapolate the Peerless ammonia system quote to 

each San Juan unit? 

Response: 

Refer to page 20 of the OAQPS discussion. The scaling was done off of NOx removal. 

NOx removal for SJRPP was 0.34 lb/MBtu (0.40 lb/MBtu inlet NOx – 0.06 lb/MBtu 

outlet NOx). 

Question 6: 

Which base cost estimate from the Peerless ammonia system quote was used to 

extrapolate the ammonia injection system and ammonia vaporization system costs to each 

San Juan unit? 

Response: 

As discussed on page 20 of the OAQPS document, the BART estimate was actually done 

off of the budgetary pricing quotation for SJRPP. However, when the OAQPS document 

was put together in response to questions by NMED, we were not able to include the 

budgetary quote because it was not a public document. So, the final quote was included 

instead of the budgetary quotations. These final quotes were slightly different than the 

budgetary quotes. We included the final quotes because the final quotes were already 

public record (since they were bid as part of the City of Jacksonville public municipal 

bidding process) and the budgetary quotations were not. The final price for two units was 

$2,945,000 (not including freight) for ammonia injection and ammonia vaporization 

equipment. While there were slight differences between the two quotes, they numbers 

were similar and the final quote demonstrated the validity of the budgetary quote. 

Question 7: 

What flow rates were used to scale the cost data in Appendix C, Sec. 4.3 Ductwork and 

Sec. 4.4 Expansion Joints, to each San Juan unit? 

Response: 

Refer to Page 21 of the OAQPS document for the scaling information. However, in 

responding to this question, B&V did notice an error in the calculation. The $360,000 

was for two units instead of one unit. So, the costs for expansion joints should have been 

scaled off of $180,000. 

Question 8: 

What is the unit size of the vendor quote used to scale the elevator costs for each San 

Juan unit? 
10/08/10 

B&V E-21 

3

Response: 

The unit was SJRPP. Refer to Attachment 1 regarding size. However, elevator pricing is 

not a function of the unit size but of load capacity and height. There would likely be no 

differences is these parameters between SJRPP and San Juan. No scaling was required 

for the elevator quote. 

Question 9: 

What is the unit size of the vendor quote used to scale the SCR bypass costs for each San 

Juan unit? 

Response: 

SJRPP was used. Refer to sizing in Attachment 1. 

Question 10: 

Is the vendor quote for the SCR bypass in Sec. 4.8 for a full bypass, i.e., able to bypass 

100% of the flow under MCR? If yes, please provide an estimate for a startup bypass, 

sized to pass just the flow during the portion of startup during which oil is burned. What 

is the flowrate assumed in the SCR bypass vendor quote? The flow rate required for each 

San Juan unit? 

Response: 

The bypass on SJRPP is a full flow bypass. The flow rates are as shown in the sizing 

information provided in Attachment 1. An estimate for a partial bypass has not been 

developed at this time. It should be noted that for SJRPP, a partial bypass would have 

still required the same size dampers. Because of their location in the ductwork, they 

would have had to isolate the entire flue gas path during bypass. Therefore, no change in 

damper pricing would have occurred with a partial bypass. 

Question 11: 

Was the vendor quote in Sec. 4.9 Structural Steel used to estimate structural steel capital 

costs in the 7/11/07 cost analysis? If yes, please show the calculations used to scale the 

Sec. 4.9 estimate to the 7/11/07 estimate. 

Response: 

As explained on page 25 of the OAQPS document, originally the budgetary quote was 

used, which was somewhat lower in cost than the final, contracted price for SJRPP. 

However, as with the ammonia, the budgetary quote could not be shared because it is not 

a public document. Since the final quote is a public document and could be shared, it 

was included in the OAQPS document to demonstrate the validity of the quotation that 

was used. Refer to page 25 of the OAQPS document regarding the scaling methodology. 

Because San Juan is a significantly more challenging site for the steel than SJRPP, a 

complexity factor was added. The two inner units (Units 2 and 3) had a 1.5 factor in the 

equation and Units 1 and 4 had a 1.2 complexity factor in the equation. 
10/08/10 

B&V E-21 

4

Attachment 1 

Design Basis Information on SJRPP 
SRJPP NOx Reduction Project Change Order 1

144805.62.0208 SCR Catalyst 06Aug07Source: 11507, 2005, v.1.0 Catalyst for Selective Catalytic Reduction Page 4 of 31

Table 11507-2 

Design Basis for Catalyst Inlet 

(Total Unit Flow, Not Per Reactor)

 Units 

Design Load with Pet Coke 

Design Load without Pet Coke 

Maximum Load with Pet Coke 

Minimum Load with Pet Coke 

Design 

Load (100% Colombian Dm Coal)

Minimum 

Load (100% Colombian Dm Coal)

Desi

Load (100DomCoal

Petcoke Firing Percent 30 0 30 30 

0

0

0

Domestic Coal Firing Percent 35 50 35 35 

0

0 100 

Colombian Coal Firing Percent 35 50 35 35 100 100

0

Unit Load (gross) MW 670 670 670 300 670 300 670 Heat Input to Boiler MBtu/hr 6,300 6,194 6,414 3,100 6,221 3,100 6,194 Flue Gas Mass Flow Rate at Economizer Outlet 

lb/hr 6,128,230 6,154,250 6,514,560 3,304,700 6,272,653 3,428,379 6,079

Flue Gas Vol. Flow Rate at Economizer Outlet 

acfm 3,086,180 3,113,690 3,292,190 1,501,530 3,254,750 1,514,056 3,065

Flue Gas Temperature at SCR Inlet 

°F 750 750 750 640 775 600 750 

Flue Gas Temperature at SCR Inlet 

°F (Range)

710-800 710-800 710-800 620-690 710-800 580-690 710-

Average Flue Gas Temperature for Material Design 

°F 824 824 824 824 824 824 824 

Flue Gas Pressure at SCR Inlet 

inches w.g. 

-6 -6 -6.8 -1.7 -6 -1.7 -6 

Typical O2 Content in 

Flue Gas at SCR Inlet 

% vol. wet 

3.25 3.25 4.0 4.8 3.25 4.8 3.25 
SRJPP NOx Reduction Project Change Order 1

144805.62.0208 SCR Catalyst 06Aug07Source: 11507, 2005, v.1.0 Catalyst for Selective Catalytic Reduction Page 5 of 31

Table 11507-2 

Design Basis for Catalyst Inlet 

(Total Unit Flow, Not Per Reactor)

 Units 

Design Load with Pet Coke 

Design Load without Pet Coke 

Maximum Load with Pet Coke 

Minimum Load with Pet Coke 

Design 

Load (100% Colombian Dm Coal)

Minimum 

Load (100% Colombian Dm Coal)

Desi

Load (100DomCoal

Typical O2 Content in 

Flue Gas at SCR Inlet 

% vol. wet (Range) 

2.5-4.0 2.5-4.0 2.5-4.0 4.0-10.0 2.5-4.0 4.0-10.0 2.5-4

Typical CO2 Content 

in Flue Gas at SCR Inlet 

% vol. wet 

 14.04 13.90 13.43 12.77 13.58 12.35 14.10 

Typical H2O Content 

in Flue Gas at SCR Inlet 

% vol. 8.88 9.60 8.61 8.32 10.48 9.78 8.97 

Typical NOx Emission Rate 

lb/MBtu 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 

Maximum NOx Emission Rate 

lb/MBtu 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.5 0.66 0.5 0.66 

Typical NOx

Concentration 

ppmvw 264 257 253 240 252 230 262 

Maximum NOx

Concentration 

ppmvw 436 425 417 300 417 287 431 

Typical SO2 Concentration 

ppmvw 1,749 614 1,672 1,591 577 525 664 

Maximum SO2 Concentration 

ppmvw 2,050 1,058 1,960 1,865 717 653 1,409 

Average SO3 Concentration 

ppmdv 51 14.5 51 52.4 17.1 15.5 19.4 
SRJPP NOx Reduction Project Change Order 1

144805.62.0208 SCR Catalyst 06Aug07Source: 11507, 2005, v.1.0 Catalyst for Selective Catalytic Reduction Page 6 of 31

Table 11507-2 

Design Basis for Catalyst Inlet 

(Total Unit Flow, Not Per Reactor)

 Units 

Design Load with Pet Coke 

Design Load without Pet Coke 

Maximum Load with Pet Coke 

Minimum Load with Pet Coke 

Design 

Load (100% Colombian Dm Coal)

Minimum 

Load (100% Colombian Dm Coal)

Desi

Load (100DomCoal

Maximum Local SO3 Concentration 

ppmdv 99.5 22.5 99.5 67.2 21.3 19.2 41.2 

Typical SO3 Emissions lb/hr 772 220 824 431 263 131 291 Maximum SO3 Emissions 

lb/hr 1,505 341 1,607 553 327 163 618 

Typical Particulate Emission Rate 

gr/acf 0.99 1.42 0.95 1.00 1.74 1.86 1.66 

Maximum Particulate Emission Rate 

gr/acf 1.14 1.64 1.09 1.15 1.99 2.14 2.26 

Typical Particulate Emissions 

lb/hr 26,230 37,855 ,26,705 12,907 48,411 24,124 45,42

Maximum Particulate Emissions 

lb/hr 30,146 43,810 30,692 14,834 55,650 27,731 61,94
SRJPP NOx Reduction Project Change Order 1

144805.62.0208 SCR Catalyst 06Aug07

Source: 11507, 2005, v.1.0 Catalyst for Selective Catalytic Reduction Page 8 of 31

Table 11507-3 

Performance Guarantees

Required Performance Demonstration Method Guarantee Value 

Maximum NOx SCR exit 

emissions, lb/MBtu 

Test A and Test B as 

Specified in Article 

11507.1.7.6. Test A and Test 

B results will be adjusted 

back to the “Design Point” 

using the performance curves 

provided by the Supplier. 

0.06 

Maximum conversion rate of SO2

to SO3, percent 

Test A and Test B as 

Specified in 11507.1.7.6. 

Test A and Test B results will 

be adjusted back to the 

“Design Point” using the 

performance curves provided 

by the Supplier. 

”Test A” oxidation rate in 

accordance with 0 to 90 day 

correction curve attached.

“Test B”oxidation rate at

800 F and ammonia off – 1.8%

2.0 percent with ammonia off

Maximum ammonia emissions at 

SCR outlet, ppmvd @ 3% O2

Test A and Test B as 

Specified in Article 

11507.1.7.6. Test A and Test 

B results will be adjusted 

back to the “Design Point” 

using the performance curves 

provided by the Supplier. 

2 

Minimum catalyst life of initial 

catalyst charge, hours 

Test B as Specified 

11507.1.7.6. Test B results 

will be adjusted back to the 

“Design Point” using the 

performance curves provided 

by the Supplier. 

18,000 hours of flue gas 

exposure or four years whichever 

occurs first 

Flue gas NOx distribution at the 

SCR outlet, based on testing a 

minimum of 40 points. 

Test A and Test B as 

Specified in Article 

11507.1.7.6. This Guarantee 

shall be met at all operating 

points tested during Test A 

and Test B. 

100% of points within 50% of 

actual measured arithmetic mean 

Maximum pressure drop across 

catalyst 

Test will be performed within 

seven (7) days of initial 

startup of the SCR system 

and immediately following 

sootblowing. Test results will 

be adjusted back to the 

“Design Point” using the 

performance curves provided 

by the Supplier. 

1.771.86 in.wg. (3 layers)