pipeline companies for the purchase of firm transportation from upstream points where gas has been purchased to the Utilities’ distribution systems, and for upstream storage services.
Charges under these transportation and storage contracts are approved by the FERC.
The Utilities are required to pay certain fixed charges under the supply, transportation and storage contracts whether or not the contracted capacity is actually used.
These fixed charges amounted to approximately $291 million in 2015, including $252 million for CECONY.
See “Contractual Obligations” below.
At December 31, 2015, the contracts were for various terms extending to 2020 for supply and 2027 for the transportation and storage.
In January 2016, CECONY entered into two 20-year transportation contracts, one of which is for capacity on the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) (see “Con Edison Transmission - CET Gas" below).
In addition, the Utilities purchase gas on the spot market and contract for interruptible gas transportation.
See “Recoverable Energy Costs” in Note A to the financial statements in Item 8.
Steam Operations Steam Facilities CECONY’s capitalized costs for utility plant, net of accumulated depreciation, for steam facilities, including steam's portion of the steam-electric generation facilities, were $1,849 million and $1,795 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
CECONY generates steam at one steam-electric generating station and five steam-only generating stations and distributes steam to its customers through approximately 105 miles of transmission, distribution and service piping.
Steam Sales and Deliveries CECONY’s steam sales and deliveries for the last five years were:
## Table 0 ##
For further discussion of the company’s steam operating revenues and its steam results, see “Results of Operations” in Item 7.
For additional segment information, see Note N to the financial statements in Item 8.
Steam Peak Demand and Capacity Demand for steam in CECONY’s service area peaks during the winter heating season.
The one-hour peak demand during the winter of 2015/2016 (through February 1, 2016) occurred on January 5, 2016 when the demand reached 8.0 MMlb per hour.
“Design weather” for the steam system is a standard to which the actual peak demand is adjusted for evaluation and planning purposes.
The company’s estimate for the winter of 2016/2017 peak demand of its steam customers is about 8.9 MMlb per hour under design conditions.
The company forecasts an average annual decrease in steam peak demand in its service area at design conditions over the next five years to be approximately 0.8 percent.
On December 31, 2015, the steam system was capable of delivering approximately 11.3 MMlb of steam per hour, and CECONY estimates that the system will have a capacity of 11.6 MMlb of steam per hour in the 2016/2017 winter.
Steam Supply Forty percent of the steam produced by CECONY in 2015 was supplied by the company’s steam-only generating assets; 43 percent was produced by the company’s steam-electric generating assets, where steam and electricity are primarily cogenerated; and 17 percent was purchased under an agreement with Brooklyn Navy Yard Cogeneration Partners L. P.
As of December 31, 2013, we: ?
owned and operated a petroleum refinery in El Dorado, Kansas (the “El Dorado Refinery”), two refinery facilities located in Tulsa, Oklahoma, a refinery in Artesia, New Mexico that is operated in conjunction with crude oil distillation and vacuum distillation and other facilities situated 65 miles away in Lovington, New Mexico (collectively, the “Navajo Refinery”), a refinery located in Cheyenne, Wyoming (the “Cheyenne Refinery”) and a refinery in Woods Cross, Utah (the “Woods Cross Refinery”); ?
owned and operated NK Asphalt Partners (“NK Asphalt”) which operates various asphalt terminals in Arizona and New Mexico; ?
owned a 50% interest in Sabine Biofuels II, LLC (“Sabine Biofuels”), a biodiesel production facility located in Port Arthur, Texas; and ?
owned a 39% interest in HEP, a consolidated VIE, which includes our 2% general partner interest.
HEPowns and operates logistic assets consisting of petroleum product and crude oil pipelines and terminal, tankage and loading rack facilities that principally support our refining and marketing operations in the Mid-Continent, Southwest and Rocky Mountain regions of the United States and Alon USA, Inc. 's (“Alon”) refinery in Big Spring, Texas.
Additionally, HEPowns a 75% interest in UNEV Pipeline, LLC (“UNEV”), which owns a 12-inch refined products pipeline from Salt Lake City, Utah to Las Vegas, Nevada, together with terminal facilities in the Cedar City, Utah and North Las Vegas areas (the “UNEV Pipeline”), and a 25% interest in SLC Pipeline LLC (the “SLC Pipeline”), which owns a 95-mile intrastate pipeline system that serves refineries in the Salt Lake City area.
Our operations are currently organized into two reportable segments, Refining and HEP.
The Refining segment includes the operations of our El Dorado, Tulsa, Navajo, Cheyenne and Woods Cross Refineries and NK Asphalt.
The HEPsegment involves all of the operations of HEP.
The financial information about our segments is discussed in Note 20 “Segment Information” in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
REFINERY OPERATIONS Our refinery operations serve the Mid-Continent, Southwest and Rocky Mountain regions of the United States.
We own and operate five complex refineries having a combined crude oil processing capacity of 443,000 barrels per stream day.
Each of our refineries has the complexity to convert discounted, heavy and sour crude oils into a high percentage of gasoline, diesel and other high-value refined products.
For 2013, gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel and specialty lubricants (excluding volumes purchased for resale) represented 50%, 33%, 5% and 2%, respectively, of our total refinery sales volumes.
The tables presented below and elsewhere in this discussion of our refinery operations set forth information, including non-GAAP performance measures, about our refinery operations.
The cost of products and refinery gross and net operating margins do not include the effect of depreciation and amortization.
Reconciliations to amounts reported under GAAP are provided under “Reconciliations to Amounts Reported Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles” following Item 7A of Part II of this Form 10-K.
## Table 1 ##
Table of Contents Hologic, Inc.  Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (continued) (In thousands, except per share data) The acquisition also provides for up to two annual earn-out payments not to exceed $15,000 in the aggregate based on BioLucent’s achievement of certain revenue targets.
The Company considered the provision of EITF 95-8, and concluded that this contingent consideration represents additional purchase price.
As a result, goodwill will be increased by the amount of the additional consideration, if any, as it is earned.
As of September 26, 2009, the Company has not recorded any amounts for these potential earn-outs.
The allocation of the purchase price was based upon estimates of the fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed as of September 18, 2007.
The components and allocation of the purchase price consisted of the following approximate amounts:
## Table 2 ##
As part of the purchase price allocation, all intangible assets that were a part of the acquisition were identified and valued.
It was determined that only customer relationship, trade name and developed technology had separately identifiable values.
The fair value of these intangible assets was determined through the application of the income approach.
Customer relationship represented a large customer base that was expected to purchase the disposable MammoPad product on a regular basis.
Trade name represented the BioLucent product name that the Company intended to continue to use.
Developed technology represented currently marketable purchased products that the Company continues to sell as well as utilize to enhance and incorporate into the Company’s existing products.
The deferred income tax liability relates to the tax effect of acquired identifiable intangible assets and fair value adjustments to acquired inventory, as such amounts are not deductible for tax purposes, partially offset by acquired net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $2,400.4.
Sale of Gestiva On January 16, 2008, the Company entered into a definitive agreement pursuant to which it agreed to sell full U. S.  and world-wide rights to Gestiva to K-V Pharmaceutical Company upon approval of the pending Gestiva new drug application (the “Gestiva NDA”) by the FDA for a purchase price of $82,000.
The Company received $9,500 of the purchase price in fiscal 2008, and the balance is due upon final approval of the Gestiva NDA by the FDA on or before February 19, 2010 and the production of a quantity of Gestiva suitable to enable the commercial launch of the product.
Either party has the right to terminate the agreement if FDA approval is not obtained by February 19, 2010.
The Company agreed to continue its efforts to obtain FDA approval of the NDA for Gestiva as part of this arrangement.
All costs incurred in these efforts will be reimbursed by K-V Pharmaceutical and are being recorded as a credit against research and development expenses.
During fiscal 2009 and 2008, these reimbursed costs were not material.
The Company recorded the $9,500 as a deferred gain within current liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheet.
The Company expects that the gain will be recognized upon the closing of the transaction following final FDA approval of the Gestiva NDA or if the agreement is terminated.
The Company cannot assure that it will be able to obtain the requisite FDA approval, that the transaction will be completed or that it will receive the balance of the purchase price.
Moreover, if K-V Pharmaceutical terminates the agreement as a result of a breach by the Company of a material representation, warranty, covenant or agreement, the Company will be required to return the funds previously received as well as expenses reimbursed by K-V.
On January 1, 2007, new authoritative guidance issued by the FASB for the accounting and reporting of uncertain tax positions was adopted.
A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows:
## Table 3 ##
(1) Reflects the settlement with the Internal Revenue Service in 2007 discussed below.
If the Company were to recognize the unrecognized tax benefits of $4.3 billion at December 31, 2009, the income tax provision would reflect a favorable net impact of $3.7 billion.
The amount of unrecognized tax benefits will change in the next 12 months due primarily to the anticipated closure of various tax examinations.
The Company estimates that the change could result in a reduction in unrecognized tax benefits of approximately $760 million.
Interest and penalties associated with uncertain tax positions amounted to a (benefit) expense of $(163) million in 2009, $101 million in 2008 and $270 million in 2007.
Liabilities for accrued interest and penalties were $1.4 billion and $1.7 billion as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
As previously disclosed, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) has completed its examination of Old Merck’s tax returns for the years 1993 to 2001.
As a result of the examination, Old Merck made an aggregate payment of $2.79 billion in February 2007.
This payment was offset by (i) a tax refund of $165 million received in 2007 for amounts previously paid for these matters and (ii) a federal tax benefit of approximately $360 million related to interest included in the payment, resulting in a net cash cost to Old Merck of approximately $2.3 billion in 2007.
The impact for years subsequent to 2001 for items reviewed as part of the examination was included in the payment although those years remain open in all other respects.
The closing of the IRS examination did not have a material impact on Old Merck’s results of operations in 2007 as these amounts had been previously accrued for.
Old Merck reported the results of the IRS adjustments for the years 1993 through 2001 to various state tax authorities.
This resulted in additional tax, as well as interest and penalty payments of $20 million and $9 million, respectively, in 2008 and $57 million and $67 million, respectively, in 2007, and an equivalent reduction in the balances of unrecognized tax benefits, accrued interest and penalties.
In October 2001, IRS auditors asserted that two interest rate swaps that Schering-Plough entered into with an unrelated party should be recharacterized as loans from affiliated companies, resulting in additional tax liability for the 1991 and 1992 tax years.
In September 2004, Schering-Plough made payments to the IRS in the amount of $194 million for income taxes and $279 million for interest.
Schering-Plough filed refund claims for the taxes and interest with the IRS in December 2004.
Following the IRS’s denial of Schering-Plough’s claims for a refund, Schering-Plough filed suit in May 2005 in the U. S.  District Court for the District of New Jersey for refund of the full amount of taxes and interest.
Schering-Plough’s tax reserves were adequate to cover the above mentioned payments.
A decision in favor of the government was announced in August 2009.
Schering-Plough has filed a motion for a retrial and if that motion in not granted, Schering-Plough intends to file an appeal to the 3rd circuit.
As previously disclosed, in October 2006, the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”) issued Old Merck a notice of reassessment containing adjustments related to certain intercompany pricing matters.
In February 2009, Old Merck and the CRA negotiated a settlement agreement in regard to these matters.
In accordance with the settlement, Old Merck paid an additional tax of approximately $300 million (U. S.  dollars) and interest of approximately $360 million (U. S.  dollars) with no additional amounts or penalties due on this assessment.
The settlement was accounted for in the first quarter of 2009.
Old Merck had previously established reserves for these

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2011</td><td>2012</td><td>2013</td><td>2014</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>Steam Sold(MMlb)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>General</td><td>519</td><td>425</td><td>547</td><td>594</td><td>538</td></tr><tr><td>Apartment house</td><td>5,779</td><td>5,240</td><td>6,181</td><td>6,574</td><td>6,272</td></tr><tr><td>Annual power</td><td>16,024</td><td>14,076</td><td>15,195</td><td>15,848</td><td>15,109</td></tr><tr><td>Total Steam Delivered to CECONY Customers</td><td>22,322</td><td>19,741</td><td>21,923</td><td>23,016</td><td>21,919</td></tr><tr><td>Steam Sold($ in millions)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>General</td><td>$28</td><td>$25</td><td>$31</td><td>$30</td><td>$29</td></tr><tr><td>Apartment house</td><td>175</td><td>158</td><td>187</td><td>180</td><td>176</td></tr><tr><td>Annual power</td><td>487</td><td>429</td><td>491</td><td>469</td><td>453</td></tr><tr><td>Other operating revenues</td><td>-7</td><td>-16</td><td>-26</td><td>-51</td><td>-29</td></tr><tr><td>Total Steam Delivered to CECONY Customers</td><td>$683</td><td>$596</td><td>$683</td><td>$628</td><td>$629</td></tr><tr><td>Average Revenue per MMlb Sold</td><td>$30.91</td><td>$31.00</td><td>$32.34</td><td>$29.50</td><td>$30.02</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011<sup>-10</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Consolidated</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Crude charge (BPD)<sup>(1)</sup></td><td>387,520</td><td>415,210</td><td>315,000</td></tr><tr><td>Refinery throughput (BPD)<sup>(2)</sup></td><td>424,780</td><td>453,740</td><td>340,200</td></tr><tr><td>Refinery production (BPD)<sup>(3)</sup></td><td>413,820</td><td>442,730</td><td>331,890</td></tr><tr><td>Sales of produced refined products (BPD)</td><td>410,730</td><td>431,060</td><td>332,720</td></tr><tr><td>Sales of refined products (BPD)<sup>(4)</sup></td><td>446,390</td><td>443,620</td><td>340,630</td></tr><tr><td>Refinery utilization<sup>-5</sup></td><td>87.5%</td><td>93.7%</td><td>89.9%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Net tangible assets acquired as of September 18, 2007</td><td>$2,800</td></tr><tr><td>Developed technology and know how</td><td>12,300</td></tr><tr><td>Customer relationship</td><td>17,000</td></tr><tr><td>Trade name</td><td>2,800</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred income tax liabilities, net</td><td>-9,500</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill</td><td>47,800</td></tr><tr><td>Final purchase price</td><td>$73,200</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Balance as of January 1</td><td>$3,665.0</td><td>$3,689.5</td><td>$5,008.4</td></tr><tr><td>Additions related to current year positions</td><td>333.0</td><td>269.4</td><td>284.5</td></tr><tr><td>Additions related to prior year positions</td><td>48.9</td><td>64.2</td><td>187.8</td></tr><tr><td>Additons related to the merger with Schering-Plough</td><td>1,176.0</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Reductions for tax positions of prior years</td><td>-547.4</td><td>-310.5</td><td>-87.0</td></tr><tr><td>Settlements<i><sup>-1</sup></i></td><td>-331.8</td><td>-38.8</td><td>-1,703.5</td></tr><tr><td>Lapse of statute of limitations</td><td>-2.6</td><td>-8.8</td><td>-0.7</td></tr><tr><td>Balance as of December 31</td><td>$4,341.1</td><td>$3,665.0</td><td>$3,689.5</td></tr></table>

Question: What's the average of the General for Steam Sold($ in millions) in the years where Refinery production (BPD)(3) for Consolidated is positive? (in million)
Answer: 28
Reasoning program: add(28,25), add(#0,31), divide(#1,const_3)