requirements relating to the Act.
The Companies’ actuaries have determined that each prescription drug plan provides a benefit that is at least actuarially equivalent to the Medicare prescription drug plan and projections indicate that this will be the case for 20 years; therefore, the Companies are eligible to receive the benefit.
When the plans’ benefits are no longer actuarially equivalent to the Medicare plan, 25% of the retirees in each plan are assumed to begin to decline participation in the Companies’ prescription programs.
To reflect the effect of the Act on the plans, the accumulated postretirement benefit obligations were reduced for Con Edison, Con Edison of New York and O&R by $160 million, $139 million and $21 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2004.
The 2004 postretirement benefit costs were reduced by $29 million for Con Edison, $26 million for Con Edison of New York and $3 million for O&R.
The Companies will recognize the 28% subsidy (reflected as an unrecognized net gain to each plan) as an offset to plan costs.
The 28% subsidy is expected to reduce prescription drug plan costs by about 25% starting in 2006.
Note G – Environmental Matters Superfund Sites Hazardous substances, such as asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and coal tar, have been used or generated in the course of operations of the Utilities and their predecessors and are present at sites and in facilities and equipment they currently or previously owned, including sites at which gas was manufactured or stored.
The Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 and similar state statutes (Superfund) impose joint and several liability, regardless of fault, upon generators of hazardous substances for investigation and remediation costs (which includes costs of demolition, removal, disposal, storage, replacement, containment and monitoring) and environmental damages.
Liability under these laws can be material and may be imposed for contamination from past acts, even though such past acts may have been lawful at the time they occurred.
The sites at which the Utilities have been asserted to have liability under these laws, including their manufactured gas sites, are referred to herein as “Superfund Sites.
” For Superfund Sites where there are other potentially responsible parties and the Utilities are not managing the site investigation and remediation, the accrued liability represents an estimate of the amount the Utilities will need to pay to discharge their related obligations.
For Superfund Sites (including the manufactured gas sites) for which one of the Utilities is managing the investigation and remediation, the accrued liability represents an estimate of the undiscounted cost to investigate the sites and, for sites that have been investigated in whole or in part, the cost to remediate the sites in light of the information available, applicable remediation standards and experience with similar sites.
For the year ended December 31, 2004, Con Edison of New York and O&R incurred approximately $44 million and $3 million, respectively, for environmental remediation costs.
Insurance recoveries of $36 million were received by Con Edison of New York, $35 million of which reduced related regulatory assets, with the remainder credited to expense.
For the year ended December 31, 2003, Con Edison of New York and O&R incurred approximately $21 million and $5 million, respectively, for environmental remediation costs.
No insurance recoveries were received.
For the year ended December 31, 2002, Con Edison of New York and O&R incurred approximately $22 million and $2 million, respectively, for environmental remediation costs, and O&R received insurance recoveries of $7 million.
The accrued liabilities and regulatory assets related to Superfund Sites for each of the Companies at December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003 were as follows:
## Table 0 ##
Most of the accrued Superfund Site liability relates to Superfund Sites that have been investigated, in whole or in part.
As investigations progress on these and other sites, the Companies expect that additional liability will be accrued, the amount of which is not presently determinable but may be material.
The Utilities are permitted under their current rate agreements to recover or defer as regulatory assets (for subsequent recovery through rates) certain site investigation and remediation costs.
Con Edison of New York estimated in 2002 that for its manufactured gas sites, many of which had not been investigated, its aggregate undiscounted potential liability for the investigation and remediation of coal tar and/or other manufactured gas plant-related environmental contaminants could range from approximately $65 million to $1.1 billion.
O&R estimated in 2004 that for its manufactured gas sites, each of which has been investigated, the aggregate undiscounted potential liability for the remediation of such contaminants could range from approximately $31 million to $87 million.
These
Gas Supply O&R and CECONY have combined their gas requirements and purchase contracts to meet those requirements into a single portfolio.
See “CECONY – Gas Operations – Gas Supply” above.
Competitive Energy Businesses Con Edison pursues competitive energy opportunities through three wholly-owned subsidiaries: Con Edison Solutions, Con Edison Energy and Con Edison Development.
These businesses include the sales and related hedging of electricity to wholesale and retail customers, sales of certain energyrelated products and services, and participation in energy infrastructure projects.
At December 31, 2010, Con Edison’s equity investment in its competitive energy businesses was $337 million and their assets amounted to $807 million.
The competitive energy businesses are pursuing opportunities to invest in renewable generation and energy-related infrastructure projects.
Con Edison Solutions Con Edison Solutions primarily sells electricity to industrial, commercial and governmental customers in the northeastern United States and Texas.
It also sells electricity to residential and small commercial customers in the northeastern United States.
Con Edison Solutions does not sell electricity to the Utilities.
Con Edison Solutions sells electricity to customers who are provided delivery service by the Utilities.
It also provides energy efficiency services, procurement and management services to companies and governmental entities throughout most of the United States.
Con Edison Solutions was reported by KEMA, Inc.  in September 2010 to be the 9th largest non-residential retail electricity provider in the United States.
Most of the company’s electricity sales volumes are to industrial, large commercial and government customers.
The company also sells to two retail aggregation entities in Massachusetts and to individual residential and small commercial (mass market) customers in the northeastern United States.
At December 31, 2010, it served approximately 115,000 customers, not including approximately 165,000 served under the two aggregation agreements.
Con Edison Solutions sold 15,993 million kWhs of electricity in 2010, a 26 percent increase from 2009 volumes.
## Table 1 ##
(a) Excludes aggregation agreement customers Con Edison Solutions seeks to serve customers in utility service territories that encourage retail competition through transparent pricing, purchase of receivables programs or utility-sponsored customer acquisition programs.
The company currently sells electricity in the service territories of 43 utilities in the states of New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Maine, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Texas, as well as the District of Columbia.
Total peak load at the end of 2010 was 5,300 MWs.
Approximately 34 percent of the sales volumes were in New York, 27 percent in New England, 31 percent in PJM and the remainder in Texas.
Con Edison Solutions offers the choice of green power to customers.
In 2010, it sold approximately 233 million kWhs of green power, ending the year with almost 24,000 customers.
Green power is a term used by electricity suppliers to describe electricity produced from renewable energy sources, including wind, hydro and solar.
Con Edison Solutions also provides energy-efficiency services to government and commercial customers.
The services include the design and installation of lighting retrofits, highefficiency heating, ventilating and air conditioning equipment and other energy saving technologies.
The company is compensated for their services based primarily on the increased energy efficiency of the installed equipment over a multi-year period.
Con Edison Solutions has won competitive solicitations for energy savings contracts with the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense, and a shared energy savings contract with the United States Postal Service.
Electric Sales and Deliveries O&R delivers electricity to its full-service customers who purchase electricity from the company.
The company also delivers electricity to its customers who purchase electricity from other suppliers through the company’s energy choice program.
The company charges all customers in its service area for the delivery of electricity.
O&R generally recovers, on a current basis, the cost of the electricity that it buys and then sells to its full-service customers.
It does not make any margin or profit on the electricity it sells.
O&R’s New York electric revenues (which accounted for 77.2 percent of O&R’s electric revenues in 2014) are subject to a revenue decoupling mechanism.
As a result, O&R’s New York electric delivery revenues are generally not affected by changes in delivery volumes from levels assumed when rates were approved.
O&R’s electric sales in New Jersey and Pennsylvania are not subject to a decoupling mechanism.
O&R’s electric sales and deliveries for the last five years were:
## Table 2 ##
For further discussion of the company’s electric operating revenues and its electric results, see “Results of Operations” in Item 7.
For additional segment information, see Note N to the financial statements in Item 8.
Electric Peak Demand The electric peak demand in O&R’s service area occurs during the summer air conditioning season.
The weather during the summer of 2014 was cooler than design conditions.
O&R’s 2014 service area peak demand was 1,370 MW, which occurred on July 2, 2014.
The 2014 peak demand included an estimated 697 MW for O&R’s full-service customers and 673 MW for customers participating in its electric energy choice program.
“Design weather” for the electric system is a standard to which the actual peak demand is adjusted for evaluation and planning purposes.
Since the NYISO can invoke demand reduction programs under specific circumstances, design conditions do not include these programs’ potential impact.
However, the O&R forecasted peak demand at design conditions does include the impact of permanent demand reduction programs.
The company estimates that, under design weather conditions, the 2015 service area peak demand will be 1,645 MW, including an estimated 819 MW for its fullservice customers and 826 MW for its electric energy choice customers.
The company forecasts average annual growth of the peak electric demand in the company’s service area over the next five years at design conditions to be approximately 0.9 percent per year.
Electric Supply The electricity O&R sold to its full-service customers in 2014 was purchased under firm power contracts or through the wholesale electricity markets administered by the NYISO and PJM.
The company expects that these resources will again be adequate to meet the requirements of its customers in 2015.
O&R does not own any electric generating capacity.
The company plans to meet its continuing obligation to supply electricity to its customers through a combination of electricity purchased under contracts or purchased through the NYISO or PJM’s wholesale electricity market.
To reduce the volatility of its customers’ electric energy costs, the company has contracts to purchase electric energy and enters into derivative transactions to hedge the costs of a portion of its expected purchases under these contracts and through the NYISO and PJM’s wholesale electricity market.
For information about the company’s contracts, see Note O to the financial statements in Item 8.
In general, the Utilities recover their purchased power costs, including the cost of hedging purchase prices, pursuant to rate provisions approved by the state public utility regulatory authority having jurisdiction.
See “Financial and Commodity Market Risks – Commodity Price Risk,” in Item 7 and “Recoverable Energy Costs” in Note A to the financial statements in Item 8.
From time to time, certain parties have petitioned the NYSPSC to review these provisions, the elimination of which could have a material adverse effect on the Companies’ financial position, results of operations or liquidity
During 2014, 2013 and 2012, Netherland, Sewell & Associates, Inc.  ("NSAI") prepared a certification of the prior year's reserves for the Alba field in E. G.  The NSAI summary reports are filed as an exhibit to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.  Members of the NSAI team have multiple years of industry experience, having worked for large, international oil and gas companies before joining NSAI.
The senior technical advisor has over 35 years of practical experience in petroleum geosciences, with over 15 years experience in the estimation and evaluation of reserves.
The second team member has over 10 years of practical experience in petroleum engineering, with 5 years experience in the estimation and evaluation of reserves.
Both are registered Professional Engineers in the State of Texas.
Ryder Scott Company ("Ryder Scott") also performed audits of the prior years' reserves of several of our fields in 2014, 2013 and 2012.
Their summary reports are filed as exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
The team lead for Ryder Scott has over 20 years of industry experience, having worked for a major international oil and gas company before joining Ryder Scott.
He is a member of SPE, where he served on the Oil and Gas Reserves Committee, and is a registered Professional Engineer in the State of Texas.
Changes in Proved Undeveloped Reserves As of December 31, 2014, 728 mmboe of proved undeveloped reserves were reported, an increase of 101 mmboe from December 31, 2013.
The following table shows changes in total proved undeveloped reserves for 2014:
## Table 3 ##
Significant additions to proved undeveloped reserves during 2014 included 121 mmboe in the Eagle Ford and 61 mmboe in the Bakken shale plays due to development drilling.
Transfers from proved undeveloped to proved developed reserves included 67 mmboe in the Eagle Ford, 26 mmboe in the Bakken and 1 mmboe in the Oklahoma Resource Basins due to development drilling and completions.
Costs incurred in 2014, 2013 and 2012 relating to the development of proved undeveloped reserves, were $3,149 million, $2,536 million and $1,995 million.
A total of 102 mmboe was booked as extensions, discoveries or other additions due to the application of reliable technology.
Technologies included statistical analysis of production performance, decline curve analysis, pressure and rate transient analysis, reservoir simulation and volumetric analysis.
The statistical nature of production performance coupled with highly certain reservoir continuity or quality within the reliable technology areas and sufficient proved undeveloped locations establish the reasonable certainty criteria required for booking proved reserves.
Projects can remain in proved undeveloped reserves for extended periods in certain situations such as large development projects which take more than five years to complete, or the timing of when additional gas compression is needed.
Of the 728 mmboe of proved undeveloped reserves at December 31, 2014, 19 percent of the volume is associated with projects that have been included in proved reserves for more than five years.
The majority of this volume is related to a compression project in E. G.  that was sanctioned by our Board of Directors in 2004.
The timing of the installation of compression is being driven by the reservoir performance with this project intended to maintain maximum production levels.
Performance of this field since the Board sanctioned the project has far exceeded expectations.
Estimates of initial dry gas in place increased by roughly 10 percent between 2004 and 2010.
During 2012, the compression project received the approval of the E. G.  government, allowing design and planning work to progress towards implementation, with completion expected by mid-2016.
The other component of Alba proved undeveloped reserves is an infill well approved in 2013 and to be drilled in the second quarter of 2015.
Proved undeveloped reserves for the North Gialo development, located in the Libyan Sahara desert, were booked for the first time in 2010.
This development, which is anticipated to take more than five years to develop, is executed by the operator and encompasses a multi-year drilling program including the design, fabrication and installation of extensive liquid handling and gas recycling facilities.
Anecdotal evidence from similar development projects in the region lead to an expected project execution time frame of more than five years from the time the reserves were initially booked.
Interruptions associated with the civil unrest in 2011 and third-party labor strikes and civil unrest in 2013-2014 have also extended the project duration.
As of December 31, 2014, future development costs estimated to be required for the development of proved undeveloped crude oil and condensate, NGLs, natural gas and synthetic crude oil reserves related to continuing operations for the years 2015 through 2019 are projected to be $2,915 million, $2,598 million, $2,493 million, $2,669 million and $2,745 million.

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"><i>Con Edison</i></td><td colspan="2"><i>Con Edison of</i><i>New York</i></td><td colspan="2"><i>O&R</i></td></tr><tr><td><i>(Millions of Dollars)</i></td><td><i>2004</i></td><td><i>2003</i></td><td><i>2004</i></td><td><i>2003</i></td><td><i>2004</i></td><td><i>2003</i></td></tr><tr><td>Accrued Liabilities:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Manufactured gas plant sites</td><td>$148</td><td>$145</td><td>$92</td><td>$106</td><td>$56</td><td>$39</td></tr><tr><td>Other Superfund Sites</td><td>50</td><td>48</td><td>49</td><td>47</td><td>1</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$198</td><td>$193</td><td>$141</td><td>$153</td><td>$57</td><td>$40</td></tr><tr><td>Regulatory assets</td><td>$165</td><td>$155</td><td>$106</td><td>$116</td><td>$59</td><td>$39</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td> 2006</td><td> 2007</td><td> 2008</td><td> 2009</td><td> 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Retail electric volumes sold (millions of kWhs)</td><td>10,633</td><td>12,209</td><td>10,749</td><td>12,723</td><td>15,993</td></tr><tr><td>Number of retail customers accounts:(a)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Industrial and large commercial</td><td>10,957</td><td>14,335</td><td>14,491</td><td>26,009</td><td>29,561</td></tr><tr><td>Mass market</td><td>31,725</td><td>33,979</td><td>39,976</td><td>49,094</td><td>85,191</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5"> Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2010</td><td>2011</td><td> 2012</td><td> 2013</td><td> 2014</td></tr><tr><td> Electric Energy Delivered (millions of kWhs)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total deliveries to O&R full service customers</td><td>3,498</td><td>3,029</td><td>2,691</td><td>2,555</td><td>2,429</td></tr><tr><td>Delivery service for energy choice customers</td><td>2,330</td><td>2,760</td><td>3,040</td><td>3,166</td><td>3,240</td></tr><tr><td> Total Deliveries In Franchise Area</td><td>5,828</td><td>5,789</td><td>5,731</td><td>5,721</td><td>5,669</td></tr><tr><td> Electric Energy Delivered ($ in millions)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total deliveries to O&R full service customers</td><td>$570</td><td>$486</td><td>$405</td><td>$427</td><td>$455</td></tr><tr><td>Delivery service for energy choice customers</td><td>132</td><td>157</td><td>178</td><td>192</td><td>207</td></tr><tr><td>Other operating revenues</td><td>-10</td><td>-2</td><td>9</td><td>9</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td> Total Deliveries In Franchise Area</td><td>$692</td><td>$641</td><td>$592</td><td>$628</td><td>$680</td></tr><tr><td> Average Revenue Per kWh Sold (Cents)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Residential</td><td>18.3</td><td>18.0</td><td>16.7</td><td>18.1</td><td>20.3</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial and Industrial</td><td>14.1</td><td>13.7</td><td>13.0</td><td>14.8</td><td>16.8</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Beginning of year</td><td>627</td></tr><tr><td>Revisions of previous estimates</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Improved recovery</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Purchases of reserves in place</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Extensions, discoveries, and other additions</td><td>227</td></tr><tr><td>Dispositions</td><td>-29</td></tr><tr><td>Transfers to proved developed</td><td>-103</td></tr><tr><td>End of year</td><td>728</td></tr></table>

Question: what were total costs incurred in 2014 , 2013 and 2012 relating to the development of proved undeveloped reserves , in millions?
Answer: 7680
Reasoning program: add(3149,2536), add(#0,1995)