xk"'
vi-EPA
                                  United States
                                  Environmental Protection
                                  Agency
                                  Industrial Environmental Research
                                  Laboratory
                                  Research Triangle Park NC 27711    ' T\ VN
                                  Research and Development
                                  EPA-600/S2-82-070C  Nov. 1982
Project Summary
                                  Acid  Rain  Mitigation  Study:
                                  Volume  III.  Industrial
                                  Boilers  and  Processes
                                  J. G. Ball, C. A. Muela, and J. L. Meling
                                   The U.S. EPA has initiated a multi-
                                  phased study of the acid rain problem.
                                  As part of Phase I, Radian Corporation
                                  investigated SOa emissions and con-
                                  trols in the industrial sector.
                                   The scope of  this 4-month study
                                  was limited to  existing industrial
                                  sources of SO2 emissions in the Acid
                                  Rain Mitigation Study (ARMS) region.
                                  This region includes all of the states
                                  east of the Mississippi River, as well as
                                  Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas,
                                  Louisiana, North Dakota, South Dakota,
                                  Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and
                                  Texas.  The objectives  of the study
                                  were to (1) identify and characterize
                                  existing industrial sources of SO2
                                  emissions, (2) identify the control
                                  techniques that can be used to reduce
                                  SO2 emissions from these sources,
                                  and  (3) estimate the SO2 emission
                                  reduction potential and the associated
                                  costs in constant 1980 dollars based
                                  on application of these controls.
                                  Because of severe time  limitations,
                                  only a portion of the SOa sources were
                                  investigated in detail. Simplifying
                                  assumptions were made about the
                                  balance of the SO2 sources studied.
                                  Time contraints also prevented an
                                  evaluation of the availability of low
                                  sulfur control options (i.e., physically
                                  cleaned coal and low sulfur fuel oil).
                                  In addition, since site visits were not
                                  made, the remaining useful lives of the
                                  sources were not determined and
                                  "average" flue gas desulfurization
                                  unit retrofit factors were estimated.
                                  Each of these considerations signifi-
                                  cantly affects both the potential SO2
                                  emissions reduction and the associated
                                  costs.
                                    The results of the investigations
                                  conducted to meet each study objec-
                                  tive are presented in the report.
                                  Recommendations concerning the
                                  use of these results are also discussed.
                                    This Project Summary was devel-
                                  oped by EPA's Industrial  Environ-
                                  mental Research Laboratory. Research
                                  Triangle Park, NC, to announce key
                                  findings of the research project that is
                                  fully documented in a separate report
                                  of the same title (see Project Report
                                  ordering information at back).

                                  Introduction
                                    There is a growing concern  about the
                                  acidity of  precipitation  in the north-
                                  eastern  United States and Canada.
                                  Many scientists think that acidic precip-
                                  itation kills  aquatic and plant life,
                                  damages crop-growing soil, and accel-
                                  erates erosion and damage to buildings.
                                  Although the mechanisms producing
                                  acid rain are not clearly understood,
                                  sulfur dioxide  (SOa)  and oxides of
                                  nitrogen (NOX) are thought to be the
                                  precursors of the chemicals that cause
                                  acid rain. Large quantities of SOa and
                                  NOX are produced by various combustion
                                  and non-combustion processes in both
                                  the utility and industrial  sectors.
                                  Reducing these SOa and IMOx emissions
                                  to the atmosphere should reduce the
                                  potential for acid rain.
                                    Because of this growing concern, the
                                  U.S. EPA initiated a multi-phased study

-------
of the acid rain problem. As part of this
study, Radian  Corporation investigated
SO2 emissions and  controls in the
industrial sector; Teknekron, Inc.  made
a similar study of the utility sector. The
study was to be completed in 4 months
to  provide direction for additional
phases.  These later phases  were
planned to investigate 862 emissions in
more detail than Phase I, to investigate
NOx sources,  and to  model source/
receptor relationships.
  The scope of this study was limited to
existing  industrial  sources  of SO2
emissions in the Acid Rain Mitigation
Study (ARMS)  region. This region
includes all of the states east of the
Mississippi River, as well as Minnesota,
Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana,
North Dakota,  South Dakota, Nebraska,
Kansas, Oklahoma,  and Texas. The
objectives of  the study  were to (1)
identify and characterize existing indus-
trial sources  of SOa emissions,  (2)
identify the control techniques that can
be  used to reduce SOa emissions from
these sources, and (3) estimate the SOa
emission  reduction potential and the
associated costs* based on application
of  these  controls. Because of severe
time limitations, only a portion of the
SOa sources were investigated in detail.
Simplifying assumptions were  made
about the balance of the  SC>2 sources
studied.
  It should also be noted that, due  to
time constraints, the availability of low
sulfur  control options (i.e., physically
cleaned coal and low sulfur fuel oil) was
not evaluated. In addition since site
visits were not made,  the remaining
useful lives of the sources were not
determined and "average" flue gas
desulfurization unit retrofit factors were
estimated. Each of these considerations
significantly affects both the potential
SOa emissions  reduction and the
associated costs.

Summary
  The  results of  the investigations
conducted to meet each study objective
are summarized below. Theassumptions
made and recommendations concerning
the use  of these results are also
discussed.

SO2 Emissions
Characterization
  The  Multistate Atmospheric Power
Production Pollution Study (MAP3S)
was used as a basis for a survey of
industrial  plants emitting  S02 within
the Acid Rain Mitigation Study (ARMS)
region. This survey identified 257 major
industrial emitters (an emitter may
contain more than one point source) of
S02 ranging in the  magnitude of S02
emissions from 5,000 to 200,000 tons
per year. These data show that utility
and industrial plants emitting more than
5,000 tons per year of SC>2 account for
90 percent of the total SO2 emissions.
The total quantity of S02 emitted each
year by these 257 industrial plants is 3.6
million tons. Because of time limitations
in this initial phase, plants with 5,000
tons per  year  of SO2 emissions  were
the smallest emitters evaluated in this
study.
  A total of 39 industrial plants, each
emitting more than 20,000 tons of SO2
per year,  together account fo about 1.6
million tons of S02. Only these 39 plants
were studied  in detail.  For these  39
plants, industrial boilers are responsible
for 695,300 tons of SO2 per year. Non-
boiler processes in the metals industry
emit about  543,200 tons of SO2 pe
year; and in other industries, including
chemicals,  petroleum  refining, anc
cement, non-boiler sources contribute
some 350,000 tones of S02 per year
These data are summarized in Table 1
  Due to time and feasibility constraints
S02 emissions from plants emittinc
between 5,000 and  20,000 tons pei
year were not characterized individually
They were evaluated  by making  £
number of assumptions (1) the approx-
imately 2  million tons of S02 per yeai
emitted by  the 218 plants emittinc
between 5,000 and  20,000 per  yeai
was assumed to result exclusively f rorr
coal-, oil-, and gas-fired boilers; (2) the
distribution of these boilers was assumec
to be similar to the nationwide distribu-
tion of industrial watertube boilers; anc
(4) the percent sulfur in coal, oil, and gas
was assumed to be the same as thef uel-
weighted average sulfur content of the
boilers  in plants  emitting more  than
20,000 tons per year of S02. The results
of these calculations are presented in
Table 2.
Table 1.    Industrial SOz Emissions from 39 Largest SOz Emitters
                                     Emissions*
                                 (103 tons SO2/year)
Process
Boilers
Coat-fired f> 100 MWJ
Coal- fired «100 MWj
Oil-fired
Gas-fired
Per Process
f 39 2.4)
( 86.9)
(172.6)
( 43.4)
Total
6.95.3
Percent of Total
43.1
Metals Industry
(excluding boilers)
  Copper smelting              (235.9)
  Iron and steel                (115.3)
  Coke metallurgy              ( 99.2)
  Lead smelting                ( 85.4)
  Aluminum                   (  3.1)
  Other                       f  4.3)
Other Industrial Processes
(excluding boilers)
  Cat crackers                 ( 71.3)
  Process heaters              ( 60.3)
  Cement kilns                f 54.2)
  Sulfuric acid                ( 49.7)
  Phosphate fertilizer           ( 41.8)
  Sulfur plants                ( 33.9)
  Alfalfa dehydration           (21.6)
  Flares                      (  8.9)
  Sulfite pulping               (  7.0)
  Sludge conversion           (  1.3)
Unclassified
         543.2
33.7
         350.0
21.7
         25.5
 1.5
'All of the  cost  presented in this study are
 expressed in constant 1980 dollars.
                                                                                         1614.0
                                                                  1OO.O
*Based on 1977 survey.

-------
 Table 2.     Size Distribution of Boilers Needed to Account for 2 Million* Tons of SO 2 Emitted per Year from Plants Emitting Between
            5,000 and 20,000 Tons/Year of S02
A verage
Boiler
Size (MWJ
45
96
220
700 (coal, oil!
1265 fgasj
Total

103 tons
SO2/yr
686
371
172
149
1378
Coal
JO3 tons SOi/
yr/Boiler
16
34
7.8
24.9

Approximate
Number of
Boilers"
429
109
22
6
566

103 tons
SOi/yr
290
135
56
15
496
Oil
103 tons SO2/
yr/Boiler
1.1
23
54
17 1

Approximate
Number of
Boilers'1
264
59
10
1
334

W3 tons
SOi/yr
51
22
17
36
126
Gas
!03 tons SO,/
yr/Boiler
0.6
1 3
29
16.9
Total
Approximate
Number of
Boilers"
85
17
6
2
110
Approximate
Number of
Boilers"
778
185
38
7
2
1010
103 tons
SCVyr
1027
528
245
164
36
2000
a The actual total of 1996 x 10 tons per year was rounded to 2000 x 10 tons per year
" The number of boilers in each size category that would yield the annual SOz emissions derived in Table 3-8 fof the full report), given the fuel quality and average boiler
 size and capacity factor discussed in the text.
Applicable SOz Emission
Control Technologies
   Both pre- and post-combustion clean-
ing processes have been used to reduce
SO2 emissions from industrial combus-
tors. The  pre-combustion processes
most commonly used for coal- and oil-
fired combustors are  physical  coal
cleaning and oil desulfurization, respec-
tively. Another method of reducing S02
emissions  from  industrial boilers is to
substitute  naturally occurring low
sulfur coal and oil for high sulfur fuels.
The most commonly used post-combus-
tion process is flue gass desulfurization
(FGD).  In  the  metals and process
industries,  S02  emissions from  non-
combustion sources have also been
controlled by FGD processes. In addition,
sulfuric acid plants are frequently used
to recover  the SOz  if the flue gas is
sufficiently concentrated to warrant
economic recovery.

Estimated Costs of Applying
SO2 Control  Techniques to
Industrial Sources and the
Potential SOz Emissions
Reductions
   Preliminary costs* for reducing S02
emissions from different industrial
sources  with the control alternatives
identified above were developed. Be-
cause each control alternative cannot
be effectively  applied  to  all of the
industrial sources, the control alterna-
-*The capital investment and annual costs are
 significant only to two figures, however, results
 are reported to the last whole significant figure to
 be consistent with other similar studies In this
 study, annual costs are first  year costs and
 include  O&M,  overhead, utilities, etc., and
 capital-related charges equivalent to 0.13 times
 the total capital investment  All of the costs
 presented in this report are expressed in
 constant 1980 dollars
 tives were applied only to those source
 categories that seem to be logical based
 on actual installations. Only one scenario
 was evaluated.
   The  use of physically cleaned coal to
 reduce S02 emissions was applied to
 boilers having capacities less than 75
 MWt (boiler  heat input  in thermal
 megawatts*), and firing coals with 2.0
 percent or greater sulfur content. This
 control method was adopted for small
 coal-fired boilers because an  FGD
 process would require very high capital
 investment/annual costs.  The  use of
 physically cleaned  coal would  reduce
 uncontrolled SOa emissions from these
 boilers by 219 x103 tons per year, which
 represents about a 30 percent reduction.
 It was  assumed that physically cleaned
 coal would be purchased from a major
 coal producer. As a result, each boiler
 operator would not incur the costs of
 constructing  and operating a physical
 coal cleaning facility;  instead, the
 operator  would  pay the  producer  a
 premium  for  cleaning  the coal. The
 cost of physically  cleaned coal was
 estimated to be  $4.28  per ton (1980
 dollars) for a total annual premium of
 approximately $46 x106 for the  applic-
 able  industrial  sources. This  cost
 represents the cost of preparation and
 does not include the costs of raw coal,
 taxes, and transportation. The availability
 of physically cleaned coal  to the SO2
 sources was not examined.
   Low  sulfur fuel oil was assumed to
 be used for reducing emissions from all
 oil-fired boilers. Uncontrolled  S02
 emissions from these boilers are
 approximately 669 x 103 tons per year.
The  use of  low sulfur  fuel oil  (0.8
 percent S) reduced the uncontrolled
emissions by 51 percent assuming an
average uncontrolled fuel oil sulfur
content of 1.64 percent. It was assumed
that low sulfur oil would be purchased
from a  major producer. The resulting
incremental cost for the low sulfur oil
was  taken  as  $2 50/bbl (based  on
hydrode sulfurization costs) for a total
annual  premium of  $314  x 106  This
represents the incremental cost of the
lower sulfur fuel compared to  the fuel
currently being used, the availability of
low sulfur  oil  to the  S02 emission
source was not examined.
  FGD  systems  were assumed to  be
used for reducing emissions from all of
the larger coal-fired boilers (those
having capacities greater than 75 MWt).
FGD would reduce S02 emissions from
these boilers by approximately 940 x 103
tons per year. The capital investment cost
for  installing these FGD  systems would
be about $2,020  x 106* The annual cost
associated with these  FGD systems
would be approximately $565 x  106. The
capital investment and annual costs for
industrial FGD systems were derived by
integrating cost  studies for small
industrial and large utility systems. This
integration required putting the  cost
studies  on the same equipment basis,
using the same investment and cost
algorithms, and  using the same unit
pricing of labor and raw materials.
  FGD systems  were also assumed to
be  used for most non-boiler sources in
the metals and process industries for all
processes emitting greater than 1000
tons per year of S02 from a single point
source.  Retrofitting an FGD process to
the uncontrolled sources in the metals
industry decreased SO2 emissions from
543 x 103 to 62  x 103 tons per year. A
*A boiler with a heat input capacity of 200 x 106
 Btu/hr would have a capacity of 58 6 MWt
"The capital investment for an FGD system retrofit
 was assumed to be 1.3 times the capital
 investment of an FGD system applied to a new
 boiler

-------
capital investment of $420 x 106andan
annual cost of about $128 x 106 would
be required to achieve this reduction. In
the process  industry, the use of FGD
systems  on  process heaters,  sludge
concentrators, sulfuric  acid plants,
catalytic crackers, and elemental sulfur
plants reduced SOz emissions from 350
x 103 to 64 x 103 tons per year, an 82
percent  reduction. The capital and
annual costs required to achieve this
reduction would be $580 x 106 and
$178 x  106,  respectively. Table  3
summarizes  the  assumed S02  control
applications. Figures 1  and 2 show the
costs used for FGD applications.
  Overall, industrial-sector plants
emitting  greater than 5,000 tons per
year  of  S02 (257  plants)  generate
approximately 3.6 x 106 tons of SO2 per
year. Implementation  of the  control
options described above would reduce
the  uncontrolled SO2 emissions  by
approximately 63 percent. To achieve
this reduction,  industry within the
ARMS region would have  to invest
about $3.0  billion  for installing the
control  processes,  as well as incur
annual costs of about $1.2 billion (see
Table 4). Plants emitting more  than
20,000 tons per year of S02 (39 plants)
account for  1.6 x 106  tons per year of
uncontrolled S02 emissions. Marginal
cost  and investment  analysis shows
that investment and cost per ton of SO2
removed  is lower for these plants than
for plants emitting 5,000 to 20,000 tons
per year of SO2 (see Tables 4 and 5). The
controls  applied to the 39 plants could
reduce uncontrolled SO2 emissions by
75 percent and  would require a $1.5
billion capital investment  and about
$0.6 billion in annual costs.
  The cost effectiveness (in $ ton/SO2
removed) for the various control options
are:
Table 3.    Summary of SO 2 Control Applications
Control
Applied
None0
Physically
Cleaned Coal
FGD (Limestone)
Oil Desulfuri-
Source
Category
Boilers
Boilers

Boilers
Boilers
A verage Sulfur Boiler Number of
Type of Level in Size Affected
Fuel Used Fuel (%f (MWJ Boilers
Coal
Coal

Coal
Oil
1.3 All Sizes
3.0 <75

2.4 >75
1.64 All Sizes
31C
449C

193
441
zation (0.8% S Oil)
None
FGDa



FGD



Boilers
Non-boiler
sources in
metals
industry
Non-boiler
sources in
process
industry
Gas
—



—



0.8 All Sizes
— 25-644e



— 17-1000'



160
—



—



^Before controls are applied.
* Boilers in the top 39 S02-emitting plants currently firing 2.0% or lower sulfur coal do
 not require controls.
cNine boilers were unclassified as to size and nine boilers were unclassified as to fuel
 type. Fourteen of these boilers were found to be at sites that used low S coal
 exclusively. Thus the number of low S coal burning boilers was increased from 17 to
 31. The  other  four unclassified size/fuel boilers  were  arbitrarily  assigned to
 physically cleaned coal.
6Sulfuric acid plants were used as controls on two smelting operations.
e The capacities of non-boiler sources in the metal industry are equivalent to boilers of
 this size range.
' The capacities of non-boiler sources in the process industry are equivalent to boilers
 of this size range.
The average cost effectiveness for the
controls  evaluated  range from about
$210/ton  of  SO2  for  physical  coal
cleaning to $915/ton  for oil hydro-
desulfurization.

Recommended  Use of Study
Results
  Preliminary estimates of the  SO2
reduction potential from existing indus-
trial sources and the associated control
$/ton S02
Removed for Plants
Emitting More Than:
Application
Boilers
Boilers
Boilers
Nonboiler Sources/
Metals Industry
Nonboiler Sources/
Process Industry
Weighted Average
Boiler Size
MW,
<75
>75
All
Fuel/
Wt. % Sulfur
Coal/3
Coal/2.4
Fuel Qil/1.6
S02 Control
Technology
Physical
Coal Cleaning
FGD
Low Sulfur Oil*
FGD
FGD
5000 tons/
yr SO2
210
601
915
266
622
542
20,000 tons/
yr SO2
210
536
910
266
622
472
costs are provided in this study and will
be useful for planning future work in the
acid rain area. Due to time and budget
constraints,  a number of key assump-
tions were made i n order to obtain these
results. Many  of these assumptions
were highlighted in this summary.
  If control of existing industrial sources
of SO2 is considered to be a reasonable
strategy for attacking the  acid  rain
problem, then a more detailed evaluation
of the  industrial sector should be
undertaken.  The scope of work should
include:
   1. A  more detailed characterization
     of the targeted point sources. Sites
     should be  visited.
  2. An evaluation  of the availability
     and costs of low sulfur fuel oil, low
     sulfur coal, and physically cleaned
     coal to the various plants.
  3. A characterization of source ages
     and remaining useful lives.
  4. Engineering evaluations to assess
     the feasibility  and  cost of FGD
     retrofits.
   5. An evaluation  of other  scenarios
     for controlling S02 emissions.
 f Costs are based on hydrodesulfurization.

-------

*>
o
%25-
•+*,

-c
^
oa 20-

S>
*-.
!f 11-
i
«)
s
^ 10-

.*-
S-

0
m
*
CO
1
"5
c
c
^
0^
           25-
           20-
            15-
                     Shop-Fabricated/Packaged
                            FGD Units
Large shift at 60 MW,
due to differences in
capital charges caused by
shop-fabricated/packaged
units vs. field-fabricated/
erected units
        Basis:
        3.5 % S Coal - 90% removal
        Costs on this figure are
         for an FGD system retro-
        fitted to an existing boiler.
 * Annual costs are expressed
  two ways:
 •  $/106Btu is the annual
  costs ($/yearj divided by the
  annual boiler heat input
  (Bttt/year).
 • $/MWt is the annual costs
  ($/year) divided by the boiler
  capacity (MW,).
**7 MWt = 3.412 x 106 Btu/hr.
               Field-Fabricated/
               Erected FGD Units
0
0
' 300
1000
600 ' 900 ' 1200
Boiler Heat Input Capacity, MW,**
2000 3000 4000
Boiler Heat Input Capacity, 10s Btu/hr
' 1500
5000
Figure 2.    Annual costs for a retrofitted limestone FGD system.

-------
Table 4.
Summary of Impact and Cost of Controls for Plants Emitting More Than 5,000 Tons/Year of SOz

       S02 Emission Sources"                                               SC>2 Control Processes
                  Boiler  Avg. Sulfur   Uncontrolled
Source      Fuel  Size      Level     SOz Emissions
Category    Type  (MWJ     1%)       (1O3 ton/yr!   Control Applied
                                                       SO2 Reduction   Controlled      Capital                        Cost
                                                          Achieved    SOz Emissions  lnvestmentg  Annual Cost     Effectiveness'
                                                             1%)        (JO3 ton/yr}      f$10e}      ($10e}°'c   ($/ton SO2 Removed!
Boilers






Non-boiler
Sources
/Metals
Industry}
Non-boiler
Sources
(Process
Industry/
Totals

Coal — " 1.3
Coal <75 3.0
Coal >75 2.41
Fuel
Oil All 1 64
Gas All 0 8



— —



— —


83
730
1044

669
169



543



350
3,588

None
Physical Coal
FGD (Limestone}

Low sulfur fuel oil
None



FGD (Limestone}9'"



FGD (Limestonef


—
30
90

51'
—



89



82
63'

83
511
104

326
169



62



64
1,319

	 —
- 46°
2,020 565

- 314"
— —



420 128



580 178
3,020 1,231

—
210
601

915
—



266



622
542
a Uncontrolled emissions for 1977.
"in this report annual costs include annual O&M. overhead, utilities, etc., and annual capital-related charges equivalent to 0 13 times the total capital investment
c 1980 S.
" Boilers in the top 30 S02 emitter that actually burn <2.0 percent sulfur coat
* The cost directly represents the premium paid by boiler operator for upgraded fuel.
1 This reduction  efficiency is set by assuming the use of 0.8 percent sulfur fuel oil down from an average level of 1 64 percent. The costs are based on resid
 hydrodesulfurization.
9 Includes two sulfuric acid plants.
"FGD process applied to point sources emitting > 1000 tons per year SOs.
 ' Weighted average.
 TableB.
 Summary of Impact and Costs of Controls for Plants Emitting More Than 20,000 Tons/Year of S02

       S02 Emissions Sources'                                               SOi Control Processes
                  Boiler  Avg. Sulfur   Uncontrolled
Source      Fuel   Size      Level    SO2 Emissions Control
Category    Type  (MWJ      1%)      (103 ton/yr}   Applied
                                                        S02 Reduction    Controlled       Capital                        Cost
                                                          Achieved    SO2 Emissions  Investment"  Annual Cost     Effectiveness"
                                                             /%}        (1O3 ton/yr}      f$10e}      ($106f-ti    (S/ton SO2 Removed}
Boilers







Non-boiler
Sources
(Metals
Industry/
Non-boiler
Sources
(Process
Industry}
Total

Coal —" 1.3
Coal <75 3.0

Coal >75 2.41
Fuel All 1.64
Oil
Gas 08
— —



— —





83
44

352
173

43
543



350



1,688

None
Physical Coal
Cleaning
FGD (Limestone}
Low sulfur oil

None
FGD (Limestone}3''1



FGD (Limestonef





	
30

90
51'

—
89



82



75'

83
31

35
84

43
62



64



402

	 	
- 3"

477 770
— 81"

— —
420 128



580 178



1,471 560

—
270

536
970

—
266



622



472'
 " Uncontrolled emissions for 1977.
 " 1980 S.
 "In this report annual costs include annual O&M, overhead, utilities, etc., and annual capital-related charges equivalent to 0 13 times the total capital investment
 " Boilers in the top 39 S02 emitters that actually burn <2 0 percent sulfur coal.
 "The cost directly represents the premium paid by boiler operator for upgraded fuel.
 'This reduction efficiency is set by assuming the use of 0.8 percent sulfur fuel oil down from an average level of  1.64 percent. The costs are based on resid
  hydrodesulfurization
 9 Includes two sulfuric acid plants
 "FGD process applied to point sources emitting >1000 tons per year S02
 1 Weighted average.
                                                                                            U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1982/659-095/0547

-------

-------
      J. G. Ball, C. A. Muela, andJ. L. Me/ing are with Radian Corporation, Austin, 7X
        78759.
      William Baasel is the EPA Project. Officer (see below).
      The complete report, entitled "Acid Rain Mitigation Study: Volume III. Industrial
        Boilers and Processes," (Order No. PB 83-101 337; Cost: $11.50, subject to
        change) will be available only from:
              National Technical Information Service
              5285 Port Royal Road
              Springfield, VA 22161
              Telephone: 703-487-4650
      The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
              Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
              U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
              Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
Postage and
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
EPA 335
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

-------