SCREENING STUDY FOR BACKGROUND

INFORMATION AND SIGNIFICANT EMISSIONS

FROM GYPSUM PRODUCT MANUFACTURING
          TASK ORDER NO. 14

        CONTRACT NO. 68-02-0242
            PREPARED FOR

      CONTROL SYSTEMS DIVISION

  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
            SUBMITTED BY

       PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
  INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
           CINCINNATI, OHIO

-------
  PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
  INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
    SCREENING STUDY FOR BACKGROUND

INFORMATION AND SIGNIFICANT EMISSIONS

  FROM GYPSUM PRODUCT MANUFACTURING
          Task Order No« 14

       Contract No.  68-02-0242
            May 25, 1973
            Prepared for

       Control Systems Division

     Environmental Protection Agency
            Submitted by

      PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
   Industrial Planning and Research
          Cincinnati, Ohio

-------
                  PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                  INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
     This  report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by Processes

Research,  Inc., Cincinnati,  Ohio in fulfillment  of Contract No. 68-02-0242.  The

contents of this report are  reproduced herein as received from Processes Research,

Inc.  The  opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed are those of the author

and not necessarily those of the Environmental Protection Agency.
                                 ii

-------
                   PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                   INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                               ABSTRACT


     The report deals with  the atmospheric emissions that are produced during the

operation of calcining gypsum and production of gypsum board products.  The aver-

age particulate emissions from these plants are between 25 and 40 pounds per hour

with baghouse collectors and electrostatic precipitators generally being employed

as control devices.   Extrapolation of emissions from all plants indicate that total

emissions are in the range  of 80,000 tons per year.  Emission of sulfur oxides is

primarily dependent  upon the sulfur content of the fuels being used for calcining

and other operations, and production of nitrogen oxides is also a function of the

combustion equipment and fuels used.  Emission regulations relating to visible,

particulate, sulfur  oxide,  and nitrogen oxide emissions are shown for nine states

A description of a general  process for production of calcined gypsum and gypsum

board products is given with flow diagrams.  A list of gypsum and/or gypsum pro-

duct producers is shown along with total industry production capacity, best

controlled plants and their control equipment, and emissions data from various

production locations.  A brief description of emission analysis, applicable con-

trol technology, and economics of control equipment is included.
                                 iii

-------
                 PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
Section

    I

   II

  III

   IV

    V

   VI

  VII

 VIII

   IX

    X

   XI
   SCREENING STUDY FOR BACKGROUND

INFORMATION AND SIGNIFICANT EMISSIONS

  FROM GYPSUM PRODUCT MANUFACTURING


               INDEX


               Title

Purpose and Scope

Summary

Air Pollution Regulations

Calcining of Gypsum

Board Products

Emissions, Analysis and Control

List of Producers

Data from Operating Plants

Best Controlled Plants

Forecast of Growth

Information Sources
Page

  1

  2

  3

 13

 19

 22

 31

 35

 41

 42

 43
                                iv

-------
                 PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                    SECTION I - PURPOSE AND SCOPE


     This report provides the Control Systems Division, Environmental Protection

Agency, with preliminary qualitative and quantitative data related to the

operation of plants for the production of gypsum and gypsum products.

     The general purposes of this preliminary study were to identify sources  of

atmospheric emissions in this industry, to identify and quantify such emissions

and to evaluate the state of the art in terms of equipment currently employed for

the control of such emissions.

     The scope of  this preliminary report deals  with the two major industry

operations:

     A.  Calcining of gypsum.

     B.  Production of board products.

-------
                 PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                        SECTION II - SUMMARY


     Review of the emissions data contained in this  report will disclose that

the "best controlled" gypsum calcining plants and  board plants employ bag collec-

tors and/or electrostatic precipitators.  The average particulate emissions for

these plants are  in the range of 25 to 40 pounds per hour and these plants will

generally comply  with existing air pollution regulations.

     If all plants were so equipped, the total nationwide emissions of particu-

lates would be on the order of 12,000 tons per year.

     Extrapolation of the data for all plants indicates that total emissions of

particulates to atmosphere are in the range of 80,000 tons per year.

-------
                 PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                 SECTION III - AIR POLLUTION REGULATIONS


     Gypsum product plants are located  in  28 states.  Ten of these states have

been selected as representing a cross section of the areas in which these plants

are located.

     A summary of the pertinent regulations of each of these states (with the

exception of California) is given below.   In California, each county has its own

regulations and a county by county analysis of these regulations is not deemed

to be appropriate for this report.

     The 10 states involved are:

                 California            Michigan
                 Florida               New Jersey
                 Georgia               New York
                 Indiana               Oklahoma
                 Iowa                  Texas

     The regulations abstracted deal with:

     1.  Particulate Emissions from Process Sources.
     2.  Visible Emissions.
     3.  Emission of Nitrogen Oxides and Sulfur Oxides from Fuel Burning
         Operations.

     1.  PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM PROCESS SOURCES

         The allowable emission,  in pounds per hour, is based on the process

weight rate.  Process weight is defined as the total weight of all materials

introduced into any source operation.   Solid fuels charged are considered as

part of the process weight, but liquid  and gaseous fuels and combustion air are

not.  The rate of allowable emission is shown in Table I.

-------
                     TABLE I




REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO GENERAL PROCESS SOURCES
RATE OF ALLOWABLE EMISSION. LBS PARTICULATE/HR
Process Weight Rate, Lbs/Hr

Florida
Georgia*
Indiana
Iowa
Michigan
New Jersey'
New York3
Oklahoma
Texas
100
.55
.551
.551
.55
.55

.50
.551
..
1,000
2.25
2.58
2.58
2.58
2.58

2.3
2.58
1.6
5.000
6.34
7.58
7.58
7.58
7.58

6.7
7.58
7.7
10,000
9.73
12.0
12.0
12.0
12.0

10.8
12.0
15.2
20 ,000
14.99
19.2
19.2
19.2
19.2

17.4
19.2
30.1
40,000
23.0
30.5
30.5
30.5
30.5

27.6
30.5
59.7
60,000
29.60
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0

36.1
40.0
67.4
120,000
33.28
46.3
46.3
46.3
46.3

51.8
46.3
82.3
200,000
36.11
51.2
51.2
51.2
51.2

56.1
51.2
95.2
1,000,000
46.72
69.0
69.0
69.0
69.0

71.7
69.0
151.2
2,000,000
--
77.6
77.6
77.6
77.6

78.3
77.6
184.4
6,000,000
—
92.7
92.7
92.7
92.7

90.24
92.7
252.3

-------
                 PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                          Notes for Table I
     1.  For new equipment only.  For existing equipment the  values are the

same through 60,000  pounds per hour.  For over 60,000 pounds  per hour, the

values are:
               Process Weight Rate
                     Lbs/Hr

                     120,000
                     200,000
                   1,000,000
                   2,000,000
                   6,000,000
Allowable Emissions
      Lbs/Hr

        63.5
        89.7
       262.0
       414.0
       873.0
     2.  New Jersey  does not follow this format.  Their format  is:

                                                                 Allowable1*
                                                                 Emission
                                                                   Rate
                                                                  Lbs/Hr

                                                                    0.5
                                                                    1.0
                                                                    6.0
                                                                   12.0
                                                                   24.0
                                                                   30.0

     a.  Based on 99 percent collection efficiency.
     b.  Based on 0.02  grains per scf.

     3.  Applies to  sources with an environmental rating of B or C.  Allowable

emission rate from sources with an A or D rating is at the discretion of the

Department of Environmental Conservation.
Potential Emission
Rate from Source
Operation
Lbs/Hr
50 or less
100
1,000
2,000
3,000 or more

Allowable*
Emission
Rate
Lbs/Hr
0.5
1.0
10.0
20.0
30.0

Source Gas
Emitted From
Source Operations
Scfm
3,000 or less
6,000
35,000
70,000
140,000
175,000 or more

-------
                 PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
     2.  VISIBLE EMISSIONS

         a_.   Process  Sources

             These emissions are graded on the basis of  equivalent opacity which

is the degree to which an emission, other than gray or black smoke, is partially

or wholly impervious  to rays of light and causes obstruction of an observer's

view.  This  is expressed as an equivalent of the obstruction caused by a gray or

black smoke  emission  of a given density as measured by a Ringelmann Smoke Chart.

         b_.   Fuel Burning Operations

             Opacity  is determined by use of a Ringelmann Smoke Chart.

             The Ringelmann Smoke Chart is published in  the U. S. Bureau of

Mines Information Circular No. 8333.

             The allowable opacities are shown in Table  II.

-------
                 PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                              TABLE II
             REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO VISUAL EMISSIONS
State
Florida
Georgia
Indiana
Iowa
Michigan
New Jersey
New York
Oklahoma
Texas
PARTICULATES
Fuel Burning1
Percent Opacity
202
202
40
40
205
206
207
20
208
Industrial Processes
Percent Opacity
No visible discharges^
104
40
40
205
20
207
20
208
                         Notes  for Table II


     1.  When presence of uncombined water is the only reason for failure of

emissions  to meet limitation,  these requirements do not apply.

     2.  For new equipment;  40 percent for existing equipment.

     3.  For sulfuric acid plants and nitric acid plants.  Other plants not

specified.

     4.  For new portland cement plants, new nitric acid plants, and new sul-

furic acid plants.  Other plants not specified.

-------
                 PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
     5.   Proposed rule change.  Existing regulation calls for 40 percent.

     6.   Applies to indirect heat exchangers with a rated hourly capacity of

200 mm Btu or greater gross heat input.   If input is less than 200 mm Btu, no

visible  emissions are permitted.

     7.   May not exceed this value for more than 3 minutes out of any 60 minute

time period.  May not exceed 40 percent  during this 3 minute period.

     8.   For new .installations.  Thirty  percent for existing installations.

-------
                  PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                  INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
     3.   EMISSION OF NITROGEN OXIDES AND SULFUR OXIDES FROM FUEL BURNING
         OPERATIONS

         The rate of allowable emission is shown in Table III.  However, enforce-

ment of  these regulations will undoubtedly be affected by the current uncertainty

in regard to the reliability of analyses for nitrogen oxides (see Section VI).

-------
Florida1




Georgia2




Indiana




Iowa




Michigan




New Jersey




New York
Oklahoma
Texas
        14
                                                                                TABLE III




                                                              EMISSION OF NITROGEN OXIDES AND SULFUR OXIDES
Nitrogen Oxides
Lbs/MM Btu Heat Input

Liquid
Fuel
0.30
0.30
0.303
0.306


0.3011
0.30

(As N02)
Solid
Fuel
0.70
0.70
0.703
	
See Note 7
See Note 9
0.7011
0.70
See Note IS
FROM FUEL BURNING OPERATIONS
Sulfur Oxides
Lbs/MM 'Btu Heat Input

Gaseous
Fuel
0.20
0.20
0.203
0.206


0.2011
0.20

(As S02)
Liquid Solid
Fuel Fuel
0.80 1.20
0.80 1.20
See Note 4
1.55 5.05
See Note 8
See Note 10
See Note 12
0.813 2.0
See Note 16

Gaseous
Fuel
•-_•
	

	



0.20


-------
                PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                        Notes for Table III


     1.   New sources, maximum 2 hour average.  All sources  after July 1, 1975.

     2.   New sources.  For existing sources:

                  S = 4000F/L^s_\ "
                          ^300 /

            Where  S = S02 emitted, Ibs/hr

                hg = Stack height, ft

                  n =» 3  for  hs < 300

                  n = 2  for  h  ^-300
                              S
                  f Varies from 0.8 to 3.0 depending upon heat  input and
                   location of source.

     3.   For fuel  burning equipment with a capacity of 250  mm Btu/hr or more.

     4.   Sulfur dioxide emission for new sources with a heat  input of more

than 250 mm Btu/hr shall comply with the Federal emission standards.  For new

sources  with a  heat input of 250 mm Btu/hr or less, and for existing equipment,

the emission rate  shall be limited to that expressed by:
                                -0.33
                  Em  *  17.0 Qrn

            Where  Em  =  Maximum allowable SC^in the stack  gases in Ibs/mm Btu
                        heat input

                  Qm  =  Heat input, mm Btu/hr

     5.   Maximum 2 hour average after January 1, 1975.  From  January 1, 1974 to
January 1, 1975, the  limits are  2.0 for liquid fuels and 6.0  for solid fuels.

     6.   Maximum 2 hour average, effective January 1, 1974.

     7.   No limits stated.
     8.   Limitations  apply to steam generating stations only.

     9.   No limits stated.
                                  11

-------
                 PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
     10.  Very involved method used for determining  allowable S02 emission.

See New Jersey Air  Pollution Control Code, Chapter 8, Sections 2.2, 2.3, and

2.17.

     11.  Applies to  installations with a heat input of more than 250 mm Btu/hr.

     12.  Limitations are placed on sulfur content of fuel rather than on

emissions.

     13.  After July  1, 1975, limit is 0.3 Ibs/mm Btu.

     14.  All figures are based on a maximum 2 hour  average.

     15.  Limitations apply to gas-fired steam generating units only.

     16.  For fuel  burning units other than steam generators, limitations are

based on ground level concentration averaged over a  30 minute period.  They are:

         Galveston  and Harris Counties  -  0.28 ppm

         Jefferson  and Orange Counties  -  0.32 ppm

         Other counties                 -  0.40 ppm
                                 12

-------
                  PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                  INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                    SECTION IV -  CALCINING OF GYPSUM


     For the manufacture of gypsum products, the gypsum must be converted from

calcium sulfate dihydrate (CaSO^ZI^O)  to calcium sulfate hemihydrate

(CaSO^»l/2H20) by calcining under controlled temperature conditions so that

calcium sulfate anhydrite (CaSO^) is not produced.  Strictly speaking, the term

"gypsum" refers only to the dihydrate,  but the term is almost universally used

in referring to the hemihydrate and anhydrite as well.  Block flow diagram

No. 3411-A shows the relationship between steps in the process and composition

of the gypsum.

     Gypsum is mined in both open pit and underground mines.  Calcining plants

are located near these mines or along a seaboard,or major waterway if imported

gypsum is used.  The run-of-mine  gypsum is reduced in size and free water re-

moved before calcining to remove  the combined water.  Referring to flow diagram

No. 3411-B, a brief description of the  process iis:

 v    Run-of-mine gypsum is conveyed to  a crusher feed bin.  From this bin it

passes over a vibrating screen to a crusher.  The underflow from the screen and

the discharge from the crusher are combined and conveyed to a crushed rock

hopper.  A portion of this material may be screened to provide the proper size

rock to be sold for use as a Portland cement retarder.  Rock from the hopper is

fed to a surge bin from which it  flows  (or is conveyed) to a grinding mill.

This mill is usually a Raymond type which grinds, classifies, and dries the rock.

When calcining or drying gypsum,  the mill is in a circuit in which the solid is

subjected to hot gases during grinding.  In this setup, the mill fan draws hot
                                  13

-------
                  PROCESSES  RESEARCH,  INC.
                  INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND  RESEARCH
combustion gases through a flue from a  furnace.  From the mill the hot dust-laden

gases exit through a duct to a cyclone  collector, from which the finished product

drops to a bin while any remaining dust is removed by a baghouse collector.  The

hot combustion gases are exhausted by a fan from the bag collector with part of

the gas being recycled to the furnace.  This is shown on flow diagram No. 3411-B1.

The ground rock from the mill (80 percent O-OO mesh) is known as "land plaster"

and may be sold as such for agricultural purposes.  This material is conveyed to

the land plaster bins which feed the calciners when further treatment is required„

     Calcining is usually done batchwise in vertical kettles until the tempera-

ture of the mass reaches a maximum of 320 to 340F.  The calcined materials, known

as "hot stucco" is then dropped to the  hot pits.  The stucco is then conveyed to

stucco storage bins.  Improperly calcined material may be conveyed to the stucco

reject bin from where it is recycled back to the crushed rock storage bin.  In

some plants, continuous calcining is carried out in a Raymond mill.  This simul-

taneously crushes, classifies, removes  the surface moisture, and calcines the

gypsum.

     The finished stucco may be sold as such for use in various plasters, Keene's

cement, etc.  It is also the major raw  material for a board products plant.  If

such a plant is built in conjunction with a calcining plant, the stucco is con-

veyed to the feed bins of the board  plant.

     The only air pollutants from this  process are gypsum dust and stack gases

from the heaters for the Raymond mills  and from the calciners.  The fuel used

for the heaters and calciners may be gas or oil.  If oil is used there may be

SOX and NOX emissions.
                                  14

-------
             PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
             CINCINNATI, OHIO
              NEW YORK, N.Y.
                     DRWG. 34II-A
                   GYPSUM
                    RCCK
                  CASQq
     •2H20
                             PARTICIPATE
                                          PARTICULATE
                  CRUSHING
PARTICULATE -	
   PLASTERS
   &CEMENTS
               SCREENING
GRINDING
                   DRYING
                  (FREE WATER!
                    ONLY)  i
PORTLAND
 CEMENT
RETARDER
CASCV2H20
         	-PARTICULATE
                    LAND
                  PLASTER
                  CAS04-2H20
               AGRICULTURAL
                 GYPSUM
                     -2H20
                  CALCINING
                PARTICULATE
                SOX,NOX
 STUCCO
CAS04-'4H20
  BOARD
PRODUCTS
       PRODUCT BLOCK  FLOW  DIAGRAM

                       15

-------
RUN-OF-
MINE ROCK
HOPPER

               CRUSHER
                 FEED
                 BIN
               V
                 ^
            SCREEN
                               TO ATM
       I

II  SCREENJV
                            CEMENT ROCK
                                   \/
                                  SURGE
                                  TANK
      CRUSHED
      ROCK
      STORAGE
      BIN
       ^
       D
                                           ^








7i
if
1









?
	 s








LAND
PLASTER
BIN




































fx
\









Si

s.
'v









/



— ... .... , >




STUCCO
REJECT
BIN

ELECTROSTATIC
PKECI PITATOR
1-
	 /I'TO ATM

r
i IT



                                         RAYMOND MILL
                                                        CALCINER
                                                               HOT
                                                               PIT
                                    TO BOARD
                                     PLANT
                 ^^-""^^

                                                                  CEMENT
                                                                  ROCK
                                                                  LOADING
                                           TYPICAL GYPSUM  PRODUCTS PLANT
                                           CRUSHING,- MILLING, AND CALCINING
                                                           DRWG. 3411-B
                                                                                    PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                                                                                    CINCINNATI, OHIO        NEW YORK, N.Y.

-------
            EXHAUST
            GASES
    RECYCLED
    GASES
                                     RAYMOND
                                       MILL
FURNACE
MAKE-UP
  AIR
FAN
                          17
                                 DRWG34II-BI
                            PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                            CINCINNATI, OHIO
                                         NEW YORK, N.Y.

-------
                 PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
     The major sources of emission and types of pollutants  are:

               Source                           Pollutant

               Primary crusher                  Dust
               Crushed rock screen              Dust
               Crushed rock bin                 Dust
               Crushed rock feeder              Dust
               Grinding mill
                 Gas fired                      Dust
                 Oil fired                      Dust
                                               S02
                                               NOX
               Calciners
                 Gas fired                      Dust
                 Oil fired                      Dust
                                               S02
                                               NOX
               Land plaster bin                 Dust
               Stucco reject elevator           Dust

     Emissions from the grinding mill, land plaster bin, calciners, and stucco

reject elevator may be too hot to be sent to a baghouse and the dust is too fine

to be collected efficiently in a cyclone.  Therefore,  they  are usually conveyed

to an electrostatic precipitator.  If the calciners and grinding mill heaters

are oil fired, the exhaust gases from the precipitator may  have to be scrubbed

to bring the S02 down to acceptable levels.

     The dust from the primary crushing and screening  operations is usually

collected in cyclone units.  It is usually necessary to supplement these with

baghouse units or a precipitator for additional cleanup«
                                 18

-------
                 PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                      SECTION V - BOARD PRODUCTS


     In manufacturing board products  from  gypsum, water ±s mixed with the stucco

and various materials are added to impart  the required properties to the finished

product.  The nature of these additives will vary, depending upon whether the

finished product is wallboard, acoustical  board, insulating board, etc.  A

typical process for making wallboard  is shown on flow Diagram 3411-C.  Referring

to this flow diagram, a brief description  of the process is:

     Stucco from the hot pits is conveyed  to the stucco storage bins in the board

plant.  No attempt is made to cool this stucco since the elevated temperature

will not affect the process adversely.  The stucco is conveyed by a screw con-

veyor to an elevator and discharged to a vibrating screen.  Any agglomerates

which may have formed are screened out and returned to the screw conveyor where

the shearing action of the conveyor will break them up.  The underflow from the

screen flows to a transfer conveyor.  Various additivies such as starch, vermicu-

lite, chopped glass fiber, and ground scrap are also added in this conveyor.

This mixture is conveyed to a mixer where  foamed soap from a foam generator and

a mixture of asphalt, potash, and water from a Hydrapulper are also added.  This

material is thoroughly mixed to form  a thick slurry, or paste, which is fed to

the board machine.

     In the board machine the paste is fed uniformly onto a liner paper.  A top

paper liner is applied under a pair of nip rolls and edge folders.  This sand-

wich is then conveyed on a flat belt  conveyor until the core hardens - usually

about 6 minutes.  The board is then cut automatically by a revolving knife.
                                 19

-------
N>
O
                                       TO ATM


                                    BAGHOUSE
                                                    UJ
                                                    O
V



1



MANUAL
"S
r




S
<\
a:\
0
x
cc
\
                                                                    SOAP
                                                                    SOLUTI.OJ
                                                               GLASS FIBER
                                                             ROVING  CUTTER

                                                             :	_£_
                            TO WASTECTRUCK)

                           »LATH TO STOkAGE
                          ABOARD TO STORAGE
                               DRYER
                                                         CUT OFF
                                                         KNIFE
BOARD  MACHINE
                                            TYPICAL  GYPSUM  PRODUCTS PLANT
                                              BOARD AND LATH PRODUCTION
                                                                                                             PAPER
                                                                                                             FEEDER
                                                                                            DRWG. 34II-C
                                                                                    PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                                                                                    CINCINNATI, OHIO
                                                NEW YORK, N.Y.

-------
                  PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                  INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
The cut boards are automatically  turned over and passed through a long,  four-

section kiln dryer.   The  boards leaving the dryer are turned face to face and

end sawed to give smooth, straight ends.  They are then bundled and stacked in

preparation for shipping  or warehousing.

     With minor modifications  in  operations, lath and sheathing can be made on

the same equipment.   The  process  is the same as described for wallboard.

     The only air pollutants from this process are gypsum dust and wallboard

dust, which are essentially the same  thing.  Dusts from the stucco handling

system, the additives elevator, and the mixer, go directly to a baghouse.  Dust

from the board-forming machine goes to a cyclone collector.  The solids from

this collector flow to the Hydrapulper and the air goes to the baghouse.  Solids

from the baghouse are recycled to the stucco feed screw.

     Dust from the end saws goes  to a cyclone or baghouse collector.  The

collected dust may be recycled as an  additive or may be discarded.  Air from the

collector is discharged to the atmosphere.
                                 21

-------
                  PROCESSES  RESEARCH,  INC.
                  INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND  RESEARCH
             SECTION VI - EMISSIONS, ANALYSIS AND CONTROL


     A.  ANALYSIS

         The determination of  the  quantity of emissions from a gypsum products

plant is facilitated by the fact that most emissions are carried in airstreams

which are moved by blowers. Few natural draft stacks are involved.  These

blowers are usually used as exhausters on the downstream side of dust collection

equipment.

         The most accurate method  in general use to determine the quantity of

air moved by a blower is a duct traverse using a standard pitot tube (Ref. 3b).

Frequently it is possible to make  a close approximation of the flow rate by

measuring the operating horsepower of the blower and the differential head across

the blower.  The flow rate can be  found from the performance curve.  The accuracy

will depend on the characteristic  curve for the blower.

         The determination of  the  quantity of particulate matter carried in any

stream is best made by passing a known quantity of the stream through a flash-

fired glass fiber filter which is  weighed before and after the sample is taken

(Ref. 3b).  The highest temperature of any of these streams from a gypsum plant

is below the temperature limit of  the filters and filter holders available.

In making these determinations, it is important that isokinetic sampling tech-

niques are used.

         Since the only S02 which  will be emitted from a gypsum plant will be

from a combustion process using oil, the simplest way to determine it is to

analyze the oil for sulfur content.  All of this sulfur will be converted to

S02 so the total emission of SO2 will depend on the firing rate.
                                 22

-------
                   PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                   INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
         The problem of measuring nitrogen oxides, especially in the presence

of sulfur oxides, is being extensively studied by many organizations.  None of

the methods now available give  completely satisfactory results (Ref. 3b, 4 and

5).  However, some of the newer methods seem promising.  One of these is the

electrochemical sensor equipped to determine both S0£ and NOX.  In this unit,

the 802 is not differentiated by the NOX sensor but the NOX does not interfere

with the SO2 sensor.  Both sensors are used and the NOX measurement is corrected

to allow for the S0£ level. In using this method the sample must be filtered

and cooled.  This could be done in conjunction with the test for particulate

matter.

         In a properly fired unit, carbon monoxide should not be present in the

outlet gases.  It is the only one of the fixed gases which is a pollutant.  The

classical procedure for measuring it is to pass the gas sample over hot iodine

pentoxide and titrate the iodine liberated.  Carbon monoxide is also measured

by gas chromatography and by nondispersive infrared (NDIR) analyzers.  The NDIR

analyzers have rapid response and good sensitivity but tend to drift so that

fairly frequent zeroing and calibration may be necessary.  All of these methods

require that the sample be filtered and cooled.

         In discussion with gypsum manufacturers in the United States, it has

been determined that no fluorine bearing gypsum (byproduct of phosphoric acid

manufacture) is used to produce commercial gypsum, wall board, .and associated

products.  Therefore, in regard to the gypsum industry, emissions of fluorines

and fluorides are not considered to be a problem.
                                  23

-------
                   PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                   INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
     B.  CONTROL

         The best way to control  802  is  to use a low sulfur fuel.  If this is

not feasible the S02 may be removed from the stack gas by wet scrubbing»  One

system uses a lime slurry which reacts with the S02 to form sulfates and sul-

fites (Ref. 3a).  This,  of course, precludes recovery of the SQ2.  Another

systems uses a hot solution of potassium sulfite (1^803) for scrubbing (Ref. 3a) .

The sulfite reacts with  802 to form potassium bisulfite.  Cooling the hot bi-

sulfite solution converts the bisulfite  (KHS03> to the pyrosulfite (1^8205) which

is concentrated and steam stripped to produce 802 an<^ potassium sulfite.  The

latter is reused in the  scrubber. This  system requires close temperature control

and uses about four pounds of steam for  each pound of 802 recovered.

         The reduction of nitrogen oxides to less than 200 ppm in an effluent

stream is very difficult.  Much of the current technology involves scrubbing with

alkaline solutions but this is of limited value because of the low solubility of

nitrogen oxides in water (Ref. 3a).   This problem is also being extensively in-

vestigated by several organizations.

         The most efficient equipment for the collection of particulate matter

is the electrostatic precipitator.  It is also the most expensive and is used in

gypsum plants only when  the effluent  is  too hot to be collected in a baghouse.

The use of cyclone collectors and baghouses should be satisfactory if proper

units are chosen for the various  services.  Wet collectors are usually avoided

since they convert an air pollution problem to a water pollution problem.

         Both baghouse collectors and electrostatic precipitators used to collect

gypsum dust have collection efficiencies of 95 to 99 percent.  The cost information

relating to these two types of  equipment are  presented  in  the following  tables.
                                  24

-------
              PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
              INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                          TABLE  IV


                     BAGHOUSE COLLECTOR



Rate:   40,000 acfm

Costs:

       FOB  (including fan, starter, and 40 horsepower motor)    $40,000

       Erected                                                $50,000

       Operating per year                                     $ 3,200

       Maintenance per year                                   $ 8,000

       Capital  (12.8 percent of erected cost)                  $ 6,400

       Total annual cost                                      $17,600

Sources:  "Estimating the Cost of Gas Cleaning Plants"   Chemical
         Engineering, December 13, 1971, Pg 86-96.

         "A Manual of Electrostatic Precipitator Technology - Part II -
         Application Areas."  NATIC No. PB-196-381
                              25

-------
                                             Table V

                   Electrostatic Precipitator Installations in Gypsum Plants
                                      (Period 1935-1969)
Pptr. Contract
Year (s)
1935-1939
1940-1944
1945-1949
1950-1954
1955-1959
1960-1964
1965-1969
Five (5)
No. of
Install.
4
3
3
18
20
10
1
Year Period Indicated
No. of
Pptrs.
5
3
3
25
21
11
2
Total Gas
Volume
(ICfacfm)
100
56
77.5
545.5
607.6
351.6
80
Average Volume /Year
During Period
(10 acfm)
20
11.2
15.5
109
121.5
70.3
16.0
Weighted Design
Efficiency on acfm
Basis (%)
98.5
98.6
96.5
97.5
97.7
99. 15
99.0
Grand Totals
59
70
1818.2
           NOTES:  The statistics in this table include precipitators on rock dryers,
                   kettles, rotary  calciners, holoflite calciners,  and combinations
                   of calciners and kettles with dryer and grinding mill vent gases.
                                          26

-------
                                                  Table VI

                  Summary of Performance Data on Gypsum Plant Electrostatic Precipitators


                                                              Calciner      Calciner      Combination
                                    Kettles     Rock Dryers    (Rotary)     (Holoflite) . Kettle,  Dryer, Mill
      Critical Parameter          Max    Min    Max   Min   Max   Min    Max   Min   Max   Min

1.   Gas Volume/Precipitator       13.6    2.9    43.0   10.8 82.5  29.8   16.6    7.6    60.2    9.0
       (acfm in thousands)

2.   Precipitator Efficiency         99.90   94.38   99.85  97.2099.82 99.14  99.90  98.20  99.96 93.76
       (per cent)

3.   Gas Velocity in Precipitator     5.5    1.5     7.5    3.1   7.9   4.2    2.8    1.4     7.4    3.0
       (fps)
•VJ
4.  Precipitator Dust Concentration 48.0    4.8   156      4.6  46.3  32.9   62.6   30.8   63.9    7.7
 ;      (gr/scfd)
5.  Precipitator Input Power      828    124     282     69   174    62    983    576   390    65
       (watts/1000 acfm)
6.  Precipitator Avg. Field        12.8    8.8    15.0    9.0  13.0   8.1   15.5    9.8   13.4    8.0
       Strength (kV/in.)

7.  Gas Moisture                  47.6    19.0    17.4    3.6  35.2  14.2   54.0   17.6   22.2    6.7
       (per cent by volume)
8.  Gas Temperature             342    220     240    125            -   339    200   250   140
       (°F)
9.  Precipitator Performance       2.39    0.74   2.06   0.89  1.45  1.03   1.39   0.47   2.39  0.40
       Ratio (R)

-------
                  PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                  INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
   Economics.  Table VII shows erected and FOB costs for precipitators installed
in gypsum plants over the period 1959-1967.  The costs per  acfm range from $0.89
to $1.03 for 99.0% collection efficiency, and from $1.43 to $1.53 for 99.5%.
Erected costs vary from $1.38 to $3.62 per acfm.

   Table VIII lists the maintenance  costs for two precipitators installed in
gypsum plants.  The fan costs were based on a pressure drop of 1/2" W.G. in the
precipitator.  The plant was assumed to operate 8000 hours  per year with elec-
tricity costs estimated at $0.0075 per kWh.
                                  28

-------
PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
             Table VII
    Gypsum Industry Economics
Year
1959
1960
1961
1962
1964


1965
1967
Type
Cost
FOB
Erected
FOB
Erected
FOB
FOB


Erected
FOB
Design Design Total Cost/Unit Volume
Volume Efficiency Cost ($ /acfm)
(1000'sacfm) (%) (10? $)
40
40
40
40
40
36
36
36
40
27
40
99.0
99.0
99.0
99.7
99.0
99.5
99.5
99.5
99.0
99.0
99.0
39.5
55.2
38.7
90.1
35.7
55.0
51.3
56.3
36.0
97.8
41.0
0.99
1,38
0.97
2.25
0.89
1.53
1.43
1.57
0.90
3.62
1.03
            29

-------
             PROCESSES RESEARCH, Lsrc.
             INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH

                                Table VIII

                   Maintenance Data for Precipitators
                     Installed on Gypsum Calciners
Prod. Rate tons/hr.                17-17                  60-90
Gas Flow, acfm                    16,600                 35,000
Precipitator Power, kW                  12.2                   13.5
No. of Maintenance Periods/year     3-4                    3-4
Man hours/year                    70-90                  70-90
Maintenance Labor Costs               480                    480
Fan Power, kW 2                        1. 04                   2.19
Power Costs - Fan, $/yr.              62.25                 131.25
Power Costs - Precipitator, $ /yr.      730                    810
Capital Costs,4 $/yr.               8,600                  9,350

Total Annual Costs                  9. 872. 25              10, 771. 25
i
 Based on $6. 00 per hour
 Based on 1/2" W. G. pressure drop
 Based on Power Costs at $0. 0075 per kWh
 Based on 12. 8% of total Erected Costs
                            30

-------
                 PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                    SECTION VII - LIST OF PRODUCERS


     Gypsum and/or gypsum products are produced in twenty-eight of the  conter-

minous states at 79 locations.  Six major producers account for sixty-nine, or

87-1/2 percent,  of these  installations.  There is no breakdown available showing

the nominal capacity or production for any of these producers.  However, the

latest data (1971) available for the overall industry shows this breakdown

(Ref. 6):

         Product                                 Capacity

     Uncalcined                                  Short Tons

         Portland cement  retarder                3,349,018
         Agricultural gypsum                       849,970
         Fillers and unclassified                  106,003

                 Total                                          4,304,991

     Calcined Plasters

       Building  Plasters

         Regular basecoat                         381,471
         Mill-mixed basecoat                       188,556
         Veneer  plaster                             89,723
         Gouging, molding, and Keene's cement       75,251
         Roof-deck concrete                        180.803

                 Total                                            915,804

     Industrial  Plasters                                           268,212

       Board Products                               .MSF

         Lath                                     477,403
         Veneer  base                              292,257
         Gypsum  sheathing                         272,269
         Regular gypsum board                    9,014,908
         Type X  gypsum board                     1,766,483
         Predecorated wallboard                    122,361

                 Total (MSF)                                    11,945,681
                                 31

-------
                  PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                  INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
     If all of  the board products averaged out at 1/2 inch thickness, which gives

a weight of 2 pounds  per square foot, the tonnage of board products is the same

as the thousands  of square feet produced.  Using this assumption,  the total ton-

nage of gypsum  and gypsum products produced in 1971 is 17,434,688  short tons.

This is in close  agreement with the apparent supply of crude  gypsum which was

estimated at 16,688,235 short tons (including imports) in 1971  (Ref» 6).

     The seven  major  producers and the location of their  installations are:
               Company

     The Celotex Corporation
     The Flintkote Company
     Georgia-Pacific Corporation
       Gypsum Division
     Johns-Manville  Corporation


     Kaiser Cement and Gypsum Corp,
   State

Iowa
New Jersey
Ohio
Texas
Wyoming

California
Georgia
Nevada
New Jersey
Texas
Delaware
Georgia
Iowa
Kansas
Michigan
New York

Texas
Utah
Wyoming

Nevada
Arizona

California

Florida
New Jersey
Washington
   City

Fort Dodge
Edgewater
Port Clinton
Hamlin
Cody

Fremont
Savannah
Las Vegas
Camden
Sweetwater
Wilmington
Brunswick
Fort Dodge
Blue Rapids
Grand Rapids
Akron
Buchanan
Quanah
Sigurd
Lovell

Las Vegas
Florence

Antioch
Long Beach
Jacksonville
Delanco
Seattle
                                  32

-------
            PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
            INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
          Company

National Gypsum Company
United States Gypsum Company
   State

Arizona
California

Connecticut
Florida
Georgia
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Louisiana
Maryland
Michigan
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York

Ohio
Texas

California

Florida
Indiana

Iowa

Louisiana
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan

Montana
Nevada
New York
                                     Ohio
                                     Oklahoma
                                     Pennsylvania
                                     Texas

                                     Utah
                                     Virginia
    City

Phoenix
Long Beach
Richmond
New Haven
Tampa
Garden City
Waukegan
Shoals
Fort Dodge
Medicine Lodge
Westwego
Baltimore
National City
Portsmouth
Burlington
Bronx
Clarence Center
Lorain
Rotan

Plaster City
Santa Fe Springs
Jacksonville
East Chicago
Shoals
Fort Dodge
Sperry
New Orleans
Baltimore
Boston
Alabaster
River Rouge
Lewistown
Empire
New Brighton (S.I.)
Oakfield
Stony Point
Gypsum
Southard
Philadelphia
Galena Park
Sweetwater
Sigurd
Norfolk
Saltville
                            33

-------
                PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND  RESEARCH
    Of the 81 installations, 46 (or  56.8 percent) are located in, or very close

to,  standard metropolitan statistical areas.  These include:

                     East Coast         21
                     Gulf Coast          4
                     West Coast          7
                     Fort Dodge,  Iowa     4
                     East Chicago,
                       Indiana           1
                     Buffalo,  New
                       York              3
                     Sandusky, Ohio       2
                     Sweetwater,  Texas    4
                                        46
                               34

-------
           PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
           INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
         SECTION VIII -DATA FROM OPERATING PLANTS


The data shown in Tables IX and X were obtained from the plants indicated.
                         35

-------
                                                                                      TABLE IX

                                                                        EMISSIONS FROM CALCINING OPERATIONS

                                                                                     PLANT DATA
                                 Date
Company and Location          Constructed

Celotex Corp.
  Cody, Wyoming                  1962
  Edgewater, New Jersey          1958
  Fort Dodge, Iowa               1958
  Hamlin, Texas              cas 1945
  Port Clinton, Ohio         ca. 1945

The Flintkote Co.
  Fremont, California            1965
  Savannah, Georgia              1964

Georgia-Pacific Corp.
  Buchanan, New York             1969
  Level1, Wyoming                1967

Grand Rapids Gypsum Co.
  Grand Rapids, Michigan         1970'

Johns-Manvllle Corp.
  Florence, Arizona              1955
  Las Vegas, Nevada              1965

Kaiser Gypsum Co.
  Jacksonville, Florida          1964
  Delanco, New Jersey            1966

National Gypsum Co.
  Richmond, California           1964
  Fort Dodge, Iowa               1940
  Clarence Center, New York      1940
  Long Beach, California         1965

United States Gypsum Co.
  Shoals, Indiana                1955
  Stony Point, New York          1956
  Baltimore. Maryland            1962
                                                             Dust Emission. Lbs/Hr
   Total
    40
    40
    40
    400
    35

.02 Grains
 Per scf
    0.5
    0.84
    0.56
    35
    0.2
    4.3
    45.5
    45
    0.45
    7.6
    12.6
    0.9
    5307
    ,96
    5.11
                                                                                                   Dust Collection Equip.
                                                                                                                                               Fuel Burning
S02
Emission
Lbs/Hr
Note 1
Note 1
Note 1
Note 1
Note 1
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
1.33
Note 5
0
0
(61) 6
0
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
N°x
Emission

Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Note 4
Note 4
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Fuel
Used
Note 1
Note 1
Note 1
Note 1
Note 1
Gas2
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas




-------
                 PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                         Notes for Table IX
     1.   S(>2 from low sulfur fuel meets. Federal standards.

     2.   No. 2 fule oil standby.

     3.   Also use a wet scrubber.

     4.   Unknown.

     5.   Unknown.  Low sulfur fuel is used.

     6.   Quantity reported as 250 tons per year.  Quantity shown is calculated

using 8160 operating hours per year.

     7.   Board plant built in 1920.
                                37

-------
                                                                                 TABLE X

                                                                  EMISSIONS FROM BOARD PLANT OPERATIONS
Company and Location

Celotex Corp.
  Cody, Wyoming
  Edgewater, New Jersey
  Fort Dodge, Iowa
  Hamlln, Texas
  Fort Clinton, Ohio

The Fllntkote Co.
  Freemont, California
  Savannah, Georgia

Georgia-Pacific Corp.
  Buchanan, New York
  Love11, Wyoming

Grand Rapids Gypsum Co.
  Grand Raplda, Michigan

Kaiser Gypsum Co.
  Jacksonville, Florida
  Delanco, New Jersey

National Gypsum Co.
  Richmond, California
  Fort Dodge, Iowa
  Clarence Center, New York
  Long Beach, California

United States Gypsum Co.
  Shoals, Indiana
  Stony Point, New York
  Baltimore, Maryland

Paper
Dust


.01
.01



15.4
Dust Emission. Lbs/Hr
End Trim Board
Dust Drying Total
30
5
5
30
Note 1
Note 3
0.5
.18 .19
.18 .19
5
33.3
14
2.8
2.6
2.1
2.9
3.6 19
12.8
9.9
Dust Collection Equip.
Cyclones Baghouse . P
X
X
X
X
Note 2
X
X
X
X
X5
X
X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
         Fuel Burning

  SC7         NOx
Emission    Emission
 Lbs/Hr^     Lbs/
 Negl.
 Negl.
 Negl.
 Negl.
 Negl.
 Negl.
 Negl.
 Negl.
 Negl.
 Negl.
 12.5
 Negl.
 Negl.
 Negl.
 (94.4)'
 Negl.
 Negl.
 Negl.
 Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Note 6
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Negl.
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas*
Gas"
Gas
                          Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas"
Gas4

-------
                PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
                INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                        Notes for Table X


     1.  None reported.

     2.  Closed system.

     3.  99 percent of particles greater than 0.5 microns collected.

     4.  No. 2 fuel oil  standby.

     5.  Also use a wet  scrubber.

     6.  Quantity of NOX emission unknown.

     7.  Quantity reported as 340 tons  per  year.  Quantity shown is calculated

using 7200 operating hours per year.
                               39

-------
                 PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.

                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
     A rough estimate  of nationwide particulate contamination from gypsum



product plants can be  made by using an average dust emission figure.  From the



data available this is 340 Ibs/hr for crushing, grinding,  and calcining oper-



ations, and 10.3 Ibs/hr for board plants.  An average board line will produce



400 square feet per minute, or




                    4000*40) 365  .  210j2M mf per yMr






Since approximately 12,000,000 MSF per year are produced (see Section VII), the



total emission for board lines is





                              (1°'3) = 588 Ibs Per hour nationwide.





     The total quantity of gypsum processed is approximately 17,500,000 tons



per year.  The average plant will process about 1000 tons  of rock  per day.



Therefore, the approximate total emission for rock processing, is






                    \l>50°>0™ (340) - 16,300 Ibs per hour nationwide
                    3o!>
This is based on continuous  three-shift operation.



     If the mill is  operated on a one-shift basis, the dust emission  rate would



be three times this.   Thus,  the total dust emission rate could be  as  high as



49,500 pounds per hour on a  nationwide basis.
                                 40

-------
                  PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                  INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                   SECTION  IX - BEST CONTROLLED PLANTS


     The best controlled plants are the latest ones built,  and are equipped

with baghouses or electrostatic precipitators or a combination of the two.

Among these are:

                  The Celotex Corporation          Cody, Wyoming
                  The Flintkote Co.                Savannagh, Georgia
                  Georgia-Pacific Corporation      Buchanan, New York
                  Grand Rapids Gypsum Co.          Grand Rapids, Michigan
                  Johns-Manville Corporation       Florence, Arizona
                                                  Las Vegas, Nevada
                  Kaiser Gypsum Co.                Delanco, New Jersey
                  National  Gypsum Co.              Long Beach, California
                  United States Gypsum Co.         Baltimore, Maryland

     The quantity of  emissions for these plants and the type of control equip-

ment in use is shown  in Tables IX and X.

     A baghouse collector costs approximately five times as much as a comparable

cyclone collector. An electrostatic precipitator can be installed at a cost

comparable to a baghouse if the flow quantity is high. The minimum flow rate

for an industrial type precipitator is approximately 50,000 absolute cubic feet

per minute.
                                 41

-------
                 PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
                 INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
                    SECTION X - FORECAST OF GROWTH


     The demand  for gypsum products is directly related to the housing industry.

For the past five years the domestic production of crude gypsum has leveled

off at 10 to 10.5 million short tons per year, with the balance of the crude

supplied as imports.  Conceivably, this situation could continue for the next

few years and present gypsum producers attach a low probability to the possibility

of new gypsum plants in the short term.

     Current indications of a rising trend in the housing industry could, however,

lead to expansion of existing plants or possibly to new gypsum board plants in

the near future.
                                 42

-------
         PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
         INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
            SECTION XI  - INFORMATION SOURCES
COMPANIES AND ORGANIZATIONS  CONTACTED

Celotex Corp.
1500 N. Dale Mabry
Tampa, Florida  33607
(813) 872-3111

Flintkote Co.
400 WestChester Ave0
White Plains, New York  10604
(914) 761-7400

Georgia-Pacific Corp.
900 S. W. Fifth Street
Portland, Oregon  97207
(503) 222-5561

Johns-Manville Corp.
Greenwood Plaza
Denver, Colorado
(303) 770-1000

Kaiser Gypsum Co.
300 Lakeside Drive
Oakland, California  94612
(415) 271-2211

National Gypsum Co.
325 Delaware Avenue
Buffalo, New York  14202
(716) 852-5880

United States Gypsum Co.
101 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois  60606
(312) 321-3400

The Gypsum Association
201 N. Wells Street
Chicago, Illinois  60606
(312) 726-5675
Grand Rapids Gypsum Co.
1007 N. Division Ave.
Grand Rapids, Michigan
(616) 459-6183
49501
                 Marion M. Hambrick
                   Vice President of Operations
                 J. E. Krebs
                   Project Engineer
                 Vincent J0 Tretter, Jr.
                    Senior Environmental
                    Engineer


                 Edmund M. Fenner
                    Director of Technical
                    Relations
                  Robert Costa
                   Vice President and General
                   Manager


                  W. A. Schmidt
                   Chief Dust Control Engineer
                 John F. Schroder
                   Manager of Environmental
                   Protection
                 F. J. Rogers
                   Manager, Administrative
                   Services
                  Not  contacted.  Data obtained
                  through the Gypsum Association
                         43

-------
            PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
            INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
B.  EQUIPMENT COMPANIES

    The Coe Manufacturing Co.
    Painesville, Ohio  44077

    The Ehrsam Co.
    300 N.  Cedar
    Abilene, Kansas  67410

    Combustion Engineering Co.
    Raymond Division
    427 W.  Randolph St.
    Chicago, Illinois  60606

C.  STATES  (Air Pollution Regulations)

    California

         California Air Resources Board
         1108 14th Street
         Sacramento, California  95814
    Florida
          Department of Pollution Control
          Suite  300, Tallahassee Bank Building
          315  South Calhoun St.
          Tallahassee, Florida  32301
    Georgia
          Georgia Department of Public Health
          47  Trinity Avenue S.W.
          Atlanta, Georgia  30334
    Indiana
          Air Pollution Control Board
          1330 Vest Michigan St.
          Indianapolis, Indiana  46206
             ATT:  Mr. Perry E. Miller
                  Technical Secretary
                            44

-------
        PROCESSES  RESEARCH, INC.
        INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
Iowa
      Iowa Air Pollution  Control Commission
      Iowa State Department of Health
      Lucas State Office  Building
      Des Moines, Iowa  50319
         ATT:   Mr.  Charles Campbell
Michigan
      Bureau of Industrial Health and Air Pollution Control
      Department of Public Health
      3500 N. Logan
      Lansing, Michigan   48914
New Jersey
      New Jersey State  Department of Environmental Protection
      Bureau of Air Pollution Control
      P. 0.  Box 1390
      Trenton,  New Jersey  08625
New York
      New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
      41 State Street
      Albany,  New York  12207
Oklahoma
      Environmental Health  Services
      Air Pollution Control Division
      Oklahoma State Department of Health
      3400 N.  Eastern
      Oklahoma City, Oklahoma  73105
Oregon
      Department of Environmental Quality
      1400 Southwest Fifth Avenue
      Portland,  Oregon  97201
         ATT:  Mr.  H.  M.  Patterson
              Chief,  Air Quality Control
Texas
      Texas Air Control  Board
      1100 West 49th Street
      Austin,  Texas   78756
                        45

-------
            PROCESSES RESEARCH, INC.
            INDUSTRIAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH
D.  PUBLICATIONS

    1.  American Petroleum  Institute Engineering Reports
            Cyclone Dust  Collectors, 1955
            Removal of  Particulate Matter from Gaseous Wastes -
              Filtration, 1961
              Electrostatic Precipitators, 1961

    2.  Chemical Economics  Handbook - Standford Research Institute,
              July 1971

    3.  Chemical Engineering Deskbook

            a_.  Environmental Engineering, June 1971
            b_.  Environmental Engineering, May 1972

    4.  Combustion, August  1972

    5.  Environmental Science and Technology, October 1972

    6.  Mineral Industry  Surveys - Gypsum (Quarterly)
            U. S.  Bureau  of Mines, 1971

    7.  Minerals Yearbook - U. S. Bureau of Mines, 1970

    8.  Pit and Quarry, August 1961

    9.  Pit and Quarry  Handbook, 1971-72

   10.  Rock Products,  November 1960

   11.  Rock Products,  June 1966

E.  PLANT VISITS
    National Gypsum Co.»  Shoals, Indiana
    United States Gypsum  Co., Shoals, Indiana
    Georgia-Pacific Corp., Buchanan, New York
    United States Gypsum  Co., Stony Point, New York
December 4,  1972
December 4,  1972
December 6,  1972
December 6,  1972
                            46

-------