xvEPA
        United
        Environmema Pi
        Agpncv

                      •
Demonstration of
Wellman-Lord/Allied
Chemical FGD Technology:
Acceptance Test Results

Interagency
Energy/Environment
R&D Program Report

-------
                  RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES


 Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
 Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
 gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
 vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
 planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
 The nine series are:

     1. Environmental Health Effects Research

     2. Environmental Protection Technology

     3. Ecological Research

    4. Environmental Monitoring

    5.  Socioeconomic Environmental Studies

    6.  Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)

    7.  Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development

    8.  "Special" Reports

    9.  Miscellaneous Reports

This report has been assigned to the INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series. Reports in this series result from the
effort funded under the 17-agency  Federal Energy/Environment Research and
Development Program. These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
health and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
tems. The goal of the  Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
ses of the transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
effects; assessments of, and  development of, control technologies for  energy
systems;  and integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
mental issues.
                       EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the participating Federal Agencies, and approved
for  publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Government, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
                                    ii

-------
                                   EPA-600/7-79-014a

                                        January 1979
Demonstration  of Wellman-Lord/
Allied  Chemical  FGD Technology:
        Acceptance Test Results
                         by

                R.C. Adams, S.J. Lutz, and S.W. Mulligan

                       TRW, Inc.
                 201 North Roxboro Street, Suite 200
                  Durham, North Carolina 27701
                   Contract No. 68-02-1877
                  Program Element No. EHE624A
                EPA Project Officer: Charles J. Chatlynne

               Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
                Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry
                 Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                      Prepared for

              U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                 Office of Research and Development
                    Washington, DC 20460

-------
                                  ABSTRACT
     Process performance guarantees were met or exceeded as confirmed by
Acceptance Testing which began on 29 August 1977 and ended on 14 September
1977.  The Acceptance Test consisted of two test periods.   The Design Load
test period was to be a 12-day period during which the FGD plant was to be
operated at the design condition of a boiler flue gas output rate equivalent
to 80% of the maximum boiler load of 115 megawatts gross.   The High Load test
period was to be an 83-hour period during which the FGD plant treated flue
gas volumes equivalent to 95% of maximum boiler load.
     Specific performance criteria were met or exceeded as follows:
     (a)  S02 removal  of 90% or better was achieved at Design Load
          conditions and at High Load conditions.
     (b)  Particulate emissions did not exceed 0.1 lb/10  Btu
          of boiler heat input at either Design Load or High
          Load conditions.
     (c)  The consumption of steam, natural gas and electrical
          power was less than the performance guarantee require-
          ments at Design Load conditions.
     (d)  Soda ash consumption was less than the limit set by
          the performance guarantees.
     (e)  Sulfur product purity was greater than 99.5% at both
          Design Load and High Load conditions.
                                     111

-------
                                CONTENTS

Figures	     iv
Tables   	     iv
Executive Summary  	      v
    1.  Introduction	1-1
          Background	1-1
          Process Description	1-2
          Performance Requirements 	   1-6
          Test Criteria	1-7
          Methods Summary	1-10
    2.  Test Results	2-1
          Test Lengths and Interruptions	2-1
          S02 Removal Performance	2-2
          Particulate Emissions Performance	2-4
          Utility and Natural Gas Consumption	2-4
          Analysis of Demonstration Plant Steam Consumption	2-5
          Raw Material Consumption 	   2-5
          Sulfur Product Purity	2-6
          Data Recovery	2-6
    3.  Data Validation	3-1
          Introduction 	   3-1
          Data Accuracy	3-1
          Validation of Flue Gas Flow Rates	3-5
          Test Precision	3-11
    4.  References	4-1
Appendices
    A.  Test Results	A- 1
    B.  Test Methods	B- 1
    C.  Flue Gas Flow Comparisons	C- 1
                                    iv

-------
                                 FIGURES
Number                                                                 Page
 1-1      Block Flow Diagram of Major Process Steps.  Location
            of Sampling Positions for Acceptance Testing	1-3
 2-1      Daily Minimum and Maximum SCL Removal Efficiencies-
            Two Hour Averages 	  2-3
                                 TABLES
Number                                                                 Page
 2-1      Interruptions During Design Load (12-Day) Test	2-2
 2-2      Sulfur Product Purity, Wt. #	  2-6
 2-3      Instrument Downtime 	  2-8
 2-4      Summary of Performance Results	2-9
 3-1      Continuous Analyzer Calibration 	  3-2
 3-2      Instrument Calibrations 	  3-3
 3-3      S02 Span Gases Concentration by EPA Method 6	3-4
 3-4      Comparison of Methods for Measuring S02 Concentrations. .  .  3-6
 3-5      Calculated Flue Gas Flow Rates	3-7
 3-6      Revised Estimates of Particulate Matter Emission Rates. .  .  3-10
 3-7      Variability of Particulate Matter Emission Rates	3-13
 3-8      Variability in Operating Costs	3-14

-------
                              EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

     Process performance guarantees were met or exceeded as confirmed by
Acceptance Testing which began on 29 August 1977 and ended on 14 September
1977.  The Acceptance Test consisted of two test periods.  The Design Load
test period was to be a 12-day period during which the FGD plant was to be
operated at the design condition of a boiler flue gas output rate equivalent
to 80% of the maximum boiler load of 115 megawatts gross.  The FGD plant was
actually operated for 265 hours at this load condition.  The High Load test
period was to be an 83-hour period during which the FGD plant treated flue
gas volumes equivalent to 95% of maximum boiler load.  Actual operating time
was 36 hours at this load condition.
     Specific performance criteria were met or exceeded as follows:
     (a)  SCk removal of 90% or better was achieved for 261
          hours of the 265 hours of operation at Design Load
          conditions and was achieved for 84 hours of the 86
          hours of operation at High Load conditions.
     (b)  Particulate emissions did not exceed 0.1 Ib./lO
          Btu of boiler heat input at either Design Load
          or High Load conditions.
     (c)  The consumption of steam, natural gas and electrical
          power averaged 76% of the performance guarantee
          requirements at Design Load conditions.
     (d)  Soda ash consumption averaged less than 6.6 tons
          of Na9CO, per day which was the limit set by the
               £  *3
          performance guarantees not to be exceeded during
          the Design Load period.
     (e)  Sulfur product purity was greater than 99.5%
          at both Design Load and High Load conditions.  As

-------
          a check to ensure that the sulfur product was
          acceptable for burning in a contact acid plant,
          impurities in the sulfur were compared with
          bright sulfur purchase specifications.  All
          impurities were less than specified.

     During the Design Load period, a S02 removal efficiency of 90% or better,
based on two hour averages, was achieved for all but four hours of the 265
hour operating period.   S02 removal was 88% and 89% two hour averages,
two two-hour periods.   Four hours were added to the 12-day test period for
these failures.  During the High Load period, there was one two hour period
during which SOg removal  was 89%.  Three hours were added to the 83-hour test
period for this failure.
                                      vli

-------
                                   SECTION 1
                                 INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
     The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is actively engaged in a number
of programs to demonstrate sulfur-oxide emission control processes applicable
to stationary sources.  These demonstration programs comprise operation of an
emission control unit of such size and for such duration as to permit valid
technical and economic scaling of operating factors to define the commercial
practicality of the process for potential industrial users.  Among the candi-
date processes being evaluated, which have the potential to become a major SO
                                                                             A
emission control method, is the Wellman-Lord/Allied Chemical (WL/Allied) pro-
cess developed by Davy Powergas and Allied Chemical.  The Wellman-Lord (WL)
S02 Removal Process removes the S02 from the flue gas and recovers the sulfur
values as S02 which in turn can be used to produce, by other processes:
sulfur, sulfuric acid, or liquid S02-  The Allied Chemical  (Allied) Sulfur
Reduction Process reduces the S02 to produce molten sulfur.  The two processes
have been combined to demonstrate flue gas desulfurization  (FGD) technology
by which the scrubbing medium is regenerated and reused and by which the
product obtained is sulfur.  For the remainder of this report, we will refer
to this configuration as the WL/Allied process, although the processes are
not contingent upon each other and each can be used in other regenerable FGD
configurations.  The demonstration unit has been constructed by Davy Powergas
and is being operated by Allied Chemical under contract to  the Northern Indiana
Public Service Company (NIPSC).  The EPA is sharing in the  cost of construction
of the unit and is conducting a comprehensive test program.  The WL/Allied
process as developed by the two design organizations is based upon the recovery
of sulfur dioxide (S02) in concentrated form and its subsequent reduction to
elemental sulfur.  The product is to be sold to partially offset the process
costs.  This is the first coal-fired Wellman-Lord application, as well as the
first joint Wellman-Lord/All led Chemical installation.
                                     1-1

-------
     The WL/Allied FGD facility has been installed at NIPSCO's Dean H. Mitchell
Station in Gary, Indiana.  The FGD plant is designed to treat all of the flue
gas discharged from the Unit No. 11 coal-fired boiler of the Mitchell Station.
Unit No. 11 is hereafter referred to as Mitchell No. 11.  Initial startup of
the FGD plant began on July 19, 1976.   After several delays as a result of FGD
plant and boiler operational problems  and boiler shutdowns for repairs, the
FGD plant was ready for acceptance testing on August 29, 1977.  The reasons
for the delays have been explained in  some detail elsewhere^ '^ '.
     The Acceptance Test is to verify  that the process performance guarantees
have been met.  The performance guarantees are a contractual requirement
placed on Davy by NIPSCO and EPA.   Over a period totaling more than 15 days,
the FGD plant must meet the minimum SCL removal  requirements of the perform-
ance guarantees at two specified levels of boiler load, and must not exceed
the specified amounts of raw materials and utilities consumption.
     TRW,  under contract to EPA, is providing the test services required for
evaluating the performance of the FGD  plant, including its ability to meet
the performance guarantees during acceptance testing.   Preceding the Accep-
                       (3)
tance Test, a Test Planv ' was prepared based on the performance requirements
specified  in EPA's contract with NIPSCO (EPA Contract No. 68-02-0621).
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
     The process employs sodium sulfite scrubbing of the flue gas to remove
S02 with thermal regeneration of the scrubbing solution to recover the S02
and subsequent reduction of the S02 to produce marketable sulfur in molten
form.  The block diagram (Figure 1-1)  shows the major process steps.
     Mitchell No. 11 is a 115 MW pulverized coal fired boiler, balanced draft,
with cold end electrostatic precipitator particle controls.  The FGD plant
accepts the total flue gas from the discharge of the boiler's induced draft
(ID) fans.  A booster fan is used to force the flue gas through the pre-
scrubber and the absorber.  The prescrubber is expected to remove additional
particulate matter such that the New Source Performance Standard of 0.1 Ib
particulate matter emitted from the absorber 710  Btu heat input is met if
particulate matter out of the ESP does not exceed 0.2 Ib/ACF or that 80%
removal is achieved if inlet grain loading exceeds 0.2 Ib/ACF.
     Cooled, humidified flue gas leaves the prescrubber and enters the bottom
of a multistage absorber and is contacted with sulfite solution fed to the top
                                      1-2

-------
                FIGURE 1-1.   BLOCK FLOW DIAGRAM  OF MAJOR PROCESS STEPS.   LOCATION OF
                                  SAMPLING POSITIONS FOR ACCEPTANCE TESTING
COAL
AIR
WATER
                    ELECTRICAL
                      ENERGY
                         STEAM
MITCHELL NO. 11
   BOILER
                      FLUE
                      GAS
                                  INLET SO,
                      NATURAL GAS
                       SODA ASH
                                                                              TREATED FLUE GAS
                                                     INCINERATED TAIL GAS
                                       ( GRAIN LOADING.
                                            FLOW)
                                          FGO PROCESS BOUNDARY
                                                                                   (CUTLET soz. GRAIN LOADING. FLOW)
                                                                                        PURGE
                                                                                        SOLIDS
                                                                                       BY-PRODUCT
                                                                                          SULFUR
                                                                                         BY-PRODUCT
                                                                                                           LEGEND

                                                                                                       SAMPLING POSITION
                                                                                                             FOR
                                                                                                      ACCEPTANCE TESTING

-------
stage of the absorber tower.  S0« is absorbed by the sulfite solution and the
treated flue gas is discharged from the top of the absorber tower through a
stack to the atmosphere.  The spent sulfite solution is removed from the
bottom stage of the tower and sent to a surge tank for storage prior to re-
generation in the S02 recovery step.  The absorber is designed to remove 90%
of the incoming SO,, continuously from the volume of flue gas expected (320,000
acfm) at 80% of full load (92 MWG).  Thus, the performance guarantees
require an extended test period (12 days) at this flue gas rate to show con-
tinuous S02 removal capability.  Because S02 removal performance is a function
of the S02 levels at the inlet to the absorber, the performance guarantees
require the level of sulfur in the coal to be within specific limits.
     During the S02 recovery step, the spent sulfite solution is regenerated
in a steam-heated evaporator and returned to the absorber feed tank.  S02 is
recovered from the evaporator overhead.  The S02 recovery area was not design-
ed for recovery of all  of the SO* removed from the flue gas at boiler loads in
excess of 80% because the boiler is normally not operated for extended periods
in excess of 80% load.   However, surge capacity was provided in the form of
surge tank and absorber feed tank capacity to allow for a limited period of
operation at full load.   The performance guarantees require that S02 and
particle removal requirements be met during an 83 hour period when accepting
flue gas equivalent to a 110 MWG load.
     A purge stream from the S02 recovery area is processed in the purge
treatment area to produce a dry sodium sulfate by-product.  The sodium values
lost in the purge stream must be made up by adding Na/>C03 to the regenerated
sodium sulfite solution.  The performance guarantees limit the amount of
Na/jCOg make-up during the 12 day test period.
     The S02 which was recovered in the S02 recovery step is sent to the S02
reduction area.  The reduction step is a proprietary process developed by
Allied Chemical which utilizes natural gas for the reduction of S02 to H2S
and finally elemental sulfur in molten form.  A small stream of tail gas is
returned after incineration to the inlet of the booster fan.  The performance
requirement is to produce a sulfur product of high purity and of a quality
which can be used to make sulfuric acid, the major market for sulfur.
                                      1-4

-------
     Limits on the consumption of utilities and natural gas are also a per-
formance requirement.  Natural gas is used as a reductant of S02 and for in-
cineration of the tail gas.  The major use of steam is in the SO- recovery
area for evaporation but steam is also used in the purge treatment area and
for steam turbine drives.  Electrical energy is consumed to drive pumps and
auxiliaries, for line tracing, for instrumentation and for lighting.
     The Sections of EPA Contract Mo. 68-02-0621 which set forth the perfor-
mance requirements are given in the next section of this report.
                                       1-5

-------
PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS

     The EPA/NIPSCO Contract No. 68-02-0621 specifies that an acceptance test

be performed in accordance with the specified performance guarantees.  Arti-

cle XIX, Paragraphs A.I and A.2, of the Contract is quoted as follows:

     "ARTICLE XIX - PROCESS PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE

     A.  Performance Guarantee

     1.  The Contractor (NIPSCO) guarantees that during the
         acceptance testing the system will perform on Unit Mo.
         11 as follows:

         (a)  The system when operated with 3.15 to 3.5%
              sulfur in the coal shall achieve 90% sulfur
              removal  from the flue gas or no more than
              200 ppm of S02 in the outlet gas stream from
              the absorber, (which shall  be the only source
              of S02 emissions from the system to the atmo-
              sphere during normal operations) whichever is
              the lesser.   For fuels containing less than
              3.15% sulfur the absorber outlet stream shall
              contain no more than 200 ppm S02-  For fuels
              containing more than 3.5% sulfur the absorber
              outlet stream will achieve no less than 90%
              sulfur removal from the flue gas.

         (b)  The system shall be capable of producing by-
              product sulfur having a sulfur assay of 99.5%
              minimum and shall be suitable for use in a
              sulfur burning contact acid plant.

         (c)  Based on the following costs, the net oper-
              ating cost per hour shall not exceed $56.OO/
              hour.

                 Electric Power        $0.007 per KWH
                 Steam                 $0.50 per 1,000 Ib. at
                                         550 psig & 750°F
                 Natural Gas           $0.55 per 1,000,000
                                         Btu

         (d)  The system's particulate emission rate shall
              not exceed the Federal flew Source Performance
              Standard for Fossil-Fuel Fired Steam Generators
              that is current at the completion of Phase I.

         (e)  The average chemical make-up over a twelve (12)
              day operating period at an average of 92 MW
              shall be no greater than 6.6 tons per day of
                                      1-6

-------
                       The value of antioxidant used during
              the 12-day period shall not exceed an average
              of $400 per day.

     2.  The Guarantees in paragraphs (a) - (e) hereof, shall  be
         demonstrated in accordance with paragraph D of Phase  II
         in the Scope of Work."

Paragraph D of Phase II in the Scope of Work cites the provisions by which
the unit will be operated during an acceptance test.  This paragraph states
that:

     "NIPSCO shall hold Davy Powergas responsible for this Phase
     of the project; accordingly, Davy Powergas shall be required
     to maintain technical staff available until such time as  the
     performance guarantees have been fulfilled in an acceptance
     test as follows:

     The test period shall consist of 12 days operation at an
     average load of 92 MW followed by 83 hours operation at an
     average load of 110 MW.  During the test period the average
     sulfur content of the coal will be 3.16% S.  Interruptions
     totalling less than 24 hours will not be considered as a
     break in continuous operation except that the test period
     will be extended by this period of interruption.  Further-
     more, if, for reasons beyond Contractor's control, there
     is either a reason to separate the 92 MW and 110 MW test
     runs, having completed no less than 10 days of the 92 MW
     test, or else the 110 MW test portion of the test has not
     been completed, then the 110 MW test can be restarted pre-
     ceded by 3 days at 92 MW operation.

     Should, for reasons beyond Contractor's control, it becomes
     necessary to adjust the basis for the guarantee run, then
     Davy Powergas will prepare new guarantee procedures consis-
     tent with the guarantees in this contract.  In no event will
     the emission guarantees be changed."

TEST CRITERIA

     Except for the particle emission rate, the performance guarantees do

not specify the criteria or methodology for determining performance or the

penalties to be assessed in case of performance failure.  Thus, specific

criteria were established and included in the Acceptance Test Plan.  The

criteria of the Test Plan were then used as a guide for final  criteria selec-

tion acceptable to the contractual parties (EPA, NIPSCO, Davy).  These final

criteria are detailed as follows.

     Specific changes were made in these performance guarantees and agreed

to by the contractual parties.  However, they do not reflect a contract

                                      1-7

-------
change.  The specific changes are described in the following paragraphs.

Sulfur Removal
     Sulfur removal was designated to mean S02 removal.  The FGD plant was to
remove 90% of the inlet S02 at the inlet flow conditions at 92 MWG and 110
MWG (flue gas volume equivalents) with sulfur in the coal between 3.0% and
3.5%.  If the sulfur in the coal exceeded 3.5% during any two hour period
that period was treated as an inlet stream interruption and the results dis-
carded without adding the interruption period to the end of the test.  The
official test results were by the TRW SOg analyzer or manual sampling except
in the case of an instrument failure, at which time the FGD plant analyzer
results were to be used provided that the SOg removal results of both instru-
ments complement each other for the time period preceding the failure.  The
SOg removal guarantees were based on twelve two-hour averages per day.  Any
sequential two hour period failure to meet SOg removal performance guarantees
was added to the end of the Acceptance Test.  This applied to both the 92 MWG
(Design) and 110 MWG (High Load) test periods.
     Due to the unpredictability of flue gas dilution levels, it was decided
to limit sulfur removal criteria to that of 90% removal efficiency alone with-
out any requirement for meeting a concentration level of 200 ppm.
Sulfur in Coal
     A sample was collected each hour of each test period.  A composite was
created for each 24-hour period and analyzed to determine if the percent
sulfur was within the range of 3.0-3.5% set forth in the performance require-
ments.  However, each one hour increment was retained for possible analysis
if requested by any of the contractual parties.
Operating Levels
     The FGD plant was designed to remove better than 90% of the SQy contin-
uously when the boiler is burning coal of 3.15% sulfur content and is devel-
oping flue gas volumes of 320,000 acfm (at 300°F) at a gross generating out-
put of 92 MW.  Pre-acceptance testing indicated that the flue gas volume was
much higher than 320,000 acfm at 92 MW gross.  Therefore, instead of testing
at 92 MWG and 110 MWG, flue gas volume equivalents were set as the operating
levels.  These were 320,000 acfm for the design (92 MWG) test period and
                                      1-8

-------
380,000-390,000 acfm for the High Load (110 MWG) test period, without correc-
tions for temperature or air dilution.
Interruptions
     Interruptions were defined as the loss of any feed stream to the FGD
plant from the moment a stream is lost to the time that the plant is back to
the original operating conditions.  Interruptions of less than 24 hours were
to be added to the end of the respective test periods.  However, since actual
interruptions during the Design Test Phase totaled less than 24-hours, the
contractual parties agreed to waive the extensions.  There were no inter-
ruptions of any kind during the High Load Test Phase.  Available performance
data during interruptions were not included in the performance results.
By-Product Sulfur
     Sulfur purity requirements were determined on composites created from
samples of each sulfur shipment (about one a day).  Sulfur purity was deter-
mined for both the Design test period and the High Load test period.  The
criteria for suitability for use in a sulfur burning contact acid plant were
Allied Chemical's sulfur purchase specifications.  Penalties for failure to
meet the performance requirements were to be by agreement among the con-
tractual parties.
Operating Costs
     Since cost performance guarantees had to be set far in advance of the
Acceptance Test period, it was intended that these performance requirements
reflect utility and natural gas consumptions rather than the current costs
for these items.  Consumption performance, reported in dollars per hour based
on the specified unit costs, was determined as the total consumptions divided
by the total uninterrupted hours operated during the Design (12-day) test
period.  Consumptions during periods of interruption were excluded.  Daily
measurements of natural gas heating value of gas being fed to NIPSCO's gas
distribution system were obtained from NIPSCO.  Penalties for any overrun were
to be by agreement among the contractual parties.
                                       1-9

-------
Particle Emissions
     EPA Method 5 was the procedure used with only the catch up to and includ-
ing the filter catch considered to be particulate matter.  One test a day,
averaging in excess of three hours per test, was used to determine particulate
control performance.  Alternative performance criteria were used.  If the in-
let particle concentration was greater than 0.2 grain/ACF, the FGD plant
particle controls must remove an average of 80% or more of the particulate
matter.  If the inlet concentration was 0.2 grain/ACF or less, the particle
emissions must meet the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) of 0.1 lb/10
Btu heat input.  One day was to be added to the test for each three hour test
failed.
Chemical Make-Up
     Following adoption of the initial performance guarantees, Davy determined
that oxidation rates could be controlled without feeding an antioxidant.  Thus,
the only chemical make-up during the Acceptance Test was soda ash.  Average
soda ash consumption for the Design (12-day) test period was determined from
measurements provided by Allied.  Total consumption was determined from in-
ventories at the start and end of the 12-day period plus shipments.  Soda ash
as NagCOg was determined from an analysis certificate supplied by Allied.  Davy
had the option to either include or exclude the Soda ash consumption during
periods of interruption but had to explain their choice in writing.  There was
to be no penalty for violations.

METHODS SUMMARY
     The test methods are described in detail in Appendix B.  However, in order
to completely understand the test results and their significance, brief de-
scriptions of the more significant methodologies are needed.
     To the extent possible, continuous high frequency test data were used.
The TRW continuous monitoring system was utilized to accomplish this.  The
continuous monitoring system samples each flue gas composition parameter (S02,
C0£, $2* ^2°) every six minutes (alternating every three minutes between
inlet and outlet of the absorber).  All other high frequency data sampling was
done every three minutes.  The data were collected and stored by the data ac-
quisition system (DAS) and hourly averages were computed and printed out.
Strip chart backup was provided in case of DAS failure.  Annubars are
                                     1-10

-------
installed 1n the absorber stack to measure the flue gas flow every three
minutes.  However, attempts to calibrate the Annubars were unsuccessful, and
other means of estimating flue gas flows had to be found.  The flue gas flow
measurement problem and its solution are treated in detail in Section 3.0.
     The test parameters  that were not amenable to continuous monitoring
are briefly described as follows:
     (a)  Particulate matter concentration in the flue gas
          was from tests performed for a limited period no
          more than once a day.  Tests were run simultaneous-
          ly at the inlet and outlet of the absorber using
          EPA Method 5 (impinger train catch discarded).
          Outlet sampling had to be done downstream of tail
          gas and tank vent returns and of the booster fan.
          It was assumed that any increase or decrease in
          grain loading contributed by the FGD plant tail
          gas stream and tank vents were negligible.
     (b)  Totalizer readings were taken only at the begin-
          ning of each day, the beginning and end of each
          grain loading test, the beginning and end of each
          interruption, and the beginning and end of the
          Design and High Load test periods.  These were
          for:
          -  Coal feed rate
          -  Natural gas and  kWh consumptions
          -  Generator total gross energy output in
             megawatts (Power output was also measured
             every three minutes).
          Booster fan speed and outlet pressure, for
          validating flue gas flow, was also read at
          these frequencies.
                                     1-11

-------
      (c)   Average  coal  compositions and heating values
           were  restricted  to  each 24-hour period and each
           period of particle  sampling.  However, coal
           samples  were  available for determining averages
           of each  two hour period.
      (d)   Soda  ash feed rates were determined from inven-
           tory  and shipments  data supplied by Allied.
      (e)   The heating value of natural gas, determined
           daily, was obtained from HIPSCO.
     To correct for dilution  in the determination of the percentage SO,, re-
moval, relative mass rates of S02 at the inlet and outlet of the absorber
were calculated.   The calculations were based on a C02 balance; that is, it
was assumed that any differences in C02 mass rates inlet and outlet the
absorber were negligible.  A  dilution factor, f, was calculated:
                                f = a (100-c
                                    F (100-d
where a = C02 inlet, vol. % of dry flue gas
      b = C02 outlet, vol. %  of dry flue gas
      c = H20 inlet, vol. % of wet flue gas
      d = H20 outlet, vol. %  of wet flue gas
The dilution factor was then  used to correct outlet SOg to the same relative
mass rate basis as the  inlet  S02 as follows:
          % S02 Removal = (SOp in, ppmv) - (SOo out, ppmv) (f)
                                      S02 in, ppmv
     Coal was sampled once every hour throughout the Acceptance Test except
during particle sampling periods when higher frequency sampling was em-
ployed.  Sample increments, about one pound each, were kept separate by
placing each increment in a plastic bag which was sealed to prevent moisture
loss.  Composites were created by mixing equal portions of each sample Incre-
ment, using a riffler.
                                    1-12

-------
     Test days began and ended at 0800 hours and were cross  referenced with
calendar dates for the day ending at 0800.   Thus, Test Day No.  1  beginning
at 0800 on August 29th was assigned a day ending date of August 30th.
                                     1-13

-------
                                  SECTION 2
                                TEST RESULTS

     Test results are divided into two test periods - a 12 day test with the
boiler flue gas flow rate held constant at about 320,000 acfm (8,960 cubic
meters per minute) and an 83 hour test with the boiler flue gas output main-
tained at about 388,000 acfm (10,864 cubic meters per minute); both flow
rates were at about 300°F and one atmosphere pressure.
     Performance requirements for S02 removal efficiency; particle emission
rate; natural gas, electrical, and steam consumptions; soda ash consumption;
and sulfur product purity were all met in both phases of the Acceptance Test.
The performance results are summarized at the end of this section (Table 2-3).
Detailed test results are appended.
TEST LENGTHS AND INTERRUPTIONS
     The 12-day test commenced at 0800 on 29 August 1977 and ended at 1200
on 10 September 1977.  Operating time totaled 265 hours out of an elapsed time
of 292 hours.  Performance guarantees for S02 removal were not met during two
2-hour periods.  Thus, the test was extended four hours.  A total of 27 hours
qualified as interruptions (Table 2-1).  Of these hours, 10 hours were boiler
interruptions and 17 hours were FGD plant interruptions.  In addition, the
boiler feed water pump went down on Day 11 from 1830 to 0800 causing a load
reduction to about 60 megawatts.  This was not considered to be an interrup-
tion for determining S0« removal performance.  However, data collected during
this period was not used for determining consumption of utilities.
                                      2-1

-------
          TABLE 2-1.  INTERRUPTIONS DURING DESIGN LOAD (12-DAY) TEST

DAY
3
4
4
5
6
7
7
10
TIME OF
INTERRUPTION
0120-0415
1450-1555
1645-2240
0240-0545
1005-1300
0900-1630
0330-0545
0845-1100
HOURS
CHARGED
3
1
6
3
3
7
2
2
CHARGED
TO
Boiler
FGD
FGD
FGD
FGD
Boiler
FGD
FGD
NATURE OF INTERRUPTION
Booster fan tripped
Booster fan tripped;
bypass damper opened
Booster fan tripped
Reduction area down,
Claus bed plugging
Reduction area down to
burn sulfur off Claus
bed
Boiler interruption;
boiler feed water
pump repairs
Reduction area down to
rake Claus bed
Reduction area down,
incinerator trip
solenoid unable to be
reset after releasing

     The 83-hour test commenced at 0800 on 11 September 1977 and ended at
2200 on 14 September 1977.  Operating time totaled 86 hours out of an elapsed
time of 86 hours.  Performance guarantees for SOg removal were not met during
one 2-hour period.  The test was extended two hours plus one additional hour
to assure sequential two hour averages.  No interruptions were experienced.
S02 REMOVAL PERFORMANCE
     Test failures occurred on only two days - one day of the Design Load
test and one day of the High Load test (Figure 2-1).  During the fifth day
of the Design Load test, the absorber failed to meet the 90% S02 removal

                                      2-2

-------
        94
        92
        90
l\>   CM
        86
                                            DESIGN LOAD
HIGH LOAD
                  1      2      3     4     5     6     7     8     9     10    11     12
                                                              DAY
                      FIGURE 2-1.  DAILY MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM S02 REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES  - TWO  HOUR AVERAGES

-------
performance requirement during two 2-hour periods - from 0800 to 1000 hours
and 1000 to 1200 hours.  In addition, the absorber did not satisfy the
90% removal guarantee for one 2-hour period during the High Load test.  This
occurred from 0200 to 0400 hours on the second day of the High Load test.
Each test series was extended for the hours failed and performance guarantees
were met during the test extensions.  When performance guarantees were met,
SOo removal varied within the 90 to 93% band.  The percentage of two hour
averages at each incremental level of S02 removal was as follows:
                                          2-HOUR AVERAGES, 56-
            S02 REMOVAL. %          DESIGN LOAD        HIGH LOAD
                  88                    0.7               0.0
                  89                    0.7               2.3
                  90                   33.4              44.2
                  91                   56.3              39.6
                  92                    8.2              11.6
                  93                    0.7               2.3
PARTICLE EMISSION PERFORMANCE
     Inlet particulate matter did not exceed 0.2 gr/acf for either test phase.
Therefore, absorber emissions were required not to exceed the NSPS of 0.1 lb/
10  Btu of boiler heat input.  A total of 8 samples during the 12-day test
and 3 samples during the High Load test were taken for grain loading
both at the inlet and outlet of the absorber.  For the 12-day test, valid
samples were obtained on test days 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 11 while, for
the High Load test, useful data were obtained on days 1, 2, and 4.  At no time
during either test period was the inlet grain loading greater than 0.2 gr/acf
or the outlet particle emissions rate greater than 0.1 lbs/10  Btu input.
UTILITY AND NATURAL GAS CONSUMPTION
     Utility and natural gas consumptions averaged only 76% of the performance
guarantee for the 12-day test period.  Furthermore, the maximum single day
average during the 12-day period was only 79% of the performance requirement..
     Based on consumption costs of $0.007 per kWh for electricity, $0.50 per
1000 Ib of steam (550 psig and 750°F), and $0.55 per 1,000,000 Btu for natu-
ral gas, the average cost for utilities and natural gas during the 12-day

                                      2-4

-------
test period was $42.74/hour of operation.  The average heating value of the
natural gas was 1029 Btu/scf.
     Utility and natural gas consumptions for the 12-day test were as follows:
          Electric Consumption:     186,640 kWh for 246.3 hours
          Natural Gas Consumption:  2,793,720 ft  for 249.3 hours
          Steam Consumption:        15,442,518 Ibs for 248.3 hours
It should be noted that the number of hours for each parameter is less than
the 261 hours which make up the 12-day test.  This is due to exclusion of
certain hourly averages on account of invalid data as well as exclusion of
data received during an interruption (see interruption schedule earlier in
this section) or during the period of low power plant output (from 1830 to
0800 hours during test day 11).
ANALYSIS OF DEMONSTRATION PLANT STEAM CONSUMPTION
     Steam usage, steam temperature and pressure, and the range for each of
these parameters is given for the Design test period:
STEAM
CONSUMPTION
(Ibs/hr)
62,139
+ 6,134
,720 - 65,510
STEAM
TEMPERATURE
(°F)
724
+ 7
711 - 730
STEAM
PRESSURE
(psig)
551
^23
518 - 573
   AVERAGE VALUE
   95% CONFIDENCE LIMITS
   RANGE OF VALUES
RAW MATERIAL CONSUMPTION
     Soda ash consumption was determined by Allied Chemical personnel by
measuring the decrease in volume of stored soda ash, taking into account
shipments received over the duration of the 12-day test.  Daily soda ash con-
sumption figures were not computed because the performance guarantee was
based on a maximum quantity consumed over the 12-day test period.
     Over the 12-day test, an average of 6.2 tons of Na2C03 per day was con-
sumed,  the performance guarantee required that no more than 6.6 tons per
day be consumed.  The soda ash assay was 99.79% as Na2C03-
                                      2-5

-------
SULFUR PRODUCT PURITY
     Sulfur analyses were performed on composites of samples of product sulfur
shipped from the sulfur recovery plant for both the Design Load test and the
High Load test.  The composite samples were made up by thoroughly mixing equal
portions of representative samples taken from every shipment of product sulfur.
Product purity exceeded the guarantee of 99.5% sulfur assay.  For analyses for
the impurities, the laboratory first determined that the product did not meet
the impurities specifications for carbon and As203.  One of these samples was
sent to a second independent laboratory which found that these components were
well below the impurities specifications.  Based on the results from the second
laboratory, it was concluded that the sulfur was suitable for burning in a
contact sulfuric acid plant.  Complete analytical results are included in
Appendix A.
DATA RECOVERY
     Various problems were encountered with the continuous sampling instru-
mentation which   required  the acquisition of data from other sources
(either other instrumentation or manual sampling).  The use of supplemental
data sources during short periods of instrument downtime made it possible to
report S02 removal for a total of 336 hours out of 351 total operating hours
(96%).  Data recovery from the TRW operated analyzers for obtaining the
primary test data was as follows:
                                      2-6

-------
                  DATA CHANNEL               PERCENT  DATA RECOVERY
            S02 Inlet/Outlet                          95
            H20 Vapor Inlet/Outlet                    94
            C02 Inlet/Outlet                          95
            02 Inlet/Outlet                           89
            Static Pressure FGD Inlet                100
            Gas Temperature FGD Inlet                100
            Demo Steam Temperature                   100
            Demo Steam Pressure                      100
            Demo Steam Flow                          100
            Power to Demo Plant                      100
     Specific outages of Instruments as well as the source of supplementary
data Is given (Table 2-2).  In addition to the downtime experienced by these
instruments, the DAS was down less than 10% of the total  operating time
during which data was extracted from strip chart recorders.
                                      2-7

-------
TABLE 2-2.  INSTRUMENT DOWNTIME

DAY
1
1

1
3
3
5
6
6
6
10
10
11

11

11

2 (High Load)

TIME
0800-1000
1900-2000

2000-2100
0000-0120
0000-0120
0600-0700
2100-0800
2100-0800
2100-0400
1100-1400
1100-1400
0900-1000

1500-1900

1500-1700

0100-0200

INSTRUMENT
so2
H20, C02, 02

so2
so2
H20, C02, 02
H20
so2
H20, C02
°2
so2
H20, C02, 02
°2

H20, C02

°2

°2

SUPPLEMENTAL SOURCE
Allied Analyzer
Average of 1800-1900
and 2000-2100
Average of 2100-2200
None
None
Average of 0700-0800
Allied Analyzer
Manual Sample
Manual Sample
Allied Analyzer
Manual Sample
Average of 0800-0900
and 1000-1100
Average of 1400-1500
and 1900-2000
Average of 1400-1500
and 2000
Average of 0000-0100
and 0200-0300
               2-8

-------
                               TABLE 2-3.   SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE RESULTS
DAY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

1 HL
2 HL
3 HL
4 HL
HOURS
UNIT
PASSED
ACCEPTANCE
TEST
24
24
21
17
21
17
IS
24
24
22
24
24
4

24
22
24
14
so2
REMOVAL
REMOVAL)
90.6
90.3
90.9
90.6
90.3
90.1
90.5
90. B
90.5
90.9
91.2
90.8
90.9

91.3
90.2
90.3
90.3
PART1CULATE
EMISSION RATE
(POUNDS/
MILLION BTU)
.01
.03
INVALID SAMPLE
NO TEST
.08
.07
NO TEST
.03
.04
.05
.04
NO TEST
NO TEST

.04
.05
NO TEST
.03
COST OF
UTILITIES
(S/HOUR)
43.05
38.91
41.59
39.44
43.78
44.50
42.46
44.22
43.96
43.91
43.07
43.39
42.09

42.20
44.03
44.45
42.06
SODA ASH
CONSUMPTION
(TONS/DAY)






6.2







DATA NOT
COLLECTED
DURING
TEST
SULFUR
PRODUCT
PURITY
(X PURE)





COMPOSITE
ANALYSIS
99 76








COMPOSITE
99.91

COAL
FEED
RATE
(POUNDS/
HOUR)
83.000
82.400
81 .500
82.200
84.400
86,300
83.700
91.200
83.900
81 .500
74.700
79.800
78,400

94,000
103,600
100,300
99,700
BOILER
HEAT
INPUT
(MILLION
BTU/HOUR)
880
866
871
863
886
908
683
970
893
873
780
853
847

998
1.072
1,036
1.066
BOILER
OUTPUT
(MEGAWATTS)
71.5
70.8
71.1
70.1
71.2
71.4
71.4
73.8
72.8
72.8
65.6
71.7
72.2

84.8
90.2
89.5
88.7
r\»

-------
                                  SECTION 3
                               DATA VALIDATION
INTRODUCTION
     In this section, calibration procedures are described and the accuracy
and precision of the test results are quantified to the extent possible.
The limitations affecting the quality of the data are discussed.  In partic-
ular, validation of the flue gas flow determinations was a major problem.
The action taken to assure that the flue gas flows were not less than the
performance requirements are described in detail.
DATA ACCURACY
     Calibration of instruments using a known standard was the predominant
method employed for validating data accuracy.  Comparison of data obtained
by different methods and of the test data with a known standard was also
employed.
Calibration Procedures
     In order to ensure valid data measurements, the continuous analyzers
were calibrated once each day with known calibration gases for both zeroing
and spanning the instruments.  The following table illustrates the gas compo-
sitions for both the zero gas and span gas for the respective analyzer
(Table 3-1).
                                      3-1

-------
                 TABLE 3-1.  CONTINUOUS ANALYZER CALIBRATION
       ANALYZER
 RANGE OF
 ANALYZER
ZERO GAS
  SPAN GAS
   SO,  (LOW RANGE)
0-500 PPMV
                260 PPMV SO,
                IN No
   SO,  (HIGH RANGE)
0-5000 PPMV
                2690 PPMV SO,
                IN No
   CO,
   H20
0-20 VOLUME
PERCENT

0-25 VOLUME
PERCENT
   N,
                15% VOLUME
                C02 IN N2
100% C2H6
GIVES INSTRU-
MENT SPAN OF
15.625%
                           0-25 VOLUME
                           PERCENT
                      N,
                AMBIENT AIR
                (21% 02 BY
                VOLUME)
The S02 calibration gases are traceable to NBS standards.
     Certain other Information was needed for determining performance.  The
source of these data and the calibration records are summarized (Table 3-2).
The instruments installed for the Acceptance and Demonstration Tests were the
major sources of data.  Other sources were coal scales, steam flow meters,
steam pressure, natural gas flow meters, and kilowatt-hour meter.  Steam flow,
steam pressure and electrical energy consumption were transmitted to the DAS.
Therefore, continuous real time data were available for analysis from all
instruments except the coal scales and the natural gas flow meters.  Totalized
readings of coal and natural gas feed rates were taken at 0800 each day and
at the beginning and end of manual sampling of the flue gas and at the
beginning and end of each interruption.
                                      3-2

-------
                     TABLE 3-2.   INSTRUMENT CALIBRATIONS
               ITEM
    CALIBRATED
CALIBRATED BY
   COAL SCALES
   FGD INLET TEMPERATURE
   FGD INLET STATIC PRESSURE
   FGD OUTLET TEMPERATURE
   FGD OUTLET STATIC PRESSURE
   STEAM FLOW METER
   STEAM FLOW TRANSMITTER
   STEAM PRESSURE
   STEAM TEMPERATURE TRANSMITTER
   STEAM PRESSURE TRANSMITTER
   NATURAL GAS FLOW METERS (2)
   KILOWATT-HOUR METER
ONCE OR TWICE/YEAR

  PRECEDING TEST
  PRECEDING TEST

  PRECEDING TEST

  PRECEDING TEST

    APRIL  1976

  PRECEDING TEST

    APRIL  1976
  PRECEDING TEST

  PRECEDING TEST

    APRIL  1976

  NOVEMBER  1976
   NIPSCO

    TRW

    TRW
    TRW

    TRW


    TRW


    TRW

    TRW


   NIPSCO
     Samples of coal and participate matter were collected manually and
laboratory analyses were performed.  One-hour sample increments of coal were
collected continuously, whereas particulate matter was collected once a day,
weather conditions permitting, for a 4-5 hour period.  During the same 4-5
hour period, S02 concentrations were determined by manual methods to help in
verifying the accuracy of the continuous analyzer.  A modified version of
EPA Method 6^ was used for the S02 measurements.  Calibrations for manual
particulate matter and S02 measurements are necessary for verifying the
accuracy of duct flow and sample flow measurements.  Dry gas meters for
sample flow were calibrated in August  1977 and pitot tubes for duct flow
were last calibrated 1n September  1976.
Agreement Between Methods
     Comparison of results by different methods was limited to the determina-
tion of S02 concentrations and of flue gas flow.  For S02, comparison of the
                                      3-3

-------
continuous analyzer output was made with EPA Method 6 results.  These com-
parisons were made both on the standard calibration gas prior to the Accept-
ance Test and on samples of flue gas collected during the Acceptance Test.
Both of these investigations were done to help validate the accuracy of the
SOg measurements and results are described in following subsections.  Flue
gas flow comparisons will be discussed separately.
Accuracy Verification of the Calibration Standard—
     The high range and low range standard gases, certifiable as traceable
to NBS standards, were analyzed by EPA Method 6 during June-July, 1977.  The
bottle labels were 2690 ppm S02 and 244 ppm SO^.  Results are presented as
follows (Table 3-3).
          TABLE 3-3.  S00 SPAN GASES CONCENTRATION BY EPA METHOD 6
fc-

LABEL, PPM
ANALYSIS, PPM







AVERAGE
HIGH RANGE
2690
2579
2726
2546
2648
2530
2672
2729
2628
2632
LOW RANGE
244
236
242
242
232
235



237

Confidence limits were calculated for the analytical results.  For the high
range, the confidence range was 2568 to 2696 ppm or only + 2.4% of the sample
mean.  Confidence limits are statistical parameters which in this case tell
us that there is a 95% probability that the true mean value of the results is
within the confidence limits.  This indicates acceptable precision for the
analytical method.  Also, for the low range span gas, confidence limits of
231 ppm and 243 ppm (+_ 2.5% of the sample mean) were an indication of
                                      3-4

-------
acceptable precision.  However, averages for the analytical results tend to
be slightly lower than the span gas bottle labels:
                                        HIGH RANGE        LOW RANGE
           SPAN GAS LABEL, PPM             2690              244
           ANALYSIS AVERAGE, PPM           2632              237
     Since span gas concentrations were only 4 to 6% higher than the lower
confidence limits and only 2 to 3% higher than the means of the Method 6
results, it was concluded that the method comparisons tended to verify the
accuracy of calibrations.
     The accuracy of the span gases was also verified against a standard gas
supplied by Research Triangle Institute in conjunction with their quality
assurance program.  This gas was analyzed by the continuous .analyzer after
calibration with the following results:
                 Analyzer Reading, ppm              1275
                 Actual Gas Analysis, ppm        1262 - 1264
                 Apparent Error, %                  +0.95
Method Comparisons of Actual Flue Gas Samples--
     A modified version of EPA Method 6 was used to determine S02 concentra-
tion entering and leaving the absorber.  The effect of the method modification
was to extend the sampling time to coincide with particulate matter sampling
(4-5 hours per day).  The average removal efficiency determined by the con-
tinuous analyzer was less than one percent higher than the comparable average
of Method 6 results (Table 3-4).
VALIDATION OF FLUE GAS FLOW RATES
     Just prior to the Acceptance Test, it was found that the apparent flue
gas rates at 92 MWG (FGD design load) were much higher than expected.  As a
consequence, it was necessary to test FGD performance during the Acceptance
Test at the design flue gas rate of 320,000 acfm rather than at 92 MWG load.
The resulting gross load was only 72 MW.  Adding the steam consumed by the
FGD plant to the steam equivalent of 72 MWG, the load equivalent of the total
steam produced by the boiler was 81 MWG or only 88% of the design load.
                                      3-5

-------
                         TABLE  3-4.   COMPARISON OF METHODS FOR MEASURING S00 CONCENTRATIONS
Ol

en nnmi
DAY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1 HL
2 HL
3 HL
4 HL
CONTINUOUS
INLET
2158
2036
	
	
2525
2385
	
2169
2051
	
2246

	
1987
2278
	
2615
ANALYZER METHOD
OUTLET INLET
161
176

—
259
204
—
180
190
—
190
—
—
141
183
—
228
2137
2123
	
	
2146
2481
	
2296
2147
	
2246
	
	
2098
2315
	
2703
6
OUTLET
162
187
—
—
272
235
—
193
203
—
218
—
—
144
197
—
250
*;n DFMfiWAI V
CONTINUOUS ANALYZER
92.5
91.0
	
	
89.5
91.2
	
90.9
89.4
	
91.2
	
	
92.2
91.4
	
91.2
MEAN 91 . 1

METHOD 6
92.3
90.6
	

86.3
90.1
	
90.8
89.3
	
90.1
	
	
92.4
90.9
	
90.7
90.4

-------
Furthermore, during the Acceptance Test, it was necessary to rely on flow
estimates derived from the fan curves for the booster fan.  This was
necessary because of an apparent bias error in the flow measurements which
was a result of limited lengths of straight duct available for measurement.
These uncertainties have brought into question whether or not enough gas was
being treated during the Acceptance Test to provide a fair test of the per-
formance of the F6D process.
     Simultaneous flow measurements at inlet and outlet the absorber were
contradictory.  Flow measurements at the inlet appeared to be in error on
the high side whereas the measurements at the outlet showed apparent errors
on the low side.  As soon as coal analyses were available following start of
the Acceptance Test, flows were calculated from the coal compositions and
rates and the flue gas excess oxygen levels.  Calculated values were at least
as high as the flows estimated from the fan curve (Table 3-5).
                TABLE 3-5.  CALCULATED FLUE GAS FLOW

DESIGN LOAD
DAY NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
AVERAGE
MEDIAN
ELOW
10"3 ACFM
349
—
337
344
374
357
351
387
372
387
320
328
324
353
354
HIGH LOAD ELOW
DAY NO. 10J ACFM
1 393
2 380
3 376
4 391
AVERAGE 385
MEDIAN 385










                AT 300°F, 29.92 in. Hg.
                                      3-7

-------
All flue gas rates reported in this section are corrected to 300°F and
29.92 in. Hg.
     In an effort to further validate the flue gas flow measurements, a
limited series of flue gas measurements were made, after completion of the
Acceptance Test, with the F6D plant completely isolated from the boiler.
The objective was to compare present day flue gas rates with those obtained
during the Baseline Tesv  .  Measurements were made at the same location as
the Baseline Test.  However, the upstream duct had been redesigned to in-
clude the louvered bypass damper and the elimination of an expansion tran-
sition of the portion of the duct collecting flue gas from the two induced
draft fans of the boiler.  The test results are summarized as follows:
     (a)  At a gross load on the boiler of 92 MW, the flue
                             3
          gas flow was 400x10  CFM compared to an average of
          369x1O3 CFM during the Baseline Test in 1974, an
          increase of about 7% after correcting for load
          differences.  The increase seems to be largely
          due to an increase in heat input to the boiler,
          which was 12% higher than during the Baseline
          Test, and the corresponding increase in fuel
          rate.
     (b)  At a gross load of 81 MW, which is the megawatt
          equivalent of total  main steam produced by the
          boiler during the design load phase of the
          Acceptance Test, the measured values averaged
          399 MCFM which was virtually the same as the
          flue gas volume measured at 92 MWG.  However,
          flows calculated from fuel composition and rate
          and excess air levels correlated fairly well
          with load.  Using calculated values, flow rates
          during the Acceptance Test were slightly higher
          but within 5% of the Baseline Test measurements.
     (c)  It 1s concluded from these results that actual
          flow rates during the Acceptance Test were higher
                                      3-8

-------
          than the 320x1O3 CFM and 388x1O3 CFM specified
          for the performance runs and also were not less
          than the flue gas volumes experienced during the
          Baseline Test.
     (d)  The data collected to determine boiler heat input
          during these flow tests and during the Acceptance
          Test suggest a loss of boiler efficiency since
          the baseline testing in 1974.  Increased flue gas
          flows would be one result of a decrease in effi-
          ciency.  The combined data of the flow tests and
          the Acceptance Test show that heat input is
          about 7% higher than during the Baseline Test.
     (e)  Based on samples of ash collected from the pre-
          cipitator hoppers, heat losses due to unburned
          carbon were found to be less than 0.5% of the
          total heat input.
     Results of these tests were reported on November 1, 1977^  .  The full
report is appended (Appendix C).
     While these investigations tend to confirm that flue gas volumes were
at least as high as those required for meeting the performance guarantees,
they did not provide a very accurate measure of the actual flue gas volumes.
Actually, the error in the flue gas flow measurements did not affect any of
the performance parameters except particle emission rates.  Inlet grain
loading was less than 0.2 gr/ACF throughout the Acceptance Test.  Therefore,
the performance requirement was that the mass rate of 0.1 lb/10  Btu not be
exceeded.  To calculate a mass rate from the measured grain loadings, the
flue gas volume must be known.  It was suspected and later confirmed that the
outlet flue gas rates were in error on the low side and the inlet flue gas
rates were in error on the high side.  The particle emission rates calcu-
lated from the outlet flue gas rates and reported were thus in error on the
low side.  Flow rates calculated from coal rates and compositions are be-
lieved to be a more accurate measure of the true flows.  The mass rates have
been recalculated from the higher flue gas rates obtained by calculation
(Table 3-6).
                                      3-9

-------
                         TABLE 3-6.  REVISED ESTIMATES OF PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSION RATES
00
I

TEST DAY
1
2
3
5
6
8
9
10
11



1 (HIGH LOAD)
2 (HIGH LOAD)
4 (HIGH LOAD)



MEASURED
ACFM
234,973
233,056
235,976
237,756
237,756
233,350
243,641
234,470
239,841



280,360
280,417
279,533



CALCULATED^1 *
MACFM
269
226
277
309
—
—
321
307
269



318
303
802



A
MACFM
+ 34
- 7
+ 41
+ 71
	
	
+ 77
+ 73
+ 29
x = + 45
a = 30
CL = + 45 + 28
+ 38
+ 23
+ 22
x = + 28
a = 9
CL = + 28 + 22
lb/106
REPORTED
0.01
0.03
	
0.08
0.07
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.04



0.04
0.045
0.033



BTU
REVISED
0.02
0.04
	
0.10
0.10
0.04
0.05
0.07
0.05



0.05
0.05
0.04




         (1)
            ADJUSTED TO OUTLET TEMPERATURES AND WATER CONTENTS.

-------
The revised estimates do not exceed the performance limit of 0.1 lb/106 Btu.
The correction was made out to the upper confidence limit (95% probability)
of the average difference between the measured and calculated flue gas flow.
Therefore, there is a low probability that the revised estimate would ever be
as high as indicated.
TEST PRECISION
     Precision in this case refers to the repeatability of the data.  That
is, it is a measure of the variability of measurements on the same sources
of data made by a single test team with the same equipment over a short
period of time.  The expected maximum instrument errors and the expected
maximum procedural errors in sampling and analysis have been used to esti-
mate variabilities expressed as the standard deviation of a mean value.  The
variabilities for S02 removal, particle emission control, and'operating
costs have been estimated.
S00 Removal
     The removal performance, expressed as a percentage was determined as
fol1ows:
                     S02 Removal = SOo in - SOp out x f
                                         S02 in
where f is a factor to correct for dilution effects:
                         f = COo in  v (1 - HoO in)
                               £     X      - £.
                             C02 out   (1 - H20 out)
The same instruments used for measuring the inlet concentrations also measured
the outlet concentrations.  If it is assumed that the instruments are in error
in one direction only, the errors tend to compensate.  Therefore, it is prob-
able that the variability of the S02 removal results were quite small.  How-
ever, it is true that sampling errors would not necessarily be compensating
since inlet and outlet samples are collected and conditioned by separate
sampling systems.  No attempt has been made to estimate the magnitude of sam-
pling errors, but these types of errors have been minimized in the design and
operation of the sampling systems.
                                     3-11

-------
 Particle Emission Control
     The variability in participate matter emission rates from random errors
 was smaller compared to the inaccuracies in the flue gas flow measurements,
 the effects of which  have been discussed earlier.  Considerable work has
 been done by EPA in an attempt to define the accuracy and precision of the
 EPA method (Method 5) and errors and expected variabilities for every step of
 the procedure have been estimated* '.  Standard deviations determined from
 expected errors have been estimated for each measurement parameter and can be
 used to estimate a probable error of the method as follows:
where,
                         222             2
                          m = al + a2 + * ' ' +an
             a  = repeatability standard deviation of the method
             a(l,2,n) = repeatability standard deviation of each
                        measurement parameter.
To put each standard deviation on a common basis, the Coefficient of Varia-
tion (CV), which is the standard deviation expressed as a percentage, is
substituted.  Thus, for particulate matter emission rate, as lb/10  Btu heat
Input, the probable error is estimated as follows:
                        2          222
                         pmrhv ~    hr      cr      pmr
Where,
                         pmrhv = emission rate, lb/10  Btu
                         pmr   = emission rate, Ib/hr
                         hr    = heating value of coal, 10  Btu/lb
                         cr    = coal rate, Ib/hr
                         CV    = coefficient of variation and
                                 probable error, %
CV's were estimated based on the mean values of the measurements of the
Acceptance Test (Table 3-7).
                                     3-12

-------
        TABLE 3-7.   VARIABILITY OF PARTICULATE MATTER  EMISSION RATES
VARIABLE
pmr
CR
hr
pmrhv
MEAN
39 lb/hr(1)
83,300 lb/hr"'
0.0104 x 106 Btu/lb^2^
0.06 lb/106 Btu(2)
cr
3.5
83.3
31 Btu Ib
0.005
CV
8.9%
0.1%
0.3%
8.9%

      (^DESIGN LOAD SERIES.
      (^DESIGN LOAD AND HIGH LOAD SERIES.
The data indicates a probable error of about 9% versus as much as a 31% error
due to flow Inaccuracies.
Operating Costs
     Measurements subject to error include:
                                                     Maximum
                                                 Expected Error
              Kilowatt-hours by meter                  1.0%
              Natural gas flow (2 meters)              5.0%
              Natural gas heating value                0.3%
              Steam flow by meter                      5.6%
              Steam temperature                        2.0%
              Steam pressure                          11.0%
The performance result was a 12-day average of a combined cost performance
not to exceed $56.00/hour based on individual utility rates as follows:
                 Electric Power        $0.007 per kWh
                 Steam                 $0.50 per 1000 Ib.
                 Natural Gas           $0.55 per 1,000,000 Btu
                                     3-13

-------
Thus, each utility consumption variable was determined by accumulating hourly
values over the 12-day period and dividing by the total operating hours.  By
applying the maximum expected errors to each of the measurement parameters,
a probable error in operating costs can be estimated by the same method used
for particle emission control.  In this case, standard deviations for the
natural gas, electricity and steam consumptions can be expressed in dollars
(Table 3-8).
                 TABLE 3-8.  VARIABILITY IN OPERATING COSTS

VARIABLE
ELECTRICITY
NATURAL GAS
STEAM
TOTAL COSTS
CUMULATIVE
TOTALS
186,640 kWh
2,875 x 106 BTU
15,442.5 x 103 LBS
	
PROBABLE
%
1.0
7.0
12.5
	
ERROR
$/HR
0.05
0.44
3.89
3.92

A probable error of $3.92/hr., added to reported costs of $42.72, is still
well within the performance requirement of $56.00/hr.
                                     3-14

-------
                                 SECTION 4

                                REFERENCES


1.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Develop-
    ment Prototype Demonstration Facility.  EPA Technology Transfer Capsule
    Report.  First Progress Report:  Wellman-Lord SO? Recovery Process-
    Flue Gas Desulfurization Plant.  EPA-625/2-77-01T.

2.  Link, F. William, and Wade H. Ponder.  Status Report on the Wellman-
    Lord/Allied Chemical Flue Gas Desulfurization Plant .at Northern
    Indiana Public Service Company's Dean H. Mitchell Station.  Prepared
    for Presentation at the Flue Gas Desulfurization Symposium Sponsored
    by the Environmental Protection Agency, Hollywood, Florida, November
    8-11, 1977.  18 pp.

3.  TRW, Inc., Transportation & Environmental Engineering Operation.
    Program for Test and Evaluation of the NIPSCO/Davy/Allied Demonstra-
    tion Plant.  Acceptance Test Plan.  Prepared for Control Systems
    Laboratory, Office of Research and Monitoring, Environmental Protection
    Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C.  April 8, 1975.

4.  42FR37936, July 25, 1977 (Federal Register).

5.  Adams, R.C., T.E. Eggleston, J.L. Haslbeck, R.C. Jordan and Ellen
    Pulaski.  Demonstration of Wellman-Lord/Allied Chemical FGD Technology:
    Boiler Operating Characteristics.  EPA-bOO/7-77-014.  TRW, Inc.,
    Vienna, Va.  February 1977.

6.  Adams, R.C., and S.W. Mulligan.  Appendix C - Demonstration of Wellman-
    Lord/Allied Chemical FGD Technology:  Flue Gas Flow Comparisons.  TRW,
    Inc., Environmental Engineering Division, Vienna, Va.

7.  Smith, Franklin and Denny E. Wagoner.  Guidelines for Development of a
    Quality Assurance Program:  Volume IV - Determination of Particulate
    Emissions from Stationary Sources.  Research Triangle Institute,
    Research Triangle Park.  EPA-650/4-74-005-d.  August, 1974.  182 pp.
                                    4-1

-------
                              APPENDIX A
                            TEST RESULTS
                               REPORT NO. 2 - SULFUR
                                 Sulfur Removal
                      1
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No.	
Mrs. Operation (Cumulative)	
     Mrs. Interrupted    Hone
                              24
                                                    TEST PERIOD:  Design
     Day Ending 0800  8/30/77
Hrs.  Operation (This Day)   24
Hrs.  Boiler Availability	24_

CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR.
2-Hr. Averages
so2
Time
0800-1040
1040-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
2100-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0200-0400
0400-0600
0600-0800
Inlet
No data
4929
4861
4942
4897
4928
4682
4637
4500
4482
4655
4831
Outlet
No Data
420
403
381
411
452
475
477
456
454
471
503
J Removal
No Data
92
92
92
92
91
90
90
90
90
90
90


REMARKS:
         Period 0800 to 1040 1s assumed to be >90Z by agreement of EPA Project
         Officer.
                       '31/77
                        itt
                                               UL-
                                               'Test Director
                                    A-l

-------
                                REPORT NO.  3  - ASH
                                Participate Control
                                                      TEST PERIOD:   Design
OPERATING TIKE:
       Test Day Ho.	T_
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative)_
     Hrs. interrupted  Hone
24
     Day Ending 0800 8/30/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)	24
Hrs. Boi 1 er Aval labi 1 ity_
                                            24
PERFORMANCE:
      Paniculate 3-Hr. Avg.. Lb/Hr.
      Gr./Acf

      Emission  Rate /   Ib'
                                                Inlet
                 0.01
                   0.006
                          0.01
REMARKS:   Test passed based on lb/10  Btu value.
                     9/01/77
                        te
   ..
   Test
                        irector
                                     A-2

-------
                                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                                  Operating Costs
                                                     TEST PERIOD:  Design
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 1
Mrs. Operation (Cumulative) 24
Mrs. Interrupted 0
Day Ending 0800 8/30/77
Hrs. Operation CThls Day) 24
Hrs. Boiler Availability 24
PERFORMANCE:
       Electric Energy, KUH/hr.
       Steam, mlbs./hr.
       Total Natural Gas, tncf./hr.
       Avg. Dally Cost, $
63.119
11.046
43.05
Cumulative
    755
  63.119
  11.046
  43.05
                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
                       9/13/77
    . C
                        Date
    Test Director
                                        A-3

-------
          REPORT NO. 4 - COST
              (Continued}


      TEST DAY NO.      1
    SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Pressure PSIG
550
549
548
548
548
549
552
551
550
549
548
548
548 •
548
548
549
549
548
548
547
548
540
548
548
                                   Temperature °F
                                         730
                                         730
                                         730
                                         729
                                         729
                                         728
                                         726
                                         727
                                         726
                                         726
                                         727
                                         726
                                         727
                                         728
                                         728
                                         728
                                         728
                                         727
                                         726
                                         727
                                         729
                                         720
                                         720
                                         720
                A-4

-------
                                REPORT NO. 2 = SULFUR
                                   Sulfur Removal
                                                       TEST PERIOD:  Cesiqn
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No.	2_
Hrs. Operation  (Cumulative)_
     Hrs. Interrupted   ilone
48
                     Day Ending 0800  S/31/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)    24
Hrs. Boiler Availability	24
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR,
2-Hr. Averages


Time
0800-1000
1000-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0200-0400
0400-0600
0600-0800
so2
Inlet
4684
4691 .
4675
4719
4443
4576
4587
4592
4806
4743
48H
4840
Outlet
459
467
452
458
422
457
437
457
487
461
457
455

% Removal
90
90
90
90
91
90
91
90
90
90
91
91


REMARKS:
                      9/01/77
                        Date
                                                   Test Director
                                       A-5

-------
                                REPORT HO. 3 - ASH
                                Particulate Control
                                                       TEST PERIOD:  Design
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 2
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 48
Hrs. Interrupted None

Day Ending 0800 8/31/77
Hrs.
Hrs.
Operation (This Day)
Boiler Availability

24
24

PERFORMANCE:
      Particulate 3-Hr. Avg., Lb/Hr.
      Gr./Acf
      Emission Rate /   !b>
                                                 Inlet
0.02
0.01
        0.03
REMARKS:  Test passed based on lb/106 Btu value.
                    9/03/77
                      Date
 « C,
Test Dlrec
                                       A-6

-------
                                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                                  Operating Costs
                                                     TEST PERIOD:   Design
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 2
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 48
Hrs. Interrupted 0
Day Ending 0800 8/31/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 24
Hrs. Boiler Availability 24
PERFORMANCE:
       Electric Energy, KHH/hr.
       Steam, mlbs./hr.
       Total Natural Gas, mcf./hr.
       Avg. Daily Cost, $
56.198
10.004
38.91
Cumulative
    750
  59.659
  10.525
  40.98
                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
                        9/13/77
                  vt.
                        [fate
    Test Director
                                        A-7

-------
                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                    (Continued)


            TEST DAY NO.	2
          SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
      PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES

Pressure PSIG                            Temperature °F
                                              720
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
548
548
548
548
548
548
548
548
548
548
548
548
548
540
540
540
540
540
540
540
540
540
540
540
                                               720
                                              720
                                               711
                                               711
                                               711
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                       A-8

-------
                                REPORT NO. 2 - SULFUR

                                   Sulfur Removal

OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 3
Mrs. Operation (Cumulative) 69
Hrs. Interrupted 3

Hrs.
Hrs.
TEST PERIOD : Design
Day Ending 0800 9/01/77
Operation (This Day) 21
Boiler Availability Z.1
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR.
2-Hr. Averages


Time
0800-1000
1000-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0200-0400
0400-0600
0600-0300
so2
Inlet
4741
4818 .
4831
4801
4797
4774
4790
4763
	
____
4856
4959
Outlet
425
445
451
443
401
462
453
449
...
_._
443
431

% Removal
91
91
91
91
92
90
91
91
—
—
91
91


REMARKS:  0000 to 0120:
          0120 to 0415:  Boiler interruption.
  Invalid S02 data.
                       9/02/77
9/0
"Da"
                          te
Jf.
£
                                                        	
                                                   Test Director
                                        A-9

-------
                                REPORT NO'. 3 - ASH
                                Particulate Control
                                                       TEST PERIOD:  Design
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No.    3
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative)   69
     Hrs. Interrupted    3
                                                    Day Ending 0800  9/01/77
                                               Hrs. Operation (This Day)	2_1_
                                               Hrs. Boiler Availability	21
PERFORMANCE:
      Parttculate 3-Hr.  Avg., Lb/Hr.
      Gr./Acf

      Emission Rate /   Ib'
                                                 Inlet
                                                                  Outlet
                                                 0.05
REMARKS:   Outlet sample invalid.
                     9/05/77
                      Date
                                                  (. a,
                                                  Test Director
                                        A-10

-------
                                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                                  Operating Costs
                                                     TEST PERIOD:   Design
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 3
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 69
Hrs. Interrupted 3
Day Ending 0800 9/01/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 21
Hrs. Boiler Availability 21
PERFORMANCE:
                                              Dally              Cumulative
       Electric Energy, KHH/hr.                 749                   749
       Steam, mlbs./hr.                       60.460                59.894
       Total Natural Gas, mcf./hr.            10.850                10.621
       Avg. Dally Cost, $                     41.59                 41.17

                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
9/13/77	            W, C.
                                                'J<,
                        Date                     Test Director
                                        A-ll

-------
                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                    (Continued)


            TEST DAY NO.       3
          SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
      PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES

Pressure PSIG                            Temperature °F
                                              719
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
540
540
540
540
540
544
540
540
540
540
540
540
518
518
518
518
518
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
540
540
540
540
                                              719
                                              719
                                              711
                                              711
                                              711
                                              711
                                              711
                                              719
                                              719
                                              720
                                              720
                                              720
                                              720
                                              720
                                              720
                                              720
                                              720
                                              720
                                              720
                                              720
                         A-12

-------
                               REPORT NO. 2 - SULFUR
                                  Sulfur Removal

OPERATING TIf€:
Test Day No. 4
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 86
Hrs. Interrupted 7
TEST PERIOD: Deslan
Day Ending 0800 9/02/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 17
Hrs. Boiler Availability 24
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR.
2-Hr. Averages


Time
0800-1000
1000-1200
1200-1400
ll)1400-1500
1450-1555
1600-1700
1645-2240
U '2300-2400
0000-0200
0200-0400
0400-0600
0600-0300
so2
Inlet
5203
5101 •
5490
5579



5530
5855
5710
5711'
3G24
Outlet
470
455
485
464
:GD Interruption
Invalid Data
:GD Interruption
509
537
512
591
596

% Removal
91
91
91
92



91
?1
91
90
yo


REMARKS:
         0)
One hour average.
                      g/03/77
                       Date
                                                 Test Director
                                      A-13

-------
                                REPORT KO. 3 - ASH
                                Particulate Control
                                                       TEST PERIOD:  Design
OPERATING TIKE:
       Test Day Ho.   4
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative),
     Hrs. Interrupted	7_
86
     Day Ending 0800  9/02/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)	]7_
Hrs. Boiler Ava1labil1ty_
                                               24
PERFORMANCE:
                                                 Inlet
                                   Outlet
      Participate 3-Hr.  Avg.,  Lb/Kr.
      6r./Acf

      Emission Rate /   !b*
                      10° Btu
REMARKS:  Test not run - rain.
                    9/05/77
                 J<. C.
                      Date
                   Test Director
                                       A-14

-------
                                REPORT HO. 4 - COST
                                  Operating Costs
                                                     TEST PERIOD:  Design
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 4
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 36
Hrs. Interrupted 7
Day Ending 0800 9/02/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 17
Hrs. Boiler Availability 24
PERFORMANCE:
       Electric Energy, KWH/hr.
       Steam, mlbs./hr.
       Total Natural Gas, mcf./hr.
       Avg. Daily Cost, $
56.762
10.238
39.44
Cumulative
    749
  59.295
  10.544
  40.83
                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:

                       Q/13/77
                                                  est Director
                                      A-15

-------
                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                    (Continued)

            TEST DAY NO.      4
          SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
      PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES
Pressure PSIG                            Temperature °F
                                               720
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
no
543
543
543
543
543
543
8
9
543
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
546
547
546
546
544
544
546
543
543
              ND  -  data not available
                       A-16
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               716
                                               724
                                               720
                                               720
                                               720
                                               722
                                               720
                                               720
                                               722
                                               722

-------
                               REPORT NO. 2 - SULFUR

                                  Sulfur Removal

OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 5
Mrs. Operation (Cumulative) 107
Hrs. Interrupted 3
TEST PERIOD; Design
Day Ending 0800 9/03/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 21
Hrs. Boiler Availability ^4
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR.
2-Hr. Averages


Time
0800-1000
1000-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0240-0545
0600-0800

so2
Inlet
6322
6250 •
621 G
5879
5767
5764
5520
5301
5109

4891

Outlet
755
663
636
564
531
496
436
492
472
FGD Interruptioi
445


% Removal
88
89
90
90
91
91
91
91
91

91



REMARKS:   Test failed 0800-1200  (4 hours).
                       9/03/77
                       Date
J<
   Test Director
                                        A-17

-------
                                REPORT NO. 3 - ASH
                                Participate Control
                                                       TEST PERIOD:   Design
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day Mo.    5
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative)_
     Hrs. Interrupted    3
107
     Day Ending 0800  9/03/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)   21
Hrs. Boiler Availability	24_
PERFORMANCE:

      Participate 3-Hr.  Avg.,  Lb/Hr.
      Gr./Acf
                   Inlet
                   0.04
                    0.03
      Emission Rate /
                      10° Btu
                            0.08
REMARKS:
                     9/05/77
                      Date
                    est Oi«
                                       A-18

-------
                                REPORT HO.  4 - COST
                                  Operating Costs
                                                     TEST PERIOD:   Design
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 5
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 107
Hrs. Interrupted 3
Day Ending 0800 9/03/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 21
Hrs. Boiler Availability 24
PERFORMANCE:
       Electric Energy, KWH/hr.
       Steam, mlbs./hr.
       Total Natural Gas, mcf./hr.
       Avg. Dally Cost, $
                      63.184
                      12.163
                      43.78
                 Cumulative
                     751
                   60.069
                   10.863
                   41.41
                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
                       9/13/77
3P
 Da
J\ . C.
J
                          te
                                                 Test  Director
                                       A-19

-------
                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                    (Continued)


            TEST DAY NO.      5
          SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
      PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES

Pressure PSIG                            Temperature °F
                                 	         720
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
5-14
542
542
544
542
543
545
547
547
545
545
544
544
545
546
547
546
535
546
20
21
22
23
24
530
546
                                              720
                                              720
                                              720
                                              720
                                              720
                                              721
                                              728
                                              724
                                              721
                                              723
                                              720
                                              724
                                              726
                                              724
                                              724
                                              726
                                              725
                                              724
                                              723
                                              724
                        A-20

-------
                                REPORT NO. 2 - SULFUR
                                   Sulfur Removal
                                                       TEST  PERIOD:  Design
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No.	6
Mrs. Operation (Cumulative)_
     Hrs. Interrupted	3_
                     128
     Day Ending 0800  9/04/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)	21_
Hrs. Boiler Availability     ?&
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR.
2-Hr. Averages


Time
0800-1000
1000-1300
UJ1300-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
(ZJ2000-2200
^2200-2400
(2)0000-0200
tZ)0200-0400
^0400-0600
tZ)0600-OSOO
so2
Inlet
5301

5296
5423
5698
5488
5363
5218
5126
5104
5241
5152
Outlet
496
FGD Interrupt! oi
531
505
509
566
562
540
517
4G4
529
509

% Removal
91

90
91
90
90
90
90
SO
91
90
90


REMARKS:  Total test hours failed to date:  4
^ '
^ '
             One hour average
             Invalid S0? data.  Allied analyzer used.
                       9/C6/77
                         ate
                                                   Test Director
                                        A-21

-------
                                REPORT NO.  3   ASH
                                Particiilate Control
                                                       TEST PERIOD:   Design
OPERATING TIKE:
       Test Day No.    6
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative^
     Mrs. interrupted	3_
128
     Day Ending 0800  9/04/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)	21
Hrs. Boiler Availability	24
PERFORMANCE:
                                                 Inlet
                                   Outlet
      Partlculate 3-Hr.  Avg.,  Lb/Hr.
      Gr./Acf

      Emission Rate / -4^—
                     10b Btu
                   0.04              0.03

                           0.07
REMARKS:

                     9/07/77
                       Ite
                    est Director
                                        A-22

-------
                                REPORT NO.  4   COST
                                  Operating Costs
                                                     TEST PERIOD-   Desian
OPERATING TIME:

       Test Day No.    6
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative),
     Hrs. Interrupted	3_
128
     Day Ending 0800 9/04/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)	21_
Hrs. Boiler Availability	2±
PERFORMANCE:
       Electric Energy, KWH/hr.
       Steam, mlbs./hr.
       Total Natural Gas, mcf./hr.
       Avg. Daily Cost, $
               63.995
               12.481
                                                                 Cumulative
                    60.723
                    11.131
               44.50
                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
                       9/13/77
                                                J.C. <
                          te
                                                 Test Director
                                       A-23

-------
                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                    (Continued)
            TEST DAY NO.
          SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
      PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES

Pressure PSIG                            Temperature °F
    544 	                          728
2
545
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
546
547
546
546
546
544
544
543
544
545
545
545
545
545
546
546
546
5^7
547
                                               723
                                               725
                                               724
                                               725
                                               723
                                               723
                                               723
                                               724
                                               726
                                               727
                                               726
                                               726
                                               726
                                               727
                                               727
                                               726
                                               727
                                               727
                                               727
                                               727
                       A-24

-------
                               REPORT NO. 2 - SULFUR
                                 Sulfur Removal
TEST PERIOD: Deslcn
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 7
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 143
Hrs. Interrupted 9
Day Ending 0800 9/05/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 15
Hrs. Boiler Availability 17
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES
2-Hr. Averages


Time
0800-0900
0900-1630
1630-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0200-0330
0330-0545
0545-0800


so2
Inlet
4953
. Bo
5246
5157
5315
5349
4982
4877

5037


Outlet
429
11 er Interrupt! o
477
514
510
529
495
479
:GD Interruption
448


, LBS/HR.
% Removal
91
,
91
90
90
90
90
90

91




REMARKS:   Total  test  hours failed to date:  4
                     9/06/77
.  c. ait
                       Date
                                                Test Director
                                      A-25

-------
                                REPORT NO. 3 - ASH
                                Parti cul ate Control
                                                       TEST PERIOD :  Design
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No.    7
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative)   143
     Mrs. Interrupted     9
                            Day Ending 0800  9/05/77
                       Hrs. Operation (This Day)   15
                       Hrs. Boiler Availability	]]_
PERFORMANCE:
      Participate 3-Hr.  Avg.,  Lb/Hr.
      6r./Acf

      Emission Rate /   lb<   .
                                                 Inlet
                                          Outlet
REMARKS:   No test - boiler Interruption.
                    9/06/77
Iff
                                                  Test Director
                                       A-26

-------
                                REPORT HO. 4 - COST
                                  Operating Costs
                                                     TEST PERIOD:  Design
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 7
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 143
Hrs. Interrupted 9
Day Ending 0800 9/05/77
Hrs. Operation CThls Day) 15
Hrs. Boiler Availability 17
PERFORMANCE:
       Electric Energy, KWH/hr.
       Steam, mlbs./hr.
       Total Natural Gas, mcf./hr.
       Avg. Dally Cost, $
61.174
11.292
42.46
Cumulative
    757
  60.769
  11.147
  41.98
                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
                       9/13/77
                         ate
                                                 Test Director
                                    A-27

-------
                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                    (Continued)
            TEST DAY NO.
          SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
      PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES
Pressure PSIG                            Temperature °F
                                              725
1
548
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
544
543
543
543
543
542
542
543
545
549
552
551
21
22
23
24
543
542
              ND -  data  not available.
                       A-28
                                              722
                                              ND
                                              725
                                              725
                                              726
                                              726
                                              728
                                              728
                                              726
                                              723
                                              722
                                              723
                                              725
                                              722

-------
                                REPORT NO. 2 - SULFUR
                                   Sulfur Removal

OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 8
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 167
Mrs. Interrupted Hone

Hrs.
Hrs.
TEST PERIOD; Design
Day Ending 0800 9/6/77
Operation (This Day) 24
Boiler Availability 24
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR.
2-Hr. Averages


Time
oaoo-iooo
1000-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0200-0400
0400-0600
0600-0800
so2
Inlet.
4966
4991
4923
4950
4929
4954
4899
4833
4885
4819
4C36
4397
Outlet
426
448
445
480
459
449
448
438
459
458
454
457

% Removal
91
91
91
90
91
91
91
91
91
31
91
91


REMARKS:   Total  hours  test  failed to date:  4
                       9/06/77
                        Date
                                                   lest Director
                                      A-29

-------
                                REPORT NO.  3 - ASH
                                Parti cul ate Control
                                                       TEST PERIOD:   Design
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No.	8_
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative)	
     Mrs. Interrupted   Hone
167
     Day Ending 0800  9/06/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)	£4
Hrs. Boiler Availability.
                                            24
PERFORMANCE:
      Participate 3-Hr.  Avg..  Lb/Hr.
      6r./Acf
                  Inlet
                  95.3
                   0.07
                                                                 Outlet
                    29.7
                     0.01
      Emission Rate /
                          0.03
                      10° Btu
REMARKS:
                     9/09/77
 •A
                        te
                         /L6
                        Direc
   Test Director
                                     A-30

-------
                                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                                  Operating Costs
                                                     TEST PERIOD:  Design
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 8
Mrs. Operation (Cumulative) ]67
Hrs. Interrupted o
Day Ending 0800 9/06/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 24
Hrs. Boiler Availability £4
PERFORMANCE:
       Electric Energy, KWH/hr.
       Steam, mlbs./hr.
       Total Natural Gas, mcf./hr.
       Avg. Daily Cost, $
64.310
11.618
44.22
Cumulative
    761
  61.286
  11.215
  42.30
                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
                       9/13/77
                         ate
                                                  est Director
                                       A-31

-------
                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                    (Continued)


            TEST DAY NO.       a
          SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
      PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES

Pressure PSIG                            Temperature °F
    542	            	724
                                 	725
2 543
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
544 -
543
544
544
544 .
543
543
544
546
547
547
547
546
544
543
544
544
544
543
543
546
545
                                               726
                                               727
                                               726
                                               726
                                               726
                                               726
                                               727
                                               727
                                               726
                                               726
                                               726
                                               726
                                               726
                                               726
                                               726
                                               726
                                               725
                                               726
                                               728
                                               728
                                               728
                                               727
                       A-32

-------
                                REPORT NO. 2 - SULFUR
                                   Sulfur Removal
                                                       TEST PERIOD;   Design
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No.    9
Mrs. Operation (Cumulative)	
     Hrs. Interrupted   None
191
     Day Ending 0800 9/07/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)   24
Hrs. Boiler Availability	Z£
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR.
2-Hr. Averages


Time
0800-1000
1000-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
16CO-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0200-0400
0400-0600
0600-0800
so2
Inlet
4810
4722 .
4732
4679
4581
4796
4674
4644
4694
4722
4847
4880
Outlet
419
473
483
486
454
465
430
430
425
433
444
449

% Removal
91
90
90
90
90
90
91
91
91
91
91
31


REMARKS:  Total hours test failed to date:   4
                       9/08/77
                          te
     .  £,/!
    Test Dir
                    est Director
                                       A-33

-------
                                REPORT HO. 3 - ASH
                                Participate Control
                                                       TEST PERIOD :   Design
                        9
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No._
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative)   191
     Hrs. Interrupted   None
     Day Ending 0800  9/Q7/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)    24
Hrs. Boiler Availability	24_
PERFORMANCE:
                                                 Inlet
      Participate 3-Hr.  Avg., Lb/Hr.
      Gr./Acf

      Emission Rate /   Ib>
                                                 0.02
                     0.02
                                                         0.04
REMARKS:
                     9/09/77
                      Date
                                                  Test Director
                                      A-34

-------
                                REPORT HO.  4  -  COST
                                  Operating Costs
                                                    TEST PERIOD:   Design
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 9
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 191
Hrs. Interrupted Hone
Day Ending 0800 9/07/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 24
Hrs. Boiler Availability -4
PERFORMANCE:
       Electric Energy, KWH/hr.
       Steam, mlbs./hr.
       Total Natural Gas, mcf./hr.
       Avg. Dally Cost, $
63.943
11.529
43.96
Cumulative
    763
  61.625
  11.255
                      42.52
                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
                       9/13/77
                        Date
    J\,C- wa^-
    Test Director
                                       A-35

-------
                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                    (Continued)


            TEST DAY NO.       9
          SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
      PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES

Pressure PSIG                            Temperature °F
                                              726
1
2
3
4
5
G
7
8
9
10
n
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
545
546
547
548
546
544
547
548
547
547
548
547
545
543
546
547
546
546
547
546
546
546
547
547
                                              726
                                              726
                                              725
                                              727
                                              727
                                              725
                                              726
                                              724
                                              724
                                              725
                                              725
                                              726
                                              726
                                              726
                                              725
                                              725
                                              724
                                              722
                                              725
                                              725
                                              724
                                              724
                                              725
                       A-36

-------
                              REPORT NO. 2 - SULFUR
                                 Sulfur Removal

OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 10
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 212
Mrs. Interrupted 2
TEST PERIOD : Design
Day Ending 0800 S/08/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 22
Hrs. Boiler Availability 24
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR.
2-Hr. Averages


Time
0800-0845
0845-1100
1100-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0200-0400
0400-0600
0600-0803
so2
Inlet
4849

4951
4940
4854
4733
4729
4664
4643
46C7
4676
4705
4C19
Outlet
460
FGD Interruption
488
475
432
423
437
418
417
430
343
422
472

% Removal
91

90
90
91
91
91
21
91
91
m
£1
jO

REMARKS:  Total  test hours failed to date:  4
                     q/ns/77
Bff
LL
                                                Test Director
                                     A-37

-------
                                REPORT NO. 3 - ASH



                                Particulate Control
                                                      TEST PERIOD;   Design
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Dav No.    10
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative),


     Hrs.  Interrupted	2_
                              213
   Day Ending 0800  9/08/77
Hrs. Operation (This  Day)_


Hrs. Boiler Availability_
                         22
PERFORMANCE:
                                                Inlet
      Participate 3-Hr. Avg., Lb/Hr.



      Gr./Acf




      Emission Rate  /   ]b'
0.02
                                                                   0.02
        0.05
REMARKS:
                    9/10/77
                      Date
                                                    (LA
                                                    t Dtri
 Test Director
                                      A-38

-------
                                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                                 Operating Costs
                                                    TEST PERIOD:   Desian
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 10
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 213
Hrs. Interrupted 2

Day Ending 0800 9/08/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 22
Hrs. Boiler Availability 24

PERFORMANCE:
       Electric Energy, KWH/hr.
       Steam, mlbs./hr.
       Total Natural  Gas,  mcf./hr.
       Avg. Daily Cost. $
64.110
11.292
43.91
Cumulative
    765
  61.885
  11.259
  42.66
                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
                      9/13/77
   J?.C.
                        Date
                                               Test Director
                                     A-39

-------
          REPORT NO. 4 - COST
              (Continued)


      TEST DAY NO.     10
    SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES
1
Pressure PSIG
547
j>
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
•i™
566
567
567
567
566
567
567
566
565
565
565
565
567
566
566
566
566
566
565
564
565
                                  Temperature  °F
                                         725
                                         722
                                        722
                                        722
                                         723
                                        723
                                        722
                                        722
                                         723
                                         723
                                         723
                                         723
                                         723
                                         723
                                         723
                                         723
                                         723
                                         723
                                         724
                                         724
                                         725
                                         725
                 A-40

-------
                                 REPORT  NO.  2  - SULFUR

                                    Sulfur Removal
TEST PERIOD: Design •
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. n
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 237
Hrs. Interrupted Hone
Day Ending 0800 9/09/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 24
Hrs. Boiler Availability 24
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES
2-Hr. Averages


Time
0800-1000
1000-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0200-0400
0400-0600
0600-0800
so2
Inlet
4870
4935
4783
4796
4675
4438
4424
4415
4426
4431
4538
4674
Outlet.
486
474
440
411
396
367
369
372
380
387
324
398
, LBS/HR.
% Removal
90
90
91
91
92
92
92
92
91
SI
92
91


REMARKS:   Total  test hours  failed  to date:  4
           One boiler feed pump  down from about 1830 to 0800.  Load at about 60 MU.
                       9/09/77

                        Date
Direc
                                                   Test Director
                                        A-41

-------
                                REPORT NO.  3 - ASH
                                Particulate Control
                                                      TEST PERIOD:  Design.
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No.	3J_
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative)  237
     Hrs. Interrupted   Hone
     Day Ending 0800  9/09/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)	24
Hrs. Boiler Availability
         24
PERFORMANCE:
                                                 Inlet
      Participate 3-Hr.  Avg.,  Lb/Hr.
      6r./Acf

      Emission Rate /   Ib'
 0.018
0.015
           0.04
REMARKS:
                    9/10/77
                      Date
   Test Director
                                        A-42

-------
                                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                                  Operating Costs
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. n
Mrs. Operation (Cumulative) 237
Hrs. Interrupted None
Hrs.
Hrs.
Day Ending 0800 9/09/77
Operation (This Day) 24
Boiler Availability 24
PERFORMANCE:
       Electric Energy, KWH/hr.
       Steam, mlbs./hr.
       Total Natural Gas, mcf./hr.
       Avg. Daily Cost, $
62.932
11.449
43.07
Cumulative
   763
 61.932
 11.268
 42.68
                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
                       9/13/77
  t'K. C,
                        Date
                                                 Test Director
                                       A-43

-------
                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                    (Continued)


            TEST DAY NO.      11
          SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
      PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES

Pressure PSI6                            Temperature °F
                                              726
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
567
567
567
569
569
571
571
569
569
570
571
571
568
569
570
570
568
567
568
569
.573
572
573
573
                                              725
                                              726
                                              725
                                              725
                                              725
                                              725
                                              724
                                              725
                                              726
                                              725
                                              726
                                              727
                                              727
                                              727
                                              727
                                              727
                                              727
                                              727
                                              725
                                              727
                                              727
                                              727
                                              726
                         A-44

-------
                                REPORT NO. 2   SULFUR

                                   Sulfur Removal

OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 12
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 261
Hrs. Interrupted "one
TEST PERIOD: Design
Day Ending 0800 9/10/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 24
Hrs. Boiler Availability 24

CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL Z HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR.
2-Hr. Averages
so2
Time
0800-1000
1000-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0200-0400
0400-0600
0600-0800
Inlet
4714
4712 .
4732
4767
4787
4853
4819
4810
4906
4872
4872
4886
Outlet
426
443
411
428
464
455
464
448
422
438
444
452
% Removal
91
91
91
91
90
91
90
91
91
91
91
91


REMARKS: Test  1s being extended four additional hours to make  up four hours
         failure.
                       9/10/77
                         ate
                                                   Te
est Director
                                       A-45

-------
                                REPORT NO. 3 - ASH
                                Particulate Control
                                                       TEST PERIOD:   Design
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No.	12_
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative)    261
     Hrs. Interrupted  None
     Day Ending 0800  9/10/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)	24
Hrs. Boiler Availability
24
PERFORMANCE:
      Paniculate 3-Hr.  Avg., Lb/Hr.
      Gr./Acf

      Emission Rate /
                                                 Inlet
                   Outlet
REMARKS:  No test.   High winds  -  unsafe test conditions.
                    9/10/77
                      Date
   Test Director
                                      A-46

-------
                                REPORT HO. 4 - COST
                                  Operating Costs
                                                     TEST PERIOD:   Design
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No.	12_
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative)    261
     Hrs. Interrupted   Hone
       Day Ending 0800  9/10/77
  Hrs. Operation (This Day)    24
  Hrs. Boiler Availability	2£_
PERFORMANCE:
       Electric Energy, KWH/hr.
       Steam, mlbs./hr.
       Total Natural Gas, mcf./hr.
       Avg. Daily Cost, $
64.560
10.875
43.39
Cumulative
    758
  62.191
  11.229
  42.75
                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
                         13/77
     1
   J(.t
                          te
                                                 Test Director
                                        A-47

-------
                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                    (Continued)


            TEST DAY NO.   12
          SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
      PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES

Pressure PSI6                            Temperature  °F
                                              726
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
572
572
572
563
567
568
569
568
568
567
566
566
566
565
565
564
563
563
562
561
566
565
567
572
                                              725
                                              724
                                              725
                                              724
                                              724
                                              723
                                              723
                                              723
                                              723
                                              724
                                              724
                                              725
                                              724
                                              725
                                              725
                                              725
                                              726
                                              726
                                              726
                                              726
                                              726
                                              727
                                              727
                     A-48

-------
                                REPORT NO. 2 - SULFUR

                                   Sulfur Removal

OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 13
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 265
Hrs. .Interrupted None
TEST PERIOD: Deslqn
Day Ending 0800 9/11/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 4
Hrs. Boiler Availability 4
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR.
2-Hr. Averages
•

Time
0800-1000
1000-1200










so2
Inlet
4890
4918 .










Outlet
449
439











% Removal
91
91












REMARKS:   Four hour .test to makeup four hours failure.  Design test period
           completed.
                       9/11/77
 .  C,
                        Date
_
Test Director
                                        A-49

-------
                                REPORT NO.  4 -  COST
                                  Operating Costs
                                                     TEST  PERIOD :   Design
OPERATING TIf€:
Test Day No. 13
Mrs. Operation (Cumulative) 265
Hrs. Interrupted None
Day Ending 0800 9/11/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) *
Hrs. Boiler Availability 4

PERFORMANCE:
       Electric Energy,  KWH/hr.
       Steam, mlbs./hr.
       Total  Natural  Gas, mcf./hr.
       Avg. Dally Cost.  $
62.340
 9.808
42.09
Cumulative
    758
  62.193
  11.206
  42.74
                 (HOURLY  STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
                       9/13/77
   Jr. C,

                        Date
    Test Director
                                       A-50

-------
                             REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                                 (Continued)


                         TEST DAY NO.      13
                       SEQUENTIAL HOURLY DEMONSTRATION
                   PLANT STEAM PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES

             Pressure PSI6                            lemperature  °F
 1  	571                        	725,
 ?.  	572	           	725
 3  	57]	           	724
 4  	572	           	724
 5  	           	
 6  	           	
 7  	           	
 8  	           	
 9  	           	
10  	           	
11  	           	
12  	\	           	
13  	           	
14  	           	
15  	           	
16  	           	
17  	           	
18  	           	
19  	           	
20  	           	
21  	           	
22  	           	
23  	           	
24	           	
                                    A-51

-------
                                REPORT NO. 4 - COST
                                  Operating Costs
                               12-DAY AVERAGE-COSTS
                              	TEST PERIOD:  Design
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No.  1-13                           Day Ending 0800  9/11/77
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative)   265              Mrs. Operation (This Day)	4_
     Hrs. Interrupted    27                    Hrs. Boiler Availability    2C2
PERFORMANCE:
                                              Daily              Cumulative
       Electric Energy, KWH/hr.            	              757.8
       Steam, mlbs./hr.                   	               62.193
       Total Natural  Gas, mcf./hr.         	               11.206
       Avg. Dally Cost, $                 	               43

                 (HOURLY STEAM PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ATTACHED)
REMARKS:
                       9/11/77                  j \.
                        Date                     Test Director
                                     A-52

-------
                             REPORT NO.  6   PRODUCT
                             By-Product Sulfur Assay
                                 12-DAY AVERAGE
                                                   TEST PERIOD
OPERATING TIKE:
Test Day No. 1-12
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 265
Hrs. Interrupted 27
Day Ending 0800 9/11/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) a.
Hrs. Boiler Availability :;,2
PERFORMANCE:
                   Sulfur Assay, Wt.  ZS       99.76
                   Wt. % Ash	0.007
                                	<5 ppm
                   Ht. % Carbon	Mi
                   Ht. % Chlorides	O.^OZ
                   Wt. % Acidity as H2S04      0.0'jJS
REI4ARKS:
                      10/3/77                 .](,
                       Date                     Test Director
^M
: Dirt
                                     A-53

-------
                                REPORT NO.  5 -  SODA
                                Soda Ash  Feed Rate
                                  12-DAY AVERAGE
                                                    TEST PERIOD:   Design
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 13
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 265
Hrs. Interrupted None
Day Ending 0800 9/11/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 4
Hrs. Boiler Availability •+

PERFORMANCE:
                  Avg.  Soda Ash Consumed, Tons/Day     6.2
REMARKS:
                      9/11/77
                        Date
Test Director'
                                      A-54

-------
                                REPORT NO.  2  - SULFUR

                                   Sulfur Removal

OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 1
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 24
Hrs. Interrupted 0)
TEST PERIOD: High Load
Day Ending 0800 9/12/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 24
Hrs . Boil er Aval 1 abi 1 i ty £4 ^ '
CONTIGUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES
2-Hr. Averages


Time
0800-1000
1000-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0200-0400
0400-0600
0600-0800
so2
Inlet
5665
5554 •
5467
5513
5647
5825
5778
5806
5879
5S6C
6029
5782
Outlet
491
419
433
442
469
495
502
551
590
5C6
S4C
435
, LBS/HR."
% Removal
91
93
92
92
92
92
91
91
90
90
91
93


REMARKS:  (^Boiler down to 55-60 HW for about one hour, 0600-0700.   iio
             Interruption is charged.
                       9/13/77
                          te
J(. C, frL^.
  Test Director
                                        A-55

-------
                                REPORT NO. 3 - ASH

                                Particulate Control
                                                       TEST PERIOD:  High Load
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 1
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 23
Hrs. Interrupted 1

Hrs.
Hrs.
Day Ending 0800 9/12/77
Operation (This Day) 23
Boiler Availability 23

PERFORMANCE:
      Particulate 3-Hr.  Avg., Lb/Hr.

      Gr./Acf


      Emission Rate /
                                                 Inlet
 0.04
0.02
          0.04
REMARKS:
                    9/14/77
                      Date
J\  t: QJi
  Test Director
                                        A-56

-------
                                 REPORT  NO. 2 - SULFUR

                                    Sulfur Removal
                                                       TEST PERIOD:  Hi oh Load
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 2
Mrs. Operation (Cumulative) 48
Mrs. Interrupted '(one
Day Ending 0800 9/13/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 24
Hrs. Boiler Availability 24
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR. '
2-Hr. Averages


Time
0800-1000
1000-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0200-0400
0400-0600
0600-0800
so2
Inlet
6163
6239
6568
7058
7232
7218
7153
7210
7213
7010
7319
7469
Outlet
553
577
655
660
678
682
713
722
704
775
729
764

% Removal
91
91
90
91
91
91
90
90
90
G3
ilO
90


REMARKS:  jest failed  two  hours,  0200-0400.
                      9/13/77
                        Date
f)\t C,  i
   Test Director
                                        A-57

-------
                                REPORT NO. 3 - ASH
                                Particulate Control
                                                       TEST PERIOD;  High Load
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day Ho.    2
Mrs. Operation (Cumulative)_
     Mrs. Interrupted  None
47
     Day Ending 0800 9/13/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)	24_
Hrs. Boiler Availability
                                            24
PERFORMANCE:
                                                 Inlet
      Participate 3-Hr. Avg., Lb/Hr.
      Gr./Acf
                        Ib.
      Emission Rate /
                   0.05
                    0.02
                            0.05
REMARKS:
                     9/14/77
                        te
   Tes
                          rector
                                       A-58

-------
                                REPORT NO.  2  - SULFUR

                                   Sulfur Removal

OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 3
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 72
Hrs. Interrupted ilone
TEST PERIOD : High Load
Day Ending 0800 9/14/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 24
Hrs. Boiler Availability 24
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR.
2-Hr. Averages


Time
0800-1000
1000-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200
2200-2400
0000-0200
0200-0400
0400-060U
0600-0800
so2
Inlet
7199
7169 .
7013
6937
6071
5790
6639
6405
6693
6d&0
7094
7394
Outlet
724
723
688
670
652
623
632
632
654
681
673
712

% Removal
90
90
90
90
91
91
91
90
90
90
91
90


REMARKS:
                      9/14/77
                        Date
!X.
  Te
                                                   est Director
                                        A-59

-------
                               REPORT NO.  3 - ASH


                               Particulate Control
                                                     TEST PERIOD:   High Load
OPERATING TI::F:
Test Day No. 3
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative) 71
Hrs. Interrupted None
Day Ending 0800 9/14/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 1:4
Hrs. Boiler Availability 24

PERFORMANCE:
                                               Inlet
                 Outlet
      Participate 3-Hr. Avg., Lb/Hr.


      Gr./Acf


      Emission Rate /
                     10" Btu
REMARKS:   No sample collected - rain.
                       Id/77
j{. d.fj
  Test Dire
                                                      irector
                                    A-60

-------
                                REPORT NO. 2 - SULFUR

                                   Sulfur Removal
OPERATING TIME:
Test Day No. 4
Mrs. Operation (Cumulative) 85
Mrs. Interrupted None
Day Ending 0800 9/15/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day) 14
Hrs. Boiler Availability 14
CONTINUOUS DATA SEQUENTIAL 2 HR. AVERAGES, LBS/HR.
2-Hr. Averaqes


Time
0800-1000
1000-1200
1200-1400
1400-1600
1600-1800
1800-2000
2000-2200





so2
Inlet
7401
7253
7079
6695
6428
648T
6448





Outlet
755
711
675
625
612
605
G31






% Removal
90
90
91
91
91
91
90







REMARKS:
                      9/14/77
                        IJate
  1
A
                                                  Test Director
                                       A-61

-------
                                REPORT NO. 3 - ASH
                                Particulate Control
                                                       TEST PERIOD:   High Load
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day Ho.    4
Hrs. Operation (Curaulative)_
     Mrs, Interrupted  itone
85
     Day Ending 0800 9/15/77
Hrs. Operation (This Day)	14
Hrs. Boiler Availability
                                           14
PERFORMANCE:
                                                 Inlet
      Participate 3-Hr.  Avg.,  Lb/Hr.
      Sr./Acf

      Emission Rate /   ]b'
                  0.04
                    0.01
                           0.03
REMARKS:
                    9/15/77
                                                 Test Director
                                        A-62

-------
                             REPORT HO. 6 - PRODUCT

                             By-Product Sulfur Assay
                                                    TEST  PERIOD:  High Load
OPERATING TIME:
       Test Day No.    1-4
Hrs. Operation (Cumulative)	

     Mrs. Interrupted   Hone
85
     Day Ending 0800  9/15/77

Hrs. Operation  (This  Day)    14

Hrs. Boiler Availability	85
PERFORMANCE:
Sulfur Assay, Wt. IS
Wt. X Ash
As-0,
Wt. X Carbon
Ht. X Chlorides
Ht. X Acidity as H.SO.

99.61
0.005
<5 DOT!
0.11
0.0002
0.0005

Corrected
99.99
0.004
Not detected
0.004
.
.

REMARKS:
                       10/3/77
                       Date
                U\.  t.
                                                Test Direc
                                  A-63

-------
                                                                      COAL ANALYSIS
Ol


Test Period

Desian
Design
Design
Design
Design
Design
Design
Design
Design
Desian
Design
Design
Design
Design
Design
Design
Deslnn
Design
Design
Design
•Design
Design
• Design

Test
Day

1
Spot
2
Spot
3
Spot
4
5
Spot
6
Spot
7
8
Spot
9
Spot
5
5
10
Spot
11
Snot
12

Day
Ending
0800
8/30/77
8/30/77
8/31/77
8/31/77
9/01/77
9/01/77
9/02/77
9/03/77
9/03/77
9/04/77
9/04/77
9/05/77
9/06/77

9/07/77
9/07/77
1000-1200
0800-1000
9/08/77
9/08/77
9/09/77
9/09/77
9/10/77'
t
C


59.50
58.87
58.88
56.41
60.07
60.30
59.09
58.78
58.30
59.29
57.71
59.29
59.42
59.25
59.91
59.20
59.09
59.03
60.34
60.09
58.81
60.12
60.09

H


4.10
4.22
4:04
3.72
4.12
4.04
4.01
3.97
3.97
4.11
3.99
4.04
4.11
4.12
. 4.08
4.07
4.07
4.11
4.06
3.99
3.79
4.16
4.09
	 Wt.
N


1.14
1.12
0.76
0.66
1.21
0.82
1.20
1.00
1.18
1.03
1.06
1.05
1.12
0.83
1.01
1.01
0.78
0.97
0.74
0.76
1.08
1.04
1.02
% 	
0


7.55
8.19
7.60
7.51
7.50
7.58
6.56
7.21
6.42
7.15
7.77
7.55
7.58
7.99
7.53
7.48
10.23
7.03
4.50
7.17
7.17
7.25
7.34

S


2.61
2.75
2.64
2.33
2.91
2.94
3.20
3.23
3.38
2.77
2.93
2.59
2.80
2.67
2.75
2.74
2.83
3.21
3.20
2.81
2.45
2.87
2.60
j.
H?0


15.62
14.48
14.88
13.66
13.06
13.23
12.78
13.50
12.23
14.95
14.75
14.90
15.46
15.68
14.75
15.76
12.60
13.39
14.26
14.18
15.34
15.00
. 14.74
Btu/Lb.
HHV


10614
10566
10509
9980
10G92
10735
10506
10491
10351
10524
10387
10546
10637
10594
10642
10540
10569
10527
10708
10616
10441
10756
10678
Ut. X
Ash


9.47
10.31
11.16
15.67 .
11.09
11.05
13.13
12.27
14.49
10.67
11.76
10.47
9.48
9.43
9.94
9.71
10.37
12.23
12.87
10.98
11.35
9.56
10.09

-------
                                                                COAL ANALYSIS (CONTINUED)
:>
en


Test Period

High Load
High Load
Design
High Load
High Load
High Load
High Load
High Load
















Test
Day

1
Spot
13
2
Spot
3
Spot
4
















Day
Ending
0800
9/12/77
9/12/77
9/11/77
9/13/77
9/13/77
9/14/77
9/15/77
9/15/77

















C


60.19
59.78
60. 46
57.79
58.41
57.81
58.09
59.68

















H


4.15
4.09
4.04
3.85
4.06
3.99
4.09
4.10















1,14.

N


1.04
0.85
1.11
1.01
1.01
1.01
0.80
0.80















V
if - - --
0


7.68
7.90
7.80
7.44
7.66
6.84
7.63
7.24







t









S


2.76
2.75
2.84
3.11
2.66
3.31
3.05
3.20

















H20


14.15
14.31
13.40
11.90
13.48
13.02
12.67
13.19















Btu/Lb.
HHV


10624
10600
10307
10350
10422
10321
10413
10696















Wt. 2
Ash


10.00
10.29
10.32
14.80
12.69
14.00
13.65
11.77
















-------
»t*» AlK/wl • UnniSTRIAL. CHEMICALS Division
j-^VS AIII8Q
^s,. Li Chemical ANALYSIS CERTIFICATION
^>§
FROM . LABORATORY
Green River Works
Si. JT
Soda Ash Analysis
''Allied Chemical Corporation' ~*
Industrial Chemicals Division
PO Box 2006
Hasoond IN 46323
Attn; Mike McCoy
L. J
DATCSAUTLI RECEIVED
July 20. 1977
ANALYSIS PATE
July 26, 1977
SOURCE
Railroad Car Loaded
RErtRENCI NO.
NO.SAUTLEI
2

D SAMPLC rHOTERLY TAKEN
D SAUTLf SAID TO REPRESENT
UARKIO
CRDX 6456
 Screen Analysis

 U.  S.  Screen

    120
     30
     40 .
     60
  • 100
    200
  -200
T, Retained

    .1
   3.0
   23.3
   54.7
   17.1
   1.6
    .2
TOTAL	:...-.	   100.0

Density.	:	   1024     GPL

Color		,	     96

Assay as  Ma.2C03	    99.79
Impurities

Sodium Chloride (as NaCl).

Soluble Silica (as SiOa)..

Organic Matter (as C)	

Iron (as Fe)	
  .0067 %

  .0155 1

  .0153 1

  .0003 t
                     ICCRTIHED BY:
                         A-66

-------
                                 APPENDIX B
                                TEST METHODS

I.    S02 REMOVAL EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION
     A)  Analysis methods used by continuous analyzers to measure gaseous
         components which determine the removal efficiency:
         1.  S02 (in/out) was determined by using a split
             beam ultraviolet photometric detector.
         2.  C02 (in/out) was determined by non-dispersive
             infrared detection using nitrogen as the
             reference gas.
         3.  H20 (in/out) was determined by non-dispersive
             infrared detection using nitrogen as the
             reference gas.
     B)  Sulfur in coal analysis was done using ASTM Standard
         Method D271.
     C)  Calibration of the three continuous analyzers used to
         determine S0« removal efficiencies was performed on a daily
         basis using the following calibration gases:
                    Zero                    Span
             S02     N2     260 ppmv S02 in N2 (low span)
                            2690 ppmv S02 in N2 (high span)
             C02     N2     75% by volume C02 in N2
             H20     N2     Pure C2Hg giving 62.5% of full scale
     D)  Manual sampling of the inlet flue gas stream (sample point was
         at the discharge of the boiler ID fans) was done using a modified
         EPA Method 6 testing procedure whereby one point, non-isokinetic
         sampling was used for S02 determination.

                                     B-l

-------
E)  F6D plant analyzer was calibrated daily using ambient air as
    the source of zero gas and an optical filter system for span-
    ning the instrument.
F)  Calculation of the S02 removal efficiency for the Design
    Test was performed using the following method:
    1.  Average gas concentrations were calculated
        for inlet and outlet S02, inlet and outlet
        COp, and inlet and outlet H20 for each 2-
        hour period, beginning at 0800 hours each
        day.
    2.  Average stack temperatures and static pressures
        were found for the same 2-hour periods.
    3.  Flue gas flow rates (assumed to be at the
        measured inlet conditions to the scrubber)
        were corrected to 70°F and 29.92" Hg. for
        each 2-hour period.
    4.  SO/> mass rates at the inlet for each 2-hour
        period were calculated by multiplying the
        average inlet S02 concentration by the
        corresponding flue gas flow rate and then
        multiplying this quantity by the density of
        S02 (0.1655 lb/ft3 0 70° F and 1 atm.)
    5.  Flue gas flow rates at the outlet for each
        2-hour period were corrected for air in-
        leakage and water pickup by using the follow-
        ing equation:
                 VSTD = (VSTDI) (COol) (100-HoOI)
                            (C020) (100-H200)

        where:                              ..
                 VSTD = outlet flow rate, ftj/hr
                 VSTDI = inlet flow rate, ft3/hr
                 C02I = inlet C02 concentration, vol. %
                                B-2

-------
                      C020 = outlet C02 concentration, vol. %
                      H2OI = Inlet H20 concentration, vol. %
                      H200 = outlet H20 concentration, vol. %
         6.  S02 mass rates at the outlet for each 2-hour
             period were calculated by multiplying the
             average outlet S02 concentration by the corres-
             ponding flue gas flow rate and then multiplying
             this quantity by the density of S02 (0.1655 lb/
             ft3 e 70°F, 1 atm.).
         7.  S02 removal efficiency for any 2-hour period
             was then given by:
                   % removal = 1 - ^S03 mass rate> Q"t1et)
                                   (S02 mass rate, inlet)-
II.  PROCESS CONSUMABLES
     A)  Natural gas flow rates were measured using the FGD plant factory-
         calibrated flow nozzles and pressure differential transducers
         which were calibrated on a routine basis.  Natural gas heating
         values were obtained from NIPSCO from calorimetric analysis.
     B)  Kilowatt-hour measurements were taken from the FGD plant meter
         which were calibrated by the NIPSCO Meter Department.
     C)  Steam flow rates were measured using pressure differential
         transducers and factory-calibrated flow nozzles.  The transducers
         were calibrated by applying known pressure differentials across
         the transducer and verifying correct output.
     D)  Steam temperature and pressure were measured using thermo-
         couples and differential pressure sensors, respectively.
         Temperature sensors were calibrated by thermocouple disconnect
         at the recorder input, application of a known DC potential
         across the input, and verifying correct output.   Pressure
         sensor calibration was performed using dead weight testers.
                                     B-3

-------
      E)  Steam temperature, pressure, and flow were reported on an
          hourly basis derived from twenty 3-minute averages taken
          during the hour.
      F)  A correction to steam flow rate based on measured temper-
          ature and pressure was derived empirically.  The equation
          for determining corrected steam flow, in lb/hr., is as
          follows:
                 (-1.3759 x IP"6 T2) + (2.3391  x IP"3 T) + .11237
          W  = W
           c
                -\/ (1.25 x 10"3 T)  - (2.21  x 10"3 p)  + 1.5525
      where:
          W = corrected flow rate,  lb/hr
          W = indicated flow rate,  lb/hr
          T = steam temperature,  °F
          p = steam pressure, psig
III.   SODA ASH
      A)  Soda ash consumption figures were provided by Allied Chemical
          along with a certificate  of analysis  for Na^CO., content.   Based
          on this analysis,  the soda ash consumption rate was converted
          to a pure Na^CO? consumption rate and reported as ^COg
          consumed.
 IV.   SULFUR PRODUCT PURITY
      A)  A sample from each truck  shipment was collected by Allied
          Chemical personnel.  Shipments were at a frequency of about one
          a day.  To prepare a laboratory sample; portions from each
          sample increment were split off, pulverized,  and mixed by
          quartering.  Two samples  were prepared in this fashion; one
          for the Design Load phase and one for the High Load phase.
      B)  The samples were analyzed by Commercial Test  and Engineering
          Company laboratories, using methods for bright sulfur supplied
          by Allied Chemical.
                                       B-4

-------
V.   PARTICULATE MATTER
     A)  Sampling was done both at the Inlet and outlet of the absorber
         in accordance with EPA Method 5, Federal Register. August 18,
         1977 using 24 traverse points.
     B)  Sampling during both the Design Load test and the High Load
         test was normally scheduled to begin between 0800 and 0900 hours
         with completion usually 4.5 hours after commencement.  During
         the period of manual sampling, coal samples were taken every
         7.5 minutes with a composite sample made up at the end.  Also,
         boiler and FGD process readings were taken both at the beginning
         and end of the manual sampling period.
     C)  Particulate matter was determined by the following methodology:
         1.  Dessicate needed quantity of Gelman, Type A-E,
             Glass-Fiber filter paper for at least 24 hours.
         2.  Weigh each filter and obtain weight to nearest
             0.0001 gram.
         3.  Place weighed filter in labeled holder.
         4.  Transport filters and holders in dessicator
             to sampling site, avoiding any contamination
             of filter.
         5.  After use in sampling train, dessicate filter
             for at least 24 hours.
         6.  Weigh filter and obtain weight to nearest
             0.0001 gram.
         7.  Obtain subtotal of particle weight by differ-
             ence.
         8.  Add to this, weight of particulate matter
             washed out of sampling line from probe inlet
             to the filter using acetone (acetone was driven
             off by heating on hot plate set to 40°C).
                                     B-5

-------
 VI.  S02 BY MANUAL METHODS
      A)  Sampling was carried out by a modified EPA Method 6 (42 FR 41754,
          August 18, 1977).  The method was modified to increase the
          absorbing reagent supply so that the sampling could cover the
          entire period of particulate matter sampling, about 4.5 hours.
          The collecting hardware was modified from a midget impinger
          train to a full sized impinger train in order to use the
          Method 5 EPA train for both particulate and sulfur oxides.
          Instead of distilled water in the impingers, the first im-
          pinger contains 80% isopropanol  (SO, absorption), the second
          and third impingers contain 3% hydrogen peroxide (S02 absorp-
          tion), and a fourth impinger is  for silica gel.
      B)  The analysis for S02 is a barium-perch!orate titration with
          thorin end-point indicator after the SOy is oxidized to S03
          by the peroxide absorbing solution.
      C)  Flow determination was accomplished in accordance with EPA
          Method 2, Federal Register. August 18, 1977.
      D)  Moisture and dry molecular weight determinations were per-
          formed by gas chromatograph analysis (using an AID GC-TC)
          which is an accepted substitute  method for both  EPA Methods
          4 and 3, Federal Register, August 18, 1977.
VII.  FLUE GAS SAMPLING BY THE CONTINUOUS  SAMPLING TRAIN
      A)  Flue gas was sampled at both the NIPSCO outlet and the absorber
          outlet.  In-stack filters, with  a filter surface of a porous
          metal removed particulates of 5  micron diameter  or greater.
          To prevent degradation of the gaseous sample, the sample was
          delivered to the sensor system in a heated process line.  At
          the NIPSCO outlet, the line was  mainteined at 300°F.  At the
          absorber outlet, a temperature of 150QF was maintained.  The
          sample line was 3/8" TFE.  The chemical inactivity of this
          line prevented degradation of the flue gas.  The electrically
          traced process line interfaced with the in-stack filter at
                                      B-6

-------
           the duct and interfaced with the S02 analyzer in the continu-
           ous monitor installation.  Blowback of the sample lines was
           initiated at the S02 analyzer to occur once every 6 minutes.
       B)  Flow control through the continuous sampling system was on a
           dual-pressure basis.  The S02 and H20 vapor analyzers operated
           on a partial vacuum flow system, while the remainder of the
           instruments used a positive pressure flow system.  Wet sample
           gas was supplied to the S02 analyzer at a rate of 5 scfh and
           was pressure-controlled internally at the analyzer to ensure
           proper readings.  Wet sample gas was supplied to the H20 vapor
           analyzer at the rate of 10 scfh and flow to the analyzer was
           controlled internally by a separate pump.  The sample gas
           stream not used by the H20 vapor analyzer then was pumped under
           positive pressure through a condenser and then supplied to the
           C02 and 02 analyzers on a dry basis.
VIII.  COAL SAMPLING
       A)  Coal was sampled by the NIPSCO coal handler from the coal hoppers
           to make composites of raw coal, using sampling probes designed by
           NIPSCO.  One gross sample per 4-hour spot test was composited
           from increments taken every 7.5 minutes, while one gross sample
           per 24-hour period was composited from increments taken every
           hour over the 24-hour sampling period, except the hours when a
           manual sample was being run.  During the hours of manual sampling,
           the hourly increment for the 24-hour composite was made up of
           equal portions of the sample taken at 7.5 minutes after the hour
           and the sample taken at 22.5 minutes after the hour.  Each incre-
           mental sample taken was stored in a plastic bag and sealed with
           ties to minimize moisture loss.  To make the composite sample,
           equal quantities from each incremental sample were riffled
           together, forming a composite sample.  Portions of the compos-
           ite were then stored in mason jars, one of which was submitted
           for analysis.  The coal handler was instructed when to begin
           and end the manual test period, thus ensuring continuous
           sampling even when the manual testing took longer than the
           planned time frame.

                                       B-7

-------
                 APPENDIX C

          FLUE GAS FLOW COMPARISONS


     DEMONSTRATION OF WELLMAN-LORD/ALLIED

           CHEMICAL FGD TECHNOLOGY:

           Flue Gas Flow Comparisons
                     by

       R. D. Adams and S. W. Mulligan
                  TRW, Inc.

     Environmental Engineering Division
            800 Follin Lane, S.E.
           Vienna, Virginia  22180
           Contract No. 68-02-1877
    EPA Project Officer:  Wade H. Ponder
                Prepared for

   Utilities and Industrial Power Division
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
   U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
    Research Triangle Park, N. C.  27711
                      C-l

-------
                                   SECTION 1
                            SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

     A limited series of flue gas measurements were made with the FGD plant
completely isolated from the boiler.  The objective was to compare present
day flue gas rates with those obtained during the Baseline Test.   These
data would be of help in confirming that the flows during the Acceptance
Test were providing a fair test of the performance of the FGD unit.
     Test results are summarized as follows:
     (a)  At a gross load on the boiler of 92 MW, the flue
          gas flow was 400 MCFM compared with an average of
          369 MCFM during the Baseline Test in 1974, an
          increase of about 7% after correcting for load
          differences.  The increase seems to be largely
          due to an increase in heat input to the boiler,
          which was 12% higher than during the Baseline
          Test, and the corresponding increase in fuel
          rate.
     (b)  At a gross load of 81 MW, which is the megawatt
          equivalent of total main steam produced by the
          boiler during the design load phase of the
          Acceptance Test, the measured values averaged
          399 MCFM which was virtually the same as the flue
          gas volume measured at 92 MUG.  However, flows cal-
          culated from fuel composition and rate and excess
          air levels correlated fairly well with load.   Using
          calculated values, flow rates during the Acceptance
          Test were slightly higher but within 5% of the Base-
          line Test measurements.
     (c)  It is concluded from these results that actual
          flow rates during the Acceptance Test were higher

                                      C-2

-------
     than the 320 MCFM and 388 MCFM specified for the
     performance runs and also were not less than the
     flue gas volumes experienced during the Baseline
     Test.
(d)  The data collected to determine boiler heat input
     during these flow tests and during the Acceptance
     Test suggest a loss of boiler efficiency since
     the baseline testing in 1974.  Increased flue gas
     flows would be one result of a decrease in efficien-
     cy.  The combined data of the flow tests and the
     Acceptance Test show that heat input is about 7%
     higher than during the Baseline Test.
(e)  Based on samples of ash collected from the pre-
     cipitator hoppers, heat losses due to unburned
     carbon were found to be less than 0.5% of the
     total heat input.
                                 C-3

-------
                                   SECTION 2
                                TEST RATIONALE

     The flow measurements were made to compare present flue gas flow rates
with the baseline flue gas flow rates.  Oust prior to the Acceptance Test, it
was found that the apparent flue gas rates at 92 MW (FGD design load) were
much higher than expected.  As a consequence, it was necessary to test FGD per-
formance during the Acceptance Test at the design flue gas rate of 320,000
acfm rather than at 92 MW load.  The resulting gross load was only 72 MW.
Adding the steam consumed by the FGD plant to the steam equivalent of 72 MW,
the load equivalent of the total steam produced by the boiler was 81 MW or
only 88% of the design load.  Furthermore, during the Acceptance Test, it was
necessary to rely on flow estimates derived from the speed and fan curves of
the booster fan.  This was necessary because of an apparent bias error in the
flow measurements which was a result of limited lengths of straight duct avail-
able for measurement.  These uncertainties have brought into question whether
or not enough gas was being treated during the Acceptance Test to provide a
fair test of the performance of the FGD process.
     The testing described in this report was designed to determine if at
a given load the flue gas flow rates of the Baseline Test could be repeated.
This was accomplished by completely isolating the FGD plant from the boiler
and then making the flow measurements at the location used for baseline
testing.  At the same time, coal rates and compositions, steam and feed water
rates, and other pertinent boiler operating data were collected with the
assistance of NIPSCO's Results Department personnel.  The Results Department
also collected data for a boiler heat balance and for air heater inleakage
tests but these results are not a part of this report.  Fly ash samples were
also collected to determine the amount of unburned carbon present.
                                      C-4

-------
                                   SECTION 3
                             RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

RESULTS AT 92 MEGAWATTS  GROSS
     Flue gas flow measurements were made at two levels of load; about 92 MW
(FGD design  load) and  about  81 MW.  The latter load represents the Acceptance
Test design  load operating condition.  At 91.3 MW gross, the flue gas rate
was 400 MCFM.   (All  flue gas rates in  this report are corrected to 300°F and
29.92" Hg absolute pressure.)  For six tests during the Baseline Test, the
flue gas rate varied from 297 MCFM to  411 MCFM at an average load of 90.0 MWG.
Of this data, the measurements made in conjunction with ASME particulate
matter sampling were more consistent and varied from 357 MCFM to 385 MCFM for
an average value of  369  MCFM.  The present operating condition at a nominal
92 MWG compared with the ba'seline condition are summarized in Table 1:
      TABLE  1.  PRESENT  OPERATING CONDITIONS VS. BASELINE AT 92 MW GROSS	

                             Average of Six
                             Baseline  Tests      Present Condition      Percent
                                 (1974)              (10/5/77)           Diff.

  Flue Gas Rate, MCFM
  (300°F, 29.92 in.  Hg)             369                  400              +8.4
  Gross Load, MW                   90.0                 91.3              +1.4
  Coal Rate, Ib/hr.              81,000               96,800             +19.5
  Boiler Heat Input,
  MM Btu/hr.                        908                 1016             +11.9

The data of Table 1  show that more fuel is being consumed now than during the
Baseline Test.  'It is  apparent that flue gas volumes would have to increase
with the fuel rates.   How much increase is dependent on the combustible com-
ponent and water contents of the coal  and on the amount of excess air.  The
                                      C-5

-------
Baseline Test flue gas rates have been calculated from the measured coal
compositions and excess air levels and plotted on Figure 1.  For 91.3 MMG,
the baseline flue gas rate is calculated to be 350 MCFM compared to a
calculated rate of 412 MCFM at 91.3 MWG during the recent flow tests.  The
corresponding measured values agree within 10% of these calculated flue gas
rates.
RESULTS AT 81 MEGAWATTS GROSS
     Flows were also measured at about 81  MW which was the operating level
for performance testing at the design rate of the FGD plant.   The average of
two flow measurements at 81.8 MWG was 399 MCFM, or virtually the same as the
flow measured at 91.3 MWG.  Obviously, there should be a decrease in flue gas.
rate with decreasing load.  However, we were attempting to measure flows at
two levels which varied by only about ten percent and a measurement error
band of +_ 10% is to be expected for the method used.   Table 2 compares the
operating conditions at the two load levels.
           TABLE 2.  PRESENT OPERATING CONDITIONS AT TWO LOAD LEVELS


Gross Load, MW
Flue Gas Rate, MCFM
Coal Rate, Ib/hr.
Boiler Heat Input,
MM Btu/hr.
Baseline Test
Compari son
91.3
400
96,800
1016
12-Day Acceptance Percent
Test Comparison Diff.
81.8 -10.4
399 <1.0
87,900 -9.2
898 -11.6

     Better correlation at varying operating levels is obtained with calculated
flue gas flows, see Figure 2.  Both measured and calculated flue gas rates are
plotted as functions of the measured heat input to the boiler.   These correla-
tions show that present flue gas rates are not substantially greater than the
Baseline Test results but that all flue gas volumes, including  the baseline
results, are substantially above the 320 MCFM and 388 MCFM specified for the
Acceptance Test.  For example, the average boiler heat input during the
                                      C-6

-------
FIGURE 1.   BASELINE TEST FLUE GAS FLOWS - CALCULATED

-------
                                  FIGURE 2.   FLUE  GAS  FLOW VERSUS  BOILER HEAT INPUT
o
00

-------
Acceptance Test at design load was 885 MM Btu/hour.  At this boiler heat input,
baseline flue gas flow rate was 365 MCFI1 and present flow rates are slightly
higher but within 5% of the baseline value.
BOILER PERFORMANCE
     The higher than expected flue gas rates are due in part to a higher than
expected input heat requirement for the level of megawatts generated.  The
gross megawatts as a function of heat input are shown on Figure 3.  On the
average, the combined flow test and Acceptance Test heat input data are about
7% higher than the boiler heat inputs encountered in 1974 during the baseline
testing.
HEAT LOSSES DUE TO UNBURNED CARBON
     To determine if there was a significant loss of heating value due to un-
burned fuel, two samples of ash were collected from the precipitator hopper
and analyzed for combustible content.  Loss on ignition was 1.4% and 2.9% of
the ash for the two ash samples.  Assuming that the corresponding combustible
content is carbon, the associated heat loss would be less than 0.5% of the
total heat input.
                                      C-9

-------
                                   FIGURE 3.  MEGAWATTS GENERATED  VERSUS  BOILER  HEAT INPUT
o

o
                     Si
                     60 -

                        I ;
                            ir
                                  Cl PTANi I
in
ri'
    Hi!
                                  4(f)0
                                        •HIP
         erot

        TEST
                                          ir
                                          i
         Si 10
                                              ER
            X
                                                :i
               HIT
               iltt
                                                xi
7]
                    1}
    * i i
    t

                           tfl
                                                                 
-------
                                TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                         (Please read Inunctions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
 EPA-600/7-79-014a
                                                     3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Demonstration of Wellman-Lord/Allied Chemical FGD
  Technology: Acceptance Test Results
                                                      . REPORT DATE
                                                      January 1979
                                                     6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)

R.C. Adams, S.J.Lutz, and S.W. Mulligan
                                                     B. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
TRW, Inc.
201 North Roxboro Street, Suite 200
Durham, North Carolina 27701
                                                     10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                                                      E HE 62 4 A
                                                     11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                                                     68-02-1877
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
 EPA, Office of Research and Development
 Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
 Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                                                      13. TYPE OF REPORT ,
                                                      Phase;  8-9/77
                                                                  T AND PERIOD COVERED
                                                      14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                                                       EPA/600/13
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
                              project officer is Charles J.  Chatlynne, Mail Drop 61,
919/541-2915. EPA-600/7-77-014 is an earlier report in this series.
i6. ABSTRAciThe report gives results of acceptance tests of Wellman-Lord/Allied Chem-
ical  flue gas desulfurization (FGD) technology. Process performance guarantees
were met or exceeded. During the 12-day Design Load test, the plant was operated
at the design condition of a boiler flue gas output rate equivalent to 80% of the maxi-
mum boiler load of 115 MW gross. During the 83-hour High Load test, the plant
treated flue gas volumes equivalent to 95% of maximum boiler load. SO2  removal of
90% or better was  achieved.  Particulate emissions did not exceed 0.1 Ib/million Btu
of boiler heat input.  The consumption of steam, natural gas,  and electrical power
was less than the performance guarantee requirements at Design Load conditions.
Soda ash consumption was less than the limit set by the performance guarantees.
Finally, sulfur product purity was greater than 99. 5%.
17.
                             KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                DESCRIPTORS
                                          b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                                                                  c. COSATI Field/Group
Air Pollution
Flue Gases
Desulfurization
Dust
Sodium Carbonates
                                          Air Pollution Control
                                          Stationary Sources
                                          Particulate
                                          Wellman Lord
                                          Allied Chemical
 13B
21B
07A,07D
11G
07B
                                          19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
                                          Unclassified
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

 Unlimited
21. NO. OF PAGES
    129
                                          20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
                                          Unclassified
                                                                  22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)

-------