^tDJ%,
QUAflTEflLY
REPORT
INDUSTRIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
VOL 1 NO 3
FALL 1977
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK. NC 27711
INTRODUCTION TO THE THIRD ISSUE
The FGD Quarterly Report is part of a comprehensive
Engineering Application Information Transfer Program on flue
gas desulfurizalion (FGD). The program is sponsored by EPA's
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory. Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina (IF.R1.-RTP). The Report is designed to
meet four major objectives: (1) to disseminate information con-
cerning F.PA sponsored and conducted research, development
and demonstration (RD&D) activities in FGD; (2) to provide
progress updates on selected ongoing contracts: (3) to report final
results of various FGD studies, and (4) to provide interested
readers with sources of more detailed information.
A special supplement hound with this issue provides highlights
of the Fourth FGD Symposium held in November in Hollywood,
Florida.
The FGD Quarterly Report is distributed, without charge, by
IERL-RTP, to a list of recipients who are interested in FGD.
Please note tha"t a prepaid return mailer is included with this
issue. The mailer must be returned if you wish to continue
receiving this report, even if this is the first issue you have
received. The card is prepaid and completely preaddressed.
Simply tear it out. check the proper box. and drop it in the mail.
EPA REVIEWS SO? NSPS
The Clean Air Act (CAA) required the establishment of New
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and also required that
they he revised as needed to reflect the influence of new techno-
logy on emissions control. An effort was underway by F.PA to
review the SO, emission standard for fossil fuel fired steam
generators when the CAA Amendments of 1977 were passed.
Originally, NSPS stipulated a reduction of SO, emissions to
specific levels measured in pounds of SO, 10" Btu. However, the
revised CAA stipulates that emissions be controlled to achieve
both an emission limit and a percent reduction in the amount of
SO, emitted compared to an uncontrolled system. This means
that users of low sulfur coal as well as those using high sulfur coal
will be expected to achieve a percent reduction.
In order to reflect the 1977 Amendmenls, the review study was
expanded and redirected somewhat to determine the appropriate
SO, emission standard. The purpose of the overall study is to
.isscss SO; removal technology and the economic impact of
alternate emission limits. To accomplish this. If) tasks or sub-
studies were implemented. Final reports from 12 of these t.isks
will be submitted by early December. The remaining reports are
due by mid-January 1978. Data from all tasks will be evaluated
by
-------
FGD QUARTERLY REPORT/FALL 1977
conversion to SO, ranges from 86 to 100 percent for bituminous
coals; 54 to 60 percent for subbituminous coals; and 69 to 97
percent for lignite
Preliminary cost data indicate that use of a lime FGD system
to remove 90 percent of the SO, from a 500 MW plant burning
3.5 percent sulfur coal will cost $122 kW to build and 9.10
mills kWh to operate. Similar control equipment installed at the
same plant to meet current NSPS will cost $108 kW to build and
8.18 mills kWh to operate.
Further information regarding the NSPS review is available
from K. R. Durkee of EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (OAQPS) in Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711.
(919)541-5301. (See also the article on Hawkins1 Keynote Ad-
dress before the FGD Symposium in the special supplement to
this issue.)
WELLMAN-LORD/ALLIED FGD SYSTEM
ACCEPTANCE
Acceptance testing for the Wellrnan-Lord Allied Chemical FGD
demonstration project has been completed. The system, in-
corporating the Wellman-Lord SO, Recovery Process with Allied
Chemical's SO? Reduction Process, is installed on the Northern
Indiana Public Service Company's (NIPSCO's) 115 MW coal-fired
LJnit No. 11 at the D. H. Mitchell Station in Gary, Indiana.
The boiler and FGD plant achieved full capacity, integrated
operation during July and August. The acceptance test was
initiated on August 29 and was concluded successfully on Sep-
tember 14. The demonstration test year began on September 16,
1977.
During the Acceptance Test period the system met or exceeded
all specified performance criteria. The results are summarized
below:
Parameter
SO, removal efficiency
Particle emissions
Na,CO, consumption
Utilities cost
Sulfur product purity
Performance
Criterion
90%
Actual
Performance
91%
< 0.04 g.'MJ 0.02 g'MJ
(< 0.1 lb/10* Btu) (0.05 Ib. 10* Btu)
6.0 Mg/day
(6.6 tons/day)
$56 hr
99.5%
5.6 Mg day
(6.2 tons day)
$43 hr
99.9%
EPA officially notified N1PSCO that the FGD plant had
successfully met all contractually required performance criteria
on September 15. 1977. Upon notification. NIPSCO officially
accepted the system from Davy-Powergas on September 16,
1977. On November 3, NIPSCO and EPA held a joint press
conference in Gary, Indiana to announce the successful con-
clusion of acceptance testing and the official beginning of the
demonstration test year. The EPA/IERL-RTP Project Officer for
this FGD demonstration project is Wade H. Ponder (919) 541-
2915.
INTERAGENCY FGD EVALUATION
STUDY
The combustion of fossil fuels in conventional utility boilers is
expected to play an important role in meeting the nation's future
energy needs. As available oil and natural gas resources are
depleted, and cost of production increases, the use of coal will
become increasingly important. Conversion to a coal-based
energy system will be accelerated under the President's proposed
National Energy Plan (NEP). Under the proposed NEP, yearly
coal consumption will be increased by 200 Tg (200 million tons)
by 1985. The increase will be stimulated by selective taxation on
continued use of oil and gas; tax credits or rebates for coal utili-
sation equipment: increased wellhead prices for gas and oil: and
compulsory utilization of coal for most new utility and industrial
boilers.
As coal utilization increases, the potential impact of SO,
emissions from coal-fired units on air quality will become more
significant. Since FGD appears to be the only viable short term
option for SO, control, the NEP stipulated that the Government
undertake a six month review to determine whether FGD techno-
logies offer sufficient environmental, cost, and reliability advan-
tages to justify accelerating the FGD research, development, and
demonstration (RD&D) program. The study was initiated June
1977 and is being conducted to review FGD technology and to
identify RD&D options that would accelerate the commercial-
ization of FGD.
The overall study is chaired by George R. Hall, the Executive
Office of the President, Office of Energy Policy and Planning
(OEPP). Richard D. Stern of IERL-RTP is coordinating the
overall study. The study utili/ed three groups: a Technical
Working Group, an Intenrgency Steering Panel and a Liaison
Group. Input material for each of the three groups was prepared
by EPA and its contractors.
The Technical Working Group is chaired by Dr. Stephen J.
Gage, Acting Assistant Administrator for Research and Develop-
ment, EPA. The group is made up of representatives from EPA,
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), Electric Power Research
Institute (EPRI) and Energy Research and Development Adminis-
tration (F.RDA3, as well as several consulting firms. I he Inter-
agency Steering panel was made up of representatives from E.PA,
TVA, ERDA, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Federal
Energy Administration (FEA), Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ), Federal Power Commission (FPC),Office of Sciences &
Technology (OST), and OF.PP, the chairing organi/ation. The
Liaison group was composed of National Academy of l.tigineers
(NAE), Science Advisory Board (SAB). TVA and EPRI
representatives.
The initial task was to compile a comprehensive list of FGD
processes and subsystems. A total of 138 systems were identified
for consideration, and a public meeting was held to solicit any
additional information. Developmental status of the systems
varied from conceptual to commercial. The processes were then
screened objectively to select those offering potential advantages.
Thirteen processes selected in the screening, along with six
commercial and developing processes, were then evaluated in
order to identify and prioritize RD&D alternatives. Emphasis was
on identifying those alternatives that would most effectively accel-
erate commerciali/ation and application of FGD.
Ihe criteria developed for evaluation of the selected pro< esses
included environmental energy considerations, development
status, economic technological considerations and applu ability
of the process to utility and/or industrial situations.
The candidate processes were grouped into two general
categories: regenerable and non-regenerable (sludge producers).
The regenerable processes were subdivided into sulfur producers
and sulfuric acid producers. This grouping, according to by-
product, allowed each process first to be ranked against others in
the same category. The most promising processes then could be
evaluated according to site specific factors. With this system.
-------
FGO QUARTERLY REPORT/FALL 197?
processes u'hich ranked high wprt- identified HS btsing better
candidates for HD&t) Mtpfjorf than those which required substan-
tial process modification to tH'c'onn* competitive.
Following the process evaluations, a list o( prioriti/ed RD&O
opportunities was developed. f:ach process on the fist was
characterized according to near or far itjrm KD&D options, bene-
fits expected, scheduling, cost, and degree of research currently
underway.
The Working Group considered RD&i) funding of prefects
designed to provide near term solutions to FGD problems as the
most effective way to advance FGD technology. Secondary
priority was assigned to processes and process developments that
could provide long term benefits. The Working Group also recom-
mended that funds be allocated for continuing technical and
economic evaluation of emerging processes and subsystems with
potential for improving FGD technology.
The findings of this study indicate that further funding of
selected FGD technologies would have significant impact on the
applicability of FGD processes to utility and industrial situations.
The Working Group felt that implementation of the programs
recommended would be valuable in achieving the goals of the
National Energy Plan.
A draft report of the interagency FGD Evaluation Study is
currently being reviewed by the Technical Working Group prior to
subnitttal to the Interagency Steering Panel. Additional in-
formation can be obtained from Richard D. Stern, (919) 541-
2915 or (FTS) 629-2915.
FGD SLUDGE DISPOSAL STUDIES
Non-regenerable FGD systems (lime/limestone or dual alkali
scrubbers) are widely accepted as practical and economical near-
term measures for SO, control. With the current increased
emphasis on conversion to coal for industrial fuel and electric
power generation, non-regenerable FGD systems can be expected
to proliferate. The waste generated by these systems, however,
presents a potentially serious environmental problem.
No Federal criteria exist for disposal of FGD sludges. Wide
variations exist in sludge characteristics, site characteristics, and
disposal methods. At this time EPA is conducting over 20
research studies, under the direction of Julian W. Jones, 1F.RL-
RTP, to define and evaluate environmentally sound disposal
methods. Five of the studies are being conducted in cooperation
with F.PA's Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory in
Cincinnati, Ohio (MERL-Cinn), Brief descriptions of several of the
studies are contained in the following paragraphs. This research
is providing EPA with a base for development of effective FGD
sludge disposal criteria.
Mine and Ocean Disposal
In a report prepared by Arthur D. Little, inc. (F.PA-600 '7-77-
051, see FGD Reports and Abstracts section), it is estimated
that, based upon current trends, operational FGD capacity will
reach 35,000 MW by 1980, and exceed 100,000 MW by 1985.
Over 90 percent of FGD capacity now in service or under con-
struction is non-regenerable. This proportion is expected to hold
through 1985. Based on this estimate and additional logic
described in the report, it is estimated that FGD will generate
about 40 Tg (40 million short tons) of wet sludge (including fly
ash) in 1980 and about 100 Tg (110 million short tons) in 1985.
The report presents the results of the first phase of a study to
determine the feasibility of disposal of FGD sludges in mines and
in the ocean. In this phase an initial assessment was made of
environmental, technical, find regulatory factors involved in such
disposal. The study also identified the need for additional
research and information on such disposal methods.
Ir was concluded from the study that, while disposal of FGD
sludges in mines appears promising front both a technological
and an environmental standpoint, such disposal has the potential
for significant environmental imparts. The fate of the sludge and
the extent of the environmental impact will depend primarily on
the geology of a particular disposal site and on the specific
chemical and physical characteristics of thp sludge. However, the
indigenous quality of the receiving groundwater, and potential
pathways to surface waters, are factors which contribute heavily
to the impact. For these reasons, it is recommended that each
proposal for FGD sludge disposal be assessed on a case-by-case
basis k> determine the magnitude and acceptability of any im-
pact.
According to the report, existing laws are technically adequate
to insure protection of the geologic environment from under-
ground waste disposal. The primary legislation covering such
disposal is the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendment of
1972. However, regulations must be developed with guidelines for
site selection and waste acceptance based upon sludge charac-
teristics and research on potential environmental impacts.
Several conclusions were drawn regarding disposal of FGD
sludges in the oceans. Based on sedimentation and suspension
impacts, disposal of treated or untreated sludges with soil-like
physical properties by bottom-dump barge on the continental
shelf must be considered environmentally unacceptable. Based
upon available information on sulfite toxtcity, sulftte-rich sludges
should be diluted 10,000:1 within minutes after dumping. The
technology necessary to achieve such dilution economically is not
currently available. Therefore, dispersed disposal of sulfite-rich
sludges is not considered a promising option.
Several disposal options appear promising and are recom-
mended for further research. These include dispersed disposal of
sulfate-rich sludges on the continental shelf as well as off the
continental shelf (deep ocean), and disposal of treated bricqtietted
FGD sludge on the continental shelf. Existing regulations
governing ocean dumping appear adequate but additional study is
needed, especially as they relate to mercury and cadmium levels.
Characterization of Treated
and Untreated Waste
In an ongoing study to determine environmentally sound
methods for disposal of f GD wastes, the Aerospace Corporation
characteri/ed treated and untreated sludges from a number of
FGD scrubbers based on lime, limestone, or dual alkali systems.
The second progress report on this study has been released (1;PA-
600 7-77-052. see FGD Reports and Abstracts section).
This report describes interim results of efforts to characteri/e
treated and untreated sludges from seven different scrubber
systems. Cost estimates are made for disposal of chemically
treated waste and for untreated waste in lined or imlinetl ponds.
Physical properties, which include bulk density, water reten-
tion, bearing strength, permeability, porosity and viscosity, are
process related. These properties are dependent on the charac-
teristics of both the liquid and solid constituents as well as the
interaction between them.
Chemical treatment has been found to effectively mmimi/e
leaching of sludge constituents. 1 his benefit is reali/«*d by a
reduction in permeability and an increase in load bearing
capacity of the sludge. The latter point permits compaction and
contouring of the sludge which can help to prevent accumulation
of standing water over the material. F.limination of a hydraulic
head over the site will reduce seepage tfWough the waste to a
minimum, or eliminate it entirely.
Cost information for a number of system/site disposal options
is given in the report. A number of recommendations for future
research are made, based on current information gaps and an
analysis of the more promising disposal methods.
-------
FGD QUARTERLY REPORT/FALL 1977
Sludge Fixation Tests Indicate
Potential Use for Fixed Sludges
Properties of raw and fixed sludges can be determined success-
fully by methods currently used in soils engineering- The testing
methods are described in a report released recently by the MERL-
Cinn. A full description of the report appears in the FGD Reports
and Abstracts section. The report (EPA-600 2-77-139), prepared
by the U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
presents detailed information on the properties of rau,1 and fixed
sludges along with recommendations for future work in testing
and sludge utilization.
Most of the fixation processes tested produced fixed sludges
having strengths comparable to those of soil-cement mixtures or
of low-strength concrete. It was determined that durability of
fixed sludges is a function of the fixation process rather than
sludge type. Because of the strength of fixed sludges, it was
recommended that an investigation be made of their potential for
use in landfill and embankment construction, in hope of reducing
disposal area requirements.
A number of factors are considered that influence the use of
fixed sludge for landfilling and embankment construction. Such
factors as compaction, bearing capacity, consolidation and slope
stability are evaluated and their influence on suitability is dis-
cussed. The discussions are brief and necessarily somewhat
speculative because of the lack of information on the per-
formance of fixed sludges tinder actual field conditions.
The report goes on to recommend that landfills constructed of
fixed sludges be carefully monitored to provide long term data on
field durability. Such data, when correlated with experimental
test results, will facilitate a prediction of field performance on the
basis of laboratory test data. Additional information on this
project can be obtained from the EPA/MERL-Cinn Project Of-
ficer, Robert E. Landreth (513) 684-7871.
Contaminant Identification and
Economic Assessment Modeling
for FGC Sludge Disposal Systems
A project is underway to create a predictive model for contam-
inant identification and economic assessment for Flue Gas
Cleaning (FGC) sludge disposal. The objective of the project is to
create and exercise a FGC sludge chemical speciation model and
to develop a preliminary economic assessment of the impact of
FGC management costs on the utility industry, SCS Engineers,
Long Beach, California, under contract to MERL-Cinn (EPA
Contract No. 68-03-2471} is conducting the project. Work began
in September 1976 and is scheduled for completion by September
1978.
Because of the distinctly different nature of the dual objectives,
the project has been divided into two separate efforts which will
run concurrently over the life of the project. The purpose of the
modeling effort is to create and verify a thermodynamic model of
FGC sludge chemical speciation. The model will provide means
for estimating leachate changes caused by various FGC or sludge
treatment alternatives.
The purpose of the second effort is to develop typical FGC
management costs in order to provide a preliminary assessment
of their probable economic impact on the utility industry.
Current project status reports indicate that speciatkms
modeling has been completed. Verification efforts were scheduled
to begin in November, at which time sludge samples were taken
for analysis. An interim report on the task is scheduled for
submission in January 1978.
Compilation and evaluation of industry financial data and
regulatory approaches is continuing as scheduled. Additional
information on this project is available from the EPA'!MEHL-Cimi
Project Officer, Donald E. Sanning (513) 684-7871.
-------
tfto sr^
QUARTERLM
flEPOflT
INDUSTRIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH
LABORATORY
SPECIAL FGD SYMPOSIUM EDITION
FOURTH FGD SYMPOSIUM HELD
The Fourth Symposium on Flue Gas Desulfurization was held
November 8-11, 1977, at th«> Diplomat Hotel in Hollywood,
Florida. The purpose of the Symposium, which was sponsored by
the EPA's Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory in
Research Triangle Park. NC (IERL-RTP). was to provide a forum
for the exchange of ideas and information on recent develop-
ments of flue gas desulfurization (FGD) systems and processes.
The General Chairman of the Symposium was Michael A.
Maxwell and the Vice-Chairman was Julian W. Jones, both of
lERI.-RTP's Utilities and Industrial Power Division, directed by
E. L. Plyler. Franklin A. Ayer, of the Research Triangle Institute,
served as Symposium Coordinator.
Trie Symposium began on Tuesday, November 8, with a
welcome by John K. Burrhard. Director, 1ERI.-RTP. Stephen J.
Gage, Acting Assistant Administrator for Research and
Development, then spoke on, "The National Energy Plan: Ac-
celerated Program in Coal Pollution-Control." The keynote ad-
dress. "A Balanced Approach to Energy and Air Quality," was
presented by David G. Hawkins. Assistant Administrator for Air
and Waste Management, U. S. EPA.
The Overview Session, chaired by Michael A. Maxwell, Chief
of the Emissions.'''Effluent Technology Branch, IERL-RTP,
followed the introductory speeches. In this session, papers
discussing the status of FGD in the U. S., Japan, and the
Federal Republic of Germany; the status of the EPRI FGD
program: and economic evaluation and computer modeling for
FGD were presented.
The Nonregenerahle Processes Session was held on Tuesday
afternoon and Wednesday morning and was chaired by H.
William Elder, Manager of Emission Control Development
Projects, TVA. This session featured presentation of results of
studies with forced oxidation in lime and limestone systems,
operating experiences at several commercial and prototype
lime/limestone and double-alkali scrubbers, and a description of
the Soarberg-Holter FGD Process.
The By-Product Disposal/Utilization Session, held Wednesday
afternoon, was chaired by Jerome Rossoff, Director, Office of
Stationary Systems, Environment and Energy Conservation
Division, The Aerospace Corporation. Most of the session dealt
with disposal of sludge front f GI) systems. Economics of waste
disposal, methods of disposal, operating experience of disposal
systems, and regulations affecting sludge disposal were discussed.
The market potential for SO, abatement products (sulfur, sulfurir
acid, and gypsum) was also presented.
On Thursday morning, the Kegenerable Processes Session was
held. The session was chaired by Richard D. Stern, Chief of the
Process Technology Branch, IER1.-KTP, and Wade Ponder of
IERL-RTP. Papers were presented on the VVellman-Lord Allied,
Atomics International, Cat-Ox, Citrate, Magnesium Oxide
Scrubbing , Shell, and Catalytic Ammonia Scrubbing Processes.
Thursday ended with an mteiesfiru} and informative pane!
discussion on FGD Problems and Solutions, chaired by Frank
Princiotta, Director of the Energy Process Division. Office of
Energy, Minerals, and industry, I). S. EPA in Washington, D. C.
The Symposium ended with the Advanced Processes Session
on Friday morning, chaired by Kurt Yea^cr, Director of Fossil
Fuel Power Plant Department, Electric Power Research Institute
(EPRI) and Smart M. Dalton of EPRI. Various advanced concepts
with potential for improving FGD technology were discussed at
the session. These concepts included subsystem combinations for
recovery processes, process alternatives with steam regeneration
for by-product S()? recovery, SO^ reduction processes, reduction
of magnesium and sodium sulfites and sulfatos.
limestone'gypsum jet bubbling scrubber, and dry sorbent in-
jection.
The Symposium coverage in this report is intended to highlight
events of the Symposium. The Proceedings will be published and
are expected to be available in about 2 months. Copies will be
sent to each Symposium registrant. Copies may be requested
from Franklin A. Ayer, FGD Symposium Coordinator, Research
Triangle Institute. Post Office Box 12194, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina. 27709. telephone (919) 451-6260.
'No Compromises on Environmental Quality " Says Hawkins
In the keynote address. David Hawkins. EPA's Assistant Ad-
ministrator for Air and Waste Management, discussed the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1977. Hawkins, making his first major
address since joining EPA, emphasized the commitment in the
Amendments to protect the air quality in the U, S. According to
Hawkins, the Amendments clearly indicate that Congress does
not intend that the Nation's energy problem or economic
problems be allowed to compromise environmental quality. The
Amendments reaffirm the goals of attaining health standards and
preventing significant air quality deterioration. The amended
Clean Air Act emphasizes the development of adequate air
pollution control programs at the state level with federal
assumption of enforcement responsibilities if necessary. The Act
also provides for strong penalties for continued inaction. The
Amendments provide incentive to resolve potential conflicts
between concerns for the environment and energy, economic, and
4a
-------
f'GO QUAKTKRLY Rl:l>ORT/,SPl:ClAl, EDITION
employment goats. This incentive is the result of focusing on
early identification of obstacles and intensified efforts to solve
such problems in the planning phase of new facilities.
}n the Amendments, Congress took a firm stand on the at-
tainment of itip National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQSK F!ach state that includes a non-attainment area must
submit a revised plan for KPA approval providing for attainment
of the NAAQS as soon as practicable, but not later than
December 1982 Some extensions to December 1987 may be
granted, however, due to unique problems associated with
photochemical oxidants and carbon monoxide. In many cases,
the new state plans will require application of the most stringent
controls available as well as strict enforcement of these
requirement* for existing sources. According to Hawkins, "Public
health is at stake and we don't intend to be timid in our efforts to
achieve it."
The Amendments also establish new enforcement tools to
provide an expeditious but equitable cleanup schedule for the
more than 1000 major emitting facilities that are not now in
compliance with the Clean Air Act. Anv enforcement orders
issued by State or Federal authorities which extend the time for
compliance must contain final compliance dates that are as
expeditious as practicable. In any case, the date may be no later
than 3 years from the date that attainment of the NAAQS would
otherwise have been required. If the affected source does not
comply by the applicable date, it will be assessed a non-
compliance penalty. The penally will be calculated on (he basis
of the costs which the non-complying source avoided by delayed
Compliance. This penalty will cancel any financial savings which
might be realized as a result of non-compliance. A source
wishing to comply by using innovative technology, however, may
be granted up to 5 years to achieve final compliance. Hawkins
said thai "innovative technology" would be given a loose, fairly
general definition.
Congress also reaffirmed its commitment that atmospheric
loading through dispersion techniques is not an acceptable
means of meeting air quality goals. F.xisting tall stacks will be
examined and no credit will be given for height above that
required by good engineering practice.
The Amendments provide mechanisms to permit the continued
substitution of domestic coal for oil and gas. but do not provide
for any relaxation of air quality standards. One section of the
Amendments deals with the issues of economic disruption and
unemployment. This section provides that sources burning coal
or ordered to convert to coal can be directed to use locally
available supplies and to use pollution-control technology to keep
emissions at the lowest levels.
In accordance with amendments to Section 111 of the Clean Air
Act. which deals with standards of performance for new
stationary sources. FPA expects to propose a revision to the new
source performance standards (NSPS) for fossil fuel fired steam
generators in early 1978 with promulgation in August of 1978.
Preliminary work indicates that the standard for sulfur dioxide
will contain three parts:
• a percentage reduction — 90 percent SO, removal with 90
percent system availability.
• maximum allowable emissions — a "ceiling" of 0.52 g. MJ
(1.2 Ib SO,. 10'But) heal input.
• maximum control level — an emission limit achievable by
combustion of very low sulfur fuel of 0.09 g MJ (0.2 Ib
SO, '10* Btu) heal input.
Although a standard of this nature has been widely rumored,
Hawkins" announcement is the most significant public disclosure
to date.
The Amendments also include new provisions for the
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) which modify am*
expand the former regulations established under the 1970 Clean
Air Act. Significant changes to the former PSD program include
the automatic classification of all international parks, national
wilderness areas, and memorial parks larger than 20 km1 (5000
acres), as well as all national parks larger than 24 km" (6000
acres) as Class I. Class I areas are subject to the most stringent
constraints on air quality deterioration. The Act also sets forth
new, more restrictive ambient air quality increments for par-
ticulate matter and sulfur dioxide in Class II and 111 areas, and
sets the NAAQS as an overriding ceiling for any increments. The
basis for the PSD program is a system of preconstruction permits
that must be obtained by all major new sources of air pollution.
The proposed facility will be subject to the best available control
technology for each pollutant. This requirement will be made
effective March 1978.
The Amendments have also established as a new national goal
the prevention of visibility impairment by man-made air pollution
in mandatory Class I areas. The Amendments require that the
Administrator promulgate regulations, including guidelines for
the states, to assure reasonable progress toward meeting this
goal. F.xisting major stationary sources which emit air pollutants
that may contribute to impairment of visibility maybe required to
install the best available retrofit technology for controlling
emissions.
Hawkins summarized his discussion of the 1977 Clean Air Act
Amendments by pointing out that Congress is more concerned
with environmental protection today than it was in 1970. "Clean
air is not an aesthetic luxury: it is a public health necessity,"
Hawkins also praised the audience for their role in the
development of FGD and in moving the Nation closer to
achieving (he goal of clean air. He staled at the beginning of his
address. "The status of FGD today is a tremendous personal
achievement by each of you who has been involved. You should
feel proud."
Old And New Meet
The Fourth Symposium on FGD featured a blending of old and
new faces and ideas. In his welcoming remarks, John K. Bur-
chard, Director of F.PA's Industrial F.nvironmental Research
Laboratory at Research Triangle Park. NC, emphasized the
"new" — the new Federal Government administration, committed
to solving the Nation's energy problems without relaxing en-
vironmental standards; the new Department of Energy: the new
F.PA administration; and the new amendments to the Clean Air
Act. Among the more than 800 attendees at the Symposium, a
number were present for the first time, and many represented
companies that had not previously been concerned with FGD.
The "old" were not lost in the shuffle, however, and many of
those responsible for developments leading lo the current status
of FGD technology were present in the audience and on the
speakers' platform. A significant portion of the Symposium was
devoted to the traditional lime/limestone scrubbers, but new
developments and improvements were also reported. The
Symposium provided an excellent format for exchange of in-
formation and ideas about FGD.
Film on Wellman-Lord Shown
I . William Fink of N1PSCO concluded tlis presentation of
"Status Report on the Wellman-Lord. Allied Chemical I"!«<* Gas
Desulfuri/ation Plant at Northern Indiana Public Service Com-
pany's Dean H. Mitchell Plant." by Link and Wade Ponder, by
showing a film on the process. This interesting film was intended
primarily for an audience unfamiliar with FGD technology. It
explained the WeHman-Lord 'Allied process and showed various
stages of construction of the NIPSCO installation.
4b
-------
FGD QUARTERLY REPORT'SPECIAL EDITION
Panel Discusses FGD Problems and Solutions
The Thursday evening session {November 10) featured an
informative panel discussion of FGD problems and solutions. The
discussion was chaired by Frank T. Princiotta, Director, F-nergy
Process Division, Office of Flnergy. Minerals and Industry. U. S.
liPA. The panel members, representing vendors of FGD
processes and equipment, were: Ab Saleern, Director, Process
and Development, Chemico Ait" Pollution Ccntrol Corporation;
Charles R. LaMantia, Manager, Chemical and Metallurgical
Engineering, Arthur D. Little, Inc.; James H, Martin, Director,
Environmental and Special Products, Combustion-F.ngineering,
Inc.; Vincent B. Birkner, Project Manager, Davy Powergas, Inc.:
Jack F. Stewart. Marketing Manager, Air Pollution Control
Section, Babcock & Wilcox Company: and Robert J. Gleason,
Manager, Process Engineering and Product Development.
Research-Cottrell, Inc.
Princiotta referred three major topics to the panel for
discussion: (1) the impact of new SO^ and paniculate regulations
being considered by EPA on FGD scrubber selection, design
philosophy, and cost; (2) regenerable processes and why they
have not made significant inroads in the FGD market; and (3)
construction materials applicable to FGD systems. In addition to
these topics, the panel members and Princiotta responded to
numerous questions from the floor. The discussion u'as still lively
at the end of the session with extensive audience participation
and might have continued longer if time had allowed.
Impact of New SO2 Standards on FGD
The panelists agreed that 90 percent SO; removal can be
achieved with lime, limestone, and dual alkali systems,
although a member of the audience questioned the ability of a
limestone system to achieve 90 percent removal continuously
without a significant increase in cost. Higher removal efficiencies
could be achieved (with some economic penalty) by increasing
the liquid/gas ratio, the number of stages in the scrubber, or
perhaps by the use of additives (with lime or limestone) to in-
crease the mass transfer rate. The panelists did not feel that the
added cost for these steps would be excessive. LaMantia believed
that the cost penalty for obtaining higher removal with dual
alkali would be less than that for lirne or limestone systems.
The major cost impact of a standard requiring 90 percent
removal of SO, would result from the elimination of reheat by
bypass and merge. With many coals, the current standard of 0.52
g MJ (1.2 Ib SO7; 10*" Btu) can be met by treating only a portion
of the due gas, bypassing the rest to mix in with the cleaned gas
to provide the required reheat. With the 90 percent removal
standard, additional fuel must be supplied to provide reheat, thus
increasing system operating costs. Also, the necessity to treat the
entire flue gas stream would increase both capital and operating
costs. The increase in FGD cost would result primarily from the
need to scrub more gas. Promulgation of this standard would
thus decrease the competitive aspects of low sulfur coat.
More stringent paniculate standards (for example, 0.01 to 0.02
instead of 0.04 g/MJ {0.03 to 0.05 instead of 0.1 Ib. 10" Btu|
heat input) would make larger electrostatic precipitators
necessary, and could make a combination precipitator SO,-
scrubber more attractive for paniculate removal. Simultaneous
removal of flyash and SO, is viable at a standard of 0.02 g MJ
(0.05 Ib 10* Btu), but may not be for lower paniculate levels.
Increased reliability that may be required in the new standard
for SO, (90 percent reliability over a 3-month period) would
result in increased maintenance requirements and costs. Good
design is important in achieving reliable operation, but the
panelists pointed out that operation and maintenance are also
important. For example, the systems that currently maintain the
highest reliability are those with no provision for flue gas bypass.
In these, the FGD system must be operational for the plant to
produce electricity. Some of the panelists felt that spares were
not the answer to achieving reliable operation.
Some members of the audience questioned the rationale of
continually more stringent standards. Factors such as cost.
energy consumption, and other environmental problems
resulting from meeting higher standards should aha bt> taken
into account in considering stricter standards. According to
F-P.A, such factors are considered. A tost benefit ratio is dif-
ficult to calculate, however. In any case, the Clean Air Act
requires more stringent NSPS as the technology improves,The
1977 Amendments reinforced this requirement. It was also
pointed out that sense installations are subject to control
requirements which may be more stringent than the present or
proposed NSPS, The vendors on the panel felt that these
stricter standards are achievable with present FGD technology,
Cost, Complexity Keep
Regenerable Processes Off Market
In general, the panelists agreed that high cost and complexity
were the main factors that prevented wider acceptance of
regenerable FGD processes, Kegenerable processes are con-
sidered to be complex chemical plants. Operators who have little
experience with such complex systems may be hesitant to
consider them. In addition, regenerable processes are generally
more expensive than throwaway processes.
Basically, the question of regenerable versus throw!away
processes is one of economics. One utility representative in the
audience reported that he was violently opposed to regenerable
processes because the utility could not afford them. Other
problems with regerterable processes are by-product marketing
and high energy consumption. 1 his is especially true for
production of sulfur, which generally requires scarce and ex-
pensive reducing gas. it was also pointed out that, since plants
burning coal must dispose of flyash, a disposal problem already
exists and sludge does not significantly increase the disposal
problem. Only Birkner expressed the belief that regenerable
processes would make significant inroads on the market in the
future, specifically in areas with little available land for waste
disposal, LaMantia emphasized that the problem with
regenerable processes was in acceptance by utilities, not in
process development. The Wellman-Lord process, for example, is
one of the most advanced and well demonstrated FGD
technologies, although it has not enjoyed widespread adoption in
the U. S.
Panelists Discuss Materials
of Construction for FGD Systems
The panelists disagreed on the best materials of construction
for an FGD system. Lined carbon or type 316 stainless were
suggested for the absorber, but Gleason felt that type 316 was
not adequate for systems with high chloride concentrations
because of pitting. Rubber-lined pumps and rubber-lined or
fiberglass pipes were suggested; however, for a 30-year plant life,
alloys may be better than linings. Martin reported that Com-
bustion-Engineering has had problems with rubber linings and
found it difficult to maintain quality control in linings from certain
vendors. Saleem felt that carbon steel can be adequately
protected with linings, and reported that Chemico has ex-
perienced failures only for certain identifiable reasons. The major
problems are in the materials for stacks and duct work. Acid
brick appears to be successful in some, but not all, units.
Temperature changes up to 300 to 400°C (600 to 800°F) can
occur, compounding materials problems. Martin reported that no
stack problems have been experienced in systems using in-line
reheaters. During this segment of the materials discussion, a
member of the audience commented that he now understood why
it was difficult to get reliability guarantees from vendors.
4c
-------
FGD QUARTERLY REPORT/SPECIAL EDITION
The panelists also disagreed on the subject ol reheater design.
Bypass and merge is the cheapest method of reheat, with in-line
reheaters possibly next. It was also suggested thai heating
ambient air and bleeding it into the stack may he cheaper than
in-line reheat, although somewhat more energy intensive. Reheat
can also be achieved by bypassing a portion of the flue gas and
heating only that portion. Good success has reportedly been
achieved with 316 stainless steel for in-line reheaters if the
surfaces are kept clean, and clean and warm when not in use.
Alloys are expensive, and their long-term life is unknown. The
need for reheat was questioned. Reheat is energy intensive.
requiring about 1 percent of the station capability for 14°C
(25°FJ of reheat. Saleem felt that reheat is noi needed, except
perhaps for "cosmetic reasons." Stewart felt that the need for
reheat was related to proper stack design and operation: it could
bc» needed to set the proper plume rise.
The final panel question of the evening related to the expected
life of an FGD system. A long life requires that stricter, more
precise specifications be given to suppliers for the entire system.
It was the consensus that an FGD system should !as! 30 years
with proper maintenance, which may be "a little or a lot."
Gage Outlines Funding for Air Pollution Control from Coal-Fired Boilers
In remarks before the Symposium. Stephen J. Gage, EPA's
Acting Assistant Administrator for Research and Development,
outlined recent funding developments for a program of air
pollution control for coal-fired boilers.
Gage began his remarks by praising John Burchard, Bill
Plyler. Mike Maxwell, Julian Jones, Dick Stern, and others at the
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory and Frank Prin-
ciotta of the Headquarters Office for their work in putting the
Symposium together. Gage also welcomed old and new par-
ticipants and thanked representatives from utilities and industries
for "bringing to the Symposium the most recent developments
from operating scrubber facilities."
Gage then went on the describe the funding developments in
the pollution control program for coal-fired boilers. One of the
major facets of the National Energy Plan approved by President
Carter is a dramatic increase in the use of the nation's vast
supplies of coal. This shift back to coal, however, along with the
increasing demand for energy, will increase the potential for
environmental degradation. In addressing the potential problems,
the President stated ". . . all new facilities, including those
that burn low sulfur coal, should be required to use the best
available control technology." The National Energy Plan also
calls for "a comprehensive coal research and development
program . . . (which) . . . should focus on meeting environmental
requirements more effectively and economically . . .," with in-
creased research devoted to controlling the fine participate and
sulfur oxide emissions resulting from coal burning.
In response to the President's statement, EPA submitted a $35
million supplemental appropriation request for an accelerated
program for coal pollution control technology development,
demonstration and information dissemination, A compromise
appropriation of $34.7 million has recently been approved by a
House and Senate Conference Committee, and final approval is
expected in the next few weeks,
Most of the supplemental appropriation *'ts designed to ensure
the availability of effective air pollution control alternatives for
combustion sources and to reduce the cost of using these options.
Specifically, in fiscal year 1978, an additional $12 million will be
made available for nitrogen oxides control, $11 million for fine
participate control, and $8 million for sulfur oxides control." The
supplemental appropriation for flue gas desulfurization will be
expended primarily on work to solve the remaining problems that
coulcl be barriers to the application of current-generation-FGO
technologies. Emphasis will be placed on technologies such as
lime or limestone scrubbing which have already made significant
market penetration and on processes such as dual alkali and
Wellman /Lord that are moving into commercialisation. Through
the cooperative efforts of Government and private industry. Gage
reported, "we're relatively confident that most of the nagging
problems of such scrubbers can be overcome and that these FGD
systems can be installed and operated by utilities and industries
with little risk."
Citrate Developers Given Award
Representatives of Morrisen-Knudsen Company, the Bureau of
Mines, St. Joe Minerals Corporation, and EPA have been
presented with Power magazine's Energy Conservation Award for
their contribution to the field of energy management in
development of the Citrate process. The award was announced
following the presentation of the paper "Citrate Process
Demonstration Plant — A Progress Report," by R. S. Madenburg
and R. A. Kurey.
4d
-------
FED QUARTERLY REPOfiT/FALL 1977
FGD REPORTS AND ABSTRACTS
This section of the FGD Quarterly Report contains abstracts of
recently completed EPA reports relating to flue gas
desulfurUatton, Each listing includes date of the report, contract
(or grant) number. National Technical information Service
(NTIS) accession number, and F.PA Office of Research and
Development number.
Each report with an NTIS number can be ordered from NTIS.
The* cost of paper copies varies by page count ($4.00 minimum);
microfiche copies are S3, Payment imisl accompany order. I he
address is: National Technical Information Service
U. S. Department of Commerce
Springfield, Virginia 2216!
Reports which do not have an NTIS number are available, as
supplies permit, through lERL-RTP's Technical Information
Service (T1S). If copies are limited, a reproduced ropy of the
report may be purchased from TIS. The address is:
W. W. Whelan, MD-64
Technical Information Service
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
1919)541-2218 (FTS) 629-2218
EPA-600 2-77-139
PB 272-266
Physical and Engineering Properties of Hazardous
Industrial Wastes and Sludges
M. J. Bartos. Jr. and M. R. Palermo, Environmental Effects
Laboratory, U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg. Mississippi, August 1977. EPA fnteragency Agreement
1AG-D4-0569. Project Officer: R. E. Landreth, MERL-Cinn.
This report presents the results of a laboratory testing program to
investigate the properties of raw and chemically fixed hazardous
industrial wastes and flue gas desulfurization (FGD) sludges.
Specimens of raw and fixed sludges were subjected to a variety of
tests commonly used in soils engineering. The grain-size
distributions, Atterberg limits, specific gravities, volume-weight-
moisture relationships and permeabilities of raw and fixed sludges
were determined. Selected fixed sludges were subjected to ap-
propriate engineering properties (compaction and unconfined
compression) tests and durability (we!-dry and freeze-ihaw) tests.
Test results show that fixing can cause significant changes in the
properties of sludge, that fixed sludges are similar to soil, soil-
cement, or low-strength concrete, and that properties are
process-dependent. On the basis of test specimen behavior, fixed
sludges can be expected to exhibit substantial engineering
strength and suitability for landfill and embankment construction,
although the durability tests show that weathering can be a
problem unless the fixed sludges are protected by an earth cover.
EPA-600 7-77-051
PB 269-270 AS
An Evaluation of the Disposal of Flue Gas
Desulfurization Wastes in Mines and the Ocean:
Initial Assessment
R. R. Lunt, C. B. Cooper, S. L. Johnson, J. E. Oberholtzer,
G. R. Scnimke. and W. I. Watson, Arthur D. Little, Inc.,
Cambridge, Massachusetts, May 1977. EPA Contract No. 68-03-
2334. Project Officer: J. W. Jones, IERI.-RTP.
The report gives an initial assessment of the feasibility of
disposing of flue gas destilfurizatimi wastes in mines and in the
ocean. The purpose of the assessment was to evaluate en-
vironmental, technical, regulatory, and economic aspects of the
use of such disposal sites. Available data on chemical and
physical properties of both treated and untreated sludges
generated in ongoing environmental and privately funded sludge
characterization programs were also collected and summarized.
The report is based on data available through January 1976. The
assessment is the first of a three-phase program. Phase 2 in-
volves a refinement of the initial assessment, based on laboratory
tests focused on key disposal impact issues. Phase 3 will involve
pilot demonstration simulation testing of viable mine and ot^nn
disposal alternatives.
EPA-600 7-77-052
PB 271-728
Disposal of By-Products from Nonregenerable Flue
Gas Desulfurization Systems: Second Progress
Report
J. Rossoff, R, C. Rossi, R. B. Fling, W. M Graven, and P. P.
Leo, The Aerospace Corporation, Los Angeles, California, May
1977.
EPA Contract No. 68-02-1010. Project Officer: J. W. Jones,
1ERL-RTP.
The report gives results of the first 3 years of study to determine
environmentally sound methods for disposing of wastes from
noriregenerable flue gas desulfurization systems. Untreated and
treated wastes from seven different scrubbers at eastern and
western plants, using lime, limestone, or double-alkali ab-
sorbents, were characterized. Concentrations of salts and trace
elements are related to potential environmental pollution for both
treated and untreated wastes. Physical properties (e.g. bulk
density, compression strength, permeability, and viscosity) are
given. Disposal of untreated wastes in impermeable im-
poundments appears to be environmentally viable; however, the
ability to reclaim the land has not been determined. Chemically
treated sludges placed in landfills have been shown to be
structurally adequate; in addition, reduction of leachate intrusion
into the subsoil is achieved by the reduction of solubility, per-
meability, and surface water. Cost estimates for chemical
treatment 'disposal equate to S2 to $3 per ton of eastern coal
burned; lined pond disposal costs are estimated at about 75% of
chemical treatment/disposal costs. Costs for disposal of wastes
— dewatered and compacted, or converted to gypsum ~- are
being determined.
PS-75/456
Sulfur Dioxide Control. Volume 1. 1964-1972. (A
Bibliography with Abstracts)
Kirk G. Werner and Axel C. Ringe. National Technical In-
formation Service, Springfield, Virginia, June 1975.
Report citations cover air pollution control technology and
equipment for sulfur dioxide. Included are references on emissions
reduction involving fluidized bed combustion, combustion
modifications and additives, scrubbing and other flue gas
desulfurization processes. Fuel desulfurization and the use of low
sulfur fuels are excluded. (Volume contains 159 abstracts.)
-------
FGD QUARTERLY REPORT/FALL 1977
FGD RD&D CONTRACTS
Ihis section of she ICil) QtMi'U'riy Report contain** s? list of current I1,.PA t'GD projects, tfav I.PA 1 ask Officer, and ihi1 project cant rat'fen".
Also included art* the mdilmg addressPS and phoru* numbers of the- Task Officers.
Non-regenerable Processes
EPA Task Officer
C, Chatlynne
IEKL-RTP
R. H. Borgwardt
IERL-RTP
N. Kaplan
IERL-RTP
N. Kaplan
IERI-RTP
N. Kaplan
IERL-RTP
M . C . Osborne
IERL-RTP
J. E, Williams
1F.RL-RTP
4, E Williams
IERL-RTP
J. E. Williams
IERL-RTP
Regenerable
EPA Task Officer
Contractor
TRW, Inc.
Vienna. VA
Bechtel Corp.
San Francisco, CA
Louisville Gas &
Electric
Louisville. KY
Bechtel Corp.
San Francisco, CA
Engr. Science, Inc.
Arcadia. CA
Louisville Gas &
Electric
Louisville, KY
TVA
Paducah. KY
U. S. Air Force
Columbus, OH
Bechtel Corp.
San Francisco, CA
Processes
Contractor
Implemented Task Title
Evaluation of Dry Sulfur Dioxide Sorbents and Fabric Filtration
Design of SO, Scrubbers for IERL-RTP Wing-G Pilot Plant
Full-Scale Dual Alkali Demonstration
Test Program for the Full Scale Dual Alkali Utility Demonstration
Key West Limestone Scrubbing Test Program
LG&E Full Scale Scrubber Testing and Waste Disposal
Operation of Shau
-------
FGD QUARTERLY REPORT/FALL 1977
EPA Task Officer
J. W. Jones
IF.RL-RTP
M. C. Osborne
lERL-RTP
J. W. Jones
IFRL-RTP
J. W. Jones
lERL-RTP
J. W. Jones
IF.RL-RTP
M, C. Osborne
IERL-RTP
R. E. Landreth
MERL-Cincinnali
R. E. Landreth
MERL-Cincinnati
M. H. Ron Her
MERL-Cincinnati
D. E. Sanning
MERL-Cincinnati
D. E. Sanning
MERL-Cincinnati
M. C. Osborne
lERL-RTP
T. G. Brna
IERL-RTP
Contractor
U. of North Dakota
Grand Forks, ND
Aerospace Corp.
Los Angeles, CA
Pullman Kellogg
Houston, TX
A. D. Little. Inc.
Cambridge, MA
A. D. Little, Inc.
Cambridge. MA
TVA
Chattanooga, TN
U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers
Vicltsburg, MS
U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers
Vicksburg, MS
U. S. Army
Dugway Proving
Ground, UT
SCS Engineers
Long Beach, CA
SCS Engineers
Long Beach, CA
TVA
Chattanooga. TN
Radian Corp.
Austin, TX
Implemented Task Title
Disposal of High Alkaline Fly Ash in a Decoaled Mine Seam
Disposal of By-Products from Non-Regenerable Flue
Gas Desulfuri/ation Systems
Lime/Limestone Scrubbing Sludge Conversion Pilot Studies
Assessment of Methods for Disposal Utilization
of Flue Gas Cleaning By-Products
Evaluation of Alternatives for Disposal of FGD Sludges
Waste Product Disposal Studies for Lime Limestone
Scrubbing and Fluid Bed Combustion
Physical Engineering Properties of Raw and
Chemically Fixed FGD Sludge
Lab and Field Evaluation of First and Second
Generation FGC Waste Treatment Processes
Studies of Attenuation of FGC Waste Leachate by Soils
Development of an FGC Sludge Disposal Data Base
Contaminant Identification and Economic
Assessment Modeling for FGC Sludge Disposal Systems
Characterization of Effluents from Coal-fired Utility Boilers
Field Testing and Laboratory Studies of the Development
of Effluent Standards for the Steam Electric Power Industry
Information Transfer and Support Studies
EPA Task Officer
J. D. Mobley
lERL-RTP
J. D. Mobley
IERL-RTP
J. D. Mobley
IF.RL-RTP
J. D. Mobley
IERL-RTP
J. D. Mobley
IERL-RTP
R. H. Borgwardt
IERL-RTP
T. G. Brna
IFRL-RTP
C. J. Chatlynne
IERL-RTP
J. W. Jones
lERL-RTP
N. Kaplan
lERL-RTP
R. D. Stern
IERL-RTP
Contractor
PEDCo
Cincinnati. OH
PEDCo
Cincinnati. OH
PEDCo
Cincinnati. OH
Radian Corp.
Austin, TX
Radian Corp,
Austin, TX
U. of Virginia
Charlortesville, VA
Radian Corp.
Austin, TX
TVA
Muscle Shoals, Al.
Radian Corp.
Austin, TX
PEDCo
Cincinnati, OH
TRW, Inc.
Vienna, VA
Radian Corp.
Austin, TX
Implemented Task Title
Engineering Application 'Information Transfer:
Limestone Data Book
Engineering Application • Information Transfer:
Non-Utility Combustion Source Survey
Engineering Application Information Transfer:
Cost 'Reliability Handbook for SO2 Control Strategies
Engineering Application* Information Transfer:
FGD Summary Reports
Engineering Application Information Transfer:
FGD Quarterly Report
Sulfur Dioxide Oxidation in Scrubber Syst€*nis
Stack Gas Reheat Assessment Study
Development of Comparative Economics of Major
Processes for Removal of SO? from Stack Gases
Characterization of Carbide Lime
to Identify Sulfite Oxidation Inhibitors
Survey of Utility FGD Systems
Interagency FGD Evaluation Study
-------
FGD QUARTERLY REPORT/FALL 197?
EPA TASK OFFICERS FOR CURRENT FGD RDM) CONTRACTS
Robert H. Borgwardt, MD-65
USEPA-1ERL-RTP
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: (919) 541-2234
(FTS) 629-2234
Ted G. Brna, MD-61
USEPA-1ERL-RTP
Research Triangle Park. NC 27711
Phone: (919) 541-2683
(FTS) 629-2683
Charles J. Chatlynne, MD-61
USEPA-1ERL-RTP
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: (919) 541-2915
(FTS) 629-2915
Julian W. Jones, MD-61
USEPA-IERL-RTP
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: (919) 541-2489
(FTS) 629-2489
Norman KapJan, MD-61
USKPA-IF.RL-RTP
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: (919) 541-2556
(FTS) 629-2556
Rohen E. Landreth
USEPA-MERL-Cinn
26 West St. Claire St.
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Phone: (513) 684-7871
(FTS) 684-7871
J. David Mobley, MD-61
USEPA-IERL-RTP
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: (919) 541-2915
(FTS) 629-2915
Michael C. Osborne. MD-61
USEPA-IERL-RTP
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: (919) 541-2898
(FTS) 629-2898
Wade H. Ponder, MD-61
USKPA-IERL-RTP
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: (919) 541-2915
(FTS) 629-2915
Michael H. Roolier
USEPA-MERL-Cinn
26 West St. Claire St.
Cincinnati. OH 45268
Phone: (513) 684-7871
(FTS) 684-7871
Donald E, Sannin<|
USEPA-MERL-Cmn
26 West St. Claire St.
Cincinnati. OH 45268
Phone-: (513) 684-7871
(FTS) 684-7871
John E, Williams, MD-61
USF.PA-1F.R1.-RTP
Research Triangle Park. NC 27711
Phone: (919) 541-2483
(ETS)629-2483
The FCSD Quarterly Report is prepared by Radian Corporation under EPA Contract No. 68-02-2608. The EPA Project Officer is J. David
Mobley (address above). The Radian Project Director is Charles E. Hudak, P. O. Box 9948, Austin. Texas 78766, (512) 454-4797. Comments
on (his issue, suggested topics for inclusion in future issues, and requests (or subscriptions should be addressed to them.
The views expressed in the EGD Quarterly Report do not necessarily reflect ilie views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency
Mention ol trade names or commercial products does not constitute an endorsement or recommendation for use by E.PA.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Research and Development
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory - RTF
Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711
MD - 61
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
Penalty For Private Use $300
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Postage And Fees Paid
Environmental Protection Agency
EPA - 335
------- |