Need to return call by / at/betw een and

. Signature:

___________________________ Pr oject No.: 0172. 07.029.040 DI STRIBUTION Page _ 1 _ of __ 2

_ Pr oject Name: Steam Electric Rulemaking TELEPHONE CALL RECORD Outgoing Call Date: 01/28/2010 Time: 4:30 pm EST

Company Name: Delta Ducon Contact Name: Craig Fle ming Phone No.: 610

- 695

- 9711
Name: Elizabeth Sabol , Sarah Holman Eastern Research Group GENERAL SUBJECT : Potential Changes to the Ash Handling Part of the Steam Electric ICR
**TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN** Sarah H olman and I contacted Craig Fle ming, Delta Ducon, on Thursday , January 28, to discuss the potential changes that EPA was considering making to Part C (Ash Handling) of the questionnaire. We briefl y talked with Mr. Fleming regarding his thoughts about these potent ial changes. Below is a summary of the call. Mr. Fle ming agreed that asking for ash handling information on a s ys tem level is a good way to go ; however, he wanted to make sure that we allow for plants that have multiple generating units and have dedicated ash handling s ys tems for each generating unit ( like Fayette). We explained that our current setup will allow for this ty pe of response. Mr. Fleming stated that it makes sense to ask for costs in three categories (convey ance, intermediate storage, and transport/disposal) , and that he thinks that plants that installed ash handling s ys tems after 1980 should have costs broken out in such categories. He stated that before 1980 they more likely would have purchased the sy stem as one lump sum , which would mak e it difficult for them to split up costs in these three categories

. Therefore, he agreed with splitting up the costs, and our suggested timeframe for gathering the costs on ash handling s ys tems. Mr. Fleming stated that he does not know of an y plant in the US that is combining fl y and bottom ash in a silo. He s tated that Cry stal River is the only plant that he knows of that is even handling bottom ash completely dry ( using a Magaldi sy stem) in order for that to be possible

. Mr. Fleming explained that p lants in China collect/handle their bottom ash dry and then mill it so that they can sell it with fly

ash. Mr. Fleming stated that he believes the vast majority of plants would have the vertical space required to retrofit a boiler with a dry

bottom ash handling s ys tem. The DRYCON sy stem needs about 10 ft of vertical space below the boiler and most boiler hoppers are about 16 to 18 ft in height. He explained that Magaldi's dry bottom ash equipment is taller , and so, there may be some vertical space iss ues that have been encountered overseas. Mr. Fleming discussed the space issues that may be encountered in US plants with conveying the bottom ash from the boiler out of the building. He suggested we ask the plants if they have space available for bottom ash to exit the building in a "straight shot". If not, capital costs could increase greatly (he cited one example where multiple DRYCONs had to be installed off

- center from the boilers and then those fed another DRYCON that convey ed the bottom ash outdoo rs).Need to return call by / at/betw een and

. Signature:

___________________________ Mr. Fleming also informed us that he reviewed the questionnaire and thinks it's good and detailed. He is concerned that we are classify ing a submerged chain convey or as a dry bottom ash handling s ys tem because it still use s water. We stated that we think we have the submerged chain convey or sy stem appropriately categorized for the purpose of the data collection. Mr. Fleming stated that they do have some cost comparison info that could help us , previously talked about in the UCC conference call on December 17, 2009, and said he would send it our way soon.