EPA HCl Performance Specification 

Stakeholder Kickoff Meeting

Conference Call Summary

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

1) Welcome – Introduction – Purpose

EPA is gathering information from instrument and gas vendors, affected facilities, testers, and 

regulatory bodies with experience performing continuous measurements of HCl from stationary 

source emissions. At a conference call Attendees (Attachment 1) provided stakeholder perspective on 

the current state of the science for CEM systems used to measure HCl in stationary source emission 

gases.

2) Technology discussion from the instrument vendor perspective

Table 1 summarizes the current instruments from equipments vendors participating in the call. 

Vendors are shown in alphabetical order. Additional comments from equipment vendors include 

descriptions of their systems and how they are used for field measurements. A summary of these 

comments are provided below.

Thermofisher

Thermofisher offers a GFC system. Water is removed as an interferent from the emissions gas using 

a permapure dryer system. GFC equipment is based on the standard simple rack mount design used 

for other Thermofisher CEMS equipment. The system has longer response time than their FTIR 

system approach to HCl monitoring. That means the GFC has to be conditioned longer and 

calibrations are required more frequently. The GFC is subject to more interference.

Thermofisher is also gaining experience with FTIR HCl measurement. Lab and field evaluations are 

being conducted in waste incinerator, power utility and cement plant gas streams with up to 40% 

moisture. FTIR is more complicated and more expensive than the GFC system. Thermofisher uses 

twice the standard deviation of the zero noise to determine detection limit. Hot, wet operation is a 

challenge at higher moisture levels. The advantage of FTIR is the opportunity to perform multicomponent analysis with one instrument. 

Sick-Maihak

Sick-Maihak offers GFC, FTIR and TDLS bases HCl monitors. All systems are run hot and wet. The 

Sick-Maihak GFC is a multi-component capable system. Cross interferences are measured real time 

and used to process the data. The simplicity of the GFC makes this technology easier to operate in the 

field. Sick-Maihak has more field experience with the GFC and has tested this technology at cement 

production, waste combustion, and power generation sites. The Sick-Maihak TDLS system can be 

used as extractive, cross stack or insitu with a probe. TDLS are less susceptible to cross interference 

because of the narrow wavelength range generated by the laser. Less interference and a stronger 

optical source allows lower detection limits. 
Table 1 Summary of Conference Call Vendors and Technologies

Vendor Technology Base Extractive 

or Cross 

Stack

Wet or Dry Lab 

Detection 

Limit 

(ppm)

Full 

Scale 

Range

(ppm)

Averaging 

Time

Initial 

Calibration

Field 

Performance 

Checks

ABB FTIR (1 - 2 

wavenumber 

resolution)

Extractive Hot Wet 0.1 to 0.2 HovaCal-Hot 

Wet at 

instrument 

detector

Checked at the 

analyzer/cell

Altech

Environment

GFC -

multicomponent

Permapure® 

water 

removal at 

the detector

HovaCal-Hot 

Wet at 

instrument 

detector

Checked at the 

analyzer

Altech

Environment

FTIR

CEMTECK CRDS Extractive Wet 0.2 0 – 3 

CEMTECK TDL Cross Stack 

or 

extractive

Insitu or 

hot/wet

0.2

Eco Chem 

analytics

GFC -

multicomponent

Extractive Hot Wet 0.1 0 – 10 HovaCal-Hot 

Wet at 

instrument 

detector

HCl Certified 

cylinder Gas

Gasmet FTIR (8 wave 

number 

resolution)

Extractive 0.1 HovaCal-Hot 

Wet at 

instrument 

detector

Can be 

checked at 

probe or 

analyzer

MKS 

Instruments

FTIR (0.5 

wavenumber 

resolution)

Extractive Hot Wet 0.1 1 min

Sick-Maihak FTIR (0.5 

wavenumber 

resolution)

Multi 

Component

Hot Wet 0.1

Sick-Maihak GFC Multi 

Component

Hot Wet 0.2 At the 

analyzer

Sick-Maihak TDLS Extractive 

and insitu

Hot Wet 0.1 0 – 5

Thermo 

fisher

FTIR (0.4 

wavenumber 

resolution)

Extractive Hot Wet 0.1 10 –

100’s

HovaCal-Hot 

Wet at 

instrument 

detector

Can be 

checked at 

probe or 

analyzer

Thermo 

fisher

GFC Extractive Permapure® 

water 

removal at 

the detector

0.2 5 –

5000

5 min HovaCal-Hot 

Wet at 

instrument 

detector

FTIR – Fouier Transform Infrared

GFC – Gas Filter Correlation

TDLS – tunable diode laser spectroscopy.
MKS instruments

MKS instruments is currently testing a multi-component FTIR, extractive CEM that measures HCl in 

hot wet gas. The system has been operated up to 40% moisture. FTIR is more expensive than a single 

component analyzer. Other components measured include hydrocarbons, NOx, SOx, HF, CO, and 

CO2. Challenges measuring HCl involve sampling rather than instrument analysis. MKS prefilter the 

gas stream. 

ABB

ABB offers an FTIR CEM for HCl similar to those described by other vendors except their unit 

operates at a resolution of 1 to 2 wave numbers.

Cemtech

Cemtech offers a TDL and a laser based cavity ring down (CRDS) CEM unit for HCl monitoring. 

The TDL technology offers a fiber coupled optical system which allows the optical system to be 

remotely located from the measurement location. This technology can be multiplexed which allows 

the laser to be directed to multiple lines of sight or locations. These systems are offered as cell based 

extractive or cross stack units. 

The CRDS unit that operates at reduced pressure to maintain stack emissions in the gas phase. No 

other sample conditioning is performed for this unit. The gas is maintained at 50 C. The sampling 

system uses a critical orifice through a filter sampling at 3 L/hour. The low pressure sampling and 

analysis system reduces or eliminates interference. The probe and transfer line is fused silica lined 

and heated to 50 C to improve response time. The CRDS system can be used for multiple 

components by adding lasers or adding an optical bench that can be multiplexed with the system to 

measure at appropriate wavelengths for each component. The same probe, umbilical transport line 

and pumps are used for single or multiple analyte configurations. Typical applications merge water 

measurement with HCl measurement. CRDS cell is maintained at a constant temperature and 

pressure. The effective path length for this application is approximately 10 kilometers. Therefore, 

the sample pressure can be reduced which keeps materials in the gas phase and narrows spectral lines 

thus reducing interference. Cell sizes range from 5 to 10 inches consistent with small rack mountable 

CEMS. Cemtech will perform its first field trial at a cement plant in July of 2011. This system is 

currently operational at a waste water treatment facility and a waste incinerator.

Gasmet Technologies

Gasmet Technologies offers an FTIR HCl CEM system that has been installed in multiple locations in 

Europe including cement plants and waste incinerators. The system measures multiple gases. Less 

resolution is used to improve detection limits by reducing noise. 

Eco Chem Analytics

Eco Chem Analytics has experience with a hot, wet, multi-component CEM system based on GFC 

technology. Their GFC monitor measures eight (8) total gases including HCl, water and up to 6 other 
interfering compounds. Units are installed in multiple U.S. facilities such as municipal waste water 

facilities and chemical facilities.

Altech has experience with multi-component CEM system based on GFC technology. Installations 

include cement plants and municipal waste incinerators. 

Altech Environment

Systems currently offers GFC multi-component system. US installations include cement plants, and 

municipal waste incinerators. Altech also has experience using FTIR to measure HCl through its 

support to European facilities. 

3) Initial Calibration, System Checks 

Vendors perform calibration of new units at the factory. Vendors perform initial calibration using the 

HovaCal equipment or certified gas cylinders. HovaCAL equipment is used (ABB, Altech 

Environment, Thermofisher) to generate various concentrations of HCl at temperatures as high as 375 

F and up to 40% moisture. HovaCal vaporizes an aqueous solution of the compound(s) of interest. 

Instrument initial calibration is done during production.

Some Gas Filter Correlation vendors (Thermofisher, Altech Environment) reduce or remove water 

interference by membrane (Permapure®) drying the gas stream. Residual water after membrane 

dryers can be measured by IR and appropriate corrections can be included if necessary. FTIR systems 

are initially calibrated using the HovaCAL and with certified gas cylinders (Thermofisher). 

Cross stack TDL (CemTech) is calibrated during manufacturing at the factory. An internal gas cell is 

used to lock the laser and to calibrate or check calibration. The laser light is redirected through the 

cell in line with the measurement path to perform a span and off peak zero check. The frequency of 

span and off peak zero check is programmable. In the field a span check is typically performed once 

every 24 hours. The frequency of calibration checks of instrument performance are programmable 

using a constant pressure constant temperature cell in the optical measurement path. This 

performance check acts as a matrix spike interference check on the instrument performance. Since the 

calibration is based on a ratio of the cell path length (typically multiple cm) and the measurement path 

length, the concentration in the cell is not as constrained as other methods and certified calibration gas 

can be used that is much higher concentration. Path length is measured independently and entered 

into system software allowing continuous concentration reporting. Temperature and pressure 

corrections need to be made to compensate for the difference between stack and reference cell 

conditions.

Initial manufacturing setup for CRDS-TDL systems involves evaluation of the optical spectra for a 

new target gas and potential interfering gases. A laser wavelength is selected from available TDLs 

that best match the sensitivity and lack of spectral interference found in the optical spectra review. A 

wavelength specific to that laser is selected where there is no spectral overlap of any of the interfering 

gases including moisture with the target gas. Once the new monitoring system is fabricated, it is 
evaluated using laboratory generated test gas that includes up to 50% moisture to demonstrate 

interference free measurement of the target gas. The system is also tested with other common 

emission gases to ensure interference free operation. The system is calibrated with known 

concentrations of calibration gas as part of the manufacturing process. 

4) Field Calibration/Drift Checks and Dynamic Spike Performance Checks

Field calibration checks are intended to verify the manufacturing calibration. Two types of field 

calibration checks and drift checks were discussed for FTIR and GFC. Some vendors reported

checking instrument performance with hot wet gas at the instrument detector using HovaCal 

equipment. Others report checking field performance using certified cylinder gas either through the 

probe or at the instrument detector. 

The HovaCAL hot wet instrument is more difficult to use in the field due to weight and complexity. 

Performance checks done under hot wet conditions with the HovaCal equipment reduce conditioning 

and response time. Vendor preference, in general, is to check instrument calibration and drift at the 

instrument cell/detector with the HovaCal and not to use the equipment on the stack to perform 

through the probe system checks. Recalibration using the HovaCal to evaluate water vapor 

interference in the field is performed yearly (Eco Chem Analytics), typically when Relative Accuracy 

(RATA) is performed. 

Vendors and testers also use Certified HCl gas cylinders to recalibrate or check the instrument 

calibration in the field. Through the probe system performance checks have been done using dry 

cylinder gases. For field calibration testers can flood the probe with cylinder gas at each concentration 

of interest. Checking instrument performance with a certified (dry) HCl gas cylinder can take 20 

minutes or more to stabilize through the probe. In Europe it is not common to check HCl field 

calibration through the probe. Instead, European systems are challenged directly at the analyzer

detector. When TUV tested HCl monitors using the HovaCal hot wet calibration gas they found 

response times on the order of 3 minutes. Gasmet does field performance checks at the analyzer and 

checks sample line integrity through the probe with NO or SO2 cylinder gas. 

Field performance checks of CRDS-TDL systems are performed through the probe using silica coated 

stainless steel lines from the cal gas supply to the probe. Since this system samples at about 3 L/hour, 

and calibration checks take about 10 minutes, very little calibration gas is needed. Gas can be run 

directly to the analyzer as a check of sample line integrity. Zero check of this system occurs every 10 

seconds (6 times a minute) by turning off the laser and measuring background signal. 

Facilities needing to measure HCl at 3 ppm or lower, the calibration and linearity of the equipment 

become significant issues. In the field, facilities check their equipment and vendor supplied spectra 

using the best quality gas standard they can find. The best spectra to use in the field are those that are 

generated on the equipment with known concentration of known quality gas standards. These 

instrument specific reference spectra are important for low concentration measurements. In addition 

to the target gas, spectra of interferents such as water and carbon dioxide are important.
5) What’s the alternative to RATAs, are they necessary

Dynamic spikes have been performed in numerous field tests (GFC and FTIR systems), and the most 

difficult challenge to this approach is measuring HCl in the presence of alkaline particulate (e.g., 

lime) as is found at cement plants. Dynamic spikes less than 10% of the gas volume from the stack 

provide a robust challenge that evaluates the effect of both interfering gases and reactive particulate 

during HCl CEM field tests or monitoring programs. This approach is consistent with PS-15. 

Stakeholders did not know of a manufacturer or test facility that performed long term dynamic 

spiking to support continuous monitoring of HCl. However, Eco Chem reports that the HovaCal can 

be programmed to produce a variety of concentrations in any sequence required. Sources with both 

HCl and ammonia emissions pose a particular problem for performance checks because of the acid 

base reaction potential between these two gases. Emissions Testing Inc. reports making 

measurements of HCl above 180 C to minimize this reaction. However, the accumulated alkaline 

dust on the sample conditioning filter scrubs significant amounts of HCl from the gas stream. 

Analyte spikes of at least 10% of the gas stream leave the sample relatively “undisturbed” resulting in 

a true check of the measurement performance. While the standard version of the HovaCal can 

perform episodic dynamic spiking it is not an automated system and requires dedicated operator 

oversight to function properly. Eco Chem reports that a “process” version of the HovaCal can 

produce a daily dynamic spike without an operator continuously onsite. However, current facility 

experience with through the probe dynamic spiking suggests it is difficult and time consuming on a 

periodic basis and not demonstrated for use on a continuous basis. Regular dry gas spiking is 

performed and data exists but may not be related to instrument agreement with reference methods 

during (RATAs). 

Thermofisher reports plans to manufacture units that allow dynamic spiking and it is their intent to 

evaluate monitor performance over the next several months as they field test their instrument designs. 

Thermofisher also plans to use SF6 as a tracer (for FTIR monitor tests) to evaluate dynamic spiking 

with a stable easily measured compound.

From a facility standpoint, many current compliance systems (Altech, SICK, Eco Chem and TDL 

systems) use dry cylinder gas for performance and calibration spikes. Typical measurement ranges 

for current compliance systems are between 0 and 25 ppm. Current compliance levels are 25 ppm.

The current cement rule poses a related challenge since it requires measuring a 30 day rolling average 

with a limit of 3 ppm. Contemporary cement plants with in line raw mills the emissions are 10 times 

higher when the raw mill is off, which may translate to the need to measure 0.5 ppm for ~90% of the 

time to compensate for 10% of the time when the plan generates 15 ppm when the mill is off. Since 

quantification limits are higher than the 0.1 to 0.2 ppm detection limit, demonstrating compliance 

may be a daunting task with today’s measurement equipment. The stakeholders will need an 

agreement on the relationship between the detection limit and the practical quantitation limit to 

determine if current measurement equipment can measure emissions present 90% of the time. As 

sampling systems age between maintenance intervals, the effective quantitation limits change. 
6) Frequency of Performance checks 

Vendors or facilities conduct performance checks weekly in Great Britain. Based on performance 

data, facilities can petition for less frequent checks if they demonstrate instrument stability for longer 

than a week. The maximum time between checks is the maintained interval of the instrument, 

approximately 90 days. European tests to evaluate monitor stability and calibration drift require field 

tests over a year period before reduced performance check schedules are approved. The stability test 

requires two identical units evaluated over at least 2 performance or maintenance periods based on 

CEN requirements.

In Europe, each country defines specific performance check frequency which can be stricter than the 

CEN standard. Some European countries require more frequent performance check after the initial 

performance period, but none require daily checks.

7) Protocol Gases – Availability and Certification

Gas Vendors (Airgas and Linde) reported availability of HCl gas in cylinders at 10 ppm to 1% 

using FTIR. Compressed gas under 1000 ppm is shippable in aluminum cylinders, however the 

vendors agreed nickel lined steel cylinders were preferable for stability. The main issues with 

lower level certified standard preparation involve stability in cylinders and availability of NIST 

certified standards as a check on vendor certification analysis accuracy. Vendors highly 

recommend using nickel lined cylinders. Some states that have HCl compliance requirements 

require nickel lined gas cylinders for HCl standards. Vendors agreed that nickel lined or treated 

hardware (e.g., regulators) may be needed to spike HCl at concentrations below 10 ppm. 

Moisture is also a key issue in the transport and stability of HCl. Any moisture in the valve or 

regulator will bias results low due to reactions with the cylinder valve or regulator. Gas vendors 

and testers added that keeping regulators on the cylinders once they are first put into service 

minimizes water contamination of the valve and regulator.

The analytical accuracy certified by the vendors for gasses from 10 ppm up to 1% is about 3%. 

Below 10 ppm vendors are only willing to certify gas cylinders to  10% because the gas vendors 

do not have a traceable standard to compare to their measurements. Vendors report NIST is 

currently capable of certifying gas to 2% accuracy. Analysis is performed using (heated cell?)

FTIR. Airgas uses MKS equipment and vendor supplied library calibration curves to determine 

cylinder gas concentration. The MKS spectra are traceable to HITRAN spectra. For gasses at 

higher concentrations (i.e., from 1000 ppm to 1%) Airgas performs wet chemical analysis of HCl 

cylinder gas. Low concentration (1000 ppm) wet chemical analysis of HCl cylinder gas can be 

compared to FTIR results to verify FTIR determined concentrations. Linde follows a similar 

process with a different IR vendor’s equipment. They also compare the results from wet chemical 

analysis to the FTIR. 

The challenge for gas vendors is NIST standard availability. The request has been made through 

the process of upgrading the “Green Book” to encourage NIST to generate a certified gas 

standard for HCl. The request for NIST support involves preparation of a NIST prime, or 
preferably a batch of NIST reference gas materials available for gas vendor purchase and use as a 

reference in the HCl gas certification process. Without an NIST standard HCl gas there is no 

inter-comparison of vendor generated standard gases. Gas vendors believe NIST can generate a 

stable reference gas material no sooner than 18 months from the time they start. Frank

Guenther is the NIST contact for this activity.

Gas vendors report the ability to generate gas in cylinders at less than 10 ppm if a NIST standard 

was available to check the certified concentration. The analytical uncertainty increases to 10% 

for standards prepared below 10 ppm because there is no (NIST) gas standard to check the bias of 

their results. Certified standard gas cylinders in the range of 10 ppm to 1% are stable for 12 

months. Vendor’s best estimate of stability in the absence of a NIST low concentration HCl 

standard, for gas less than 10 ppm will be no better than 6 months. Moisture contamination and 

inert transfer lines are a large component of HCl field cylinder stability. 

Testers have generated low concentration HCl gas in the field by diluting high concentration gas 

standards. Mass flow controller calibration, construction material and conditioning are 

contributors to the original standard gas uncertainty for dilution system generating low 

concentration HCl test gas. However, the accuracy and precision a tester experiences is based on 

the combination of the uncertainty contributed by the calibration gas and the uncertainty 

contributed by the field dilution and delivery system. Testers and facilities need to qualify both 

the detection limit and the linearity of their monitors.

Vendor(s) asked if the NIST reference standard development was limited to standards in the gas 

phase. Reference was made to the HOVACAL as a reference standard. Facility(s) responded they 

would prefer using a dry gas standard to keep the spiking process as simple as possible. 

8) Other relevant performance specifications

State Performance Specifications (e.g., Pennsylvania) exist for waste to energy processes. The 

Pennsylvania performance specification mirrors PS – 2. The concentration measured at these 

sources is well above 1 ppm. Typically facilities perform RATA tests using Method 26A. 

Instruments well measuring dry gas streams. Daily QA/QC and calibration is consistent but 

needs to be tracked regularly. Early RATA tests failed the 20% agreement requirement and 

Pennsylvania agreed to accept an absolute  5 ppm agreement between Method 26A and the 

CEM.

According to Ralph Roberson at RMB consulting, the EGU facilities are concerned about the 

issue of RATA agreement because the mean difference divided by a small concentration results in 

a value that can be 100% of the target concentration. The issues here are similar to the issues 

encountered with Mercury CEMs. The important technical issue for the Industry is performance 

evaluations where concentrations can be accurately measured by both the CEM and the reference 

method.
Jim Peeler at Emission Monitoring Inc. commented that for tests involving the cement industry 

area sources, Method 26 or 26A have not been allowed and testers must use Method 321. The 

instrument (FTIR) is validated using known addition of spikes. Testers are hard pressed to get 2 

ppm or lower spikes through the alkaline cement kiln dust caked onto the instrument inlet filter. 

RATAs using a reference FTIR method to quality a FTIR CEM will not identify common 

interference issues. Jim proposed automated analyte spikes as one way to demonstrate the 

performance of continuous HCl monitors. 

According to Peeler, the states of Michigan and Maryland have approved dynamic spiking as an 

alternative to qualify HCl and SOx/NOx systems. 

EPA Method 321 also has a provision for dynamic spiking as an integral part of the QC for FTIR 

measurements.

9) Other Issues to Address – Open Discussion

The proposed EGU MACT rule sets the HCl standard at 1.4 ppm for existing sources. Measurements 

will need to be qualified down to approximately 1 ppm.

The gas vendors believe the path to an HCl NIST Reference Gas Material may occur sooner if NIST 

is willing to work with the Netherlands Measurement Institute NMi toward a memo of understanding 

regarding NMi HCl reference material.

10) Action Items

Schedule a conference call with Frank Guenther at NIST to discuss the need for an HCl reference 

gas standard. Ray Merrill will talk with Bob Wright (EPA/ORD) to identify a small group of 

participants and schedule a conference call.

EPA has access to an early draft HCl PS written by Eli Lilly which we will review for relevance 

to development of an HCl Performance Specification.

EPA will review the status of dynamic spiking as an alternative to qualifying the performance in 

Method 7E.

EPA will prepare a summary of this conference call and distribute it to the stakeholders for 

review.

After receiving review comments EPA will schedule the next conference call to update 

stakeholders on the HCl performance specification and to open topics that need additional input 

or clarification.
Table 1: Conference Call Attendees and Contact Information

Name Affiliation Interest Email

Allan Rilling ABB Equip Vendor allan.j.rilling@ca.abb.com

Bob Davis AirGas Gas Vendor bob.davis@airgas.com

Musa Zada Altech Equip Vendor

Malik Hatar Altech Equip Vendor

Bob Vantuyl Ash Grove Cement Facility bob.vantuyl@ashgrove

Andy Edwards Ash Grove Cement Facility

Deseri Haggard Calportland Facility

Ty Smith Cemtech Environmental Equip Vendor

Kieth Crab Cemtech Environmental Equip Vendor

Joe Aldina Covanta Energy Facility jAldina@covantaenergy.com

Edul Chikhliwala EcoChem Analytics Equip Vendor chikli@ecochem.biz

Laura Kinner Emission Monitoring Inc. Tester lkinner@mindspring.com

Jim Peeler Emission Monitoring Inc. Tester jimpeeler@mindspring.com

Ray Merrill EPA/OAQPS/AQAD/MTG Regulatory 

Agency

merrill.raymond@epa.gov

Jason Dewees EPA/OAQPS/AQAD/MTG Regulatory 

Agency

dewees.jason@ epa.gov

Robin Segall EPA/OAQPS/AQAD/MTG Regulatory 

Agency

segall.robin@@epa.gov

Barrett Parker EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MPG Regulatory 

Agency

parker.barrett@epa.gov

Rachael Agnew EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MPG Regulatory 

Agency

agnew.rachael@epa.gov

Collin Boswell EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MPG Regulatory 

Agency

boswell.collin @epa.gov

Gerri Garwood EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MPG Regulatory 

Agency

garwood.gerri@epa.gov

Candace Sorrell EPA/OAQPS/AQAD/MTG Regulatory 

Agency

sorrell.candace@epa.gov

Luc Sevrette Gasmet Equip Vendor luc.sevrette@gasmet.com

Andre Hegre Gas Technologies, Finland Equip Vendor

Hector Ybanez, Holcim Inc. Facility hybanez@gmail.com

Matthew Rutledge Lafarge Facility

Mike Hayes Linde Gas Gas Vendor

Barbara Marshick MKS Instruments Equip Vendor Barbara_Marshik@mksinst.com

Fred Grunewald MKS Instruments Inc. Equip Vendor fred.grunewald@mksinst.com

Martin Spartz Prism Analytical technology Tester m.spartz@pati-air.com

Ralph Roberson RMB Consulting Facility-ECU Roberson@mb-consulting.com

Dan Kietzer Sick-Maihak Equip Vendor dan.kietzer@sickmaihak.com

Kita Dieter Thermofisher Equip Vendor dieter.kita@thermofisher.com

Stephen Johnson Thermofishter Inc. Equip Vendor Stephen.Johnson@thermosisher.com

James Willis Titan America Facility jwillis@titanamerica.com

Jeff Harrington Tyco Environmental Systems Equip Vendor

Gary Catchatory Tyco Environmental Systems Equip Vendor

Michael Corvese Thermofisher Equip Vendor Michael.corvese@thermofisher.com

Frank Duckett Thermofisher Equip Vendor Frank.duckett@thermofisher.com

Ashmud Patel Ethyl Smith Automation

Henry Veger CEM Specialties Equip Vendor

Dave Vigowax Marantee Tile Facility