# Reinhold Environmental Ltd.

____________________________

2009 NOx-Combustion Round

Table & Expo Presentation

______________________________________

February 9 & 10, 2009, Cleveland, OH2009 NOx-Combustion/PCUG2009NOxFebruary 10, 2009Assessing DeactivationTrends for CatalystDesign and Management PlanningDesignandManagementPlanningPresenterCoauthorJohn CochranCERAM Environmental, Inc.(913) 239-9896Dr Greg HolscherCERAM Environmental, Inc.(913) 239-9896CERAM Environmental Inc.U S B d S b idi f CERAM F d d i 2000U.S.BasedSubsidiary ofCERAMFoundedin2000Providing Catalyst Supply Contract CoordinationCatalyst Design, Flow Modeling, DeliveryCoordination, Training, Startup Services,Guarantee AdministrationProviding Comprehensive Catalyst ManagementServices for >30 Coal Based SCRs in the USAIG TuningsReactor InspectionsCatalyst TestingSCR System DCS Data Reporting, Assessments,and TroubleshootingandTroubleshootingRegeneration and Rejuvenation ServicesProcurementCatalyst Management and SCR Operations PlanningCatalystManagementandSCROperationsPlanningCatalyst Deactivates WithExposure to Flue GasNatural GasCoal Low DustKo (Original Catalyst Activity)

e Activity)Coal High DustBiomassWaste High Dust

o (Relativ eK/Ko @ 16 khr0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000

K/K oOperation [hrs]zDefinition: K/Ko = Activity at Time of Test (K) /OriginalCatalyst Activity(Ko)y( )zK/Ko @ 16khr Can Range From 0.2 to >0.9 Dependent onFuel Quality and Operating CircumstancesCatalyst Deactivates WithExposure to Flue GasNatural GasCoal Low DustKo (Original Catalyst Activity)

A ctivity)CoalLowDustCoal High DustBiomassWaste High Dust

(Relative AK/Ko @ 16 khr0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000

K/KoOperation [hrs]Catalyst Design (at hour=0) Must Anticipate Deactivation toCatalystDesign(athour=0)MustAnticipateDeactivationtoEnd of Guarantee Period to Size Catalyst ProperlyCatalyst Deactivation is Very Site and Fuel Specific0.91.0K/Ko vs Time060.70.8

v ity0.40.50.6

e lative Acti v0.10.20.3

R e0.00.10 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000Hours of SCR OperationTracking K/Ko Trends Critical to Accurately Manage CatalystReasons for CatalystAdditions or ReplacementszDeactivation – Loss of chemical activityzPlugging/Surface Accumulations – Loss of active catalyst surface areazErosion – Loss of catalyst material or loss or mechanical integrityzSintering – Thermal destruction of activityMiddle Catalyst Laer for Schahfer Unit 14yNORTH SIDE WITH AIGSH SH SH SH SH SH SH SH1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 122A50-100% 40-80% 40-80% 20-80% 50-80% 50-80% 40-60% 20-100% 50-100% 30-100% 50-100% 100%2B40-50% 20-40% 20-40% 15-20% 20-30% 20-50% 20-50% 20-100% 40-50% 40-50% 50-60% 40-100%2C15-20%10-15%15-20%10-15%15-20%15-20%20-30%10-15%15-20%10-15%20-30%30-40%Overall Activity7.00008.0000Min. Activity5 0%0 5%5 0%0 5%5 0%5 0%0 30%0 5%5 0%0 5%0 30%30 0%2D5-10% 5 -10% 10-15% 5-10% 10-15% 5-10% 10-15% 5-10% 10-15% 5-10% 15-20% 10-15%2E5-10% 5-10% 5-10% < 5% 5-10% 5-10% 5-10% 5-10% 5-10% < 5% 5-10% 5-10%WEEAS 2F< 5% 5-10% < 5% < 5% < 5% 5-10% < 5% 5-10% < 5% < 5% < 5% < 5%STTEST ELEMENTTREMOVED 11-03-04SSIID2G< 5%< 5%< 5%< 5%< 5%< 5%< 5%< 5%5-10%< 5%< 5%< 5%DNH3 Slip2.0 ppmvd ref. O20 ppmvd ref.O2Relative Activity Layer 33.00004.00005.00006.0000yD2G<5%<5%<5%<5%<5%<5%<5%<5%5-10%<5%<5%<5%DEE2H< 5% 5-10% < 5% < 5% < 5% 5-10% < 5% < 5% < 5% < 5% < 5% < 5%2I< 5% < 5% < 5% < 5% < 5% 5-10% 5-10% < 5% < 5% < 5% < 5% < 5%2J< 5% < 5% < 5% < 5% 5-10% < 5% < 5% < 5% < 5% < 5% < 5% < 5%5 10%5 10%5 10%5 10%5 10%5 10%5 10%5 10%5%5%5%5%Relative Activity Layer 2Relative Activity Layer 1Relative Activity Spare Layer0.00001.00002.00003.000002550751001251501752K5-10%5-10%5-10%5-10%5-10%5-10%5-10%5-10%<5%<5%<5%<5%SOUTH SIDE< 10% Blockage 10% to 20% Blockage 20% to 40% Blockage 40% to 70% Blockage 70% to 100% Blockage = Fly Ash Piles (> 1 ft) = Unburned Carbon/LOI0255075100125150175Operation Hours x 1000 [h]Reactor Pluggage MapCatalyst ActivityCatalyst Testing is an Essential Element ofCatalyst Management PlanningzMeasurements:DeNOx Activity (Ko and K)Surface Chemical AnalysisSurfaceChemicalAnalysisBulk Chemical AnalysisOther – SO2to SO3Conversion Rate, PoreVolume Specific Surface Area AbrasionVolume,SpecificSurfaceArea,AbrasionResistance, Compression StrengthzPredominant Catalyst Test Objectives:A D ti ti R t d P j t K/K T dAssessDeactivationRate andProjectK/KoTrendIdentify Deactivation MechanismsEvaluate Mechanical PropertieszInformation Obtained Used to Assess CatalystCapabilities and Project Future ReplacementsCERAM Laboratory CapabilitieszExtensive Laboratory Capabilities1 Bench Reactor and 7 Semi-Bench ReactorsTesting New and Aged Catalyst Samples (Honeycomb Plate CorrugatedTestingNewandAgedCatalystSamples(Honeycomb,Plate,CorrugatedFiber)>1000 Tests Performed in 2008z2006 VGB Catalyst Activity Testing Round Robin2006VGBCatalystActivityTestingRoundRobinElement With Unknown Activity Circulated to6 LaboratoriesC A l Cl A lCERAM Result WasClosest toAverage ResultActivity -0.1% (-0.03 m/h) From Average1.1% Standard Deviation for 5 TestsOther Labs (Total of 37 Measurements in 6 Labs)Activity -2.6 m/h (-7.0%) to +3.2 m/h(+8.3%)From Average) gAverage Activity Variance = 1.0 m/hLaboratory Test Results41422006 VGB Round Robin Activity Measurement Test Results394041EON (element starts)CERAMSTEAG (now Evonik)373839

A ctivity, m/hSTEAG(nowEvonik)EnBWArgillon (now Johnson Mathey)353637

AKWHEON (element returned)3435012345678Test #Overall Test Result AverageTest#Original Catalyst SizingC l S li P j d D i i R (K/K E d h E d f hzCatalystSupplierProjectedaDeactivationRate(K/KoExpectedat theEndoftheSpecified Guaranteed Period) Based onExperience and...SpecifiedSCR Design Type (High Dust, Low Dust, or Tail-End)SpecifiedFuel Conditions (S Ash AsCaOP K Na etc )FuelConditions(S,Ash,As,,P,K,Na,etc.)SpecifiedOperating ConditionszSupplier Sized Catalyst (Determined the Required Reactor Potential) Basedon This K/Ko Projection andonThisK/KoProjectionandSpecifiedDesign Point Data....NOx In/Out and NH3SlipFlue Gas Temperature0.800.901.00Catalyst Deactivation Trend Indicative of Illinois Basin Coal16,000 hrGuaranteeFlueGasTemperatureGas Flow Rates & ConstituentsDistributions (V, NH3/NOx, T)Expected Catalyst Pluggage0.500.600.70

K /KoK/Ko Assumed forCalculation of RequiredReactor Potential24,000 hrExpectedCatalystPluggageOther Specified Items0.100.200.300.40

KDesign/Expected DeactivationOriginal Design Basis K/Ko @16 khrO i i l D i B i K/K @24kh,Guarantee0.000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hoursOriginalDesignBasisK/Ko@24khrTraditional Catalyst ManagementzUtility Pulls Test ElementsUtilityPullsTestElementszTest Elements Sent to LaboratoryzLaboratory Tests ElementsL b I di if K/K i Ab O i i l Si i B iMidwest Utility Unit Burning IL Basin CoalRelative Activity vs. Operating HourszLaboratoryIndicatesifK/KoisAboveOriginalSizingBasiszIs This Catalyst Management Planning?This Approach:0.91.0

o )ThisApproach:zNeglects Reactor MechanicalCondition (Pluggage)N l Diff D NO0.70.8

Relative Activity (K/K ozNeglectsDifferentDeNOxOperating Demands fromDesign/Specification Basis0.50.60 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20OperatingHours x 1000(hrs)g ()Guaranteed LifeAvg. K/Ko for 3 Layers (2003)Avg. K/Ko for 3 Layers (2004)Avg. K/Ko for 3 layers (2005)Avg. K/Ko for 3 Layers (2006)Avg K/Ko for 3 Layers (2007)End of Guarantee Expected K/KoMinimum Required K/KoExpected Deactivation CurveK/Ko Tracking is NOT the Only Part of anEffective Catalyst Management Program!!!zItems Not Accounted for With K/Ko Testing Include...Relative Accuracy of Activity MeasurementsReactor Pluggage PresentReactorPluggagePresentOriginal Catalyst Activity Different From Design BasisConditions Different Than Design/Specified BasisInlet NOxOutlet NOxAmmonia SlipGas TemperaturesDistributionsFlow RatesFlowRatesFlue Gas ConstituentsDid Catalyst Supplier Estimate the Correct Required ReactorP t ti l f C diti P t?PotentialforConditionsPresent?Catalyst Deactivation TrendsCatalyst Activity Should be Tracked Annually0.800.901.00CatalystDeactivationTrends3rdYear2ndYear1stYear0500.600.70080

K o4thYear0.300.400.50

K/ KMost Recent Test ResultsPrevious Test Results0.000.100.200500010000150002000025000Design/Expected DeactivationOriginal Design Basis K/Ko @16 khr05,00010,00015,00020,00025,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hourszTrend Analysis Should Consider All Results With Emphasis on MostRecent ResultsRecentResultsCase Study – Ameren Duck Creek Unit 1 (360 MW)Aging Model Applied to Results toDetermine Long Term Trends0 901.00Catalyst Deactivation TrendsTrend Based on0.700.800.90All Test Results0 400.500.60

K/KoTest Average (All Tests)0.200.300.40Most Recent Test ResultsPrevious Test ResultsDesign/Expected Deactivation0.000.100 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000g pOriginal Design Basis K/Ko @16 khrExposure to Flue Gas, hoursMost Recent Results May IndicateMost Representative Trend0 901.00Catalyst Deactivation TrendsTrend Based on Most0.700.800.90TrendBasedonMostRecent Results Only0 400.500.60

K/KoTest Average (Most Recent Tests)0.200.300.40Most Recent Test ResultsPrevious Test ResultsDesign/Expected Deactivation0.000.100 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000g pOriginal Design Basis K/Ko @16 khrExposure to Flue Gas, hoursCatalyst Deactivation Trends-Ameren Duck Creek Unit 1Things Going According to Plan0 800.901.00CatalystDeactivationTrendsAmerenDuckCreekUnit1360 MW Operation Burning Illinois Basin CoalLab Accuracy of -1KValue Considered0.600.700.80

o0.300.400.50

K/KTest Average (Most Recent Tests)Avg -1K Lab Accuracy (Most Recent Tests)Most Recent Test Results0 000.100.20Previous Test ResultsDesign/Expected DeactivationOriginal Design Basis K/Ko @16 khr0.000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hourszThe Lab Accuracy (±1 K) Should Also Be Considered in the TrendingTheLabAccuracy(1K)ShouldAlsoBeConsideredintheTrendingAnalysisIs The Trend Changing With Time?0.901.00Test Results Projected K/Ko at 16 khr0.800.901.00Catalyst Deactivation Trends - Ameren Duck Creek Unit 1360 MW Operation Burning Illinois Basin Coal0.700.80

e d K/Ko at 16khrMost Recent TestsPrevious TestsOriginal Design Basis K/Ko@16 khr0.400.500.600.70

K/KoTest Average (Most Recent Tests)A1K L b A (M R T )0400.500.60

Calculat eAverage Most RecentAverage All TestsIndividual ResultsProjected to 16 khrBased on Aging Model0 000.100.200.30Avg -1KLabAccuracy(MostRecentTests)Most Recent Test ResultsPrevious Test ResultsDesign/Expected DeactivationOriginal Design Basis K/Ko @16 khrzUse AgingModels to Project K/Ko Result to 16,000 Hours0.400 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000Exposure to Flue Gas at Time of Catalyst Test, hours0.000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hoursgg jzK/Ko at 16 khr Projection Provides a Common Basis to AssessDeactivation TrendsWhich Reactor Level is the Weak Link?0 700.800.90Level Based Catalyst Activity Tracking0.901.00

k hrLevel Based Test Results Projected K/Ko at 16 khrLevel 1 Test ResultsLevel 2 Test ResultsL l 3 T t R lt0.400.500.600.70

K/KoTest Average (Most Recent Tests)Avg Measured -1K (Lab Accuracy)Level 1 Test Results0.700.80

a ted K/Ko at 16 kLevel3TestResultsLevel 4 Test ResultsOriginal Design Basis K/Ko@16 khrLevel 1 Average0.000.100.200.30Level 2 Test ResultsLevel 3 Test ResultsLevel 4 Test ResultsDesign/Expected DeactivationOriginal Design Basis K/Ko @16 khr0.400.500.60

Calcul aLevel 2 AverageLevel 3 AverageLevel 4 AverageIndividual Layer BasedResults Projected to 16 khrBased on Aging Model0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hourszDeactivation Rates Can VaryFrom Level to Level in the Reactor0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000Exposure to Flue Gas at Time of Catalyst Test, hourszInformation Useful to Determine Which Level Has Lowest Activity WhenTime to Change Out CatalystDuck Creek Reactor ArrangementInitial LPA ScreenLocationFinal LPA ScreenLocationzInitially No LPA Screen InstalledLPA Observed and Caused OEM to Install ScreenzFirst LPA Screen Installed by OEM Above Flow RectifierLPA Deposited on Back Side of ReactorzFinal LPA Screen Located at Economizer OutletHigh Velocity at LPA Screen (75 to 90 fps) and Failures Passed Further LPAHighVelocityatLPAScreen(75to90fps)andFailuresPassedFurtherLPAResulting in Pluggage on AIG Side of ReactorDuck Creek Top Layer Pluggage MapAfter 2005 6 7 mm/1mm WallSB SB SB SB2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H190-100% 80-100% 70-80% 50-60% 50-60% 80-100% 100% 100%Top Catalyst Level (6.7 mm Pitch)NORTH SIDEAfter20056.7mm/1mmWallzInitial Operation Without Screen290-100% 80-90% 50-60% 50-60% 50-60% 80-100% 100% 100%390-100% 80-90% 40-50% 50-60% 50-60% 80-90% 100% 100%490-100% 80-90% 40-50% 40-50% 50-60% 90-100% 100% 100%L70% Average Pluggage <10% AveragePluggageLzInitialOperationWithoutScreen–LPA on AIG Side of ReactorzLPA Screen Added Above Catalyst –LPA Deposited on Far Side ofAfter 2 Ozone Seasons of 40 to 70%Pl NSi ifi t E i590-100% 70-80% 50-60% 40-50% 30-40% 90-100% 100% 100%680-90% 70-80% 50-60% 40-50% 40-50% 90-100% 100% 100%780-90% 70-80% 50-60% 50-60% 40-50% 80-90% 100% 100%890-100%70-80%50-60%50-60%40-50%70-80%100%100%AIGSIDEBACKWALLLPLPLPADepositedonFarSideofReactorPluggageNoSignificantErosionNoted With 6.7 mm Catalyst890 100%70 80%50 60%50 60%40 50%70 80%100%100%990-100% 70-80% 50-60% 50-60% 40-50% 70-80% 100% 100%1090-100% 80-90% 60-70% 60-70% 40-50% 50-60% 100% 100%1190-100% 80-90% 60-70% 60-70% 40-50% 50-60% 100% 100%ACCESSDOORA A1290-100% 80-90% 70-80% 70-80% 40-50% 50-60% 100% 100%SOUTH SIDE< 10% Pluggage10% to 20% Pluggage 20% to 40% Pluggage 40% to 70% Pluggage 70% to 100% PluggageUnburned Carbon Popcorn Ash / LPA Fly Ash Piles (>1 ft)Duck Creek Top Layer Pluggage MapAfter 2005 6 7 mm/1mm WallAfter 2006 8 2 mm/1mm WallSB SB SB SB2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H190-100% 80-100% 70-80% 50-60% 50-60% 80-100% 100% 100%Top Catalyst Level (6.7 mm Pitch)NORTH SIDEAfter20056.7mm/1mmWallzInitial Operation Without ScreenSHSHSHSHSH2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H1 10-15% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5%Top Catalyst Level (8.2 mm Pitch)NORTH SIDEAfter20068.2mm/1mmWall290-100% 80-90% 50-60% 50-60% 50-60% 80-100% 100% 100%390-100% 80-90% 40-50% 50-60% 50-60% 80-90% 100% 100%490-100% 80-90% 40-50% 40-50% 50-60% 90-100% 100% 100%L70% Average Pluggage <10% AveragePluggageLzInitialOperationWithoutScreen–LPA on AIG Side of ReactorzLPA Screen Added Above Catalyst –LPA Deposited on Far Side of2 5-10% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5%3 <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5%4 5-10% 5-10% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5%<10% Average PluggageAfter 2 Ozone Seasons of 40 to 70%Pl NSi ifi t E i590-100% 70-80% 50-60% 40-50% 30-40% 90-100% 100% 100%680-90% 70-80% 50-60% 40-50% 40-50% 90-100% 100% 100%780-90% 70-80% 50-60% 50-60% 40-50% 80-90% 100% 100%890-100%70-80%50-60%50-60%40-50%70-80%100%100%AIGSIDEBACKWALLLPLPLPADepositedonFarSideofReactor5 5-10% 5-10% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5%6 5-10% 5-10% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5%7 5-10% 5-10% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5%8 <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5%AIGSIDEBACKWALLPluggageNoSignificantErosionNoted With 6.7 mm Catalyst890 100%70 80%50 60%50 60%40 50%70 80%100%100%990-100% 70-80% 50-60% 50-60% 40-50% 70-80% 100% 100%1090-100% 80-90% 60-70% 60-70% 40-50% 50-60% 100% 100%1190-100% 80-90% 60-70% 60-70% 40-50% 50-60% 100% 100%ACCESSDOORA A9 <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5%10 <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5%11 5-10% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5%ACCESSDOOR1290-100% 80-90% 70-80% 70-80% 40-50% 50-60% 100% 100%SOUTH SIDE< 10% Pluggage10% to 20% Pluggage 20% to 40% Pluggage 40% to 70% Pluggage 70% to 100% PluggageUnburned Carbon Popcorn Ash / LPA Fly Ash Piles (>1 ft)12 5-10% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5% <5%SOUTH SIDEAmeren Duck Creek Unit 1Catalyst Management Plan

2 003 2 005 2 007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 20191.8Catalyst Management PlanTotal Reactor PotentialReq Reactor Potential W/Perf. Basis and/or FuelChangesStart of Planning Period (2009)End of Planning Period (2023)Total Reactor and Layer (Bottom) Potential (Includes Pluggage Effects)

2 2 21.21.41.6 n sidering Pluggage)E1 New L2 6.7mm Pitch HoneycombE2 New L3 6.7mm Pitch HoneycombE3 New L4 6.7mm Pitch HoneycombE4 New L2 8.2mm Pitch Honeycomb0 60.81.0 r Layer Potential (Co nE5 New L3 8.2mm Pitch HoneycombE6 Clean Old L4 6.7mm Pitch HoneycombE7 New L2 8.2mm Pitch HoneycombE8 New L4 8.2mm Pitch Honeycomb3 Levels of 6.7 mm CatalystPlugged Due to LPA 25 to 70%}Up Rate of Unit from 360 to 440 MWTemperatures Increase From 700 to 761 F0.20.40.6 Reactor o rE9 New L1 8.2mm Pitch CatalystE10 New L2 8.2mm Pitch CatalystE11 New L3 8.2mm Pitch CatalystE12 New L4 8.2mm Pitch Catalyst}Transition to 8.2 mm Pitch LowerOxidation Catalyst (0.5% at 761 F)



# }0.00 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000Catalyst Exposure to Flue Gas, hoursStart of YearzCERAM Honeycomb CatalystOxidationCatalyst(0.5%at761F)The Plan Past 2010 is One ofMany Being Consideredy yzFinal Oxidation Rate for 8.2 mm Pitch/1 mm Thick WallCatalyst <0.5%@761 FCatalyst Deactivation TrendsIndiana Utility 500 MW Cyclone 85% PRB Blend0.901.00500 MW PRB Fired Cyclone Unit Deactivation Trends0 600.700.80G t0.400.500.60

K/KoDesign/Expected DeactivationTest Average (All Tests)A2K (All T t )GuaranteeSizing Basis0.100.200.30Avg -2K(AllTests)Catalyst Sizing Basis K/Ko (13.5 khr)Original Design K/Ko Equiv @16 khrMost Recent Test Results (Unit A)Previous Test Results (Unit A)0.000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hoursPreviousTestResults(UnitA)zCatalyst Sized Based on K/Ko = 0.66 at 13,500 HourszGuarantee: 89% NOx Removal and 2.0 ppm Slip for 13,500 hoursCatalyst Management PlanIndiana Utility 500 MW Cyclone 85% PRB Blend

0 03 0 05 0 07 0 09 0 11 0 13 0 15 0 17 0 191.8Catalyst Management PlanTotal Reactor PotentialReq Reactor Potential W/Perf. Basis and/or FuelChangesStart of Planning Period (2008)Total Reactor and Layer (Bottom) Potential (Includes Pluggage Effects)

2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 01.21.41.6 s idering Pluggage)StartofPlanningPeriod(2008)End of Planning Period (2027)E1 New L1 7.4mm Pitch HoneycombE2 New L2 7.4mm Pitch HoneycombDespite Pluggage Levels of 20 to40% Initial Catalyst LifeExceeded 13.5 khr Guarantee Due toHigh Initial K of Catalyst0.81.0 L ayer Potential (Con sE3 New L3 7.4mm Pitch HoneycombE4 New L1 9.2mm Pitch HoneycombE5 New L2 8.2mm Pitch HoneycombE6 New L3 8.2mm Pitch HoneycombTransitioning From 7.4 mm to 9.2 (Top)d 8 2 (L L l ) Pit h C t l t0.20.40.6 Reactor or LE7 New L4 8.2mm Pitch HoneycombE8 New L1 9.2mm Pitch HoneycombE9 New L2 8.2mm Pitch HoneycombSt t f Yand8.2(LowerLevels)PitchCatalystHigh LOI0.00 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000Catalyst Exposure to Flue Gas, hoursStartofYearThe Plan Past 2010 is One ofMany Being ConsideredzCERAM Honeycomb CatalystgPluggage Occursy yzGuarantee – 89% NOx Removal and 2.0 ppm Slip for 13,500 hoursCatalyst Deactivation TrendsIndiana Utility 500 MW Cyclones 85% PRB Blend0.901.002x500 MW PRB Fired Cyclone Unit Deactivation TrendsUnit B0.600.700.80ResultsAll Tests All TestsK/Ko@16khrCatalyst Test0 300.400.500.60

K/KoDesign/Expected DeactivationTest Average (All Tests)Avg-2K(All Tests)Unit A Unit B0.725 0.7060.740 0.7130.724 0.7120 7120 692CatalystTestResults SummaryReactor AverageLevel 1Level 2Level 30.100.200.30g( )Catalyst Sizing Basis K/Ko (13.5 khr)Original Design K/Ko Equiv @16 khrMost Recent Test Results (Unit A)Previous Test Results (Unit A)Test Results (Unit B)0.7120.692Level 4Level30.000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hoursTestResults(UnitB)zResults From Sister Unit (500 MW Cyclone) Burning PredominatelyResultsFromSisterUnit(500MWCyclone)BurningPredominatelySame PRB Blend Exhibits Similar Deactivation RateNorth American Station2 x 500 MW PRB Blend (80%) Wall Fired Units0.800.901.00Unit A Catalyst Test Results0.800.901.00Unit B Catalyst Test Results0 400.500.600.70

K/Ko0 400.500.600.70

K/Ko0.100.200.300.40Plate Catalyst Manufacturer Design PointTest Average (Most Recent Tests)Avg -1K Lab Accuracy (Most Recent Tests)Plate Catalyst Test Results0.100.200.300.40Plate Catalyst Manufacturer Design PointTest Average (Most Recent Tests)Avg -1K Lab Accuracy (Most Recent Tests)Plate Catalyst Test ResultszPl t C t l t Si d B d K/K f0.000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hours0.000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hoursMost Recent Most RecentK/Ko@16khrCatalyst TestzPlateCatalystSizedBasedonK/Ko of0.70 at 16,000 HoursUnit A Unit B0.616 0.6480.559 0.6290.567 0.621CatalystTestResults SummaryReactor AverageLevel 1Level 20.613 0.6380.725 0.706Level 3Level 4North American Station2 x 500 MW PRB Blend (80%) Wall Fired Units0 800.901.00Unit A Catalyst Test Results0 800.901.00Unit B Catalyst Test ResultsHoneycombResultsHoneycombResults0.500.600.700.80

K /Ko0.500.600.700.80

K /Ko0.100.200.300.40

KPlate Catalyst Manufacturer Design PointTest Average (Most Recent Tests)Avg -1K Lab Accuracy (Most Recent Tests)Plate Catalyst Test ResultsHoneycomb Catalyst Test Results0.100.200.300.40

KPlate Catalyst Manufacturer Design PointTest Average (Most Recent Tests)Avg -1K Lab Accuracy (Most Recent Tests)Plate Catalyst Test ResultsHoneycomb Catalyst Test ResultszPl t d H b C t l t E hibiti Si il D ti ti R t0.000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hoursHoneycombCatalystTestResults0.000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hoursHoneycombCatalystTestResultszPlate andHoneycombCatalystareExhibitingSimilarDeactivationRatesNorth American Station500 MW PRB Blend (80%) Wall Fired Unit

2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 20191.82.0 g ageNanticoke Unit 8 - Catalyst Management Plan 2008 (4 ppm Slip)Total Reactor PotentialOriginal Design Required Reactor PotentialR R P i l W/P f B i d/Total Reactor and Layer (Bottom) Potential (Includes PluggageBeing Considered1.21.41.6

C onsidering Plug gReqReactorPotentialW/Perf.Basis and/orFuel ChangesStart of Planning Period (2008)End of Planning Period (2017)E1 New L1 5.7mm Pitch Plate2 ppm Slip4 ppm Slip and0.60.81.0 r Layer Potential CE2 New L2 5.7mm Pitch PlateE3 New L3 5.7mm Pitch PlateE4 New L4 7.4mm Pitch HoneycombE5 New L1 9.2mm Pitch Honeycomb4ppmSlipandLower NOx In0.20.4

Reactor oE6 Regenerate L2 5.7 mm Pitch PlateE7 Regenerate L3 5.7 mm Pitch PlateStart of Year0.00 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000Catalyst Exposure to Flue Gas, hourszGuarantee – 83% NOx Removal and 2.0ppm Slipfor 16,000 hoursThe Plan Depicted is One ofMany Being Consideredpp p ,zPlate and Honeycomb Catalyst in ReactorNorth American Station2 x 500 MW High Sulfur Bituminous Coal0.800.901.00Unit Y Catalyst Test Results0.800.901.00Unit Z Catalyst Test Results0 400.500.600.70

K/Ko0 400.500.600.70

K/Ko0.100.200.300.40OEM Plate Catalyst Manufacturer Design PointTest Average (Most Recent Tests)Avg -1K Lab Accuracy (Most Recent Tests)Plate Catalyst Test Results0.100.200.300.40OEM Plate Catalyst Manufacturer Design PointTest Average (Most Recent Tests)Avg -1K Lab Accuracy (Most Recent Tests)Plate Catalyst Test ResultszCatalyst Sized Based on K/Ko of 0 80 at0.000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hoursy0.000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000Exposure to Flue Gas, hoursMost Recent Most RecentK/Ko@16khrCatalyst TestzCatalystSizedBasedonK/Koof0.80at16,000 HoursUnit Y Unit Z0.656 0.6510.669 0.6710.659 0.617CatalystTestResults SummaryReactor AverageLevel 1Level 20.640 0.6510.665Level 4Level 3Catalyst Deactivates Independent of Catalyst TypeHigh Arsenic/Low Calcium Oxide Operating Unit1Relative Activity Vs Time600 MW Unit With High Arsenic and Low CaOF l B d Diff t Th0.70.80.9FuelsBurnedDifferentThanThat Specified InitiallyResult is Extreme Deactivation0.50.6

A ctivity (K/Ko)0.20.30.4

Relative AHoneycomb Catalyst Test ResultsCorrugated Fiber Catalyst Test Results00.10 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000Projected DeactivationExpected Activity for Specified Fuel (16khr)Current Deactivation Trend (16khr),,,,Exposure to Flue Gas (hrs)Catalyst Testing is Only One Part ofEffective Catalyst ManagementEffectiveCatalystManagementActivity ObjectivesAIG Checks and Tuning Optimize NH3/NOx Distribution (Check/Tune Annually)Monitor Ammonia in Fly Ash Test Frequently and Track Ammonia Slip TrendsOperations Data Assessment Evaluate DeNOx Demand (NOx, T, Flow, Delta P, etc.)Monitor Fuels Data Evaluate Possible Effects on CatalystReactor Inspections Assess Pluggage and Mechanical ConditionCatalyst Testing Assess Current Activity Levels and Deactivation TrendsCatalyst Management Planning Evaluate Near Term SCR System Performance CapabilitiesPredict Next Need for Catalyst AdditionEvaluate Options for Catalyst Addition (New vs Regen, etc.)AIG = Ammonia Injection GridConclusionszCareful AttentionShouldbePaidtoInitialCatalystSizingtoEnsureaPropere u e o S ou d be a d o a Ca a ys S g o su e a opeReactor Potential and K/Ko Basis is UtilizedzCatalyst Deactivation Rates are Independent of Catalyst TypezNew Plants:Seek Hard K/Ko Data to Substantiate Catalyst DesignNewPlants:SeekHardK/KoDatatoSubstantiateCatalystDesignzCatalyst Testing is Notthe Only Part of a Catalyst Management ProgramzCERAM Performs ComprehensiveCatalyst Management ServicesCATLife®ProgramCatalystManagementServices–CATLife®ProgramCatalyst TestingReactor InspectionsCatalystManagementPlanningAIG TuningsOperating Data and Fuel Quality AssessmentsRegeneration/Rejuvenation ProcurementReactorI ti /CatalystTesting(K/Ko)SCR SystemO tig jCatalyst Management Planning(Manage CATLife®Model)Considering Full Range ofInspection/MechanicalConditionOperatingDemandAssessmentBoilerOperationsAssessmentSCROperationsAssessmentConsideringFullRangeofOptions (New/Wash/Regen)Assess FuelQualityAssessmentAIG TuningAssessmentAssessNH3in AshMeasurementThanks!!!Any Questions?CatalystManagementPlanningCatalyst(CATLife®Program)ReactorTesting(K/Ko)SCR SystemInspection/MechanicalConditionOperatingDemandAssessmentBoilerOperationsAssessmentSCROperationsAssessmentThe Plan Depictedis One of ManyBeing ConsideredAssess FuelQualityAIG TuningAssessNH3in AshMeasurement