# P:\PACIFICORP\370414BART2\TECHNICAL_MEMORANDUM_DELI VERABLES\BART_TMS_DAVEJOHNSTO NUNIT4_FINAL.DOC 1 

# TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM



# Addendum to Dave Johnston Unit 4 BART Report

PREPARED FOR: 

# Wyoming Division of Air Quality

PREPARED BY: 

# CH2M HILL

COPIES: 

# Bill Lawson/PacifiCorp

DATE: 

# March 26, 2008



# Introduction

In compliance with the Regional Haze Rule (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 51), the Wyoming Division of Air Quality (WDAQ) required PacifiCorp Energy to conduct a detailed Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) review to analyze the effects to visibility in nearby Class I areas from plant emissions, both for ba seline and for reasonable control technology scenarios. PacifiCorp submitte d these evaluations to WDAQ in January 2007. A revised report

was submitted in October 2007.

On January 3, 2008, PacifiCorp Energy personnel met with WDAQ staff to discuss the status of
the BART reviews. At that time, the state re quested that additional modeling scenarios for several of the PacifiCorp facilities be performed to aid in their BART review. This memorandum presents the economics analysis for one scenario previously modeled, referred to as Scenario A,

and new model results for Scenar io B and described as follows:

• 

# Scenario A: PacifiCorp committed controls at permitted rates—low nitrogen oxide (NO

x 

# ) burners (LNBs) with over-fire air (OFA), dry flue gas desu lfurization (FGD), new fabric

filter

• 

# Scenario B: PacifiCorp committed controls and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) at permitted rates

The CALPUFF modeling system (v. 5.711a) was used for this analysis. All technical options and model triggers used in CALMET, CALPUFF, and CALPOST are consistent with those used for the previous BART analyses and described in the BART report submitted in October 2007.



# Stack Parameters, Emissions Information, and Capital Cost

Table 1 summarizes the control equipment for Scenarios A and B as well as the current equipment installed at the plant. The overall capital cost of installing these options is also shown.

# ADDENDUM TO DAVE JOHNSTON UNIT 4 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_DAVEJOHNSTONUNIT4_FINAL.DOC 2



# TABLE 1 

# Control Scenario Summary

Dave Johnson Unit 4

Equipment Type Capital Cost

NO
x 

# SO 2 

# PM 10 

# Million dollars

Baseline LNB Lime—add

Venturi scrubber Venturi scrubber —

Scenario A LNB with OFA Dry FGD Fabric Filter $251.0

Scenario B LNB with OFA and SCR Dry FGD Fabric Filter $395.0



# Emissions were modeled for the following pollutants:

• 

# Sulfur dioxide (SO 2 

# )

• 

# NO

x



# • 

# Coarse particulate (PM 2.5 

# <diameter<PM 10 

# )

• 

# Fine particulate (diameter<PM 2.5 

# )

• 

# Sulfates

Table 2 shows stack parameters and emission rate s that were used for the Dave Johnston Unit 4 BART modeling and analysis.

TABLE 2 

# Calpuff Model Inputs

Dave Johnston Unit 4

BART Comparison (d)



# Model Input Data Baseline Scenario

A (e) 

# Scenario

B (f)



# Hourly Heat Input (mmBtu/hour) 4,100 4,100 4,100

Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) 2,050 615 615

Nitrogen Oxide (NO
x 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) 1,640 615 287

PM 10 

# Stack Emissions (lb/hr) 250 61.5 61.5

Coarse Particulate (PM 2.5 

# <diameter< PM 10 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) (a) 

# 108 35.1 35.1

Fine Particulate (diameter<PM 2.5 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) (b) 

# 143 26.4 26.4

Sulfuric Acid (H 2 

# SO 4 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) 37.7 3.8 5.8

Ammonium Sulfate [(NH 4 

# ) 2 

# SO 4 

# ] Stack Emissions (lb/hr) — — 0.8

(NH 4 

# )HSO 4 

# Stack Emissions (lb/hr) — — 1.4

H 2 

# SO 4 

# as Sulfate (SO 4 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) 37 3.7 5.6

(NH 4 

# ) 2 

# SO 4 

# as SO 4 

# Stack Emissions (lb/hr) — — 0.6

(NH 4 

# )HSO 4 

# as SO 4 

# Stack Emissions (lb/hr) — — 1.2

# ADDENDUM TO DAVE JOHNSTON UNIT 4 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_DAVEJOHNSTONUNIT4_FINAL.DOC 3



# TABLE 2 

# Calpuff Model Inputs

Dave Johnston Unit 4

BART Comparison (d)



# Model Input Data Baseline Scenario

A (e) 

# Scenario

B (f)



# Total Sulfate (SO 4 

# ) (lb/hr) (c) 

# 37 3.7 7.4

Stack Conditions

Stack Height (meters) 76 152 152

Stack Exit Diameter (meters) 9.75 5.79 5.79

Stack Exit Temperature (Kelvin) 322 350 350

Stack Exit Velocity (meters per second) 8.53 25.7 25.7

NOTES:
(a) 

# Based on AP-42, Table 1.1-6, the coarse particulates are counted as a percentage of PM 10 

# . This equates to 43% ESP and 57% Baghouse. PM 10 

# and PM 2.5 

# refer to particulate matter less than 10 and 2.5 micrometers, respectively, in aerodynamic diameter.
(b) 

# Based on AP-42, Table 1.1-6, the fine parti culates are counted as a percentage of PM 10 

# . This equates to 57% ESP and 43% Baghouse.
(c) 

# Total Sulfate (SO 4 

# ) (lb/hr) = H 2 

# SO 4 

# as Sulfate (SO 4 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) + (NH 4 

# ) 2 

# SO 4 

# as SO 4 

# Stack Emissions (lb/hr) + (NH 4 

# )HSO 4 

# as SO 4 

# Stack Emissions (lb/hr)
(d) 

# SO 2 

# , NO
x 

# , and PM rates are expressed in terms of permitted emission rates. Actual emissions will be less than the permitted rates.
(e) 

# PacifiCorp Committed Cont rols @ permitted rates : LNB with OFA, Dry FGD, New Fabric Filter
(f) 

# PacifiCorp Committed Controls and SCR @ permitted rates



# Economic Analysis

In completing this additional analysis to supplement the previous BART study, technology alternatives were investigated and potential reductions in NO

x 

# , SO 2 

# , and PM 10 

# emissions rates

were identified.

A comparison of Scenarios A and B on the basis of costs, design control efficiencies, and tons of pollutant removed is summarized in Tables 3 through 5. Capital costs were provided by PacifiCorp. The complete economic analyses for these two scenarios are provided as

Attachment 1.ADDENDUM TO DAVE JOHNSTON UNIT 4 BART REPORTJMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_DAVEJOHNSTONUNIT4_FINAL.DOC4TABLE 3Scenario A Control CostDave Johnston Unit 4NOxControl SO2Control PM10Control Scenario ALNB with OFADry FGDFabric FilterControl CostTotal Installed Capital Costs (million dollars) $7.90 $243.1 — $251.0Annualized First-Year Capital Costs$0.75$23.13—$23.88First Year Fixed and Variable O&MCosts (million dollars)$0.09$5.32—$5.41Total First Year Annualized Costs (million dollars)(a)$0.84 $28.77 — $29.61Power Consumption (MW)—4.45—4.54Annual Power Usage (Million kWh/Yr)—35.79—35.79Permitted Emission Rate (lb/mmBtu) 0.150.150.02—Additional Tons of Pollutant Removed perYear over Baseline4,0415,65774310,441First Year Average Control Cost ($/Tonof Pollutant Removed)2085,028—2,805NOTE:(a)First year annualized costs include power consumption costs.ADDENDUM TO DAVE JOHNSTON UNIT 4 BART REPORTJMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_DAVEJOHNSTONUNIT4_FINAL.DOC5TABLE 4Scenario B Control CostDave Johnston Unit 4NOxControl SO2Control PM10Control Scenario BLNB with OFA &SCRDry FGDFabric FilterControl CostTotal Installed Capital Costs (million dollars) $151.9 $243.1 — $395.0Annualized First-Year Capital Costs$14.45$23.13—$37.58First Year Fixed & Variable O&MCosts (million dollars)$1.98$5.32—$7.30Total First Year Annualized Costs (million dollars)(a)$16.43 $28.44 — $44.87Power Consumption (MW)2.294.54—6.83Annual Power Usage (Million kWh/Yr)18.0535.79—53.85Permitted Emission Rate (lb/mmBtu) 0.070.150.02—Additional Tons of Pollutant Removed perYear over Baseline5,3345,65774311,734First Year Average Control Cost ($/Tonof Pollutant Removed) 3,081 5,028 — 3,824NOTE:(a)First year annualized costs include power consumption costs.ADDENDUM TO DAVE JOHNSTON UNIT 4 BART REPORTJMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_DAVEJOHNSTONUNIT4_FINAL.DOC6TABLE 5Incremental Control Costs, Scenario B compared to Scenario ADave Johnston Unit 4NOxControl SO2Control PM10ControlTotalControl CostIncremental Installed Capital Costs (million dollars) $144.0 0 0 $144.0Incremental Annualized First-YearCapital Costs$13.7000$13.70Incremental First Year Fixed & VariableO&M Costs (million dollars)$1.8900$1.89Incremental First Year Annualized Costs (million dollars)(a)$15.59 0 0 $15.59Incremental Power Consumption (MW)2.29002.29Incremental Annual Power Usage (Million kWh/Yr)18.050018.05Incremental Improvement in Emission Rate (lb/mmBtu)0.0800—Incremental Tons of PollutantRemoved1,293 0 0 1,293Incremental First Year Average Control Cost ($/Ton of PollutantRemoved)12,056 0 0 12,056NOTE:(a)Incremental first year annualized costs include power consumption costs.

# ADDENDUM TO DAVE JOHNSTON UNIT 4 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_DAVEJOHNSTONUNIT4_FINAL.DOC 7 

# Modeling Results and Least-Cost Envelope Analysis

CH2M HILL modeled Dave Johnston Unit 4 fo r two post-control scenarios. The results determine the change in deciview based on each a lternative at the Class I areas specific to the project. The Class I areas potentially affect ed are Badlands Nationa l Park and Wind Cave

National Park for this unit.

Modeled Scenarios

Current operations (baseline) a nd two alternative control scenar ios were modeled to cover the range of effectiveness for the combination of the individual NO

x 

# , SO 2 

# , and PM control technologies being evaluated. The mode led scenarios incl ude the following:

• 

# Baseline: Current operations with LNB and Venturi Scrubber

• 

# Scenario A: LNB with OFA, Dry FGD, new fabric filter

• 

# Scenario B: Scenario A with SCR

Summary of Visibility Analysis

Tables 6 and 7 present a summary of the modeling period (2001–2003) results for each

scenario and Class I area.

TABLE 6 

# Costs and Visibility Modeling Results as Applicable to Badlands National Park

Dave Johnston Unit 4

Scenario Controls Total First Year

Annualized Cost Highest Δ dV 98 th



# Percentile

Δ dV Maximum

Annual

Number of Days Above

0.5 dV

Baseline Current Operations with FGD

and Venturi Scrubber — 3.610 1.291 49

Scenario A Scenario A: PacifiCorp

Committed Controls $29,285,200 1.291 0.435 7

Scenario B Scenario B: PacifiCorp

Committed Controls and SCR $44,873,886 0.938 0.302 4

# ADDENDUM TO DAVE JOHNSTON UNIT 4 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_DAVEJOHNSTONUNIT4_FINAL.DOC 8 

# TABLE 7 

# Costs and Visibility Modeling Results as Applicable to Wind Cave National Park

Dave Johnston Unit 4

Scenario Controls Total First Year

Annualized

Cost Highest Δ dV 98 th



# Percentile

Δ dV Maximum

Annual

Number of Days Above

0.5 dV

Baseline Current Operations with FGD

and Venturi Scrubber — 4.304 1.695 47

Scenario A Scenario A: PacifiCorp

Committed Controls $29,285,200 1.727 0.543 9

Scenario B Scenario B: PacifiCorp

Committed Controls and SCR $44,873,886 1.260 0.374 7



# Results

Tables 8 and 9 present a summary of the cost s and modeling results for each scenario and

Class I area.

TABLE 8 

# Incremental Costs and Incremental Visibility Imp rovements Relative to Badlands National Park

Dave Johnston Unit 4

Scenario Comparis

on Controls Incremental

Annualized Cost (Million$) Reduction in

98 th 

# Percentile

maximum dV Reduction in

Number of Days Above

0.5 dV Cost per dV

Reduction (Million$/dV

Reduced) Cost per Day

to Achieve a

Reduction in

the Days

above 0.5 dV (Million$/Day)

Scenario A Compared

to Baseline Scenario A: PacifiCorp

Committed

Controls $29.29 0.856 42 $34.21 $0.70

Scenario B Compared

to Baseline Scenario B: PacifiCorp

Committed

Controls and

SCR $44.87 0.989 45 $45.37 $1.00

Scenario B Compared

To

Scenario A Addition of SCR $15.59 0.133 3 $117.21 $5.20

# ADDENDUM TO DAVE JOHNSTON UNIT 4 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_DAVEJOHNSTONUNIT4_FINAL.DOC 9 

# TABLE 9 

# Incremental Costs and Incremental Visibility Improvements Relative to Wind Cave National Park

Dave Johnston Unit 4

Scenario Comparis

on Controls Incremental

Annualized Cost (Million$) Reduction

in 98 th



# Percentile

maximum dV Reduction in

Number of Days Above

0.5 dV Cost per dV

Reduction (Million$/dV

Reduced) Cost per Day

to Achieve a

Reduction in

the Days

above 0.5 dV (Million$/Day)

Scenario A Compared

to Baseline Scenario A: PacifiCorp

Committed

Controls $29.29 1.152 38 $25.42 $0.77

Scenario B Compared

to Baseline Scenario B: PacifiCorp

Committed

Controls and

SCR $44.87 1.321 40 $33.97 $1.12

Scenario B Compared

To

Scenario A Addition of SCR $15.59 0.169 2 $92.24 $7.79



# Least-Cost Envelope Analysis

The least-cost envelope graphs for Badlands National Park are shown in Figures 1 and 2 and for Wind Cave National Park are shown in Figures 3 and 4.

# ADDENDUM TO DAVE JOHNSTON UNIT 4 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_DAVEJOHNSTONUNIT4_FINAL.DOC 10 

# FIGURE 1

Least Cost Envelope PacifiCorp Dave Johnson Unit 4 - Badlands National Park

Scenario B

Scenario A

Baseline

$0.0 $5.0 $10.0 $15.0 $20.0 $25.0 $30.0 $35.0 $40.0 $45.0 $50.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50



# Reduction in Days of Exceeding 0.5 dV (days)Total Annualized Cost (Mil $)



# FIGURE 2

Least Cost Envelope PacifiCorp Dave Johnson Unit 4 - Badlands National Park

Scenario B

Scenario A

Baseline

$0.0 $5.0 $10.0 $15.0 $20.0 $25.0 $30.0 $35.0 $40.0 $45.0 $50.0

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20



# 98th Percentile Delta-Deciview Reduction (dV)Total Annualized Cost (Mil $)

# ADDENDUM TO DAVE JOHNSTON UNIT 4 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_DAVEJOHNSTONUNIT4_FINAL.DOC 11 

# FIGURE 3

Least Cost Envelope
PacifiCorp Dave Johnson Unit 4 - Wind Cave National Park

Scenario B

Scenario A

Baseline

$0.0 $5.0 $10.0 $15.0 $20.0 $25.0 $30.0 $35.0 $40.0 $45.0 $50.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45



# Reduction in Days of Exceeding 0.5 dV (days)Total Annualized Cost (Mil $)



# FIGURE 4

Least Cost Envelope
PacifiCorp Dave Johnson Unit 4 - Wind Cave National Park

Scenario B

Scenario A

Baseline

$0.0 $5.0 $10.0 $15.0 $20.0 $25.0 $30.0 $35.0 $40.0 $45.0 $50.0

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40



# 98th Percentile Delta-Deciview Reduction (dV)Total Annualized Cost (Mil $)

# ATTACHMENT 1 

# Complete Economic Analyses

for Scenarios A and BECONOMIC ANALYSIS SUMMARY - FIRST YEAR COSTSDJ4Boiler Design: Tangential-Fired PCTYPE OF EMISSIONS CONTROLSNOxControlScenario A Scenario BTechnology Label BASEA B C D F G A+F D+FCurrent OperationLow NOxBurners withOverfire AirRotating Overfire AirLow NOxBurners withOverfire Air and NonSelective CatalyticReductionLow NOxBurners withOverfire Air andSelective CatalyticReductionDry FGD & FabricFilterWet FGD w/ FabricfilterLNB w/OFA, Dry FlueGas Desulfurizationand Fabric FilterBaghouseLNB w/OFA, SCR. DryFlue GasDesulfurization andFabric Filter BaghouseCAPITAL INVESTMENTTotal Installed Capital Costs ($) $0 $7,900,000 $14,719,868 $17,905,780 $151,900,000 $243,100,000 $289,166,335 $251,000,000 $395,000,000FIRST YEAR DEBT SERVICE ($/Yr) $0 $751,510 $1,400,269 $1,703,338 $14,449,916 $23,125,574 $27,507,764 $23,877,084 $37,575,490FIRST YEAR FIXED O&M Costs ($/Yr)Operating Labor ($/Yr)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $506,128 $809,804 $506,128 $506,128Maintenance Material ($/Yr)$0 $36,000 $54,000 $105,000 $166,000 $1,102,288 $1,430,784 $1,138,288 $1,268,288Maintenance Labor ($/Yr)$0 $54,000 $81,000 $157,500 $249,000 $734,858 $953,856 $788,858 $983,858Administrative Labor ($/Yr)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0TOTAL FIRST YEAR FIXED O&M COST $0 $90,000 $135,000 $262,500 $415,000 $2,343,274 $3,194,444 $2,433,274 $2,758,274FIRST YEAR VARIABLE O&M Costs ($/Yr)Makeup Water Costs ($/Yr)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $142,730 $189,923 $142,730 $142,730Reagent Costs ($/Yr)$0 $0 $0 $45,823 $293,563 $552,256 $526,723 $552,256 $845,819SCR Catalyst / FF Bag Costs ($/Yr) $0 $0 $0 $0 $369,000 $186,992 $186,992 $186,992 $555,992Waste Disposal Costs ($/Yr)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $303,197 $383,582 $303,197 $303,197Electric Power Costs ($/Yr)$0 $0 $1,706,886 $130,086 $902,718 $1,789,668 $2,479,518 $1,789,668 $2,692,386TOTAL FIRST YEAR VARIABLE O&M Costs ($/Yr) $0 $0 $1,706,886 $175,909 $1,565,281 $2,974,843 $3,766,739 $2,974,843 $4,540,124SUMMARY OF FIRST YEAR COSTS ($/Yr)First Year Debt Service ($/Yr)$0 $751,510 $1,400,269 $1,703,338 $14,449,916 $23,125,574 $27,507,764 $23,877,084 $37,575,490First Year Fixed O&M Costs ($/Yr) $0 $90,000 $135,000 $262,500 $415,000 $2,343,274 $3,194,444 $2,433,274 $2,758,274First Year Variable O&M Costs($/Yr)$0 $0 $1,706,886 $175,909 $1,565,281 $2,974,843 $3,766,739 $2,974,843 $4,540,124Total First Year Costs ($/Yr)$0 $841,510 $3,242,155 $2,141,747 $16,430,197 $28,443,691 $34,468,947 $29,285,201 $44,873,888CONTROL COST COMPARISONSNOxTechnology ComparisonAdditional NOxRemoved From Base Case (Tons/Yr)0 4,041 4,041 4,525 5,334First Year Average Control Cost ($/Ton NOxRemoved)$0 $208 $802 $473 $3,081Technology Case ComparisonA-BASE B-A C-A D-AIncremental NOxRemoved (Tons/Yr)0 4,041 0 485 1,293Incremental Control Cost ($/Ton NOxRemoved)$0 $208 #DIV/0! $2,682 $12,056SO2Technology Comparison58.6%87.6% 91.7%Additional SO2Removed From Base Case (Tons/Yr)05,657 6,465First Year Average Control Cost ($/Ton SO2Removed)$0$5,028 $5,332Technology Case ComparisonF-E G-FIncremental SO2Removed (Tons/Yr)0-2,424 808Incremental Control Cost ($/Ton SO2Removed)$0-$11,197 $7,456PM Technology Comparison0.0%Additional PM Removed From Base Case (Tons/Yr)0743 0First Year Average Control Cost ($/Ton PM Removed)$0$38,258 #DIV/0!Technology Case ComparisonF-E G-FIncremental PM Removed (Tons/Yr)0-242 -743Incremental Control Cost ($/Ton PM Removed)$0-$111,967 -$8,104SCENARIO A AND B COMPARISONSAdditional NOx, SO2, & PM Removed From Base Case (Tons/Yr)010,441 11,734First Year Average Control Cost Compared to Base Case ($/Ton Removed)$0$2,805 $3,824Incremental Tons Removed - Scenario B vs Scenario A (Tons/Yr)01,293Incremental Control Costs - Scenario B vs Scenario A ($/Ton Removed)$0$12,056JMS ES032008003SLC\First Yr Summary\DJ4 appendix.xlsPAGE 1 OF 1INPUT CALCULATIONSDJ4Boiler Design: Tangential-Fired PCPARAMETERCurrentOperationNOxControl TechnologiesScenario A Scenario BControl TechnologiesNOxEmission Control SystemGood Practices LNB w/OFA ROFA LNB w/OFA & SNCR LNB w/OFA & SCR LNB w/OFA LNB w/OFA & SCRSO2Emission Control SystemLime additionDry FGDWet FGD w/ FabricfilterDry FGD Dry FGDPM Emission Control System Venturi ScrubberFabric Filter Fabric Filter Fabric FilterGeneral Plant Design and Operating DataType of Unit PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PCAnnual Power Plant Capacity Factor 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90%Annual Operation (Hours/Year) 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884Net Power Output (kW) 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000Net Plant Heat Rate (Btu/kW-Hr)12,425 12,425 12,425 12,425 12,425 12,425 12,425 12,425 12,425Boiler Heat Input, Measured by Fuel Input (MMBtu/Hr)4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100Annual Heat Input, Measured by Fuel Input (MMBtu/Year)32,326,371 32,326,371 32,326,371 32,326,371 32,326,371 32,326,371 32,326,371 32,326,371 32,326,371Boiler Heat Input, Measured by CEM (MMBtu/Hr)4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100 4,100Annual Heat Input, Measured by CEM (MMBtu/Year)32,324,400 32,324,400 32,324,400 32,324,400 32,324,400 32,324,400 32,324,400 32,324,400 32,324,400Plant Fuel SourceBoiler Fuel Source Dry Fork PRB Dry Fork PRB Dry Fork PRB Dry Fork PRB Dry Fork PRB Dry Fork PRB Dry Fork PRB Dry Fork PRB Dry Fork PRBCoal Heating Value (Btu/Lb) 7,784 7,784 7,784 7,784 7,784 7,784 7,784 7,784 7,784Coal Sulfur Content (wt.%) 0.47% 0.47% 0.47% 0.47% 0.47% 0.47% 0.470% 0.47% 0.47%Coal Ash Content (wt.%) 5.01% 5.01% 5.01% 5.01% 5.01% 5.01% 5.01% 5.01% 5.01%Coal Flow Rate (Lb/Hr) 526,754 526,754 526,754 526,754 526,754 526,754 526,754 526,754 526,754Coal Consumed (Ton/Yr) 2,076,463 2,076,463 2,076,463 2,076,463 2,076,463 2,076,463 2,076,463 2,076,463 2,076,463Nitrogen Oxide EmissionsNOxEmission Rate (Lb/MMBtu)0.40 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.07 0.15 0.07NOxEmission Rate (Lb/Hr)1,640 615 615 492 287 615 287NOxEmission Rate (Lb Moles/Hr)54.65 20.49 20.49 16.39 9.56 20.49 9.56NOxEmission Rate (Ton/Yr)6,465 2,424 2,424 1,939 1,131 2,424 1,131Add'l NOxRemoved from Current Operations (Lb/Hr)0 1,025 1,025 1,148 1,353 1,025 1,353Add'l NOxRemoved from Current Operations (Ton/Yr)0 4,041 4,041 4,525 5,334 4,041 5,334Sulfur Dioxide EmissionsUncontrolled SO2(Lb/MMBtu)1.211.21 1.21 1.21 1.21Uncontrolled SO2(Lb/Hr)4,9464,946 4,946 4,946 4,946Uncontrolled SO2(Lb Moles/Hr)77.2177.21 77.21 77.21 77.21Uncontrolled SO2(Tons/Yr)19,49819,498 19,498 19,498 19,498Controlled SO2Emission Rate (Lb/MMBtu)0.500.15 0.10 0.15 0.15SO2Removal Efficiency (%)58.6%87.6% 91.7% 87.6% 87.6%Controlled SO2Emissions (Lb/Hr)2,050615 410 615 615Controlled SO2Emissions (Ton/Yr)8,0812,424 1,616 2,424 2,424SO2Removed (Lb/Hr)2,8964,331 4,536 4,331 4,331SO2Removed (Ton/Yr)11,41717,074 17,882 17,074 17,074Add'l SO2Removed from Current Operations (Lb/Hr)01,435 1,640 1,435 1,435Add'l SO2Removed from Current Operations (Ton/Yr)05,657 6,465 5,657 5,657Particulate Matter EmissionsUncontrolled Fly Ash (Lb/Hr) 21,11221,112 21,112 21,112 21,112Uncontrolled Fly Ash (Lb/MMBtu) 5.1495.149 5.149 5.149 5.149Uncontrolled Fly Ash (Tons/Yr) 83,22583,225 83,225 83,225 83,225Controlled Fly Ash Emission Rate (Lb/MMBtu) 0.0610.015 0.061 0.015 0.015Controlled Fly Ash Removal Efficiency (%) 98.8%99.7% 98.8% 99.7% 99.7%Controlled Fly Ash Emissions (Lb/Hr) 25062 250 62 62Controlled Fly Ash Emissions (Ton/Yr) 986242 986 242 242Fly Ash Removed (Lb/Hr) 20,86221,051 20,862 21,051 21,051Fly Ash Removed (Ton/Yr) 82,23982,982 82,239 82,982 82,982Add'l Ash Removed from Current Operation (Lb/Hr) 0189 0 189 189Add'l Ash Removed from Current Operation (Ton/Yr) 0743 0 743 743Economic FactorsInterest Rate (%) 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10%Discount Rate (%) 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10%Plant Economic Life (Years) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20SO2and PM ControlTechnologiesJMS ES032008003SLC\Tech Calcs\DJ4 appendix.xlsPAGE 1 OF 2INPUT CALCULATIONSDJ4Boiler Design: Tangential-Fired PCPARAMETERCurrentOperationNOxControl TechnologiesScenario A Scenario BControl TechnologiesNOxEmission Control SystemGood Practices LNB w/OFA ROFA LNB w/OFA & SNCR LNB w/OFA & SCR LNB w/OFA LNB w/OFA & SCRSO2Emission Control SystemLime additionDry FGDWet FGD w/ FabricfilterDry FGD Dry FGDPM Emission Control System Venturi ScrubberFabric Filter Fabric Filter Fabric FilterSO2and PM ControlTechnologiesInstalled Capital CostsNOxEmission Control System ($2006)$7,900,000 $14,719,868 $17,905,780 $151,900,000 $7,900,000 $151,900,000SO2Emission Control System ($2006)$243,100,000 $289,166,335 $243,100,000 $243,100,000PM Emission Control System ($2006)$0 $0 $0 $0Total Emission Control System Capital Costs ($2006) $7,900,000 $14,719,868 $17,905,780 $151,900,000 $243,100,000 $289,166,335 $251,000,000 $395,000,000NOxEmission Control System ($/kW)$24 $45 $54 $460 $24 $460SO2Emission Control System ($/kW)#REF! $876 $737 $737PM Emission Control System ($/kW)Total Emission Control Capital Costs ($/kW) $24 $45 $54 $460 $737 $876 $761 $1,197Fixed Operating & Maintenance CostsOperating Labor ($)$0 $0 $0 $0 $506,128 $809,804 $506,128 $506,128Maintenance Material ($)$36,000 $54,000 $105,000 $166,000 $1,102,288 $1,430,784 $1,138,288 $1,268,288Maintenance Labor ($)$54,000 $81,000 $157,500 $249,000 $734,858 $953,856 $788,858 $983,858Administrative Labor ($)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total 1st Fixed Year O&M Cost ($) $90,000 $135,000 $262,500 $415,000 $2,343,274 $3,194,444 $2,433,274 $2,758,274Annual Fixed O&M Cost Escalation Rate (%) 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Levelized Fixed O&M Cost ($/Yr) $106,695 $160,043 $311,195 $491,984 $2,777,958 $3,787,023 $2,884,653 $3,269,942Variable Operating & Maintenance CostsWater CostMakeup Water Usage (gpm)0 0 0 0 248 330 248 248Unit Price ($/1000 gallons)$1.22 $1.22 $1.22 $1.22 $1.22 $1.22 $1.22 $1.22First Year Water Cost ($)$0 $0 $0 $0 $142,730 $189,923 $142,730 $142,730Annual Water Cost Escalation Rate (%) 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Levelized Water Costs ($/Yr)$0 $0 $0 $0 $169,207 $225,155 $169,207 $169,207Reagent CostType of ReagentNone None UreaAnhydrous NH3Lime Lime LimeLime & Anhydrous NH3Unit Cost ($/Ton)$0.00 $370.00 $400.00 $91.25 $91.25Unit Cost ($/Lb)$0.000 $0.185 $0.200 $0.046 $0.046Molar Stoichiometry0.00 0.45 1.00 1.10 1.02Reagent Purity (Wt.%)100% 100% 100% 90% 100%Reagent Usage (Lb/Hr)31 186 1,535 1,464First Year Reagent Cost ($)$0 $45,823 $293,563 $552,256 $526,723 $552,256 $845,819Annual Reagent Cost Escalation Rate (%) 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Levelized Reagent Costs ($/Yr)$54,324 $348,020 $654,701 $624,432 $654,701 $1,002,721SCR Catalyst / Fabric Filter Bag Replacement CostMaterial ReplacedSCR Catalyst Bags Bags Bags & SCR CatalystAnnual SCR Catalyst (m3) / No. FF Bags123 1,798 1,798SCR Catalyst ($/m3) / Bag Cost ($/ea.)$3,000 $104 $104First Year SCR Catalyst / Bag Replacement Cost ($)$369,000 $186,992 $186,992 $186,992 $555,992Annual SCR Catalyst / Bag Cost Escalation Rate (%)2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Levelized Catalyst/Fabric Fitler Bag Costs ($/Yr)$437,451 $221,680 $221,680 $221,680 $659,130FGD Waste Disposal CostFGD Solid Waste Disposal Rate, Dry (Lb/Hr)3,161 3,999 3,161 3,161FGD Waste Disposal Unit Cost ($/Dry Ton)$24.33 $24.33 $24.33 $24.33First Year FGD Waste Disposal Cost ($)$303,197 $383,582 $303,197 $303,197Annual Waste Disposal Cost Esc. Rate (%)2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Levelized Waste Disposal Costs ($/Yr)$359,441 $454,738 $359,441 $359,441AuxiliaryPower CostAuxiliary Power Requirement (MW)0.00 4.33 0.33 2.29 4.54 6.29 4.54 6.83Auxiliary Power Requirement (% of Plant Output) 0.00% 1.31% 0.10% 0.69% 1.38% 1.91% 1.38% 2.07%Auxilliary Power Useage (MWh)0 34,138 2,602 18,054 35,793 49,590 35,793 53,848Unit Cost ($2006/MW-Hr)$50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00First Year Auxiliary Power Cost ($)$0 $1,706,886 $130,086 $902,718 $1,789,668 $2,479,518 $1,789,668 $2,692,386Annual Power Cost Escalation Rate (%) 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Levelized Auxilliary Power Costs ($/Yr) $0 $2,023,518 $154,217 $1,070,175 $2,121,657 $2,939,476 $2,121,657 $3,191,832JMS ES032008003SLC\Tech Calcs\DJ4 appendix.xlsPAGE 2 OF 2