p. 1



# OAR Box 

# 1778 Prepped byOllie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 227 ) 11-1- 7 Docket Number: 

# A-90-0 6

Printed 10/28/20089:51:02 AM

Sheet 227 of 276P. 2

iTCD-fii'-S U lil t i.'i£ fH Ar 

# Wisconsin Electric POWER COMPANY 23 1 WMichigan , RO

. Bo x2046

. MRwouted

. W l W2C 1 Januar y 11 , 198 9

Mr . Dal e Zieg e Burea uo f Ai r Managemen t Wisconsi nDepartmen t o f Natura l Resource s P . 0 . Box792 1 Madison , Wl 5370 7 Dea r Mr . Ziege : POR T WASHINGTO N

POWERPLAN T RENOVATIO N PROJEC T PS DPERMI T BAC T ANALYSI S II-1- 7

(414)221-234 5



# i^jili-B s

Availabl e Contro l Technolog y leademission s from

th e Por t We hav e enclose dou r analysi s o f th e Bes t (Attachment s 1 an

d2 ) fo r N

O , beryllium

and Washingto nplant . Yo uhadagree da t ou r Octobe r 27 , 1988 , meetin gt o revie w andrespon dt o thi s informatio nbefor e yo udraf t a PS Dpermit . Youwil l als o recal l tha t we pla nt o kee pannua l particulat e an dSO - emissio nincrease s t o les s tha nPS Dsignificanc e level s throug hnegotiate dpermi t condition s fo r th e renovate dplant . We hav e conclude dtha t th e burne r desig nan dconfiguratio no f th e plan t boiler s represent s th e Bes t Availabl e Contro l Technolog y (BACT ) fo r N

O emissions . Thi s i s base do ninformatio nprovide db y Mr . Hubbard , andMr . McDowel l o f EPA , showin ghighe r N Oemissio nlimit s i npermit s issue dfo r constructio no f pulverize dcoal-firedrelectri c utilit y steam generator s andan independen t inquir y

I mad e wit hEP A

Regio nIX . Th e economi c an denerg y analysi s o f post-combustio nN Oreductio ntechnologie s installe donth e plan t boiler s fo r compariso nwa s provide db y th e Bechte l Corp . Als o Attachmen t 3 t o thi s submittal , whic hwa s informall y lef t wit hyo uonOctobe r 27 , 1988 , alon g wit hth e EPR I repor t o f NOemissio ntest s conducte donth e plan t boilers , provide s additiona l informatio nt o suppor t ou r conclusion . Rehabilitatio no f th e plant' s electrostati c precipitators , include di nth e scop e o f th e Por t Washingto nRenovatio nProject , i s expecte dt o yiel dES P particulat e remova l efficiencie s o f 99. 2 t o 99. 5 percent . We believ e tha t thes e expecte dcontro l efficiencie s constitut e BAC T fo r emission s o f leadand beryllium

base donth e relativel y minima l projecte demissio nrate s presente d inAttachmen t 2 . Pleas e le t me know

i f yo uhav e an

y question s concernin gthi s submittal .

Roge rD

. Dodd

s r . udj Qjualit Er Ai rSJ/jalit ytngirjee r Environmenta l Departmen t dm p Attachment s cc : J

. Paisie-EP ARegio n VP. 3 htb-2/-b UlU t a : 14 t-M NU . UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUIM W 

### .'"••• . Attachmen t 1

POR T WASHINGTON

POWE RPLAN T UNIT S 1- 5 BAC T FORNOxEMISSION S
NITROGE N

OXIDE S CONTRO L Th e five Stea

m Generator s a t Por t Washingto nPower Plan t ar e pulverize dcoa l fired , dr y botto m furnace , natura l circula tio nboiler s wit hsuperhea t an drehea t circuits . The stea

m generator s a t Por t Washingto ninherentl y incorpo rat e combustio nfeature s whic hinhibi t NO xformation . Th e burner s ar e mounte do nth e furnac e arc handfir e downward . Th e lon g flame s emitte dfro m the burner s receiv e th e bul ko f combustio nai r perpendicula r t o andalon g th e lengt ho f th e flam e jet , producin g stage dcombustion . Th e water-coole d furnac e fron t wall s an dbottom , alon g wit hrelativel y lo w combustio nai r temperatures , ai di nachievin g a lo w bul kcom bustio ntemperatur e thu s inhibitin g NO xformation . Conse quently , Nitroge nOxide s (NOx ) ar e emitte di na nomina l rang e o f 0.3 4 t o 0.4 7 lb/MMBt ufor thes e units . A . BES T AVAILABL E CONTRO L TECHNOLOG Y- BAC T A clearinghous e searc hwa s conducte di ncooperatio nwit h Wisconsi nDepartmen t o f Natura l Resource s andEPA Region s V an dI Xt o determin e lowes t achieve demission s fro m a pulverize dcoa l fire delectri c utilit y steam generato r whic hha s bee npermitted , constructe dan ddemonstrated . Th e searc hreveale dn o pulverize dcoa l installation s wit h permitte dNO xemissio nlevel s lowe r tha n0.4 9 lb/MMBtu . Thos e installation s whic hachiev e th e NSP S NO xemissio n limi t o f 0. 6 lb/MMBt uo r les s d o s o by applyin g burne r desig nandboile r operatio ntechnique s t o limi t NO x formatio ndurin g combustion . Non e o f th e permitte d sources , whic har e newl y construce dboilers , appl y post-combustio nga s treatment . Ther e hav e bee nn o determination s mad e t o dat e o nwha t constitute s BAC T fo r NO xemission s fro

m renovate dcoa l fire dutilit y boiler s simila r t o thos e a t Por t Washington . B . BACKGROUND- NOxCONTRO L MEASURE S Contro l technologie s t o reduc e NO xemission s fal l int o tw o categories , combustio ncontrol s an dpost-combustio n controls . Combustio ncontrol s see kt o optimiz e firin g condition s t o minimiz e therma l NO xformatio ndurin g the combustion ) process , whil e post-combustio ncontrol s see k t o remov e NO xfro

m the flu e gas .P. 4 

### rkb-^Y-9 0 TUE dH 6 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO P . 0 4

Availabl e combustio ncontrol s t o minimiz e therma l NO x formationd

o s o b y contro l o f th

e combustion stoichiometry , limitin g free oxygenpresent b y staged admissionof ai r during th e combustionprocess , thu s inhibiting,NO

xformation . A

nadditiona l strateg y i s to minimiz e th

e temperatur e of th e combustionproces s to suppres s reaction s whic hfor m NOx . Post-combustionNO xcontrol s utiliz e a reducin g agent , typicall y

ammoni a or urea , t o conver t NO

xto elementa l Nitrogenan

dwate r vapor . I f a catalyti c surfac e o r reactor i s employed , th e proces s i s calledSelective Catalyti c Reduction(SCR) , whil e withou t a catalys t th e proces s i s oftencalledTherma l De-NOx . 1 . Selectiv

e Noncatalyti c NO

xReduction Th e us e o f ammoni a withou t a catalys t i s mos t effective whenit i s injectedint o anare a wher e th e flue ga s i s maintainedat 1750°F . Th e Por t Washingtonunit s ar e subjec t to cycli c an dloa dfollowin

g duty . Durin

g operation , loa

dchange s an

dfurnac e slaggin

g woul dcaus e th e ga s temperatur e to var y at th e injectio

nlocation . Thi s woul dresul t i nvariabl e remova l effectivenes s an d exces s ammoni a slippin g throug

hunreacted . Curren t tes t Installation s indicat e a typica l ammoni a sli po f 35-6 5 pp

m inth e flue gas . Thi s ammoni a emissionwoul d b e inexchang e fo

r a potentia l NO

xremova l of 30-10 0 pp m fo r th e Por t Washingtonunits . 2 . Selectiv

e Catalyti c Reduction Catalyti c NO

xreductioni s accomplisheda t flue ga s temperature s of 700-750°F , whichi s th e temperatur e a t th e flu e ga s inle t of th

e existin

g Por t Washingtonai r heater s whe nth

e unit s ar e a t operating conditions . Remova l effectivenes s durin g start-u

pperiod s woul dbe significantl y

reducedunti l operatin g temperature s ar e reached . Applicationof catalyti c reductionwoul drequir e relocationof ai r heaters , I.D . fans , precipitator s an d ductworki nadditionto th e sitin g an dinstallationo f th e large volum

e catalys t bed s themselves . 3 . Othe r Issue s o f Concernwit hPost-combustionControl s Ther e i s limite

dEuropeanan

dJapanes e experienc e wit h SCRo nutilit y

boiler s firin

g lo w sulfu r coal s of 1.2 * sulfur conten t o

r less . Th

e uncertainty

intranslating thi s internationa l experienc e int o predictedperformanc e inth e U.S . lie s inth

e highe r sulfur content an d differen t as hconstituent s o f Americancoals . Th e Por t Washingtoncoa l wil l hav e a sulfur conten t o f 1.5 * orrcD-ci-%iij t b* ' i 8 P. 5 Fii XHO . uuOuOGOuuOOOOOOOOOO O p , 0 5



### c . more . Th e highe r level s o f SO , an d S0 3 produce d wil l reac t wit hth e ammoni a t o for m ammoniu

m sulfate s resultin g i n pluggag e o f th e catalys t be d an d ai r heaters . Trac e element s presen t i n America n coal s ar e expecte d t o accelerat e deactivatio n o f th e catalys t bed , hastenin g it s replacement . JUSTIFICATIONTHA

T TH E POR T WASHINGTONSTEA M GENERATOR S CONSTITUT E BAC T A s state d above , th e steamgenerator s a t Por t Washingto n Powe r Plan t produc e NO xemission s o f 0.3 4 - 0.4 7 lb/MMBtu . Fo r th e reason s discusse d i n thi s section , i t i s th e Owner' s judgemen t tha t th e equipmen t and operation s whic hproduc e thi s emissio n leve l constitute s Bes t Availabl e Contro l Technology , BACT . 1 . MOS T STRINGENT CONTRO L I NPRACTIC E A s evidence d b

ya searc hconducte d b yWEPCo , WDN

R an d EPA Region s V

and IX , ther e ar e n o pulverize d coa l fire d electri c utilit ysteamgenerator s operatin g unde r an y permit s requirin g NO xemission s les s tha n 0.4 9 lb/MMBtu . 2 . TECHNICAL LIMITATION S Por t Washingto n Unit s 1- 5 origina l desig n feature s incorporat e contemporarycombustio n control s t o minimiz e therma l NO xformation . A s applie d i n othe r installations , thes e technique s hav e resulte d i n NO x emission s o f 0.4-0. 6 l bNOx/MMBtu , n o bette r tha n curren t Por t Washingto n performance . Post-combustio n technologie s fo r NO xremova l hav e no t bee n develope d o r demonstrate d a t a commercia l leve l fo r pulverize d coa l fire d units . Thei r remova l effectivenes s and overal l impac t o n emission s and plan t operation s ar e ver yuncertain . 3 . ECONOMI C IMPAC T T o potentiall ylowe r NO xemission s throughth e installatio n an

d operatio n o f Non-catalyti c (Therma l De-NOx ) o r Selectiv e Catalyti c Reductio n (SCR ) system s fo r NO xremova l woul d resul t i n significan t additiona l costs . Estimate d costs , base d o n a recen t stud yconducte d fo r WEPCo , fo r a singl e uni t operatin g a t optimisti c remova l level s ar e summarize d i n tabl e l , attached . I t i s importan t t o not e tha t th e estimate d installe d cos t o f SCR system s fo r fiv e unit s alon e exceed s th e entir e curren t renovatio n budge t b y50* ; th e initia l cos t o f fiv e Therma l De-NO xsystem s woul d increas e th e curren tr-CD-di-au i uc >co 'M Ai\v, uUUUUUuUUOuOUUUUUUU U P. 6 o O

renovatio n budge t b y20* . Additionally , thi s cos t estimat e doe s no t includ e th e cos t impac t o f relocation , replacemen t o r resizin g o f existin g affecte d equipmen t suc ha s ai r heaters , precipitato r and I.D . fans . 4 . ENERG

Y IMPAC T Lowering th e NO xemissio n rat e throughth e us e o f post-combustio n control s woul d resul t i n degradatio n o f th e uni t hea t rate s and a n increas e i n plan t auxiliar y electrical.load , reducin g ne t uni t outpu t b ya n estimate d 0.5* . The,combustio n o f additiona l fue l woul d b e require d t o mee t electrica l demand . 5 . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT S Th e potentia l fo r reducin g NO xemission s belo wcurren t level s i s uncertain . I f additiona l reduction s ar e possibl e wit hpost-combustio n controls , th e environmenta l impact s woul d includ e emission s o f ammoni a and , i f SCR i s used , disposa l o f spen t catalys t bed s containin g toxi c metals . Catalys t replacemen t wil l b e require d o n a 1- 3 yr/uni t frequency . Currently , ther e ar e n o program s wit h th e catalys t manufacturer s fo r retur n o r refurbishmen t o f th e spen t catalys t beds . Th e applicatio n o f furthe r emissio n control s fo r NO x woul d no t produc e a significan t differenc e i n ai r qualit y impact s following repai r o f th e plant . Th e ambien t ai r qualit ystandar d o f 10 0 microgram s o f NO xpe r cubi c mete r i s 6 0 time s greate r tha n th e post-repai r maximum predicte d averag e annua l ground leve l concentratio n o f abou t 1.6 5 microgram s o f NO xpe r cubi c meter . Thi s predicte d concentratio n i s a t o r belo wth e leve l o f detectio n o f th e referenc e metho d fo r measuremen t o f NO x concentration s i n th e ambien t air . Therefore , any furthe r reductio n i n NO xemission s throughflu e ga s treatmen t Method s wil l hav e a n undetectabl e effec t o n th e ambien t ai r quality . 6 . CONCLUSION Taking int o consideratio n al l o f th e factor s discusse d above , i t i s ou r opinio n tha t operatin g Por t Washingto n Unit s 1- 5 a t a NO xemissio n limi t consisten t wit hcurren t emissio n rate s wil l constitut e BACT .rcb-(if-b

U1 U L 6'•_.__rri ANU . ouUUUUUUUUuUUUUUUUU Ur . U

/

Tabl e 1 POR T WASHINGTO NPOWE R PLAN T THERMA L DE-NO xO R SC R TECHNOLOGIE S COS T ESTIMAT E PE R UNI T

Therma l De-No xSC R NO xremova l 30 * 80 * NO xRemova l @ MC R - 9 0 24 0 (Lb/Hr ) Installe d Cos t $ K 3,63 7 25,05 9 Annualize d Installe d Cos t $ K 31 3 2,15 5 Fixe d Annua l Ofi

M Cos t $ K 10 3 415 Variabl e O& M Cos t o f 20 0 100 0 NO xRemove d ($/Ton ) NO xRemove d Annuall y* 11 * Capacit yFacto r (Tons ) 4 3 11 6 46 * Capacit yFacto r (Tons ) 18 1 48 4

Annua l Cos t $ K 11 * Capacit yFacto r 425 2,69 0 46 * Capacit yFacto r 45 2 3,05 5

| Annua l Cos t ($/To n NO xRemoved ) 11 * Capacit yFacto r 9,88 3 23,19 0 46 * Capacit yFacto r 2,49 3 6,31 0

* Annua l Capacit yFactor s Fo r Por t Washingto n Unit s ar e ex- . pecte d t o rang e fro m a minimu mo f ll * t o a maximu mo f 46 * fo r th e remainin g lif e o f th e units .P. 8 ttti-Zl-W TU h'A.A6 hfi xNU . UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU Ur.Ut i

- ' • Attachmen t 2

PORT WASHINGTONPOWE R PLANT EMISSIONCONTRO L O F NON-CRITERI APM-RELATE D POLLUTANT S Th e trac e amount s o f lead and berylliu m i n coa l ar e volatilize d durin g combustio n and subsequentl ycondens e o n th e flyas hbein g emitted . S o th e emission s o f thes e element s ar e controlle d byth e particulat e contro l devic e employed . Unit s 1- 5 a t Por t Washingto n Powe r Plan t ar e eac hequippe d wit ha n electrostati c precipitato r (ESP ) fo r particulat e re mova l . Renovatio n wor k a t Por t Washingto n include s reha

bilitatio n o f th e ESP' s t o allo wthe m t o performa t thei r origina l desig n particulat e remova l efficiencie s o f 99.2-99.5* . Thi s wil l b e accomplishe d vi a physica l repai r o f th e ES P components , includin g straightenin g o f collecto r plates , an

d replacemen t o f existin g control s wit hmoder n mi

croprocesso r base d controls . Additionally , appropriat e siz

ing o f replacemen t ai r heater s (Unit s 1-4 ) and th e planne d applicatio n o f a flu e ga s conditioner , suc ha s S03 , wil l op timiz e the flu e ga s temperatur e an d resistivit yfo r par ticulat e removal . Th e amount s o f trac e material s containe d i n coal s var ywit h th e sourc e o f coal . Fo r the curren t and anticipate d Por t Washingto n coal , typica l concentration s hav e bee n developed . Base d o n thes e concentrations , th e precipitato r collectio n efficiencie s and th e plan t utilization , o r capacit yfactor , th e annua l expecte d emission s o f Berylliu m and Lea d ar e tabulate d below . *
ANNUAL EMISSION S

CAPACIT Y FACTO R P M B e P b YEA R (* ) (Ton ) (Ton ) (Ton ) 199 3 1 1 3 4 0.000 7 0.0 3 200 9 4 6 14 1 0.00 3 0.1 3 Th e particulat e contro l device s wit hcollectio n efficiencie s comparabl e t o th e upgrade d ESP' s ar e baghouse s and hig h efficienc ywe t scrubbers . However , th e us e o f thes e device s wer e no t evaluate d wit hrespec t t o contro l o f th e trac e lead an d berylliu

memission s becaus e i t i s intuitivel yobviou s tha t theyar e no t cos t effectiv e fo r retrofittin g t o th e Por t Washingto n plan t boilers . Th e existin g ESP' s upgrade d t o desig n particulat e remova l efficiencie s o f 99.2-99.5 * the n represen t BAC T fo r lead an d berylliu

memissions .P. 9 KhB-^7-9 0TU t

9*2 5 FA XNO
. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O P
. 0 9 

### Attachmen t3 /

NO xEMISSION S PORT WASHINGTONPOWE R PLANT Furthe r reductio n i n the emissio n rat e o f nitroge n oxide s (NOx ) fro

mPor t Washingto n Powe r Plan t i s currentl yno t practical . A s discusse d below , th e emissio n rate s fo r the Por t Washingto n boiler s ar e alread yles s tha n require d fo r NSPS . Curren t combustion-base d NO xcontro l technologie s ar e alread

yincorporate d int o th e boilers , a s theyar e inheren t t o the burner/furnac e design . Flu e ga s NOxremova l technologie s hav e neithe r ye t bee n commerciall ydevelope d no r successfull ydemonstrate d fo r coa l firing . Th e For t Washingto n boilar s employ"Arc hFiring " i n whic h pulverize d coa l i s introduce d downwar d along th e fron t wal l o f the furnace . Thi s result s i n a long downwar d flame , turning a t the bottom i n a U-shape d pattern . Th e bul k o f combustio n ai r i s introduce d throughthe furnac e fron t wal l alon g the lengt ho f the flame , perpendicula r t o th e flam e jet . Thi s inherentl ygenerate s stage d combustio n condition s whic hinhibi t NOxformation . Th e water-coole d fron t wal l an d furnac e bottomadditionall yinhibi t NO xformatio n throughreductio n o f the bul k furnac e temperature . Th e desig n an

d functio n o f arc hfiring an d it s impac t o n NO x formatio n i s furthe r describe d i n th e attache d EPR I repor t CS-2813 . Tes t result s cite d i n the repor t sho wthe Por t Washingto n unit s produc e NO xemission s i n th e rang e o f 0.3-0. 5 lb/MStu , wel l belo wthe NSP S reouiremen t O f 0. 6 lb/MBtu . Retrofi t contro l technologie s t o reduc e NO xemission s fal l int o two categories , combustio n control s an d pos t combustio n controls . Combustio n control s see k t o optimiz e firing condition s t qminimiz e therma l NO xformatio n durin g the combustio n process , whil e post-combustio n control s see k t o remov e NO xfro

m th e flu e gas . Availabl e combustio n control s consis t o f lo wexces s air/lo w NO xburners , stage d combustion , burner/furnac e wal l re-orientatio n an

d flue ga s recirculatio n (FGR) . The replacemen t burne r an d stage d combustio n technique s reduc e NO xformatio n b

ymaintaining th e air/fue l rati o initiall ya t sub-stoichiometri c levels , the n increasin g th e proportio n o f ai r a s the combustio n proces s continues . Burner/furnac e orientatio n limit s NOxformatio n b yminimizin g th e temperatur e o f th e combustio n proces s throughradiatio n t o th e furnac e walls . Flu e ga s recirculatio n als o minimize s th e combustio n temperature , throughdilutio n o f th e fuel/ai r mixtur e i n th e combustio n zon e wit hlo woxyge n conten t exhaus t gas .P.1 0 -nb-dl-b U!U h\_\v<Ll

rH X NU . UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU UY, I

U

Wit hth e exceptio n o f FGR , al l o f thes e combustio n contro l feature s ar e alread yinherentl yemploye d a t Por t Washingto n i n th e desig n an

d arrangemen t o f the arc hfired furnaces . Additionally , th e cite d retrofi t technologie s resul t i n NO x emission s o f approximatel y0. 4 lb/MBtu , offerin g n o expecte d improvemen t beyond curren t Por t Washingto n performance . Flu e gas ' recirculatio n mayno t b e applicabl e t o Por t Washingto n du e t o the smal l primaryai r admissio n are a a t th e burner s wher e the flu e ga s woul d be re-introduced . However , sinc e th e uniqu e bi n and feede r firing systema t Por t Washingto n doe s no t requir e ho t ai r fo r coa l drying , combustio n ai r i s delivere d a t a relativel ylowtemperatur e (les s tha n 60 0 F ) an d combustio n temperature s ar e therefor e minimize d i n a manne r analogou s t o FGR . Pos t combustio n control s involv e th e additio n o f a reducin g agent , typicall yammoni a (NH3) , t o th e flu e ga s stream t o reduc e NO xt o elementa l nitroge n (N2 ) an d wate r (H20) . A catalyti c reacto r o r surfac e mayadditionall yb e employe d t o enhanc e remova l effectiveness . Ther e ar e n o commercia l installation s i n the U.S . utilizin g catalyti c system s o n coa l fire d boilers . Limite d Europea n and Japanes e experienc e ha s show n tha t the catalys t i s subjec t t o bot h pluggin g an

d erosio n i n additio n t o poisonin g b ytrac e metal s i n th e ash . No monitorin g metho d exist s t o detec t exces s NH 3 passin g int o the catalys t wher e i n combinatio n wit hS03 , sulphat e pluggin g ma yoccur . During cyclin g operation , amount s o f NH 3 equa l t o the NO xremova l mayb e emitted . Furthe r developmen t o f pos t combustio n control s i s require d befor e practica l application s ca n be made .P.1 1 F-E5-2T-30 TU

E 8:29 FA X NO , uuGOOOuOGOOOOOGOOOO O r , l

i

24-May-8 9

SITE-SPECIFI C APPLICATIONO F SELECTIVE NON-CATALYTI C REDUCTIONTECHNOLOGY T O POR T WASHINGTONUNIT S 1- 5

A . INTRODUCTION Asit e specifi c stud yo f Selectiv e Non-Catalyti c Reductio n (SNCR ) technologya s a possibl e BAC T fo r Nitroge n Oxide s (N O ) emission s a t Por t Washingto n Powe r Plan t ha s bee n mad e i n Respons e t o the February28 , 198 9 lette r o f Mr . Dal e Ziege , Wisconsi n Departmen t o f Natura l Resources , Burea u o f Ai r Management . Th e result s o f thi s study , whic har e discusse d below , provid e site-specifi c informatio n t o supplemen t th e initia l BAC T analysi s submitte d b yWisconsi n Electric , date d January11 , 1939 . B . CONCLUSION Wisconsi n DNR' s lette r o f February28 , 198 9 state d tha t th e departmen t concurre d wit hWEPCo 1 s judgemen t (i n WEPCo' s Januar y11 , 198 9 BAC T analysis ) tha t SCR wa s inappropriat e and ne t consisten t wit hBAC T fo r Por t Washington . WEPC o ha d state d i n th e analysi s tha t applicatio n o f SCR woul d requir e equipmen t relocation , resul t i n pluggin g o f component s durin g operatio n and cos t a n estimate d $6,000-$23,00 0 pe r to n o f NO removed . x Thi s subsequen t stud yo f SNC R conclude s tha t lik e SCR , SNC R applicatio n t o Por t Washingto n Powe r Plan t wil l als o requir e significan t equipmen t relocation , resul t i n pluggin g durin g operation , an

d cos t a n estimate d $15,000-$62,00 0 pe r to n o f NO , removed , *• %

t Installatio n o f SNCR o n the fiv e Por t Washingto n Units , wit h th e require d modifications , i s estimate d t o cos t approximatel y$7 2 millio n i n additio n t o the $8 0 millio n tota l estimate d renovatio n cos t state d i n Wisconsi n Electric' s Certificat e o f Authorit yapplicatio n o f July , 1987 . I t i s incongruou s tha t applicatio n o f BAC T woul d requir e change s t o th e plan t a s extensiv e a s th e wor k originall ypropose d b ythe company , wor k whic hthe EP A contend s triggere d the PS D revie wi n th e firs t place . SNC R is , therefore , no t BAC T fo r Por t Washingto n Powe r Plant . C . SUMMARY O F FINDING S SNC R fo r NO emissio n reductio n canno t simpl yb e adde d a t the Por t Washingto n Powe r Plant . Th e existin g configuratio n o f th e Por t Washingto n boiler s doe s no t provid e th e prope r combinatio n o f temperature , opportunit yfo r mixing , an d time fo r reactio n necessaryfo r effectiv e NO reductio n utilizin g

- 1 -;z-<i.-^'j

IU C n AtHU

. OvjwUUbVuUuuiJUUUUljulj U P.1 2

SNC R chemica l processes . Extensiv e an d costl ymodificatio n o f th e boilers , auxiliaryequipmen t and boile r hous e structur e i s require d t o instal l th e necessaryreactio n zones . A s shown i n Tabl e 1 , thi s effor t i s estimate d t o resul t i n cost s o f $15,00 0 t o $62,00 0 pe r to n o f N O remove d a t capacit yfactor s o f 46-11* , respectively . SNC R i s therefore , no t cos t effectiv e whe n compare d t o ou r earlie r estimate s o f $2,000-$10,00 0 pe r to n o f N O remove d fo r direc t application s o n boiler s no t requirin g modifications . Applicatio n o f SNC R withou t th e require d boile r modifica

tions , wil l hav e significan t advers e impact s o n the boile r and auxiliar yequipmen t cause d b ySNC R by-products , whil e resultin g i n onl yminima l reduction s i n N O emissions . Extensiv e modificatio n o f equipmen t and operatio n woul d b e require d t o mitigat e th e detrimenta l effects . Inefficien t us e o f th e SNC R chemical s wit hth e existin g boile r configura

tio n wil l als o produc e additiona l gaseou s emission s whos e characteristic s ar e no t clearl yidentifie d b yth e supplier s o f SNC R system s o r the technica l literatur e a t thi s time . Th e technica l problems , limitations , and the leve l o f com mercia l developmen t o f SNC R systems , demonstrat e tha t SNC R i s no t BAC T fo r N

O emission s a t Por t Washingto n Powe r Plant . D . CHARACTERISTIC S O F PORT WASHINGTO NUNIT S . Arrangemen t o f Hea t Transfe r Surface s and Resultan t Flu e Ga s Temperature s Th e fiv e Por t Washingto n boiler s ar e basicall yo f the same uniqu e natura l circulatio n arch-fire d desig n shown i n Figur e 1 , consistin g o f a furnac e and a thre e dru mStirlin g convec tio n boile r wit ha convectio n superheater . Thi s convectio n are a i s confine d i n a compac t spac e a t th e ape xo f th e boile r (Area s C-F) , adjacen t t o a smal l volum e vestibul e (Are a B ) locate d a t th e top o f th e furnac e (Are a A) . Th e furnac e wall s ar e constructe d largel yo f superheate r and reheate r surfaces , wit honl ythe fron t wal l an d a smal l portio n o f the rea r wal l containin g wate r circuits . Coa l i s fe d downwar d int o th e furnac e from2 0 individua l burner s wit hprimar yair , forming a fue l ric hregion . Th e resultan t flame descend s approximatel y2 5 ft . alon g th e fron t wall , throughwhic hadditiona l combustio n ai r i s supplied . Thi s arrangemen t result s i n stage d combustio n and lowNO formation . Th e flame the n turn s an d travel s upwar d through th e furnace , wher e hea t i s absorbe d int o the wall s an d burnou t i s completed . Th e ho t gase s leav e the furnac e an d pas s througha smal l taperin g transitio n are a (vestibule ) fro m approximatel y1 2 t o

- 2 -P.1 3 -•3 UI L/ C fHANU . uUUUUUUOuu'UUUUUUUUU U f . i o

2'deep x60 ' wid e x20 ' highint o the convectio n passes . Th e variatio n i n furnac e hea t transfe r surfac e temperature s and rapi d transitio n t o the convectio n are a result s i n a non-uniformuppe r furnac e temperatur e profile . Ga s temperatur e measurement s wer e recentl ytake n t o documen t th e actua l ga s temperature s an d temperatur e profil e (referenc e 6) . Th e result s illustrate d o n Figur e 1 wer e take n fromUni t 3 a t ful l load (8 0 M W) and lo wload (2 4 M W) conditions , typica l o f al l the units ,e dail yloa d followin g cycli c operation . A t ful l load , furnac e exi t ga s tem
perature s wer e 200 0 - 2150°F . Ful l loa d ga s temperature s dro p t o approximatel y125 0 F afte r th e second pas s o f th e convectio n sectio n (Are a D) , 860° F afte r th e thir d pas s (Are a E ) and 75 0 - 800° F a t the boile r ga s outle t (Are a G) . A t lo wload , ga s temperature s take n a t th e sam e point s range d fromapproximatel y1450° F a t th e furnac e exi t t o 70 0 - 75 0 F a t th e boile r ga s outlet . Th e Por t Washingto n boiler s ar e designe d wit hcomparativel y tigh t tub e spacin g o f bot hth e stea mand wate r tube s locate d i n th e convectio n are a t o maximiz e hea t transfe r an d minimiz e the us e o f spac e an d materials . Th e spacin g betwee n the tube s i n th e firs t convectio n pas s i s oni y3 inches , a s com pare d wit hothe r mor e typica l design s whic hhav e tub e spacing s i n simila r area s o f from7 inche s t o 2 7 inche s fo r boiler s firin g U.S . easter n an d wester n coals , respectively . Tub e spacin g i n subsequen t passe s o f th e Por t Washingto n boiler s reduce s t o a 1-7/8 " clearanc e betwee n tube s i n th e las t passe s (Area s E&F) . Th e surface s o f th e water-coole d firs t pas s tube s ar e u p t o 400° F coole r tha n tube s i n simila r location s o n mor e typica l units . Th e coo l surfaces , i n combinatio n wit hth e tigh t tub e spacing , resul t i n slaggin g and pluggag e wheneve r increase s i n as hloadin g occur . Slaggin g o f th e hea t transfe r surface s i s partiall y controlle d throughthe us e o f firs t pas s sootblowers . Any increas e i n solid s loading , suc ha s materia l deposite d from th e SNC R process , increase s th e slaggin g potentia l i n thi s are a whic hfurthe r exacerbate s th e pluggag e proble m and in

terfere s wit hoperatio n o f th e units . E . APPLICATIO NO F SELECTIVE NON-CATALYTI C REDUCTION(SNCR ) TECHNOLOGY T O PORT WASHINGTON Technica l Impediment s an d Impact s Effectiv e applicatio n o f SNC R require s specifi c an d critica l combination s o f temperatur e wit hopportunitie s fo r unimpede d mixin g and reactio n t o occur . A s state d i n th e Bechte l re por t o n SNC R technology(referenc e 3) , th e primar yrequire

-

- 3 -rLD~-:i~O U!UL3'0 0 TM ANU

. UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU U P. M r . 1 4

men t fo r applicatio n o f SNCR i s tha t th e reagent s b e injecte d int o a temperatur e regime o f 1600-2200°P , and remai n i n suc h regim e fo r 0.2-0. 5 second s fo r effectiv e NO reduction . .-r V Th e requisit e temperatur e zone s fo r SNC R i n the existin g Por t Washingto n boiler s occu r i n o r nea r th e firs t convectio n passes , wher e unimpede d mixin g and th e necessar yreactio n time ar e no t availabl e an d canno t b e provide d throug hsimpl e boile r modifications , makin g th e applicatio n impractical . Th e literatur e (referenc e 5 ) and experience s reporte d from SNC R supplier s (reference s 3 and 7) , sho wtha t no t al l boiler s hav e suitabl e area s fo r the SNC R process . Modificatio n o f the Por t Washingto n boiler s t o provid e sufficien t volume s fo r evaporation , mixin g and reactio n i n th e appropriat e temperatur e rang e woul d involv e relocatio n and reconstructio n o f virtuall yth e entir e boiler , an d therefor e i s no t economica l fo r the Por t Washingto n units . Fo r th e Por t Washingto n boiler s a t ful l load , injectio n o f SNC R reagent s int o o r immediatel yafte r th e firs t convectio n pass Q (Are a C , fig . 1 ) woul d b e require d t o mee t th e 160 0 - 200 0 F ga s temperatur e criteria . Injectio n o f th e reagen t int o th e convectio n passe s i s unsuitable , however , becaus e th e chemical s woul d b e injecte d directl yont o th e hea t ex changin g surfaces . Th e literatur e (referenc e 5) , specificall ystate s tha t the reagent s shoul d no t b e injecte d directl yont o hea t exchanging surfaces . I n th e Wes t Germa n brown coa l applicatio n (referenc e 7) , injectio n withi n fiv e fee t o f hea t transfe r surface s wa s eliminate d afte r i t re sulte d i n poo r reagen t utilizatio n and resultan t pass-throug h o f unreacte d ammonia , calle d slip . Injectio n int o th e con vectio n passe s wil l resul t i n limite d NO reduction , tub e surfac e fouling , pluggag e o f ga s paths , fo wreagen t utiliza

tio n and hig hammoni a slip . Injectio n int o highe r temperatur e location s i n th e vestibul e (Are a B ) o r neare r the furnac e (Are a A ) woul d resul t i n sig

nifican t therma l decompositio n o f eithe r ure a o r NH g and oxidatio n t o NO^ , thu s increasing tota l NO emissions . In
jectio n downstream

o f th e boile r ga s outle t (Are a G ) woul d b e ineffectiv e du e t o the lo wga s temperatur e and woul d resul t i n minima l N0 xreductio n wit ha larg e portio n o f ammoni a an d th e othe r unreacte d reagent s passin g ou t o f th e boiler . Anothe r significan t requiremen t cite d byBechte l fo r effec

tiv e us e o f SNC R i s t o provid e a n appropriat e volum e withi n th e temperatur e rang e wher e evaporatio n (aqueou s ure a solution) , mixin g an d reactio n o f th e reagent s ca n occu r and th e chemica l reaction s ca n procee d t o completion . Wherea s successfu l prio r demonstratio n o f thes e processe s wer e

- 4 -P.1 5 frnd-*i/-y u IU L X'<6tt

THANU . UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU Ur , 1 0

characterize d b yinjectio n int o larg e furnac e volume s o r othe r cavitie s (withou t interferin g structures ) whic hallowe d effectiv e mixin g an d reaction s t o occur , th e Por t Washingto n boiler s ar e characterize d bycompactnes s an d lac k th e require d cavitie s i n th e appropriat e temperatur e range . Th e necessar ycavit yt o provid e a mixin g an d reactio n tim e o f 0. 2 t o 0. 5 second s i s no t provide d i n th e convectio n area , wher e onl y1-1/2 • maximu mclearance , o r a residenc e tim e o f les s tha n 0.0 5 second , exist s betwee n tub e banks . Durin g lo wan d moderat e loads , flu e ga s temperature s decreas e an d th e effectiv e temperatur e "window " fo r SNC R woul d mov e ou t o f th e convectio n are a int o th e vestibul e an d uppe r furnac e (Area s Aan d B) . Multipl e injectio n point s hav e bee n use d i n prio r application s (referenc e 3 ) t o follo wchange s i n load , however , th e variet yo f hea t transfe r surface s i n th e furnac e yield s a non-unifor mhorizonta l temperatur e profil e o f th e ga s i n thi s region . Unifor mtemperatur e i n th e plan e o f th e injectio n point s i s essentia l fo r effectiv e N O reductio n (referenc e 3) . Injectio n int o thi s are a a t lo wan d moderat e load s wil l resul t i n poo r reagen t utilization , hig h ammoni a sli p an d limite d N O reduction . X Additiona l Consequence s o f SNC R Th e applicatio n o f SNC R t o Por t Washingto n withou t extensiv e boile r reconfiguratio n woul d produc e a numbe r o f seriou s side-effect s resultin g fro mth e productio n o f variou s ammoniu m

sulfat e compound s i n th e boiler . Thes e sid e effect s wil l includ e boiler , economize r (Uni t 1) , an d ai r heate r pluggage , reduce d precipitato r performance , as h handlin g equipmen t corrosion , increase d wastewate r treatmen t requirement s an d increase s i n ultimat e gaseou s emissions . Associate d wit hth e anticipate d lo wN O reductio n an d lo w utilizatio n o f reagent s fo r SNC R applicatio n a t Por t Washing

to n i s ammoni a slip . Th e reaction s o f ammoni a wit hS0 3 presen t i n th e flu e ga s ar e o f particula r concern . Th e fue l use d a t Por t Washingto n i s currentl ya coa l con tainin g approximatel y1.5 * sulfu r b yweight , an d onl ya sligh t reductio n i n sulfu r i s anticipate d i n futur e coals . Th e Por t Washingto n fue l sulfu r conten t i s thre e t o eigh t time s tha t o f th e fuel s use d i n prio r application s o f chemica l N O reductio n technique s (referenc e 3) . Th e quan tit yo f S0 3 i n th e flu e ga s an d subsequen t reaction s wit ham moni a t o for m

ammoniu msulfat e an d bisulfat e wil l b e propor tionatel ygreate r tha n i n pas t applications . Th e sulfate s wil l deposi t o n th e boiler , ai r heater , I.D . Fan , ductwor k an d precipitato r surfaces . A t th e ga s temperature s i n th e existin g Por t Washingto n

- 5 -P.1 6

: D - _.I

_ S UlU t -J--4

UTii ANU . UuUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU Ur . I U

economize r an d ai r heater , ammoniu mbisulfat e i s a stick y liqui d whic hwil l collec t o n th e hea t transfe r surface s wit h flyash , formin g deposit s whic hma yonl yb e remove d effec

tivel ywit hoff-lin e wate r washing , a s determine d durin g re vie wo f SC R technologyand application s (referenc e 4) . Th e curren t plate-typ e ai r heater s hav e insufficien t provision s fo r cleanin g and narro w(5/8 " design ) ga s passages , whic h woul d quickl yplu g wit hdeposits . Conversio n o f th e Por t Washingto n plate-typ e ai r heater s t o Ljungstrom-typ e ai r heaters , wit hspeciall yconstructe d basket s and washin g provision s i s require d t o addres s th e increase d fouling (referenc e 4 ) i n thi s area . Consumptio n o f flu e ga s S0 3 b yexces s NH 3 wil l lead t o highe r flyas hresistivit yan d reduce d precipitato r performance . This , combine d wit hadditiona l particulat e loadin g fro m am moniu msulfat e productio n woul d requir e a n increas e i n pre cipitato r surfac e are a t o maintai n precipitato r collectio n capabilit yan d mee t curren t particulat e emissio n an d opacit y requirements . Althoug hth e exac t quantitie s and distributio n o f depositio n o f ammoniu

msulfate s throughou t th e ga s pat hca n no t b e de

termine d fromth e curren t literature , thes e corrosiv e depos

it s woul d nonetheles s requir e frequen t remova l b ywate r wash-down . Th e resultan t drainag e woul d hav e t o b e route d t o th e existin g wastewate r treatmen t facility , increasin g th e influen t tota l dissolve d solid s (TDS ) and tota l suspende d solid s (TSS ) t o th e facility . I n response , additiona l equipmen t fo r p H neutralization , solid s coagulation , flocculation , and sludg e handlin g woul d b e required . Discharg e TD S level s ar e expecte d t o increase , despit e additiona l treatmen t equipment . Ammoniu msulfate s collecte d i n th e precipitato r wit hth e flyas hwil l adversel yaffec t plan t as hhandlin g and transpor t equipmen t throug hpluggag e an d corrosion , and upo n disposa l wil l modif yth e characteristic s o f th e flyas hlandfil l leachate . Ultimat e SNC R gaseou s emission s hav e no t bee n characterize d i n pas t industr ydemonstrations . Therefore , potentia l emission s fro ma n applicatio n t o Por t Washingto n ar e unknown . Littl e informatio n exist s i n th e literatur e o n th e fat e o f unreacte d ammoni a o r ure a an d enhance r combinations . Th e informatio n whic hi s availabl e indicate s tha t flu e ga s emission s o f ammoni a (slip ) and CO

- (fro mure a decomposition ) wil l increase . Measuremen t o f ammoni a sli p i s a n importan t function . A s describe d above , contro l o f th e sli p represent s contro l o f the entir e proces s fo r efficienc yan d mitigatio n o f

- 6 -P.1 7 rtti-dl-W TU E 9:4 o rii X Nu . uuUuUUUUUUuUUUUUUUU Ur . 1 (

downstrea m

effects . Importantly , Bechtel' s repor t (referenc e 3 ) , cite s tha t n o commerciall yaccepte d continuou s emissio n monito r fo r ammoni a i s available . Therefore , automati c contro l o f th e SNC R syste mt o minimiz e ammoni a sli p i n respons e t o change s i n th e proces s environmen t i s no t available . Withou t monitorin g an d automati c control , change s i n operatin g condition s suc ha s fue l characteristics , ambien t temperature , exces s air , an d furnac e slaggin g wil l resul t i n uncontrolle d ammoni a slip . F . COMMERCIA L READINES S Ou r revie wo f th e curren t stat e o f th e ar t i n N O remova l technolog yconfirm s tha t ther e hav e bee n n o application s o f SNC R o n U.S . pulverize d coa l boiler s o r o n an yboile r usin g a fue l containin g mor e tha n 1 * sulfu r b yweight . Al l prio r successfu l application s hav e bee n o n boile r an d furnac e con figuration s wit hvolume s an d temperature s conduciv e t o th e proces s i n combinatio n wit hlo wsulfu r fuel s whic hminimiz e downstrea mproblem s wit hammoni a sli p an d ammoniu msulfates . A s a n example , th e Wes t Germa n application , (referenc e 7 } wa s fuele d wit h"Brow n Coal " containin g 0.2 * Sulfu r an d 60 * moisture . Combustio n o f thi s fue l require s larg e furnac e volumes . Th e combinatio n o f th e larg e furnac e an d hig h moistur e fue l resulte d i n a maximu mfurnac e temperatur e o f 2 20 0 F , whic hi s relativel ylow , an d makin g mos t o f th e furnac e volum e availabl e a s th e SNC R reactio n zone . Fo r th e Por t Washingto n boilers , SNC R experienc e an d develop

men t ha s no t ye t reache d th e poin t o f commercia l availabilit y wherei n a contrac t ca n b e entere d int o wit henforceabl e per formanc e warrantie s necessar yan d pruden t t o assur e th e operator' s confidenc e tha t ai r permi t condition s ca n b e rou tinel ymet . Thi s technolog yi s therefore , no t availabl e a s a techniqu e t o compl ywit hN O emissio n limitations . G . COS T Ther e i s n o experienc e wit hSNC R o n U.S . pulverize d coa l fire d boilers . This , couple d wit hextensiv e reconstructio n o f thes e uniqu e boiler s an d consequentia l modificatio n an d relocatio n o f auxiliar yequipmen t necessar yt o accommodat e SNC R technology , require s orde r c f magnitud e estimates , W e have , however , endeavore d t o identif yan d estimat e th e potentia l installe d an d operatio n costs . O n th e followin g pages . Tabl e 1 summmarize s th e estimate d cos t pe r boile r fo r SNC R a t Por t Washingto n Powe r Plant . Include d i s th e estimat e fo r SNC R equipmen t an d installatio n alone , a s containe d i n ou r January , 198 9 submittal , an d th e estimate d cost s fo r proces s developmen t an d testing , an d modificatio n o f th e boile r an d ancillar yequipment , t o adap t

- 7P.1 8

:D-ci~A[i iU

_c3*4 bFAXNu . uuuGGGGuGuGGGGGuGGu U r . 1 0

th e facilit yfo r SNCR operation . I n area s wher e SNC R modification s coincid e wit hplanne d renovatio n projects , th e additiona l cos t (differential ) abov e th e estimate d renovatio n cos t i s shown . Table s 2 and 3 provid e mor e detail s o f th e cost s whic hcompris e the estimate .

- 8 -I rv

TABL E 1 POR T WASHINGTONPOWE R PLAN T SNC R TECHNOLOGY COS T ESTIMAT E PE R UNIT , 1990 $ r r

c r

NO xremova l NO xRemova l @ MCR (Lb/Hr ) Installe d Cos t Annualize d Installe d Cos t Fixe d Annua l O& M Cos t Variabl e O& M Cos t o f NO xRemove d ($/Ton ) NO xRemove d Annuall y* 11 * Capacit yFacto r (Tons ) 46 * Capacit yFacto r (Tons ) bote Annua l Cos t 11 * Capacit yFacto r 46 * Capacit yFacto r L>o% Annua l Cos t ($/To n NO xRemoved ) 11 * Capacit yFacto r 46 * Capacit yFacto r 

### 6tff o 1/8 9 Submitta l SNC ROnl v 3 0 * 9 0 3,637,00 0 313,00 0 103,00 0 20 0 Modification s an d

Ancillar yEquipmen t

3 0 * 9 0 14,433,00 0 1,283,00 0 979.00 0

_ SNCR , Tota l Modification s & Ancillar yEauipmen t

18,070,00 0 1,596,00 0 1,082,00 0 2 0 0

4 3 18 1 >30 » 425,00 0 452,00 0 Ho l, °°o >9,88 0 2.50 0 t,1t» * 4 3 16 1 230 2,262,00 0 2,262.00 0 2 it * ot>o 52,60 0 12,50 0 

## Vtrs r 2 2 4 3 18 1 3-^ 6 ,687,00 0 ,714,00 0 62,48 0 15,00 0 -x .

cr :

* Annua l Capacit yFactor s Fo r Por t Washingto n Unit s ar e expecte d t o rang e fro ma minimu mo f 11 * t o a maximu mo f 46 * fo r the remainin g lif e o f th e units .iabl e i
POR T MASIilNGTO

N PGUH RPLAN T SNC RMODIFICATIONS FO RNQ KRfcMOVA

L ESTIMATE! ! COSTS PE RUNIT , M X COST'S I N S 199 0 Ma y 11 , 198 9 D

a c

Ljungsti-c-

m Ai r Heate r Fan s an dDuc t Mods . Precipitato r Mods . Wastewate r Modification s CEM' a Developmen t it Modellin g Mashdown s force dOutage s Boile r an dBoilerhous e Modification s TOTALS INSTALLE D COS T $2,100,00 0 $2,100,00 0 $809,00 0 $50,00 0 $150,00 0

$9,224,00 0 $14,433,00 0 ANNUA L OS M $30,00 0 $110,00 0 $800,00 0 SI6,50 0

$8,00 0 $14,60 0

$979,10 0 (Differentia l Coat , replacemen t wit hLjungstrc-r o v s Plate-typ e replacemen t ai r heater )

(One-fift ho f estimat e fo r a fiv e uni t facility )

(Differentia l cost , boile r & bollerhous e modification s versu s planne dreplacemen t o f rea r steam dram ) c n

AMORTIZE DINSTALLE DCOST . A T 6.5 * 1 8 YEAR S = > $1,203,38 1 / YEA R

A t a o Mw . NQ KProduce d= (8B 0 M-Ktu/Hr , x<0.3 4 l bN0x/M4Btu ) 29 9 lb/li r

CAPACIT Y FACTO R 60 % 50 % 46 % 20 % 11 * 10 % NOXCOS T EFFECTIV E HOUR S A T B O l-

W 5,25 6 4,38 0 4,03 0 1.7S 2 96 4 87 6 KO X(TO M PRODUCE D (0.3 4 LB/WlBtu ) 78 6 65 5 60 3 26 2 14 4 13 1 S/YR )

REM3VE D (30 % REM. ) 23 6 19 7 18 1 7 9 4 3 3 9 ANNUAL

FIXE DOS M $979,10 0 $979.10 0 $979,10 0 $979,10 0 $979,10 0 $979,10 0 1 8 YEA R ANNUALIZE D INST . OOS T $1,283,38 1 $1,283,38 1 $1,283.3B 1 $1,283,38 1 $1,283,38 1 $1,283,38 1 TOTA L

AMUUAL COS T $2,262,48 1 $2,262,48 1 $2,262,48 1 $2,262,48 1 $2,262,48 1 $2,262,48 1 $/T0 M

NO XREMOVE D $9,69 1 $11,51 0 $12,51 0 $28,77 4 652,31 6 $57.S4 B 3 :

c c c r c c c • c c c c CZ c c c c c c c c c

cP.2 1

i i_ u c i o u i U L o • -*

o TH ANU . UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU U r . d i

Tabl e 3 POR T WASHINGTONPOWE R PLANT ESTIMAT E FO R BOILE R MODIFICATION S

T O ACCOMODAT E SNC R 06/22/8 9

Activit y Estimate d Cos t $ K Redesigne d Convectio n Superheate r and Boile r $10,00 0 Boile r Suppor t Structura l Revision s $50 0 Buildin g Modification s Found. , Facade , Struct , $50 0
Coa l Conveyo r Relocatio n Coa l Bunke r Revisio n Lightin g & Fir e Protect . Subtota l A/ E @ 8 * Tota l M& L Contingenc y@ 15 * Tota l Fo r Modification s

Curren t Estimat e Boile r Dru mReplacemen t Uni t 3 Differentia l Cos t $20 0 $15 0 $15 0 $11,50 0 $92 0 $12,42 0 $1,86 3 $14,28 3
$5,05 9 $9,22 4 Fo r Boile r Modification s

BLRES T 

### -11

-

### rcD-dz-a um t y.^ a FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O P , 71 P.22

FIGUR S 1

TYPICA L POR T WASHINGTO N BOILE RCROSS-SECTIO N

FLU E GA S TEMPERATURE S A T FUL L LOA O

I-gCES P A - FURNAC E B - VESTISUt B C - CONVECTIO

N ARE A FIRS T PAS S D- CONVECTIO

N ARE A SECON DPAS S E - CONVBCTIC

N ARE A THIR DPAS S P - CONVECTIO

N ARE A FOURT HPAS S G- BOILE

RGA S OUTLE TP.2 3 rttr^-y u lU t o'.fd FA X NO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O P.23

-, »

Reference s 1 . "Por t Washingto n Powe r Plan t Unit s 1- 5 BAC T fo r NO Emissions" , attachment s 1 an d 3 , memo , Roge r Dodds* , Wisconsi n Electri c t o Dal e Ziege , Wisconsi n Departmen t o f Natura l Resources , Januar y11 , 1989 . 2 . Memo , Dal e Ziege , Wisconsi n Departmen t o f Natura l Resources , t o Roge r Dodds , Wisconsi n Electri c Powe r Company , Mem o No . 4530 , Februar y28 , 1989 . 3 . Evaluatio n o f Selectiv e Non-Catalyti c Reductio n Technologie s fo r Wisconsi n Electri c Powe r Company , Bechte l Powe r Corporation , May , 1989 . 4 . Update d Technica l an d Economi c Revie wo f Selectiv e Catalyti c NO Reductio n Systems , J . E . Damon , P . A . Ireland and D . V . Giovanni , EPRI/EP ASymposiu m o n Stationar yCombustio n Nitroge n Oxid e Control , Ne w Orleans , Marc h1987 . 5 . U.S . Paten t 4,777,024 , Multi-stag e Proces s fo r Reducin g th e Concentratio n o f Pollutant s i n a n Effluent , Epperl y e t al , Octobe r 1988 . 6 . Temperatur e Measurement s o f Por t Washingto n Uni t 3 , Te9 t Dat a take n b

yV . Ashtemenko , Wisconsi n Electri c Powe r Company , Marc h21 , 1989 . 7 . NO Contro l i n a Brown Coal-Fire d Utilit yBoiler , .J . Horfman , J . Bergmann , D . Bokenbrink , EPA/EPR I Join t Symposiu

mo n Stationar yCombustio n NO Control , Sa n Francisco , Marc h6-9 , 1989 .

_1 3
_