P.1 

OAR Box 1490 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

Document Number: 

4DIV-C-14 

Docket Number: 

A-94-52 

Printed 8/4/2008 11:51:47 AM Sheet 41 of 273 
P.2 

PES 

A MACTEC COMPANY 

A-94-52 

Pacific Environmental S . , , 

5001 South Miami Boulevard, j i ua JU D 

P.O. BOX 12077 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 

Office: 919/941-0333 Fax: 919/941-0234 

Home Page: www.mactec.com 

February 20,2002 

Mr. Jim Kuzara 

Durr Environmental 

Phone: 248-668-5216 

Fax: 248-926-6570 

FEB 2 0 2002 

TO- i.VCu-^tAix 

0>f $i^J*K 

Dear Jim: 

Thank you for talking with me yesterday. I have enclosed several items for your 

consideration. These are as follows: 

Item 1. "Summary of Durr Industry Rotary Concentrator System Cost for Styrene Control." This 

is a single page table provided by Jim Stone to Research Triangle Institute (RTI), and is dated 

March 14, 1996. 

Item 2. Contact Report between Melanie Proctor and Jim Stone, dated April 25 and 26, 2001. 

Item 3. Contact Report between Melanie Proctor and Jim Stone, dated May 11, 2001. 

Item 4. Fan Power Calculations. Spreadsheet showing calculated fan powers (kW) for various 

combinations of fan efficiencies (either 0.65 or 0.8) and pressure drops (5, 6 or 8) in inches 

water. This spreadsheet was created to see what combinations of fan efficiencies and pressure 

drops would yield the electrical consumption values shown in Item 1. 

A little background. We are supporting EPA in the development of a NESHAP for the 

reinforced plastic composites (RFP) industry. To support this and another effort, back in 1996, 

RTI was putting together costing algorithms for controlling styrene emissions using various 

technologies. One of those technologies was the Durr rotary concentrator system (including the 

carbon bed and the oxidizer). Jim Stone provided the information shown in Item 1 and RTI used 

it to develop a costing algorithm which we used in the RFP standard development process. 

We received comments (generated by Rob Haberlein) that questioned the natural gas and 

electricity costing associated with the rotary concentrator system. PES called Jim Stone to clarify 

Vhe numbers. While we think we understand the natural gas numbers, we still are concerned 

about the electricity consumption numbers. Rob Haberlein used the fan power equation from 

EPA Control Cost Manual and higher pressure drops such that he generated much higher 
P.3 

Mr. Jim Kuzara 

Durr Environmental 

February 20, 2002 

electricity consumption numbers. As I mentioned, he was looking at pressure drops of at least 16 

inches. I believe he also referenced one of Durr's installations at a RFP facility. 

What we are looking for now is first and foremost a review of the electricity consumption 

information Jim Stone provided in Item 1. These numbers need to represent an expected 

pressure drop across the concentrator and the oxidizer (and, as you mentioned, any intervening 

duct work). We would also like more detail (words?) explaining the derivation of the electricity 

consumption values (even if they do not change from what Jim provided). This explanation will 

help us respond to public comments. 

Secondly, if any of the other costs have changed from those shown in Item 1 (say by at 

least 10%), we would appreciate an update on those values as well. 

Please do not hesitate to call me with any questions. If you need to talk to our EPA 

project lead, his name is Keith Barnett (919-541-5605). I realize that this is a favor, so we will 

work with you on your schedule. Please let me know when you think you might be able to get 

back to us. If at all possible, we are trying to do our re-costing within the next one to two weeks. 

Thank you very much for your time. 

Kenneth R. Meardon 

ftuv 

PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. ^ 

919-941-0333 (phone) 

919-941-0234 (fax) 

krmeardon@mactec. com 

2^ 
C\J 

CD 

5 * 

i oo 

00 

VJO 

^ k 

SUMMARY OF DURR INDUSTRIES ROTARY CONCENTRATOR SYSTEM COST FOR STYRENE CONTROL 

A. 

SMALL PLANT, 20 TPY 

AIRFLOW (Q) 

OXIDIZER TYPE 

EQUIPMENT COST (EC) 

MISCELLANEOUS COST 

SCFM 

US$ 

USS/YEAR 

ELECTRICAL CONSUMPTION kW 

FUEL CONSUMPTION million BTU/HR 

^ 

5.000 

RECUPERATIVE 

$149,918 

$4,040 

6.6 

0.00 

1.& 

7.500 

RECUPERATIVE 

$163,802 

$4,890 

8.3 

0.23 

Q,qz 

10,000 

RECUPERATIVE 

$191,183 

$6,870 

10.1 

0.38 

C. ?-h 

15.000 

RECUPERATIVE 

$223,739 

$8,990 

13.7 

0.61 

sr^i 

20,000 

RECUPERATIVE 

$270.93.4 

$12,340 

17.2 

0.87 

MEDIUM PLANT, 100 TPY 

AIRFLOW (Q) 

OXIDIZER TYPE 

EQUIPMENT COST (EC) 

MISCELLANEOUS COST 

SCFM 

US$ 

US$/YEAR 

ELECTRICAL CONSUMPTION kW 

|FUEL CONSUMPTION million BTU/HR 

15,000 

RECUPERATIVE 

$223,739 

$8,990 

13.7 

0.00 

20,000 

RECUPERATIVE 

$291,334 

$12,340 

17.2 

0.27 

y.^i-" 

30.000 

RECUPERATIVE 

$331,361 

$14,530 

24.3 

0.78 

<TZ-7" 

50.000 

RECUPERATIVE 

$499,461 

$13,600 

38.5 

1.60 

V cr-/* 

100,000 

REGENERATIVE 

$1,082,932 

$27,200 

74.1 

0.52 

LARGE PLANT, 400 TPY 

AIRFLOW (Q) SCFM 

OXIDIZER TYPE 

EQUIPMENT COST (EC) US$ 

MISCELLANEOUS COST USI/YEAR 

ELECTRICAL CONSUMPTION kW 

FUEL CONSUMPTION million BTU/HR 

50.000 

RECUPERATIVE 

$499,461 

$13,600 

38.5 

0.00 

100,000 

REGENERATIVE 

$1,082,962 

$27,200 

74.1 

0.00 

s-H 

150,000 

REGENERATIVE 

$1,512,380 

$40,800 

109.6 

0.00 

4.4 6¥ 

' 200.000 

REGENERATIVE 

$1.9)6.729 

$54,400 

145.1 

0.00 

.. 4.W. 

250.000 

REGENERATIVE 

$2,320,296 

$66,000 

180.7 

0.19 

NOTE 1. MISCELLANEOUS COST IS FOR ADSORPTION MEDIA REPLACEMENT EVERY 5 YEARS 

2. RECUPERATIVE OXIDIZER HAS 60% THERMAL EFFICIENCY 

3. REGENERATIVE OXIDIZER HAS 90% THERMAL EFFICIENCY 

4. CONCENTRATION RATIO IS 10:1 FOR ALL SYSTEMS 

5. EQUIPMENT COST IS F.O.B. PLYMOUTH Ml 

6. NOT INCLUDED. INSTALLATION. FOUNDATION. DUCTWORK. START-UP. PERFORMANCE TESTING 

H* 

STYRDAT1.XLS 3/14/96. 10:27 AM 

TJ 
P.5 

J7e^K^ 

Contact Report 

From: Melanie Proctor, Pacific Environmental Services, Inc. (PES) 

Date: April 25,2001 and April 26,2001 

Contact: Mr. James Stone, Sales Manager - On-Site Programs 

Company: Durr Environmental, Inc. 

Telephone Number: (630)587-9960 

Fax Number: (630) 587-9970 

Contact Summary: 

Mr. Stone was contacted to verify cost information previously provided to the Research 

Triangle Institute (RTI) for Diirr Environmental, Inc. rotary concentrator systems. In response to 

Ms. Proctor's questions Mr. Stone indicated the following: 

The information Diirr Environmental, Inc. provided to RTI in 1996 is still applicable, 

with the exception of costs for smaller skid mounted systems, which have decreased since 1996. 

Mr. Stone explained that Durr Environmental, Inc. sells rotary concentrator systems designed to 

handle flows as low as 3000 cfm and as high as 700,000 cfm. A Diirr rotary concentrator system 

with higher flows (i.e., greater than 60,000 cfm) will typically consist of more than one module. 

Each added module can handle an additional flow of 60,000 to 70,000 cfm. 

Mr. Stone further indicated that the cost information provided by Diirr Environmental, 

Inc. is applicable to rotary concentrator systems as low as 3,000 cfm and higher than 300,000 

cfm, contrary to claims made by CFA (see information attached). 

INFORMATION IS ACCURATE 

4 
P.6 

ITEM 3 

Contact Report 

From: Melanie Proctor, Pacific Environmental Services, Inc. (PES) 

Date: May 11,2001 

Contact: Mr. James Stone, Sales Manager - On-Site Programs 

Company: Durr Environmental, Inc. 

Telephone Number: (630)587-9960 

Fax Number: (630) 587-9970 

Contact Summary: 

Mr. Stone was contacted to verify cost information previously provided to the Research 

Triangle Institute (RTI) for Diirr Environmental, Inc. rotary concentrator systems. In response to Ms. 

Proctor's questions Mr. Stone indicated the following: 

The pressure drop in Diirr rotary concentrator systems without any pre-filtration is between 

6-8 inches and the combined fan and motor efficiency is between 65 and 80 percent. The data 

provided to RTI in 1996 are for systems without any pre-filtration. Facilities generally need at least 

some pre-filtration, however, the amount of pre-filtration varies from facility to facility. 

The data provided to RTI show no step up in electrical consumption due to an increased 

pressure drop when switching from a recuperative to a regenerative oxidizer because the thermal 

efficiency of the regenerative oxidizer has been reduced from 95 to 90 percent to yield a higher stack 

gas temperature needed to desorb the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from the carbon in the 

pre-concentrator. The lowered thermal efficiency reduces the pressure drop for the regenerative 

oxidizer. 

With regard to fuel use, Mr. Stone explained that facilities may choose a 

concentrator/recuperative oxidizer for flows less than 75,000 cfm and a concentrator/ regenerative 

oxidizer for flows at 75,000 cfm and above. He added that from a technology standpoint, a 

recuperative oxidizer could be used at any flow rate even at flows above 75,000 cfm, but for higher 

flow rates a regenerative oxidizer may be a better choice from an economical standpoint. Mr. Stone 

added that balancing operating and capital cost considerations will determine the customer's choice 

between a recuperative and a regenerative oxidizer. 

INFORMATION IS ACCURATE 

<3 
P.7 

ITEM 4 

FAN POWER CALCULATIONS 

Type of 

Oxidizer Flow (cfm) 

Fan Power 

(kW) 

Calculated Fan Power (kW) 

recup 

recup 

recup 

recup 

recup 

recup 

recup 

regen 

regen 

regen 

regen 

5000 

7500 

10000 

15000 

20000 

30000 

50000 

100000 

150000 

200000 

250000 

6.6 

8.3 

10.1 

13.7 

17.2 

24.3 

38.5 

74.1 

109.6 

145.1 

180.7 

3.671875 

5.507813 

7.34375 

11.01563 

14.6875 

22.03125 

36.71875 

73.4375 

110.1563 

146.875 

183.5938 

4.40625 

6.609375 

8.8125 

13.21875 

17.625 

26.4375 

44.0625 

88.125 

132.1875 

176.25 

220.3125 

4.519231 

6.778846 

9.038462 

13.55769 

18.07692 

27.11538 

45.19231 

90.38462 

135.5769 

180.7692 

225.9615 

5.423077 

8.134615 

10.84615 

16.26923 

21.69231 

32.53846 

54.23077 

108.4615 

162.6923 

216.9231 

271.1538 

5.875 

8.8125 

11.75 

17.625 

23.5 

35.25 

58.75 

117.5 

176.25 

235 

293.75 

7.230769 

10.84615 

14.46154 

21.69231 

28.92308 

43.38462 

72.30769 

144.6154 

216.9231 

289.2308 

361.5385 

Fan Efficiency 0.8 0.8 0.65 0.65 0.8 0.65 

Pressure drop, inches H20 5 6 5 6 8 8 

Equation: kW= 0.0001175 x flow x inches water 

fan efficiency 

6 flow.xls