1 Cost Calculations 

Based on the attached curves contained with this letter, GE proposes the following structure 

modifications to the equations within the 22 March memo: 

Equipment Capital Cost= 

_i~BJ-) __ _,__ 

Where: 

y = Equipment capital cost in USD 

x = Design plant flow rate in gallons per minute (gpm) 

Installation Capital Cost= 

Equipment Capital Cost X Installed Cost Factor 

Where: 

Installed Cost Factor = 

(C£,1) 

y = Installed Cost Factor as a percentage of Equipment Capital Cost 

x =Design plant flow rote in gallons per minute (gpm) 

(1) 

[2) 

(3) 
Nutrient Consumption = 

Nutrient cost per gallon = 

ABMet® Consumption = 

# wor""s IFTE) = 

Operation 

Bulk Nutrient Refill 

Sampling (estimated! 

Cell Backflush* 

Daily Plant Inspection 

Weekly Plant Walk down 

Nutrient consumption in gallons of nutrient per 1.000 gallons of 

water treated as per Section 2. Item 4 of this letter. 

( GBI..) 

0.36 kWh per 1.000 gallons of water treated as per Section 2. Item 5 

of this letter. 

GE recomm~nds calculation based on one (1) FTE as a requirement 

for the ABMft® system alone based on the following requirements: 

Frequency Duration Min worker# 

1/month 2 hr 1 

1/week 4 hr 1 

varies 3 hr 1 

daily 1 hr 1 

weekly 2 hr 1 

Monthly Plant Maintenance (probe monthly 1 day 1 

cleaning, etc) 

Weekly Estimate - 18 hrs 
ppgy

Addition of the calculated GE equipment cost plus the calculated BOP/installation 

cost will yield on estimated total project capitol cost. This combined cost is 

estimated to be +/- 25%. 

These costs include the some assumptions as the December 20091 curve other than 

the geographical limitation: 

• Unionized contractor labor is assumed 

• No special seismic criteria ore incorporated 

• Costs ore based on executing project structure of consortium between GE 

and contractor with balance of plant engineering as o sub-contractor 

• Costs ore based on ABMet® system being on 'island' with integration into 

the full power plant system no being included (e.g. DCS interfaces, tie-in 

with existing wastewater plant, etc. omitted) 

• Costs ore assuming integration of ABMet® system into larger waste water 

facility, for example integrating ABMet® following conventional 

physical/chemical treatment with ABMet® backwash waste recycled to 

conventional system for solids removal 

1 "CBI ABMet® Cost Curve" Letter from J. Harwood GE to Sarah Holman ERG dated 17 December. 2009. 
submittal: 

• Utility overhead and labor 

• Plant tie-in/integration (e.g. DCS interface, feed water, effluent water line to 

discharge, etc) 

• Pilings, caissons, etc 

• Permitting 

• Financing charges 

• Other waste water processes such as pre or post-treatment, dewatering 

• Backwash waste disposal/solids handling 

b. Please provide a description of the assumed system design used as the basis for the 

provided cost curve. For example, how many bioreactor trains are assumed, how 

many bioreactor cells are assumed per train, what is the design residence time through 

each bioreactor cell, etc. 
600 6 15 X 15 X 26 

800 8 15 X 15 X 26 

1000 10 15 X 15 X 26 

c. Is the system design based on standard-sized bioreactor cells that are designed to 

receive a maximum flow rate through each cell and where additional trains are added 

to accommodate increased flow? What are the design and maximum flow rates for 

each bioreactor cell? What determines whether additional trains are needed? How do 

total capital costs vary between configurations? 

For all systems (not including the 50 and 100 gpm systems), the designs are based 

on all trains operating optimally for the design flow rate. In events such as 

backwashing. the piping sized so that the remaining bioreactors can accommodate 

the full design flow over the brief duration of the backwash events or in the event 

that an individual bioreactor is to be taken off-line for service while still 

maintaining performance. 

2 ERG Memo to J. Harwood of GE dated 22 March, 2011. EPA DCN: SE00559.Cl. 

3 EBCT = Empty Bed Contact Time. This is defined as the required reactor process volume/flow rate NOT including 

the displacement of the media. To compare this with previous correspondence using the term HRT (Hydraulic 

Retention Time). multiply the HRT by a foetor of 2 to arrive at EBCT. 
related engineering is included within the GE equipment scope. Insurance under 

the GE scope is only limited to insurance carried by GE forGE supplied 

services/liability. Insurance coverage such as builders' risk is included under 

installation. 

GE Capital Equipment Scope: 

• All pumps 

• All process valves 

• All process instruments 

• All reactor internals (media, biology, supply and collection headers) 

• Nutrient dosing system including tank and first-fill 

• Compressed air system 

• Motor Control Center and PLC 

• Process engineering 

• Mechanical, electrical engineering forGE supplied portions of plant 

• Spare parts (initial supply) 

• Commissioning labor (GE supplied equipment) 
• Waste disposal 

• Raw materials, chemicals. and utilities during equipment start-up and 

operation, unless otherwise specified. 

• All required permits 

• Supply of telephone/fax/modem access while GE staff are on-site 

• Laboratory services, operating and maintenance personnel during 

equipment checkout. start-up and operation 

f. Does the capacity (in GPDI assume that the FGD operates 24 hours per day? What is 

the minimal operating period for the ABMet® system to ensure the viability of the 

bugs? 

Capacities assume 24 hour a day operation. The ABMet® system is not designed to 

be operated in a batch mode, therefore, operations such as 12 hours a day are not 

recommended. Equalization would be recommended to ensure as consistent 

operation as possible. There is no hard number for minimal operating period and 

such cases would have to be reviewed on an individual basis. likely through 

piloting. 
In theory this is correct os a reduction in temperature will slow the biological 

kinetics resulting in a requirement for an increased retention time in order to 

achieve the same result. Development and validation work conducted since 2009 

has verified that the retention time used in this cost should be sufficient for 99%+ 

of the potential FGO installations in the US. Therefore, the system should not need 

resizing. 

c. In the 2008 meeting with EPA, GE indicated that geographic location will affect the 

installation costs of the system. How will location impact the installation costs 

represented in equation (2) above? 

Individual State regulations and policies may have an impact on the installation 

costs. Some states/utilities do not require unionized labor for example which could 

lower the installation portion. Others, like Pennsylvania, require the exclusive use 

of steel sourced in the US, which can be a premium depending on the timing and 

the market. Given the number of variables, it is difficult to quantify any specific 

impacts. 
wastewater without scaling the equipment? 

The units used previously were of titanium construction. It may be possible for an 

alternative material that will offer similar performance at a reduced cost. A heat 

exchanger vendor would be able to offer the most comprehensive analysis of the 

options. 

4. Nutrient Costs. Does GE recommend that nutrients be continuously fed into the bioreactors to 

maintain bacteria regardless of whether the FGD scrubber wastewater is fed? If so. how does 

GE determine the minimal nutrient feed rates during instances where FGD scrubber purge is 

not being fed into the system? Does GE have nutrient cost data in $ per gallon of FGD 

scrubber wastewater treated and/or in $ per unit of nutrient added? 

GE recommends that nutrient is fed continuously during operation. During cases where 

the system is in stand-by without receiving feed water, nutrient would only be dosed 

periodically every few days as part of a maintenance mode. 

( CBl.) ,. 
James Harwood 

Industrial Soles Manager - ABMet 

en c. 

GRAPH- ABMet® FGD GE Equipment Cost $US per Gallons per Minute Capacity 

GRAPH- ABMet® FGD Installation Cost Component as a % of GE Equipment 
e ~ater & Process Technologies ABMet FG

$US per Ga
- Water & ~:OCe~s Technologies ABMet FGD Ins

as a%