Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0696-0002
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2014-05-14T04:00Z

EPA HCl Performance Specification 
                          Stakeholder Kickoff Meeting
                            Conference Call Summary
                            Tuesday, May 17, 2011

1) Welcome  -  Introduction  -  Purpose
   EPA is gathering information from instrument and gas vendors, affected facilities, testers, and regulatory bodies with experience performing continuous measurements of HCl from stationary source emissions.  At a conference call Attendees (Attachment 1) provided stakeholder perspective on the current state of the science for CEM systems used to measure HCl in stationary source emission gases.
   
2) Technology discussion from the instrument vendor perspective
   Table 1 summarizes the current instruments from equipments vendors participating in the call.  Vendors are shown in alphabetical order. Additional comments from equipment vendors include descriptions of their systems and how they are used for field measurements.  A summary of these comments are provided below.
   Thermofisher
   Thermofisher offers a GFC system.  Water is removed as an interferent from the emissions gas using a permapure dryer system. GFC equipment is based on the standard simple rack mount design used for other Thermofisher CEMS equipment. The system has longer response time than their FTIR system approach to HCl monitoring.  That means the GFC has to be conditioned longer and calibrations are required more frequently.  The GFC is subject to more interference.
   
   Thermofisher is also gaining experience with FTIR HCl measurement. Lab and field evaluations are being conducted in waste incinerator, power utility and cement plant gas streams with up to 40% moisture. FTIR is more complicated and more expensive than the GFC system.  Thermofisher uses twice the standard deviation of the zero noise to determine detection limit. Hot, wet operation is a challenge at higher moisture levels.  The advantage of FTIR is the opportunity to perform multi-component analysis with one instrument. 
   Sick-Maihak
   Sick-Maihak offers GFC, FTIR and TDLS bases HCl monitors.  All systems are run hot and wet. The Sick-Maihak GFC is a multi-component capable system.  Cross interferences are measured real time and used to process the data. The simplicity of the GFC makes this technology easier to operate in the field. Sick-Maihak has more field experience with the GFC and has tested this technology at cement production, waste combustion, and power generation sites.  The Sick-Maihak TDLS system can be used as extractive, cross stack or insitu with a probe.  TDLS are less susceptible to cross interference because of the narrow wavelength range generated by the laser. Less interference and a stronger optical source allows lower detection limits. 
   
   Table 1 Summary of Conference Call Vendors and Technologies
                                    Vendor
                                Technology Base
                           Extractive or Cross Stack
                                  Wet or Dry
                             Lab Detection Limit 
                                     (ppm)
                               Full Scale Range
                                     (ppm)
                                Averaging Time
                              Initial Calibration
                           Field Performance Checks
ABB
FTIR (1 - 2 wavenumber resolution)
Extractive
                                    Hot Wet
                                  0.1 to 0.2

                                       
HovaCal-Hot Wet at instrument detector
Checked at the analyzer/cell
Altech Environment
GFC - multicomponent

                   Permapure(R) water removal at the detector
                                       

                                       
HovaCal-Hot Wet at instrument detector
Checked at the analyzer
Altech Environment
FTIR

                                       
                                       

                                       

CEMTECK
CRDS
Extractive
                                      Wet
                                     0.2 
0  -  3 
                                       

CEMTECK
TDL
Cross Stack or extractive
                               Insitu or hot/wet
                                      0.2

                                       

Eco Chem analytics
GFC - multicomponent
Extractive
                                    Hot Wet
                                      0.1
0  -  10
                                       
HovaCal-Hot Wet at instrument detector
HCl Certified cylinder Gas
Gasmet
FTIR (8 wave number resolution)
Extractive 
                                       
                                      0.1

                                       
HovaCal-Hot Wet at instrument detector
Can be checked at probe or analyzer
MKS Instruments
FTIR (0.5 wavenumber resolution)
Extractive
                                    Hot Wet
                                      0.1

                                     1 min

Sick-Maihak
FTIR (0.5 wavenumber resolution)
Multi Component
                                    Hot Wet
                                      0.1

Sick-Maihak
GFC
Multi 
Component
                                    Hot Wet
                                      0.2

At the analyzer
Sick-Maihak
TDLS
Extractive and insitu
                                    Hot Wet
                                      0.1
0  -  5

Thermo fisher
FTIR (0.4 wavenumber resolution)
Extractive
                                    Hot Wet
                                      0.1
10  -  100's

HovaCal-Hot Wet at instrument detector
Can be checked at probe or analyzer
Thermo fisher
GFC 
Extractive
                   Permapure(R) water removal at the detector
                                      0.2
5   -  5000
5 min
HovaCal-Hot Wet at instrument detector

FTIR  -  Fouier Transform Infrared
GFC  -  Gas Filter Correlation
TDLS  -  tunable diode laser spectroscopy.
      
   MKS instruments
   MKS instruments is currently testing a multi-component FTIR, extractive CEM that measures HCl in hot wet gas. The system has been operated up to 40% moisture.  FTIR is more expensive than a single component analyzer. Other components measured include hydrocarbons, NOx, SOx, HF, CO, and CO2. Challenges measuring HCl involve sampling rather than instrument analysis. MKS prefilter the gas stream. 
   ABB
   ABB offers an FTIR CEM for HCl similar to those described by other vendors except their unit operates at a resolution of 1 to 2 wave numbers.
   Cemtech
   Cemtech offers a TDL and a laser based cavity ring down (CRDS) CEM unit for HCl monitoring.  The TDL technology offers a fiber coupled optical system which allows the optical system to be remotely located from the measurement location.  This technology can be multiplexed which allows the laser to be directed to multiple lines of sight or locations.  These systems are offered as cell based extractive or cross stack units. 
   
   The CRDS unit that operates at reduced pressure to maintain stack emissions in the gas phase. No other sample conditioning is performed for this unit.  The gas is maintained at 50 C.  The sampling system uses a critical orifice through a filter sampling at 3 L/hour. The low pressure sampling and analysis system reduces or eliminates interference.  The probe and transfer line is fused silica lined and heated to 50 C to improve response time. The CRDS system can be used for multiple components by adding lasers or adding an optical bench that can be multiplexed with the system to measure at appropriate wavelengths for each component. The same probe, umbilical transport line and pumps are used for single or multiple analyte configurations.  Typical applications merge water measurement with HCl measurement. CRDS cell is maintained at a constant temperature and pressure.  The effective path length for this application is approximately 10 kilometers.  Therefore, the sample pressure can be reduced which keeps materials in the gas phase and narrows spectral lines thus reducing interference.  Cell sizes range from 5 to 10 inches consistent with small rack mountable CEMS.  Cemtech will perform its first field trial at a cement plant in July of 2011.  This system is currently operational at a waste water treatment facility and a waste incinerator.
   Gasmet Technologies
   Gasmet Technologies offers an FTIR HCl CEM system that has been installed in multiple locations in Europe including cement plants and waste incinerators.  The system measures multiple gases.  Less resolution is used to improve detection limits by reducing noise.  
   
   Eco Chem Analytics
   
   Eco Chem Analytics has experience with a hot, wet, multi-component CEM system based on GFC technology.  Their GFC monitor measures eight (8) total gases including HCl, water and up to 6 other interfering compounds.  Units are installed in multiple U.S. facilities such as municipal waste water facilities and chemical facilities.
   
   Altech has experience with multi-component CEM system based on GFC technology. Installations include cement plants and municipal waste incinerators. 
   
   Altech Environment
   
   Systems currently offers GFC multi-component system.  US installations include cement plants, and municipal waste incinerators.  Altech also has experience using FTIR to measure HCl through its support to European facilities. 

3) Initial Calibration, System Checks 
   
   Vendors perform calibration of new units at the factory. Vendors perform initial calibration using the HovaCal equipment or certified gas cylinders.    HovaCAL equipment is used (ABB, Altech Environment, Thermofisher) to generate various concentrations of HCl at temperatures as high as 375 F and up to 40% moisture.  HovaCal vaporizes an aqueous solution of the compound(s) of interest.  Instrument initial calibration is done during production. 
   
   Some Gas Filter Correlation vendors (Thermofisher, Altech Environment) reduce or remove water interference by membrane (Permapure(R)) drying the gas stream. Residual water after membrane dryers can be measured by IR and appropriate corrections can be included if necessary. FTIR systems are initially calibrated using the HovaCAL and with certified gas cylinders (Thermofisher).  
   
   Cross stack TDL (CemTech) is calibrated during manufacturing at the factory.  An internal gas cell is used to lock the laser and to calibrate or check calibration.  The laser light is redirected through the cell in line with the measurement path to perform a span and off peak zero check.  The frequency of span and off peak zero check is programmable.  In the field a span check is typically performed once every 24 hours.  The frequency of calibration checks of instrument performance are programmable using a constant pressure constant temperature cell in the optical measurement path.  This performance check acts as a matrix spike interference check on the instrument performance. Since the calibration is based on a ratio of the cell path length (typically multiple cm) and the measurement path length, the concentration in the cell is not as constrained as other methods and certified calibration gas can be used that is much higher concentration. Path length is measured independently and entered into system software allowing continuous concentration reporting. Temperature and pressure corrections need to be made to compensate for the difference between stack and reference cell conditions.
   
   Initial manufacturing setup for CRDS-TDL systems involves evaluation of the optical spectra for a new target gas and potential interfering gases.  A laser wavelength is selected from available TDLs that best match the sensitivity and lack of spectral interference found in the optical spectra review.  A wavelength specific to that laser is selected where there is no spectral overlap of any of the interfering gases including moisture with the target gas.  Once the new monitoring system is fabricated, it is evaluated using laboratory generated test gas that includes up to 50% moisture to demonstrate interference free measurement of the target gas.  The system is also tested with other common emission gases to ensure interference free operation.  The system is calibrated with known concentrations of calibration gas as part of the manufacturing process.  
   
4) Field Calibration/Drift Checks and Dynamic Spike Performance Checks
   
   Field calibration checks are intended to verify the manufacturing calibration. Two types of field calibration checks and drift checks were discussed for FTIR and GFC. Some vendors reported checking instrument performance with hot wet gas at the instrument detector using HovaCal equipment.  Others report checking field performance using certified cylinder gas either through the probe or at the instrument detector. 
   
   The HovaCAL hot wet instrument is more difficult to use in the field due to weight and complexity.  Performance checks done under hot wet conditions with the HovaCal equipment reduce conditioning and response time.  Vendor preference, in general, is to check instrument calibration and drift at the instrument cell/detector with the HovaCal and not to use the equipment on the stack to perform through the probe system checks.  Recalibration using the HovaCal to evaluate water vapor interference in the field is performed yearly (Eco Chem Analytics), typically when Relative Accuracy (RATA) is performed.  
   
   Vendors and testers also use Certified HCl gas cylinders to recalibrate or check the instrument calibration in the field.  Through the probe system performance checks have been done using dry cylinder gases. For field calibration testers can flood the probe with cylinder gas at each concentration of interest.  Checking instrument performance with a certified (dry) HCl gas cylinder can take 20 minutes or more to stabilize through the probe. In Europe it is not common to check HCl field calibration through the probe.  Instead, European systems are challenged directly at the analyzer detector.  When TUV tested HCl monitors using the HovaCal hot wet calibration gas they found response times on the order of 3 minutes.  Gasmet does field performance checks at the analyzer and checks sample line integrity through the probe with NO or SO2 cylinder gas. 
   
   Field performance checks of CRDS-TDL systems are performed through the probe using silica coated stainless steel lines from the cal gas supply to the probe.  Since this system samples at about 3 L/hour, and calibration checks take about 10 minutes, very little calibration gas is needed.   Gas can be run directly to the analyzer as a check of sample line integrity. Zero check of this system occurs every 10 seconds (6 times a minute) by turning off the laser and measuring background signal.  
   
   Facilities needing to measure HCl at 3 ppm or lower, the calibration and linearity of the equipment become significant issues.   In the field, facilities check their equipment and vendor supplied spectra using the best quality gas standard they can find. The best spectra to use in the field are those that are generated on the equipment with known concentration of known quality gas standards.  These instrument specific reference spectra are important for low concentration measurements.  In addition to the target gas, spectra of interferents such as water and carbon dioxide are important.
   
5) What's the alternative to RATAs, are they necessary
   
   Dynamic spikes have been performed in numerous field tests (GFC and FTIR systems), and the most difficult challenge to this approach is measuring HCl in the presence of alkaline particulate (e.g., lime) as is found at cement plants.  Dynamic spikes less than 10% of the gas volume from the stack provide a robust challenge that evaluates the effect of both interfering gases and reactive particulate during HCl CEM field tests or monitoring programs.  This approach is consistent with PS-15.  Stakeholders did not know of a manufacturer or test facility that performed long term dynamic spiking to support continuous monitoring of HCl.  However, Eco Chem reports that the HovaCal can be programmed to produce a variety of concentrations in any sequence required.  Sources with both HCl and ammonia emissions pose a particular problem for performance checks because of the acid base reaction potential between these two gases.  Emissions Testing Inc. reports making measurements of HCl above 180 C to minimize this reaction.  However, the accumulated alkaline dust on the sample conditioning filter scrubs significant amounts of HCl from the gas stream.    Analyte spikes of at least 10% of the gas stream leave the sample relatively "undisturbed" resulting in a true check of the measurement performance.  While the standard version of the HovaCal can perform episodic dynamic spiking it is not an automated system and requires dedicated operator oversight to function properly. Eco Chem reports that a "process" version of the HovaCal can produce a daily dynamic spike without an operator continuously onsite.  However, current facility experience with through the probe dynamic spiking suggests it is difficult and time consuming on a periodic basis and not demonstrated for use on a continuous basis.  Regular dry gas spiking is performed and data exists but may not be related to instrument agreement with reference methods during (RATAs). 
   
   Thermofisher reports plans to manufacture units that allow dynamic spiking and it is their intent to evaluate monitor performance over the next several months as they field test their instrument designs.  Thermofisher also plans to use SF6 as a tracer (for FTIR monitor tests) to evaluate dynamic spiking with a stable easily measured compound.
   
   From a facility standpoint, many current compliance systems (Altech, SICK, Eco Chem and TDL systems) use dry cylinder gas for performance and calibration spikes.  Typical measurement ranges for current compliance systems are between 0 and 25 ppm.  Current compliance levels are 25 ppm.
   
   The current cement rule poses a related challenge since it requires measuring a 30 day rolling average with a limit of 3 ppm.  Contemporary cement plants with in line raw mills the emissions are 10 times higher when the raw mill is off, which may translate to the need to measure 0.5 ppm for ~90% of the time to compensate for 10% of the time when the plan generates 15 ppm when the mill is off.  Since quantification limits are higher than the 0.1 to 0.2 ppm detection limit, demonstrating compliance may be a daunting task with today's measurement equipment.  The stakeholders will need an agreement on the relationship between the detection limit and the practical quantitation limit to determine if current measurement equipment can measure emissions present 90% of the time. As sampling systems age between maintenance intervals, the effective quantitation limits change.  
   
6) Frequency of Performance checks 

   Vendors or facilities conduct performance checks weekly in Great Britain.  Based on performance data, facilities can petition for less frequent checks if they demonstrate instrument stability for longer than a week.  The maximum time between checks is the maintained interval of the instrument, approximately 90 days.  European tests to evaluate monitor stability and calibration drift require field tests over a year period before reduced performance check schedules are approved.  The stability test requires two identical units evaluated over at least 2 performance or maintenance periods based on CEN requirements.
   
   In Europe, each country defines specific performance check frequency which can be stricter than the CEN standard.  Some European countries require more frequent performance check after the initial performance period, but none require daily checks.
   
7) Protocol Gases  -  Availability and Certification
   
Gas Vendors (Airgas and Linde) reported availability of HCl gas in cylinders at 10 ppm to 1% using FTIR.  Compressed gas under 1000 ppm is shippable in aluminum cylinders, however the vendors agreed nickel lined steel cylinders were preferable for stability.  The main issues with lower level certified standard preparation involve stability in cylinders and availability of NIST certified standards as a check on vendor certification analysis accuracy.  Vendors highly recommend using nickel lined cylinders. Some states that have HCl compliance requirements require nickel lined gas cylinders for HCl standards.  Vendors agreed that nickel lined or treated hardware (e.g., regulators) may be needed to spike HCl at concentrations below 10 ppm.  Moisture is also a key issue in the transport and stability of HCl.  Any moisture in the valve or regulator will bias results low due to reactions with the cylinder valve or regulator.  Gas vendors and testers added that keeping regulators on the cylinders once they are first put into service minimizes water contamination of the valve and regulator.
 
The analytical accuracy certified by the vendors for gasses from 10 ppm up to 1% is about 3%.  Below 10 ppm vendors are only willing to certify gas cylinders to  10% because the gas vendors do not have a traceable standard to compare to their measurements.  Vendors report NIST is currently capable of certifying gas to 2% accuracy.  Analysis is performed using (heated cell?) FTIR.  Airgas uses MKS equipment and vendor supplied library calibration curves to determine cylinder gas concentration.  The MKS spectra are traceable to HITRAN spectra.  For gasses at higher concentrations (i.e., from 1000 ppm to 1%) Airgas performs wet chemical analysis of HCl cylinder gas. Low concentration (1000 ppm) wet chemical analysis of HCl cylinder gas can be compared to FTIR results to verify FTIR determined concentrations.  Linde follows a similar process with a different IR vendor's equipment. They also compare the results from wet chemical analysis to the FTIR.  

The challenge for gas vendors is NIST standard availability.  The request has been made through the process of upgrading the "Green Book" to encourage NIST to generate a certified gas standard for HCl.  The request for NIST support involves preparation of a NIST prime, or preferably a batch of NIST reference gas materials available for gas vendor purchase and use as a reference in the HCl gas certification process.  Without an NIST standard HCl gas there is no inter-comparison of vendor generated standard gases. Gas vendors believe NIST can generate a stable reference gas material no sooner than 18 months from the time they start. Frank
Guenther is the NIST contact for this activity.
 
Gas vendors report the ability to generate gas in cylinders at less than 10 ppm if a NIST standard was available to check the certified concentration.  The analytical uncertainty increases to 10% for standards prepared below 10 ppm because there is no (NIST) gas standard to check the bias of their results.  Certified standard gas cylinders in the range of 10 ppm to 1% are stable for 12 months. Vendor's best estimate of stability in the absence of a NIST low concentration HCl standard, for gas less than 10 ppm will be no better than 6 months.  Moisture contamination and inert transfer lines are a large component of HCl field cylinder stability.  

Testers have generated low concentration HCl gas in the field by diluting high concentration gas standards.  Mass flow controller calibration, construction material and conditioning are contributors to the original standard gas uncertainty for dilution system generating low concentration HCl test gas.  However, the accuracy and precision a tester experiences is based on the combination of the uncertainty contributed by the calibration gas and the uncertainty contributed by the field dilution and delivery system.  Testers and facilities need to qualify both the detection limit and the linearity of their monitors.

Vendor(s) asked if the NIST reference standard development was limited to standards in the gas phase. Reference was made to the HOVACAL as a reference standard. Facility(s) responded they would prefer using a dry gas standard to keep the spiking process as simple as possible. 

8) Other relevant performance specifications
   
State Performance Specifications (e.g., Pennsylvania) exist for waste to energy processes.  The Pennsylvania performance specification mirrors PS  -  2.  The concentration measured at these sources is well above 1 ppm. Typically facilities perform RATA tests using Method 26A.  Instruments well measuring dry gas streams.  Daily QA/QC and calibration is consistent but needs to be tracked regularly.  Early RATA tests failed the 20% agreement requirement and Pennsylvania agreed to accept an absolute  5 ppm agreement between Method 26A and the CEM.

According to Ralph Roberson at RMB consulting, the EGU facilities are concerned about the issue of RATA agreement because the mean difference divided by a small concentration results in a value that can be 100% of the target concentration. The issues here are similar to the issues encountered with Mercury CEMs.  The important technical issue for the Industry is performance evaluations where concentrations can be accurately measured by both the CEM and the reference method.

Jim Peeler at Emission Monitoring Inc. commented that for tests involving the cement industry area sources, Method 26 or 26A have not been allowed and testers must use Method 321.  The instrument (FTIR) is validated using known addition of spikes. Testers are hard pressed to get 2 ppm or lower spikes through the alkaline cement kiln dust caked onto the instrument inlet filter.  RATAs using a reference FTIR method to quality a FTIR CEM will not identify common interference issues.  Jim proposed automated analyte spikes as one way to demonstrate the performance of continuous HCl monitors.  

According to Peeler, the states of Michigan and Maryland have approved dynamic spiking as an alternative to qualify HCl and SOx/NOx systems. 

EPA Method 321 also has a provision for dynamic spiking as an integral part of the QC for FTIR measurements.

9) Other Issues to Address  -  Open Discussion
   
   The proposed EGU MACT rule sets the HCl standard at 1.4 ppm for existing sources.  Measurements will need to be qualified down to approximately 1 ppm.
   
   The gas vendors believe the path to an HCl NIST Reference Gas Material may occur sooner if NIST is willing to work with the Netherlands Measurement Institute NMi toward a memo of understanding regarding NMi HCl reference material.

10) Action Items
   
Schedule a conference call with Frank Guenther at NIST to discuss the need for an HCl reference gas standard.  Ray Merrill will talk with Bob Wright (EPA/ORD) to identify a small group of participants and schedule a conference call.

EPA has access to an early draft HCl PS written by Eli Lilly which we will review for relevance to development of an HCl Performance Specification.

EPA will review the status of dynamic spiking as an alternative to qualifying the performance in Method 7E.

EPA will prepare a summary of this conference call and distribute it to the stakeholders for review.

After receiving review comments EPA will schedule the next conference call to update stakeholders on the HCl performance specification and to open topics that need additional input or clarification.

         Table 1: Conference Call Attendees and Contact Information
Name
Affiliation
Interest
Email
Allan Rilling 
ABB
Equip Vendor
allan.j.rilling@ca.abb.com
Bob Davis 
AirGas
Gas Vendor
bob.davis@airgas.com
Musa  Zada
Altech
Equip Vendor

Malik Hatar
Altech
Equip Vendor

Bob Vantuyl 
Ash Grove Cement
Facility
bob.vantuyl@ashgrove
Andy Edwards
Ash Grove Cement
Facility

Deseri Haggard
Calportland
Facility

Ty Smith
Cemtech Environmental
Equip Vendor

Kieth Crab
Cemtech Environmental
Equip Vendor

Joe Aldina 
Covanta Energy
Facility
jAldina@covantaenergy.com
Edul Chikhliwala
EcoChem Analytics
Equip Vendor
chikli@ecochem.biz
Laura Kinner   
Emission Monitoring Inc.
Tester
lkinner@mindspring.com
Jim Peeler
Emission Monitoring Inc.
Tester
jimpeeler@mindspring.com
Ray Merrill
EPA/OAQPS/AQAD/MTG
Regulatory Agency
merrill.raymond@epa.gov
Jason Dewees
EPA/OAQPS/AQAD/MTG
Regulatory Agency
dewees.jason@ epa.gov
Robin Segall
EPA/OAQPS/AQAD/MTG
Regulatory Agency
segall.robin@@epa.gov
Barrett Parker
EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MPG
Regulatory Agency
parker.barrett@epa.gov
Rachael Agnew
EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MPG
Regulatory Agency
agnew.rachael@epa.gov
Collin Boswell
EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MPG
Regulatory Agency
boswell.collin @epa.gov
Gerri Garwood
EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MPG
Regulatory Agency
garwood.gerri@epa.gov
Candace Sorrell
EPA/OAQPS/AQAD/MTG
Regulatory Agency
sorrell.candace@epa.gov
Luc Sevrette      
Gasmet
Equip Vendor
luc.sevrette@gasmet.com
Andre Hegre
Gas Technologies, Finland
Equip Vendor

Hector Ybanez, 
Holcim Inc.
Facility
hybanez@gmail.com
Matthew Rutledge
Lafarge
Facility

Mike Hayes
Linde Gas
Gas Vendor

Barbara Marshick
MKS Instruments
Equip Vendor
Barbara_Marshik@mksinst.com
Fred Grunewald
MKS Instruments Inc.
Equip Vendor
fred.grunewald@mksinst.com
Martin Spartz 
Prism Analytical technology
Tester
m.spartz@pati-air.com
Ralph Roberson
RMB Consulting
Facility-ECU
Roberson@mb-consulting.com
Dan Kietzer
Sick-Maihak
Equip Vendor
dan.kietzer@sickmaihak.com
Kita Dieter
Thermofisher
Equip Vendor
dieter.kita@thermofisher.com
Stephen Johnson
Thermofishter Inc.
Equip Vendor
Stephen.Johnson@thermosisher.com
James Willis
Titan America
Facility
jwillis@titanamerica.com
Jeff Harrington
Tyco Environmental Systems
Equip Vendor

Gary Catchatory
Tyco Environmental Systems
Equip Vendor

Michael Corvese
Thermofisher
Equip Vendor
Michael.corvese@thermofisher.com
Frank Duckett
Thermofisher
Equip Vendor
Frank.duckett@thermofisher.com
Ashmud Patel
Ethyl Smith Automation

Henry Veger 
CEM Specialties
Equip Vendor

Dave  Vigowax
Marantee Tile
Facility