Internal Letter

Rockwell Internationa l
No: . 78- 768-000-19 4

September 15, 197 8

Date :

.

TO :

(Name, Organization Internal Address)

FROM' ( Name, Organization , letereal Address, Phone)

G . W . Jeff s
Corporate Offices-El Segundo
970, 001-A1 2
Subject : .

S . F . Iacobellis
Energy Systems Group
797, 071-LA0 4
220 1

One-Quarter-Ton-Per-Hour Coal Hydropyrolysis Conversion
Test Facility (AR 91AF1 )

INTRODUCTION
The Energy Systems Group requests a project appropriation of ,EDACTE
consisting of ; -- - - - - - =REDACTED= - to provide
equipment and facility modifications for expansion, modification, and
relocation of the One-Quarter-Ton-Per-Hour (1/4 TPH) Coal Hydropyrolysis
Conversion Test Facility .
BACKGROUN D
The existing 1/4-TPH coal research pilot plant was activated in December
1975 by the Rocketdyne Division for the development of their hydrogenation process for coal liquefaction and gasification . Under IR&D tasks
and a DOE-sponsored hydrogasification program (Contract EX-77-C-01-2518),
the facility has been used to develop process system and subsystem
design data required to advance the development of the single-stage
hydrogasifier (reactor) . The 1/4-TPH Coal Hydropyrolysis Conversion
Test Facility will be directed toward further characterizing the performance and requirements of the reactor system, providing additional data
for process optimization, and for design of the 4-TPH reactor which will
be constructed in FY 1979 at the Bowl Area VTS-III test stand . This
DOE-sponsored program is a 36-month_orogram__scheduled to start in October
1978 with a contract value of REDACTE D
- ----------The above DOE contract for the 4-TPH Gasifier Reactor Development Program
requires 100% dedication of the 1/4-TPH facility for at least 15 months
starting in January 1979 . Therefore, this use of the facility (as
presently designed) will preclude its use for other contracts and companysponsored programs for commercial applications of flash hydropyrolysis
(i .e ., crude oil residual upgrading, petrochemical production, peat
gasification, etc .) . Additionally, dedication of the facility would
preclude process development for hydropyrolysis applications within the
scope of the Cities Service/ESG agreement . For this reason, facility
expansion is required . The proposed expansion of the 1/4-TPH Coal
Hydropyrolysis Conversion Test Facility will immediately establish a
dual test position test facility with provisions for a coal flow loop .
This expansion will allow additional contract and company-sponsored
programs to be conducted simultaneously with the existing gasification
reactor development contract . The expanded facility will make extensive
use of common test and instrumentation systems for multiple-shift
operations (i .e ., first shift dedicated to DOE Reactor Developmen t

F",' 7 it-2 R~•~ . 't 7e

i
Ifl
HE
1
BNA0590930
HDMSt00012824

 G . W . Jeffs
September 15, 1978
Page 2

Program ; second shift dedicated to the hydropyrolysis process-applications
and development) .
The planned facility modification and projected test density increase
for both the 1/4-TPH reactor and the currently adjoining Rocketdyne
Laser Engineering Test Facility (LETF) present operational problems .
The previous 30 months of mutual testing in the LETF area has been
accomplished by close coordination between the two facilities and by
extended shift operation on a daily basis by the coal gasification
personnel . It will be impossible, however, to continue in this manner
due to increased test density and the mutually exclusive nature (explosion
hazard, experimental hardware, noncoded vessels) of the testing . For
these reasons, facility relocation is required .
Historically, great benefits have been obtained by separating growing,
diverse programs and test facilities . Additionally, a minimum total
impact to both the 1/4-TPH reactor and LETF test programs will be incurred
if the coal facility is relocated concurrently with the planned expansion/
modification . Minimal schedule impact is emphasized since the committed
and proposed programs for the Coal Conversion Facility require the
facility to be in operation in January 1979 .
Relocation of the facility will also provide for a coal flow test loop
facility to support hydropyrolysis process development . The loop will
be used for DOE- and company-funded programs to establish engineering
design data for dense phase flow systems of solid carbonaceous feed
(coal, peat, petroleum, coke, etc .) . This installation is required to
support detailed process designs of feed systems for pilot and commercialscale plants .
PROPOSAL
The Energy Systems Group proposes to expand, modify, and relocate the
1/4-TPH Coal Hydropyrolysis Conversion Test Facility to the Bowl Area
Control Center . This will locate the facility in the Bowl Area which is
now assigned in its entirety to the Energy Systems Group and which
contains the 1-TPH reactor at VTS-II and the planned 4-TPH reactor at
VTS-III .
ALTERNATIVES
Six alternatives were evaluated to select a course of action that would
meet the objectives of the program in a cost-effective manner .

BNA0590930 2
HDMSt00012825

 G . W . Jeffs
September 15, 1978
Page 3

1 . Remain at the present location (LETF) .
2 . Construct a 1/4-TPH facility at a new and independent location .
3 . Relocate to Rocketdyne ' s Component Test Laboratory I (CTL-I) .
4 . Relocate to Rocketdyne ' s Component Test Laboratory V (CTL-V) .
5 . Relocate to the Bowl Area VTS-I test stand .

6 . Relocate to the test cells at the Bowl Control Center .
It was concluded from this investigation that the relocation of the
1/4-TPH facility from its present location is required, and the most
feasible site for relocation is a test cell at the Bowl Area Control
Center .
Consideration of a new and independent location was ruled out when
preliminary cost estimates indicated that costs would exceed other
candidate locations by a factor of three or four . (A major cost item
for the new independent location would be a data acquisition system .
Such a system exists and is in operation at the Bowl Control Center . )

Recent programmatic developments at Rocketdyne have eliminated CTL- I
as a candidate location . Rocketdyne has immediate plans for conducting
IR&D laser programs at this facility, which would present the same
problem of competing test programs in direct proximity to one another
such as exist now at LETF . Rocketdyne has future plans for full
utilization of CTL-I for F-15 auxiliary power unit testing if they are
successful in obtaining follow-on production contracts .

The comparative cost estimates for the alternative locations presente d
in Attachment A are limited to the costs associated with the modification
and relocation of the 1/4-TPH plant . While this tabulation reveal s
CTL-V to be the least costly alternative , additional costs would be
incurred if this alternative were selected because of CTL-V' s location
away from other ESG facilities in the Bowl Area . In addition, CTL-V
is currently in a deactivated state ( reference Attachment B) .
The remaining candidate locations are the Bowl Control Center and the
VTS-I test stand, both of which are in the area now assigned to the
Energy Systems Group . The major factors leading to the selection of the
Control Center location was the fact that operations can be conducted at
the 1/4-TPH facility, the 1-TPH facility at VTS-II, and the planned
4-TPH facility at VTS-III with a minimum amount of interference (road
access and potential blast hazards) . Also, Bowl Control Center costs
are less than those of VTS-I .

i ui mi uu

BNA05909303

HDMSt00012826

 G . W . Jeffs
September 15, 1978
Page 4

The 1/4-TPH Facility Flow Diagram is shown in Attachment C .. Attachment D
shows the projected component layout in the Bowl Control Center .
JUSTIFICATION
The need for expanding the 1/4-TPH Coal Hydropyrolysis Conversion Test
Facility is based on the contractual need to increase the present 8-min
duration capability to 1 hr for one test position and concurrently
provide for other contract and/or company-sponsored test programs at a
second test position .

Need for relocating the 1/4-TPH facility is based on projected increases
in test density and resultant constraints on existing programs . The
choice of the site for relocation is based upon avoidance of future test
interference and programmatic priorities, centralization of coal utilization test facilities, and lowest cost . Attachment E provides the projected
test density for the 1/4-TPH facility and indicates the multiple-shift
test operation required .
The operation of the 1/4-TPH facility on a noninterference basis is
essential to the support of the DOE-sponsored 4-TPH reactor design and
ESG's objectives to advance the development of the single-stage hydrogasifier to commercial status .
Due to the developmental nature of this program, utilizing a facility of
less than commercial capacity to promote markets for new products and to
develop products for eventual manufacture, in accordance with Corporate
Financial Policy, Section 12, Chapter 10, Publication 1, no financial
analysis or computation of return on assets is provided . However, it
can be stated that this investment is essential to the current sales
effort,_which is expected to generate sales amounting to at least
REDACTED
Iduri ng the 5-year period, 1979 through 1983 .
-------------METHOD OF IMPLEMENTATIO N
This project will be managed under the direction of a facilities project
engineer . This individual will control the scope of work, costs and
schedules, and coordinate all ESG functions including Engineering,
Operations, Purchasing, outside construction contractors, and interface
with Rocketdyne as required . Fossil Energy Conversion Systems of the
Energy Systems Group will monitor the project to ensure compliance with
technical and scheduler requirements .
The project will be implemented in two phases . Engineering and design
of the site preparation, structural supports, and basic utility service s

BNA05909304
HDMSt00012827

 G . W . Jeffs
September 15, 1978
Page 5

for the facility will be prepared by F&IE for construction by an outside
contractor . Minimal engineering guides in the form of process and
instrumentation diagrams and equipment layouts will be prepared by
Engineering for the installation of the process system piping and instrumentation . This work will be performed using combinations of outside
subcontract and in-house labor under the direction of a field engineer .
This method of implementation was selected as the most effective means
to accomplish the work within the planned schedule, indicated in Attachment F, while concurrently minimizing design and engineering costs . The
required capital funding is included in the Energy Systems Group Annual
Capital Plan for FY 1979 .
ENVIRONPIENTAL/ENERGY CONSERVATION CONSIDERATION S

The emissions generated by the 1/4-TPH facility are considered to be
laboratory or bench- scale quantities . Therefore, this facility has been
exempted from an operating permit by the Ventura County Air Pollution
Control Board .
Modifications to the facility will neither increase nor decrease the
environmental / energy conservation considerations .
RECOMMENDATIONS
-- REDACTED----------------------------- _ recommended
to support modifications to and relocation of the 1/4-TPH Coal Hydropyrolysis Conversion Test Facility . The proposed changes will eliminate
the operational constraints which would prevent ESG from being able to
meet contract schedules .

Al, ~ULL

S . F . Iacobellis
President
Energy Systems Grou p
jcs :92 1

Attachments

i
I
f
l
BNA05909305
HDMSt00012828

 1/4-TPH COAL FACILITY COMPARATIVE COST ESTIMATE S

Demolition and Site Preparation
Structural R/L and Addition s
Gas (GN2-GH2) and Water Services
(Includes Firex Modifications)
Electrical Power for GH2 Resistance
Heate r
Disconnection of Process Piping at
CHT L
R/L and Installation of Process Piping
Valve Servicin g
100 Channels of Instrumentation
28-V dc Control s
Additional Metering Instrumentation
R/L and Installation of System
Instrumentation and Controls
Dense Phase Flow Loo p
Engineering and Field Supervision
Total s

*See Attachment B for additional costs associated with this alternative .
co

jcs :921

 Attachment B

IL to G . W . Jeffs
September 1 5 , 197 8

ANALYSIS OF ADDITIONAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH CTL- V
The CTL-V facility is located approximately 1/2 mile from the-Bowl Area
and is presently deactivated . Reactivation of CTL- V as the site for the
1/4-TPH facility would result in additional capital requirements as wel l

as operating costs . An analysis of these costs is summarized_below :__ _
CAPITA L
Utility Meterin g
The metering of gaseous hydrogen, gaseous nitrogen, electric power, and water used by ESG
facilities is required to permit proper apportionment of costs between Rocketdyne and ESG . This
can be accomplished with single metering
installations serving all facilities within . the
Bowl Area . If the 1/4-TPH facility were located
at CTL-V, additional meters would be required on
each of these systems .
REDACTED
------------------

Mobile Handling Equipment
A forklift is a very essential piece o f
equipment for the operation of all of the coal
hydropyrolysis facilities . By locating the
1/4-TPH facility within the Bowl Area,
utilization of a forklift could be share d

as required by the 1/4 TPH, the 1 TPH, and the
proposed 4 TPH . Locating the 1/4-TPH facilit y
at .a remote location such as CTL-V would
require the acquisition of an additional
forklift .

REDACTE D

Shop Support Equipmen t
There are a number of items of operations
support equipment that can be shared by all
facilities located within the Bowl Area . If
the 1/4-TPH facility were located at CTL-V,
these items would have to be duplicated a t
the other location . This equipment would includ e

tube bending and flaring equipment, pipe
threader, cutoff saw, grinder, etc .
TOTAL ADDITIONAL CAPITAL

BNA05909307
HDMSt00012830

 ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS

COS T

Personne l

REDACTED

The close proximity of the test facilities when
all are located within the Bowl Area, as well
as the common use of support systems, lends
itself to the effective utilization and rotation
of test mechanics as required between the
individual test installations .
The location of the 1/4 TPH at CTL-V would result
in the need for one (1) additional mechanic to
offset the time lost in transferring personnel
between areas and maintaining the additional
support systems such as the data acquisition
equipment .
The reactivation of CTL-V would require additional
Plant Services support estimated at 1 .5 EP's .
This would include janitorial support, preventive
maintenance, and normal repair maintenance
associated with building support equipment and
utility systems .

REDACTE D

Utilitie s
The activation of the CTL-V Control Center and
pretest building would result in increased
utility costs for heating, air conditioning,
and lighting .
15 kW - lighting
5 kW - instrumentatio n

20 kW - air conditioning and heating
5 kW - miscellaneou s
45 kW

-

45 kW x .05/kWh x 24 x 30 REDACTE

D

Energy Cons . Sav . 20% REDACTE D
REDACTEDREDACTE D

Taxes
This estimate is based on 1977 assessments/
exceptions for property "held for convenience
of the Government" (to be confirmed by
Corporate Tax Department) .

' REDACTE D
TOTAL ADDITIONAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST

jcs :921

2

K

BNA05909308
HDMStOO012831

 _ 4,I

;

3`sI, {+•_

•; •1ts ~ r:r • . ~.1~ :` - in
/

fY `~ QeC << . J.2I/. : l a ~

GIa .M ♦ GT Y~/

a

.mod

1t~2~ .

i ui uuuiu

BNA05909309

HDMSt00012832

 -> -r • ~ 4 .t s

,
_
•

Sys4Q.+.

C/fV C71/aH

~''~ aX

fJ f

Orr :sr ..a aa•1• .. ..La. l

,411e

t4cpvM..• .

r
. .n
~•-

: r .. ~,~ ~"L.~ j=•<<
•'i CYGt~of•
`
s
(l
• J '!
y!atJ
I a s. c: -~1

Aa ✓

ou a. .C .

--: .sa

.•'al
-+
G ,1 . o/
~-s .w
• 1e
10 /0•+
•+ .
u a. 7 v Q
~v c o... / +1- a

T/+r t

dC/.a .

R.9

. .• .f',G .

1107E w .,= or.•cr.nst spWnrz,

BNA0590931 0
HDMSt00012833

 ✓--9 74
IYOS uw •

UNLESS ON[P %t SW "' '
N .CNS1ONS . 1C 'h 1'.~! : . h0
APPLY nqw TO r'FIS M
raps SU•• -Oul-cs S
OCC.u,ys .4 . OJ
■ 11 .5 7i0
MOl13 -01" '9~LL •
O.TA rwnu
roll-kwu
0= om

am Im oae - acFa

OA M

;A5$F'C,4rOrv --ACru TY
a(L

,Uq

(WO ~y s1 ~ICh '~/•I~r14 r~

I

Mucis,"W 11" A"

m
Ma
Wo _ a :e
YM Ire • 0111 - s 0
OO POT SG1l[ -hl

I

BNA0590931 1
HDMSt00012834

  

I. mil{you  4" 1?
unseat: 

I, crux . 4, Kw,?

m, . .A Maw..- I ?m A
   '1  f1} Lgcuomm3.9? max 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.. .. mm]
PLAN 50am 4qu i Ame/mam, 

MI HIM HII mm 
BNAO 59 093 1 2


y?





. 5
a



3

if)
COW/raw wt? J.

TPH Candi, 
Chm:

 

. .

BNA059093 13


1/4-TPH FACILITY UTILIZATIO N

1978
A S

0

N

F ri

A

11

1979
J ! J A

N D

J

Peat Gasification (DOE)
FHP of HC Liquids (IR&D)
Coal Gasification (DOE)
Relocatio n
Testing
Syngas Proc . Dev . (IR&D)
Alt . Resource Conversion
(IR&D)

co

.ics :921

 Attachment F
IL to G . W . Jeffs
September 15, 197 8

Sept .

1978
Oct .

Nov

Dec

1979
Jan .

Feb

Mar .

AR Preparation and
Approva l
Design (O .C .) Demo .
Struct ., Elect ., GH2,
Firex, Vsl . Mod .
P&ID and Controls
Minimal Design (I .Hr )

Bid and Award (O .C . )
Vessel Mod . and Fab .
(Inc . Duration )

Demo . Process Sys . Comp .
Controls and Instr .
(I .H . )
Valve Servicing and
Instr . Cal ., etc .
Construction (O .C . )
Process Piping Instr .
and Controls (I .H . )

jcs :921

BNA0590931 5

uiuuu

HDMSt00012838

 SEPTEMBER 11, 197 8

1/4 TPH COAL HYDROPYROLYSIS CONVERSION TEST FACILIT Y
PLANNED EXPANSION, MODIFICATION & RELOCATIO N
1.

PLAN OF ACTION.
A.
B.
C.
D.

2.

SCHEDUL E
A.
B.

3.

FACILITY PHOT O
BOWL RELOCATION AREA PLA N
MODIFIED 1/4 TPH FACILITY FLOW DIAGRA M
NEW DENSE PHASE FLOW DIAGRAM

FACILITY UTILIZATIO N
FACILITY MODIFICATION/RELOCATIO N

COST S
A . ALTERNATE RELOCATION SITE SUMMARY
B . BOWL AREA SITE

  


(:42



 

 

 

BNA059093 17


 

.I . .1: o-Ir?fll .6 I. to I 

?3??f?1?a5f??ll I. .r

 

.

h~ if]: 

BNA05909318



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     
    
 

  
      

    
 
 
 







.f-c 


.

 
       
      
    
 





 c:

{a
$5152: 13minIWI IIHI WI um HIM MI HIM 
BNAO 59 093 1 9


/'~A✓ce

CAP,rA~,

~MP.Por~'rYrEN rs

JS i 4 A14 ,e
,. I c r~i c c. -

C. 6#2

'fe'e yiCE Sao k%w 608

4 ;# , ESSUA'E

111.4lc

D. 6M 11GN I'VrESsu eg LIVE
E /~ECG .QiM EO f!/r,-,R c~E•E'/'/C'E

BNA0590932 0
HDMSt00012843

 oc

SI APLIGirD SC -~~A&Ti G

► /4--TPLi CO&L

co Q V 2s 1o ►

'F~, cI L T` '

p ~Vf~t-`l

Qev- pl

RF6r_T'OR
WG U P2e5G- QE

wn.TR T7N V.
((oo0 GAL)

Qoax O
sEPrv

'oc 2P-c -I\J2a

3tc~J C,I~L .
Orn

-1~ i t~UT1 J f2D~'rY~s

A

.b` P R 1 1 I-louR DURI~TIC
FLARG 7 7 / 7

 CG LL DE i S r, PI LS FLOW, LOO S
O15G-,2c3

~- V I SC'AQ-D

PLUM P-qKY-1 S~ co
Foe FoR.wA 2 0

Ud co&L
r?Lowoouw►-J

 1/'-TONS/HR RELOCATION COST EST IPIATE S
COAL - FACILITY ----------------------- --------------------- -

DEMOLITION AND SITE PREPARATION
STRUCTURAL R/L'AND ADDITION S
GAS (GN2-~G112) AND MATER SERVICES
(INCLUDES F I REX MODIFICATIONS)
ELECTRICAL POWER FOR GH2 RESISTANCE
HEATE R
DISCONNECTION OF PROCESS PIPING AT CHTL
R/L AND INSTALLATION OF PROCESS PIPING
VALVE SERVICIN G

100 CHANNELS OF INSTRUMENTATION .,
28 VDC CONTROLS

ADDITIONAL METERING INSTRUMENTATION .
R/L AND INSTALLATION OF SYSTEM
INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROLS
TOTALS

 Agenda

Coal Hydropyrolysis Discussio n

September 19, 197 8

1 . Technical Status

Friedman

2 . Marketing Status

Friedman

3 . 1/4 TPH Plan t

Johanso n

A . Description of Present Plant
B . Limitation s

C . Alternatives Considered
4 . Plans re 1/4 TPH Plant Brees e
5.

4

TPH

Plant

Powel l

mim :2/3

BNA0590932 4
HDMSt00012847