Technical Feasibility Sample Clauses

Technical Feasibility. Subject to applicable and effective FCC rules and orders, if the Parties are unable to reach agreement, pursuant to voluntary negotiations, as to whether it is technically feasible, or whether sufficient space is available, to unbundle the subloop at the point where a carrier requests, BellSouth shall have the burden of demonstrating to the Commission, pursuant to state arbitration proceedings under section 252 of the Act, that there is not sufficient space available, or that it is not technically feasible, to unbundle the subloop at the point requested.
Technical Feasibility. The Parties acknowledge for purposes of this requirement that the locations listed in Appendix B constitute the technically feasible points of Direct Interconnection which include any meet point location at the service boundary of the Telephone Company, any other location within the service area boundary at which the Telephone Company has provisioned services to its end users, any location at which a Telecommunications Carrier has obtained special access services from Telephone Company, or any point mutually agreed to the Parties. Appendix B contains the existing POIs established between the Parties if applicable. The CMRS Provider and Telephone Company may establish additional POIs, from time to time, in accordance with this Agreement. Appendix B also contains information on the other locations where Direct Interconnection with the Telephone Company’s network may be requested.
Technical Feasibility. Well-designed adsorption systems may achieve 95 to 98 percent control efficiencies at input concentrations of 500 to 2,000 ppmv. (U.S. EPA, CATC, May 1999) For organic concentrations above 100 ppm, carbon absorbers can achieve control efficiencies of at least 95%, which have been demonstrated in many applications. (U.S. EPA, CTC, May 1995). In theory, activated carbon can be tailor-made to remove pollutants at very low organic concentrations. However, there is great variation in control efficiencies based on performance data found in literature. (U.S. EPA, CTC, May 1995) Many factors can impact the performance of the carbon adsorption system including very low inlet concentrations, temperature, and humidity. High humidity and temperature diminishes the adsorptive ability of GAC. There is no theoretical method that consistently and accurately predicts the performance of adsorption systems. (U.S. EPA, March 2006) Carbon adsorption is based on the principle of equilibrium partitioning from the vapor phase to the surface of the carbon. The carbon adsorption capacity is strongly influenced by the contaminant concentration in the process stream and the temperature at which the adsorption is taking place. In general, the higher the concentration of contaminant in the vapor stream, the higher the contaminant adsorption capacity of the carbon. Conversely, higher temperatures result in lower adsorption capacity. Carbon manufacturers generally have adsorption isotherm data (i.e., adsorption capacity as a function of concentration at a constant temperature) for specific compounds and their specific carbon type that allows prediction of adsorption capacity when breakthrough occurs. Inlet VOC concentrations may vary by more than an order of magnitude, but the outlet concentration from the carbon bed essentially remains constant prior to breakthrough. Other ways in which carbon adsorption systems are robust is that they are insensitive to rapid changes in VOC concentrations. Activated carbon adsorption systems can treat a wide range of VOCs, although some highly polar compounds (such as alcohols and organic acids), highly volatile compounds like vinyl chloride and methylene chloride, smaller molecules (such as methanol and formaldehyde), and sulfur compounds do not adsorb well. Hydrophilic zeolites adsorb these compounds better than GAC. (U.S. EPA, CTC, May 1995) Adsorption systems are most effective in terms of both cost and waste management in projects involving dilute...
Technical Feasibility. As required by Section 251 of the Act, Powertel may interconnect with ALLTEL's network at any technically feasible point. The Parties acknowledge for purposes of this requirement that the locations listed in Attachment 5: Points of Interconnection constitute the technically feasible points of interconnection for Powertel to pass traffic to ALLTEL for transport and termination by ALLTEL on its network or for transport to a Third Party Provider.
Technical Feasibility. If ABT, in its reasonable discretion, determines that a requested Localization is not technically feasible, ABT will not be obligated to commit resources to perform such Localization. ATTACHMENT H DRT END USER LICENSE DRT DEALER REAL TIME ACCESS AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO THIS _____, DAY OF _____ BETWEEN AUTO-BY-TEL MARKETING CORPORATION, A DELAWARE CORPORATION WITH ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS LOCATED AT 18870 XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX, XXXXXX, XXXXXXXXXX 00000-0000 ("XICENSOR"), AND __________ A(N) ____________ LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION, WITH ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS LOCATED AT ___________________ ("LICENSEE").
Technical Feasibility. HEE/Duall’s proposed technology solution with the three-stage scrubbing system followed by carbon adsorption addresses all the targeted Hanford COPC groups. The HEE/Duall system should attain a total removal efficiency of 90% or greater for all Hanford targeted COPC groups since the downstream carbon adsorption systems can achieve high removal efficiencies (i.e., 99%). Table 3-4 includes vendor-provided removal efficiencies for these targeted groups. The vendor recommends pilot testing to verify removal efficiencies. Table 3-4. HEE/Duall Projected Removal Efficiencies of Hanford Tank Farms Targeted COPC Groups Technology Stage VOCs Dioxins/ Furans NOx Ammonia Mercury Absorption 1st Stage: Acid Gas Spray Scrubber (Amines, Ammonia, Soluble Hg species) 99.5% (amines) 99.5% 95% 2st Stage: Oxidation Spray Scrubber (Furans, NO, N2O) 90% Furans 90% (NO, N2O) 3rd Stage: Reduction Spray Scrubber (NO2) 99.5% (NO2) Adsorption Granular Activated Carbon (VOCs, Organic Hg) 99% (1) 99% (1) Sulfur Impregnated Carbon 99% Total Absorption and Adsorption 99% (1) 99% (1) 90% (2) NOx to N2 99.5% 99%
Technical Feasibility. REMEDIA® filter bags reportedly remove 99% of dioxin and furans from the inlet stream. Compounds such as SO2 and phosphorous compounds will poison the catalyst. The manufacturer recommends maintaining SO2 levels below 200 ppm and phosphorous compound levels below 500 ppm. The catalytic reaction is temperature dependent. The inlet gas temperature should be between 350°F and 400°F to achieve the rated destruction efficiencies. DeNOx filter bags reportedly achieve destruction efficiencies up to 75%. They require addition of ammonia for the reduction of NOx. (If the inlet stream contains stoichiometric excess ammonia for the reaction, then ammonia injection is not required.) Other selective catalytic reactors report a typical ammonia “slippage” (i.e., excess unreacted ammonia exiting the process) of 10 ppm. The treatment of the Hanford waste tank vapors is a unique and complex application; initial planning should assume a similar or larger slippage. The temperature range for optimum catalytic reaction in the DeNOx filter bags is 350°F to 450°F. As with the REMDIA® filter bags, SO2 and phosphorous compounds tend to foul the catalyst. Powdered activated carbon injection can achieve mercury removal efficiencies as high as 90%. (Xxxxx, Xxxxxxx, Xxxxx, Xxxxxx, III, & Xxxxxxx, 2007) Additional enhancements occur using treated activated carbon, such as bromine or sulfur treatments (US EPA, UNEP, SERI, 2014). Removal efficiencies are driven primarily by initial concentrations of mercury and activated carbon injection rates. All three filter bag technologies assume the use of a bag house to house the filters and some form of oxidation treatment preceding it. Mercury removal efficiency for sorbent polymer catalyst is 99% or higher and depends on the gas velocity and filter stack height (i.e., number of filter modules used). For mercury removal rates of 99% the stack height exceeds 10 feet. This technology is attractive because of the high loading capacity for mercury reported by the vendor: 2.7 lb of mercury in a 2 ft x 2 ft x 1 ft filter module.
Technical Feasibility. Cryogenic condensation is often used in the dry cleaning and pharmaceutical industries where the solvents are recycled. Cryogenic condensation is attractive because the recovered solvent is uncontaminated by water or other recovery agents. The technology is best suited for low flow, less than 3000 scfm, (Comi Polaris Systems) and high concentration, greater than 1 vol %. (Dwivedi, Gaur, Sharma, & Verma, 2004) This range flow rates compare favorably with the Hanford application but the offgas VOCs concentration is well below the 1 vol % range.
Technical Feasibility. The vendor provided an estimated efficiency of 99.99% DRE for VOCs. The thermal oxidizer would operate at 1800°F, with a 2 second residence time, and a Xxxxxxx’x Number >10,000 to meet the anticipated efficiencies. Project Integration did not provide removal efficiencies for mercury with the activated carbon powder injection system. However, data is available from the National Energy Technology Laboratory, the Electric Power Research Institute and a group of utility companies demonstrating Hg removal efficiencies for several coal-fired electric utility applications using activated carbon injection (ACI) as shown in Table 3-32 (U.S. EPA-APPCD, February 2005). These applications were equipped with a cold or hot spray electrostatic precipitator while burning bituminous or subbituminous coals. In all cases, ACI improved mercury capture over the baseline but did not attain the overall high removal efficiencies (>99%) projected by vendors of chemically treated activated carbon in carbon bed designs. Table 3-32 Mercury Removal Efficiency for Combined Activated Carbon Injection and Baghouse Test Site Information Mercury Capture, % Test Site Coal Particulate Control Baseline ACI Test Results Long-term Test Duration PG&E NEG Xxxxxxx Point, Unit 1 Low-sulfur Bituminous Two CS-ESPs in Series 90.8 94.5 ACI for two 5-day periods PG&E NEG Salem Harbor, Unit 1 Low-sulfur Bituminous CS-ESP 90 94 ACI for one 4-day period Wisconsin Electric Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, Xxxx 0 Subbituminous CS-ESP 5 65 ACI for one 5-day period Alabama Power Xxxxxx, Unit 3 Low-sulfur Bituminous HS-ESP COHPAC(1) 0 25-90 ACI for one 9-day period University of Illinois Xxxxxx Station High-sulfur Bituminous CS-ESP 0 73