The Reclaimer
A News Publication by CCR Technologies
Focus on CCR’s Engineering Department
CCR Technologies believes in the
importance of our customers’ ability to
have completely open access to all of
our resources and, of course, the key
people who are the gatekeepers of
CCR’s technology and innovation.
Terry Trofimuk, CCR’s Vice President
of Engineering & Technology, has
assembled a dedicated team of
individuals who must constantly
redefine theirmultitasking roles for the
benefit of maintaining CCR’s high level
of service-orientation. As no one
knows CCR’s vacuum distillation
technology better than him, he was
very candid regarding the value of this
proprietary technology: “For any given
reclamation project, the range of
contaminants that we are challenged
with removing can be very broad – not
only in the types – but in the volumes
as well. CCR’s proprietary vacuum
distillation process is robust enough to
handle the degrees of difficultly that we
often must face because we are often
presented with unknowns and a few
surprises. Thus, you could say that we
have the best technology and the most
appropriate equipment for the projects
that our customers present to us.”
Inside this issue:
Focus on CCR’s Engineering 1 improvements, the CCR engineering
Department
Frequently asked customer questions 2 FEL-1 (front end loaded conceptual)
The Benefits of Great 4 preliminary) studies, and FEED (front
Environmental Performance
Technology: CO2 Recovery Using 5 MEG reclaiming systems or fixed ARU’s
Monoethanolamine
Chemistry: DEA Reclaiming 8
Meet the CCR Business Development 9 technical issues regarding CCR’s MEG
Team
Volume 4
Terry was quick to add that, for the
customer, one of the greatest
environmental and economic
advantages of our equipment is not
what it can do, but what it does not do.
Meaning . . . the CCR reclamation
process does not generate large
volumes of waste material, but rather, a
relatively small, concentrated volume of
waste material that is very manageable.
Terry and his department have several
projects running concurrently that
consume the bulk of their time. But
when asked about the number one
priority, he responds: “Our on-going
Terry Trofimuk, P.Eng., VP - Engineering & Technology
focus is to continuously improve the
performance and operating efficiencies
of our processing equipment”. CCR’s
engineering department is constantly and ARU installations in existence
looking to design distillation equipment around the globe.
with fewer moving parts, smaller
footprints, fewer processing stages, The CCR engineering team works well
better reliability, and less dependency together as some of its members have
on manpower. With some carefully collaborated together for years. At the
planned adaptations in progress, CCR very least, the engineering team brings
could soon be expanding the breadth of to our table a wide variety of
products that we would process professional experiences in the oil & gas
beyond our customary amine and glycol industry which include systems design,
reclaiming businesses. process engineering, automation, and
project management. Our engineering
In addition to processing and equipment group works closely with our chemist
Ray Abry. He is not only knowledgeable of
team spends a considerable amount of oil & gas production and refining
time for and with our clients developing systems that can help clients to
interpret anomalies based upon bench
studies, FEL-2 (front end loaded lab tests and the nature of solvent
contaminants, but he has been a
end engineering & design) studies. In mainstay at CCR for more than 20
these areas, CCR’s focuses on our large years.
(amine reclaiming units) for specific site Continue on page 2
requirements. At the same time,
Terry’s group is also responsible for
providing full customer support for
 Page 2
Th e R e c l a i m e r

Continued., Engineering Department

Recently, Terry and his team have

spent time onsite at customer locations
to collect data and better understand
the unique requirements of customers
who are looking for new equipment
alternatives or who desire to improve
the efficiency and adaptability of
equipment not purchased from CCR.
In some cases, depending upon the
nature and incursion rates of the
contaminants, batch processing could be
preferable and adequate for a given
system. From Terry’s perspective,
“CCR’s aim is to provide the best Raymond G.F.Abry, Chemist (left),
options that will reap the best Steve Ayres, EIT, Process Engineer
Shaun Hill, P. Eng., Project Manager (right)
economics, performance and savings for
the customer.” Last, but not least, define operating conditions before we
Terry and his staff have done their part Technologies) at Heriot-Watt
University, in Edinburgh, Scotland, and go into a design phase.”
to foster better awareness of the
advantages and capabilities of CCR by IFE (Institute for Energy Technology) in
reaching out to key global engineering Oslo, Norway. Terry says: “These
firms by hosting educational seminars. firms can offer CCR new perspectives
on very complex process models that
As an extension of own engineering enable us to optimize our design
resources, Terry frequently and openly features. Having open access to our
consults with several well established partners’ research, services and lab
research organizations such as capabilities allows us to test different
HYDRAFACT Ltd. (Hydrate and Flow compositions and components to better
Assurance Consulting and

Frequently Asked Customer Questions

Q. What are the implications of
amine contamination?
A. Contamination can severely affect
an amine unit’s capacity, operational
stability and mechanical integrity.
Plant Capacity: As solvents become
contaminated with non-regenerable
impurities, they lose their effectiveness
because the amine concentration is
reduced. To compensate for this effect,
the solvent circulation rate can be
increased. However, the increased
circulation rate affects other parts of
the process such as the heat duty in
the reboiler. It may also change the
product gas composition because more
liquid is flowing to the absorber,
thereby altering the gas/liquid ratio and
changing the H2S and CO2 removal
characteristics. The temperature profile in
the absorber also tends to change with
circulation rate. Quite often, operators
have to reduce the raw gas flow to the
plant to ensure satisfactory operation.
If operators do not compensate for the
presence of contaminants in the amine,
there is a danger of overloading the
solution with H2S and CO2. Excessive
amine loadings can lead to unexpectedly
high corrosion rates in some parts of
the amine unit, particularly where
there are rapid changes in pressure,
temperature and/or velocity. Two
phase flow may arise resulting in pipe
hammer and slug-type flow into
downstream equipment. These problems
not only affect the plant operation but
may also cause mechanical damage.
Stability of Plant Operation:
Higher contaminant levels usually
increase the viscosity of amine
solutions, which reduce the mass
transfer rates in the absorber and
stripper. These viscosity increases
ultimately lead to the product gas no
longer meeting specifications. This is
particularly detrimental in tail gas
treating units, where reportable
environmental excursions can result.
Continued on page 3
 Page 3
Continued., customer questions
More viscous solutions also have a higher tendency to
foam. Hydrocarbons and particulates can also contribute to
foaming problems. In extreme cases, foaming can cause
significant pressure drops across the absorber and amine
regenerator. Activated carbon filtration is often used to
contain the hydrocarbon problems, but heavier hydrocarbons
can be costly to remove in this manner.
In addition to promoting foaming, particulates may also
reduce heat transfer efficiencies by fouling exchanger surfaces.
These fines may be introduced with the raw gas or they may
be generated in the amine unit itself. Iron sulfide fines are
"washed" off vessel walls by sudden changes in operating
conditions or by foaming. Mechanical filtration can be used to
deal with most of the fines. However, some fines are so small
that conventional filtration media cannot capture them.
Corrosion: Various types of corrosion can result from
contaminated amine solutions. Increased circulation rates can
cause erosion corrosion, the physical wearing away of metals
by the abrasive action of the solution. This is of greatest
concern where restrictions or changes in direction of flow
are encountered. Corrosion rates increase with velocity and
even mildly corrosive solutions can produce extremely high
corrosion rates if erosive conditions are present.
Amines may be degraded through excessive heat or contact
with oxygen, CO2, or other contaminants. The resulting
degradation products may increase the tendency for fouling
and corrosion to occur in the system. Concentration cells
can be set up beneath fouling deposits or scale, leading to
high localized corrosion rates. Chlorides entering the amine
plant via poor inlet filtration or cooling water exchanger leaks
can accelerate general and pitting corrosion, and can induce
stress corrosion cracking in stainless steel components. High
levels of other inorganic and organic acid salts can also
contribute significantly to corrosion.
All types of corrosion reduce the life expectancy of amine
processing units and can result in major financial losses.
Q. What contaminants should I be concerned about?
A. The primary contaminants of concern are:
• Heat Stable Salts / Ash
• Degradation Products
• Chlorides
• Metals
• Particulates
• Hydrocarbons
Th e R e c l a i m e r
CCR’s Unit 3 on location in the Gulf Coast
Most contaminants can be categorized into three basic groups
Amine Degradation Products: Amine degradation
products are compounds which are formed either by the
direct reaction of the amine and constituents of the feed gas
(such as carbon dioxide, carbonyl sulfide, carbon monoxide,
oxygen, carbon disulfide) or by thermal decomposition of the
amine. Conversion of the amine, irrespective of the
mechanism, represents a loss of active and valuable
amine. Furthermore, some of these degradation products
may cause foaming, corrosion and reduced gas treating
capacity.
Heat Stable Salts: During the normal absorption/
regeneration process, the amine solution, which is basic,
reacts with acid gases entering with the raw feed gas. In the
case of H2S and CO2, the amine salts are thermally
regenerable. If other anionic species and/or stronger acidic
components are present in the raw feed gas, they too form
amine salts. However, these compounds are not thermally
regenerable and are hence designated as “heat stable
salts”. Both inorganic and organic heat stable salts
occur. Heat stable salts can reduce plant throughput and
increase corrosion rates.
Non-Volatile Contaminants: Non-volatile contaminants
arise from diverse sources such as gas wells, make-up water,
anti-foaming agents, sealants, lubricants and anti-corrosion
agents. Another common type of non-volatile contaminants
are particulates which may be carried into the amine solution
by the raw feed gas. Iron sulfide is very common and
undesirable, usually because of its potential to stabilize foams
or enhance foaming tendencies. Solid contaminants of any
type can decrease the efficiency of the absorber and stripper
by plugging contactor trays, contactor packing and process
piping.
 Page 4
The Benefits of Great Environmental Performance
One of the unpleasant facts of life is
knowing that decisions made with
imperfect foresight will be judged (by
some) with the benefit of perfect
hindsight. Sometimes, clear trends make
the right decision obvious. More often,
substantial uncertainties require the use
of human judgment. When it comes to
the environment, there is mounting
evidence that major changes are
underway, creating new risks and
opportunities. The extent and implications of
these changes are still uncertain, making
related corporate decisions difficult.
Consider how public attitudes changed
between 2002 and 2007. The following
table comes from the Pew Global
Attitudes Survey, and shows the percentage of
people in various countries who cited
pollution and environmental issues as a
top global threat.
It is clear that the attitudes of our clients
and customers are changing. Surely their
perceptions of the companies they work
for and buy from will not be far
behind. Behind these attitude changes
are a growing number of widely
publicized studies that have called for
substantial changes in environmental
policies. A number of them have
concluded that, in order to limit the risk
of a substantial rise in planetary
temperature (and its associated
consequences), the amount of carbon
dioxide in the earth’s atmosphere should
be limited to 450 to 550 parts per
million (ppm). In 2006, the level of
atmospheric CO2 was 381 ppm (35%
above the estimated pre-industrial era
level), but the rate of increase had
accelerated, to 1.9 ppm/year between
2000 and 2006, versus 1.5 ppm/year
between 1970 and 2000.
These studies, and the attention they
have received, have generated increasing
pressure for government action, including
stricter limits on emissions, demands for
greater recycling, and some type of
Percentage of Population Citing Environmental Issues as a Top Global Threat**
Country 2002
Brazil 20%
Canada 43%
United States 23%
France 29%
Germany 27%
Italy 39%
United Kingdom 30%
China 69%
India 32%
Japan 55%
**source Pew Global Attitudes Project (http://pewglobal.org)
explicit price on carbon. In turn, the
combination of significant changes in
public attitudes and greater pressure for
government action has caused the
investment community to take notice of
the potential impact of these trends on
financial risk and return. As early as
1997, Konar and Cohen (in “Does the
Market Value Environmental
Performance?”) found that the level of
toxic chemical emissions negatively
affected firms’ intangible asset value. In
2002, King and Lenox (“Exploring the
Locus of Profitable Pollution Reduction”)
found strong evidence linking waste
prevention to better financial results.
Systematic attempts have been made to
rate environmental performance and
show its linkage to shareholder value
creation. Some examples are “The
Economic Value of Corporate
Eco-Efficiency”, by Derwall et al,
“TRUEVA: A New Integrated Financial
Measure of Environmental Exposure”, by
Repetto and Dias, and the “carbon beta”
ratings recently initiated by Strategic
Value Advisors. In light of these studies,
multiple institutional investor groups
have been formed to focus on
environmental issues, including CERES,
the Investor Network on Climate Risk,
the Institutional Investor Group on
Climate Change, the London Accord, and
Th e R e c l a i m e r
2007
49%
54%
37%
52%
45%
51%
46%
71%
49%
70%
the Cleantech Venture Network.
In light of these trends, companies are
beginning to take action, both to limit
the downside risk associated with
concern about the environment, and
to pursue the upside opportunities it
creates. Broadly speaking, the theme
that links all these initiatives together,
and often connects them back to the
new shareholder value measures, is a
focus on minimizing emissions and
waste, both directly (e.g., through
recycling or installation of solar cells)
and indirectly (e.g., through reduced
energy demand and better industrial
process designs).
At CCR, we are pleased to play a role
in our clients’ efforts in these
areas. Here are three examples. Our
patented continuous vacuum distillation
technology removes more contaminants
from amines than any other approach,
and allows more of them to be
recycled. At the same time, the
superior amine quality that results
minimizes refinery process upsets
(which generate waste), energy usage
(since temperatures and circulation
rates don’t have to be increased to
offset declining amine quality), and
very expensive reductions in throughput
(due to regulatory constraints on flaring
acid gas).
Continued on page 5
 Page 5
Continued., Environmental Performance
A second example is the use of CCR’s
amine reclaiming technology in power
plant post-combustion CO2 capture
pilot projects. Multiple studies have
found that the economics of CO2
capture are challenging, for a variety of
reasons. One of these is the loss of
the amine used in the process. Efficient
reclamation can minimize these losses
and reduce electricity prices by $.002/
kilowatt hour.
A final example is the increasing
demand for reclaiming contaminated
monoethylene glycol that is used for
hydrate inhibition in the growing
number of deep offshore gas field
developments. Clients with seasonal
needs have used CCR’s mobile
vacuum distillation units for this
Technology: CO2 Recovery Using Monoethanolamine
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is one of several
greenhouse gases that is associated with
global warming. With CO2 being most
frequently the end product of
combustion processes, the volumes
released to the atmosphere are easier
to estimate than most. This is generally
done by estimating the energy
consumption at the large, point sources
outlets such as industrial plants
(refineries, chemical plants, etc.) as well
as determining the amount of fuel (coal,
natural gas, etc.) needed to generate a
given amount of power at large utility
power facilities.
With the advent of carbon dioxide
trading and, more recently in North
America, penalties for emitting carbon
dioxide into the atmosphere,
considerable effort is being expended
to remove CO2 from process vent
streams. The goal is to produce a
concentrated stream of CO2 that can
be transported for use as a feedstock
for urea fertilizer production,
sequestering in deep brine reservoirs
or into declining oil reservoirs to
provide improved oil recovery. Coastal
region sources could consider deep
ocean sequestration as well.
purpose, while larger projects have
designed CCR’s patented technology
into their permanent installations.
Given uncertainty about the future
implications of current environmental
trends, some client decisions in this
area are easier to make than others. On
the easy end of the spectrum, it isn’t
hard to justify reclaiming and recycling
monoethylene glycol when it can be
done for $750/cubic meter and new
product costs at least twice that. At
Since the introduction in the 1930’s of
the Gerbitol Process, that used
diethanolamine to remove hydrogen
sulphide and carbon dioxide from
natural gas, a variety of liquid
absorption chemicals have been used,
with monoethanolamine being one.
The use of the liquid absorption
chemicals from the natural gas industry
has been adapted for carbon dioxide
capture from flue gas vent streams
since the 1950’s.
This adaptation was necessary due to
the very low operating pressures
inherent to the flue gas streams relative
to natural gas streams. While the flue
gases are being vented at near
atmospheric pressure, natural gas
streams can range from pounds to over
a thousand pounds operating pressure.
The low partial pressure of carbon
dioxide in the flue gas makes the
selection of the appropriate liquid
absorbent more challenging.
Historically, carbon dioxide capture has
relied on Monoethanolamine (MEA) as
the solvent of choice to meet this
challenge.
Th e R e c l a i m e r
the other end of the decision spectrum, it
is still sometimes hard to make the
business case for
reclaiming amines when a refinery’s
ERP system does not capture the full
benefits of this strategy (e.g., the
avoided costs of fewer upsets, lower
throughput, and reduced emissions
and waste generation). However, with
rising public, government and investor
concern with environmental performance,
and its demonstrated linkage to
Being a primary amine, MEA reacts
more rapidly with CO2 than other
amines typically used in natural gas
treating such as diethanolamine (DEA),
diisopropanolamine (DIPA) or
methyldiethanolamine (MDEA). Flue gas
MEA systems are also being operated at
higher amine concentrations than found
in natural gas treating. While typical
monoethanolamine concentrations range
from 18 wt% to 20 wt% MEA in water
for natural gas facilities, this has been
increased to 30 wt% MEA with the in-
clusion of proprietary corrosion inhibi-
tors for flue gas applications. The higher
amine concentrations allow for more
CO2 capture per unit volume of
solution, so equipment sizes can be
decreased, which directly impact the
capital cost of the MEA unit.
Continued on page 6
Page 6 Th e R e c l a i m e r

Example of a MEA Unit Layout

Continued., Using Monoethanolamine
By the very nature of the chemistry
of MEA, it is susceptible to
degradation through the introduction of
sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides and
oxygen. At present, it is common
place to have pretreatment of the
flue gas in upstream units to
lower the SOx and NOx down to
acceptable levels of 10 ppmv and 20
ppmv, respectively. Proprietary
corrosion inhibitors that are added
to the high concentration MEA units
also utilize oxygen in their activation,
so not only is the equipment
protected but the effect of oxygen
on degrading the MEA is lowered as
well. Even with such safe guards in
place, degradation products will build
up over time and require removal to
regain solvent processing capacity.
Long term operating advantages and
cost savings can be achieved by
integrating a CCR Reclaimer with the
regeneration loop thereby keeping the
solvent at peak operating
performance at all times.
as much CO2 per unit volume as a
virgin solution would, reasonable
levels of CO2 removal ranging from
75% to 90% of its initial
concentration in the flue gas, are
being achieved with these systems.
The advantage to operating these
semi-lean units is related to the
lower energy requirement to drive
the bulk of the CO2 from the sol-
vent.
As seen in the following primary
reactions associated with CO2
removal with MEA, two moles of
MEA are needed for every mole of
carbon dioxide that is captured:
Once the Protonated MEA and MEA
Carbamate are in solution, heat is
applied in the stripper to shift the
equilibrium to the left, back towards
MEA and CO2. The regenerated
MEA is recycled to the absorber
where it picks up more carbon
dioxide, while the CO2 liberated in
the stripper column is sent on to
dehydration and compression. The
compressed CO2 can then be
directed to an end use as mentioned
previously.
Continued on page 7

Further energy savings and

operational optimizations are
centered on the partial stripping of
CO2 out of the rich MEA. Even
though it is well recognized that
sending a semi-lean MEA solution
back to the absorber will not pick up
Page 7 Th e R e c l a i m e r

Continued., Using Monoethanolamine customer’s specific requirements determining which layout is

Further improvements are being evaluated with other
solvents under investigation to either supplement the MEA
or to replace it. Blended amines such as MEA / MDEA
blends are being investigated by university researchers. Ab-
sorption of CO2 in aqueous 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanaol
(AMP) is also under investigation. In addition to these, other
solvents being considered are aqueous DIPA/MDEA (ADIP)
blends, hindered amines such as Flexsorb or new proprie-
tary solvents called KS-1, KS-2 & KS-3 from Mitsubishi
Heavy Industries (MHI) and Kansai Electric Power Co.
(KEPCO). Given the wide suite of existing deep cut CO2
solvents, it will not be surprising to see these enter the Flue
Gas CO2 arena in the future.
finally selected. An example of one such reclaimer design is
illustrated in the layout example. By working closely with
the system provider, the optimum unit fit for purpose can be
included in the base design.
Our North American based mobile units also offer a unique
opportunity for utilities to try the technology on a short
term basis at their existing amine based Flue Gas CO2
removal system. Data gathered during these runs then can
be utilized by CCR to offer a tailor-made stationary
reclaiming unit for that application.

As with MEA, all of these new solvents will have the need to
remove degradation products from the solution over time.
CCR Technologies Ltd. (CCR) is uniquely qualified to
provide a built-to-order, integrated solvent reclaimer for
your MEA or alternative solvent Flue Gas CO2 capture
system. There are multiple configurations possible, with the
Page 8 Th e R e c l a i m e r

Chemistry: DEA Reclaiming

rates < 10 mils per year) are:

Aqueous diethanolamine (DEA) has been traditionally used Oxalate 250 ppm
in both refinery and natural gas sweetening processes. It is a
preferred amine to use in refineries where sulfur compounds Chloride 500 ppm
such as carbonyl sulfide and carbon disulfide are present Formate 500 ppm
because DEA will react minimally with these compounds to
form degradation products. DEA is more of a non-selective Glycolate 500 ppm
amine that will remove both H2S and CO2 acid gases Malonate 500 ppm
effectively vs. the more selective MDEA or specialty-MDEA
formulas. DEA is generally used in the 10 to 30 percent by Sulfate 500 ppm
weight range in the aqueous solution. Sulfite 500 ppm
Just like all amines, DEA does degrade over time in gas Acetate 1,000 ppm
sweetening duty. Factors which will influence the rate of Succinate 1,000 ppm
DEA degradation are temperatures, CO2 partial pressures,
and higher concentrations of DEA in solution nearing 30 Ammonia 10,000 ppm
wt%. Some of the major degradation products of DEA are: Thiocyanate 10,000 ppm
Thiosulfate 10,000 ppm
BHEP – N,N’-bis(2-hydroxyethyl) piperazine Sodium 2,000 ppm
HEOD – 3-(2-hydroxyethyl) oxazolidone All Other Metals 100 ppm
THEED – N,N,N’-tris(2-hydroxyethyl)ethylene-diamine
Formyl DEA (Formamides) – reaction of formate anions CCR’s Overall Solvent Quality Guidelines for DEA are:
(when present) and DEA
Bicine – Bis-(hydroxyethyl) glycine;
Free DEA 30 wt% max
Water 60 wt% min
Studies have shown that DEA degradation appears to limit
itself once BHEP equilibrium is established. The presence of Total HSS Anions < 1.2 wt% solution – or –
H2S also appears to inhibit DEA degradation. But it should < 2.5 wt% DEA
also be noted that in the presence of CO2, DEA is more
likely to degrade than other amines like MEA or MDEA. Bicine 250 ppm max
Formyl DEA (DEA-F) < 3.0 wt% solution max
DEA solution corrosivity is directly affected by an increase in
THEED < 1.5 wt% solution max
the levels of DEA degradation products, heat stable salt
anions, and CO2 absorption. All of these factors will lower
the DEA solution pH. Some studies also claim that DEA Ion Exchange and electrodialysis are not able to remove
degradation products and the presence of metals together non-ionic compounds such as the DEA degradation products
will act as chelating agents, further contributing to listed above, certain metals, hydrocarbons and particulates.
corrosivity and adversely affecting solvent performance. Only distillation is able to remove these undesirable
contaminants. Bicine, in particular, is a degradation product
The good news is that DEA can be used successfully, with formed in the presence of DEA and unstable chemical
low degradation and low corrosivity, if the proper CO2 intermediates. It is considered corrosive and can be
loadings, solvent strength and heat stable salt guidelines are removed by vacuum distillation. It has been shown that ion
maintained. Individual HSS anion contaminant guidelines exchange is not very effective in removing this compound
most commonly reported by amine suppliers for DEA since it is dipolar or a zwitterion (meaning that it may
behave as an anion or a cation depending on the pH of the
solutions (based upon maintaining carbon steel corrosion solution).
 Page 9 Th e R e c l a i m e r

Meet the CCR Business Development Team Contact Us

With over 600 reclamation projects for over Business Development Managers
80 customers, CCR Technologies has Donald Aromando
demonstrated its unique ability to offer Phone: (281) 988-5800
custom-tailored solutions to reclaiming Fax: (281) 988-5858
challenges anywhere in the world – on-land Mobile: (830) 832-8497
or off-shore. E-mail: daromando@reclaim.com CCR Technologies Ltd. – CANADA
10655 Southport Road SW , Suite 440
Calgary, Alberta T2W 4Y1
If you have any needs, questions or Julie Fox
Main Toll Free: 800-820-4682
comments regarding CCR‘s mobile Phone: (281) 988-5800
Main Local: 403-543-6699
reclaiming services or our engineered Fax: (281) 988-5858 Main Fax: 403-252-2941
reclaiming systems, please contact any of our Mobile: (713) 252-1585
business development managers. E-mail: jfox@reclaim.com CCR Technologies, Inc. – USA
1500 CityWest Boulevard, Suite 550
John Sczesny Houston, TX 77042
Main Toll Free: 866-280-3073
Phone: (281) 988-5800
Main Local: 281-988-5800
Fax: (281) 988-5858
Main Fax: 281-988-5858
Mobile: (713) 818-8226
E-mail: jsczesny@reclaim.com Visit Our Website: www.reclaim.com
Email: info@reclaim.com